When will this shit end?

[tigger123]

 

[Crazyfool01]

3 minutes ago, Barry Fish said:

I just thought you was happy  🙂 have fun we are having the kids grand parents over as it's daughters birthday.

Remember no hugging 😀 (joking-hug away)

ill wait for second doses ... won't be long 🙂 not much of a hugger anyway 

[Ozanne]

23 minutes ago, crazyfool1 said:

sod all these restrictions today im seeing my parents in the Garden 🙂 

I hope you enjoy mate, weather seems like it should be good for it. I’m meeting some friends in the park for some beers. 

[eFestivals]

11 minutes ago, Ozanne said:

I hope you enjoy mate, weather seems like it should be good for it. I’m meeting some friends in the park for some beers. 

Me I'd just liketo be meeting some beers 

[Fuzzy Afro]

36 minutes ago, crazyfool1 said:

sod all these restrictions today im seeing my parents in the Garden 🙂 

This is allowed anyway - enjoy 🙂 🙂 

[SophieBee]

47 minutes ago, duke88 said:

With regards to vaccination passports, one thing I haven’t seen mentioned is what happens to those of us who have been participating on vaccine trials?

As far as I know, because the vaccines had not been approved by the MHRA when we received them, our NHS records don’t actually show that we have been vaccinated. 
Seems a bit unfair if the thousands of people who took part in trials can’t prove they have been vaccinated and end up continually having to take tests to show they aren’t carrying anything.

Are you on the J&J trial like me? When I went to my last appointment (the blood tests following my second 'dose') I had to reconsent as they are changing the study protocol. When the J&J single dose gets MHRA authorisation, which should be within the next couple of weeks I think, then the study will change to a platform trial. They are going to unblind everyone and those on the placebo will receive the single dose to test effectiveness against the double dose. My understanding is that because the single dose will have been authorised for use, this will count for vaccine passport purposes (whether you had the single or double dose I think) and our NHS records will be updated. It's probably an attempt to try to keep as many people on the trial as possible.

[ace56blaa]

18 hours ago, Ozanne said:

But those mistakes you think he's making will be driven by data/research that will show that will be the thing to do. He needs to win over Tory voters to have any hope of getting into government. The public supports a government during a time of national crises or looks for a way to support them hence why the Tories are polling well during the vaccination program. He's in a difficult spot, if he offers no policies now people from the left will criticise; if he comes out with a load of policies some will either criticise that he's doing it in a pandemic or will just ignore it.

I think the comments that some don't know what he stands for to be fair as I can see how that would be unclear to some.

It's a hard job for sure. But that's the problem, exactly what you are saying is the problem. He doesn't actually stand for anything beyond trying to get labour points in the polls. He holds no strong position, which in my opinion is more important than trying to look good for tory voters. In my opinion, he's a buffoon, he clearly thinks the only time he really needs to stand up to the Tories is in PMQs. Whilst often his messages on social media are "The Tories are doing everything wrong, but watch me be more like the Tories in policy and values in order to win over their voters" which is just gonna alienate the core labour voters. Pandering to conservative voters is pretty stupid if it means you lose more young voters and actual left leaning voters to Lib Dems and green party. 

But going to a Church known for homophobic rhetoric and not being in support of contraception, putting Christianity at the forefront of your messaging, associating yourself with this place despite Theresa May making the same mistake a few years ago. Despite being the candidate who was standing up for Black Lives Matter and other social justice issues when it was popular to do so, and then supporting this backwards institution (the video still hasn't been taken down or apologized for after two days of criticism) so either he genuinely supports the church or is ignoring it to not draw attention to it. - Which in my opinion is a problem. 

It might be the right political move? But for what? Also he is trying to frame labour as the party of "Law and Order" because of his background, but that doesn't sit right with people in the midst of a conversation about police abusing their powers. - He wants to give police more funding where the Tories haven't, when most left leaning people are asking if we should defund the police force, especially the london met. 

TLDR: Keir Starmer has no solid opinions or policies, other than to pander to conservative voters, despite the fact it alienates a portion of his existing voters and hasn't really changed to polls the entire year. 

