Weston Super Saint

Hhhmmm, so her reason for travelling back to Scotland was because she was scared she might have to self isolate in an hotel for two weeks! Oh, and now we find out that she went to church the day after her test before she went to London but she insists she didn't break any rules! https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-54496759 She also states that she had a test because she had a "tickly throat" - yeah right, like that one's believable - but even so, if you book a test you must self isolate whilst you wait for your results, the rules on this seem pretty clear, although she is claiming they are 'muddled' : https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/coronavirus-covid-19/testing-and-tracing/what-your-test-result-means/ Still, good job she apologised eh, as that means she hasn't undermined the Government's message

Oh look, my thick as pig shit stalker has arrived. I'm assuming that you've decided it's more expedient to join the debate with your pants round your ankles rather than pull them down with your posting later on. Many thanks for the link to a quote from an 'ex' Chief Constable. His 'opinion' on this matter is truly as worhless as yours! Can you find a link that disputes the FACT that Cummings was NOT charged for breaking the rules in place at the time or are you just going to continue linking to articles that have pointless opinions on them?

It's not me that thinks he did nothing wrong it was the police force that investigated him. All I've done is repeat the facts, not offer my opinion, surely even you can see that? I'm assuming you also agree with the outcome since you've not offered an answer to the question posed regarding which rules he broke...

Scottish PM? Since when? You're all over the place pal! You also said : "She doesn't think they were appropriate, she's admitted what she did was wrong and apologised. Unlike the scumbag at no10." but now you're saying it's worse than Cummings did! Not really sure what you wanted Cummings to do. In your own opinion his actions were not as bad as hers and indeed the police investigated and concluded he had broken no rules, yet you call him a 'scumbag' for not apologising for not breaking any rules, but seem to suggest that she is somehow better than Cummings because she has apologised! Seems an illogical argument.

Go on then, if you were in charge, what would she be in court for?

Lol, in court