[Fuzzy Afro]

Happy Easter all 🙂 hope you all enjoy an absolute mountain of chocolate today. And if you happen to be one of those weirdos who doesn’t like chocolate, still have a lovely day 🙂 

[JoeyT]

Closest I’ll get to putting a tent up at a festival this year... sob. Nice to be setting the garden up for a mini festival for the Wife’s 30th however!

 

[eFestivals]

8 minutes ago, ace56blaa said:

It's a hard job for sure. But that's the problem, exactly what you are saying is the problem. He doesn't actually stand for anything beyond trying to get labour points in the polls. He holds no strong position, which in my opinion is more important than trying to look good for tory voters. In my opinion, he's a buffoon, he clearly thinks the only time he really needs to stand up to the Tories is in PMQs. Whilst often his messages on social media are "The Tories are doing everything wrong, but watch me be more like the Tories in policy and values in order to win over their voters" which is just gonna alienate the core labour voters. Pandering to conservative voters is pretty stupid if it means you lose more young voters and actual left leaning voters to Lib Dems and green party. 

 

I don't think he's pandering to Tory voters just to voters who might swap their vote to labour.which is better than alienating those voters which is what Corbyn did.

8 minutes ago, ace56blaa said:

 

But going to a Church known for homophobic rhetoric and not being in support of contraception, putting Christianity at the forefront of your messaging, associating yourself with this place despite Theresa May making the same mistake a few years ago. Despite being the candidate who was standing up for Black Lives Matter and other social justice issues when it was popular to do so, and then supporting this backwards institution (the video still hasn't been taken down or apologized for after two days of criticism) so either he genuinely supports the church or is ignoring it to not draw attention to it. - Which in my opinion is a problem. 

 

 

Backing away from it would be a bigger story than doing it has been

8 minutes ago, ace56blaa said:

 

 

It might be the right political move? But for what? Also he is trying to frame labour as the party of "Law and Order" because of his background, but that doesn't sit right with people in the midst of a conversation about police abusing their powers. - He wants to give police more funding where the Tories haven't, when most left leaning people are asking if we should defund the police force, especially the london met. 

 

Most people are decent people.labour often makes the mistake of not looking like it stands for decent values which was Corbyn's history.that impression Ned's reversing.

 

8 minutes ago, ace56blaa said:

 

 

TLDR: Keir Starmer has no solid opinions or policies, other than to pander to conservative voters, despite the fact it alienates a portion of his existing voters and hasn't really changed to polls the entire year. 

Lots of those existing voters do the party no favours when they bang in about Spaffer being far right voters don't see that and wonder what those people are seeing and where their values are.

[RobertProsineckisLighter]

2 hours ago, Barry Fish said:

Trying to think it though..

I think they are saying we you spend sub 15 to 25 mins with other people then you are good to go   if you are sat together for hours then you need a passport 

I mean its bollocks because it only takes a second to infect someone.  I guess the risks do go up the longer you are together but it's marginal differences really 

Lots ladies haircuts take longer than 25 minutes, lots.of train journeys are longer than that. Denmark who is upgrading it's digital ID system to include the Covid status are saying you might need it for hairdressers etc... I think it's a load of crap, but at least have an evenly spread layer.of crap. 

[RobertProsineckisLighter]

1 hour ago, steviewevie said:

Low numbers of deaths...

https://www.theguardian.com/theobserver/commentisfree/2021/apr/04/how-is-it-possible-that-the-number-of-deaths-is-now-so-low

It was the same last year too was it not?

[El Matador]

2 hours ago, steviewevie said:

Low numbers of deaths...

https://www.theguardian.com/theobserver/commentisfree/2021/apr/04/how-is-it-possible-that-the-number-of-deaths-is-now-so-low

And yet its another 5 weeks until we can legally meet friends or family indoors

[RobertProsineckisLighter]

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/04/03/grandparents-could-use-covid-passport-app-screen-birthday-party/

I remember the uproar on here when it was suggested your wrists band at Glastonbury might be used to pay for things. Yet folk are just happy to have this sort of shit imposed on their lives - it's utterly bizzare.

[st dan]

All of this talk of vaccine passports etc is certainly giving the New World Order folk some fuel for their fire. 

[Crazyfool01]

2 minutes ago, RobertProsineckisLighter said:

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/04/03/grandparents-could-use-covid-passport-app-screen-birthday-party/

I remember the uproar on here when it was suggested your wrists band at Glastonbury might be used to pay for things. Yet folk are just happy to have this sort of shit imposed on their lives - it's utterly bizzare.

Uproar ? Can’t remember that ... people questioned it ... just like most things are questioned and discussed on here ... as is now the case around vaccine passports ... personally I’ve mixed feelings on them ... if they encourage a higher uptake of vaccine now then great ... but the implementation and use is unnerving .. and maybe unnecessary once we have a highly vaccinated population 

[steviewevie]

21 minutes ago, El Matador said:

And yet its another 5 weeks until we can legally meet friends or family indoors

yes, cautious steps.

[steviewevie]

I'm actually kind of anti vaccine passports..I see why people want them...but I don't think we should have them.

[st dan]

3 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

I'm actually kind of anti vaccine passports..I see why people want them...but I don't think we should have them.

Yeah I agree - they are just a tool for stopping the spread of the virus, which we shouldn’t really be doing anymore in the coming months. 
Much better to concentrate on getting the vaccines out, improving the treatments for those who still fall in, and letting herd immunity soon take its full effects. 

[efcfanwirral]

2 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

I'm actually kind of anti vaccine passports..I see why people want them...but I don't think we should have them.

It's weird I'm very anti the idea of going as far as israel and denmark has, but it could give us an opportunity to have events that otherwise seemed unrealistic this year (but not forever more- it has to be limited to when there's a realistic threat). I just think by creating and introducing the system we'll probably end up with lobbying from pharma and the businesses that profit from the system itself to continue it's expansion to more venues and probably more vaccines (they're working on cancer ones apparently). When your politicians are shamelessly and openly for sale it doesn't take much to push mad things through. 

I still think the logical next step is adding a flu vaccine to it as we could really help the NHS and save lives with that (lots of crossover with people who'd die from covid), and that's probably the right thing to do, it just further opens the door 

And this is before the idea of us losing our shit and voting a farage type in...

[JoeyT]

 

[efcfanwirral]

2 minutes ago, JoeyT said:

 

Proper North South divide there

[duke88]

3 hours ago, Barry Fish said:

Or just take the vaccine again?

Means the trial data won’t be reliable. Still be monitored in the future to check antibody levels etc.

[duke88]

2 hours ago, SophieBee said:

Are you on the J&J trial like me? When I went to my last appointment (the blood tests following my second 'dose') I had to reconsent as they are changing the study protocol. When the J&J single dose gets MHRA authorisation, which should be within the next couple of weeks I think, then the study will change to a platform trial. They are going to unblind everyone and those on the placebo will receive the single dose to test effectiveness against the double dose. My understanding is that because the single dose will have been authorised for use, this will count for vaccine passport purposes (whether you had the single or double dose I think) and our NHS records will be updated. It's probably an attempt to try to keep as many people on the trial as possible.

I’m on the Novovax trial. What they’ve done with us is extend the trial, and everyone will get the opposite of what they had before (so placebos get the vaccine, and vice-versa). We aren’t being unblinded.

Had my first jab of the second bunch yesterday, and it’s still not been authorised, so won’t show on my NHS records. We get something to show we’ve been on the trial, I’m just a bit concerned it won’t show up if we have to have an app or something.

[Zoo Music Girl]

33 minutes ago, st dan said:

Yeah I agree - they are just a tool for stopping the spread of the virus, which we shouldn’t really be doing anymore in the coming months. 
Much better to concentrate on getting the vaccines out, improving the treatments for those who still fall in, and letting herd immunity soon take its full effects. 

I'm another one not in favour of vaccine passports (except for internationally, which I think makes sense). Not sure where this idea that everyone is happy about them is coming from. I'm just waiting to see what actually gets announced rather than freaking out about leaks and trials. I don't think they will be a permanent thing if they are brought in.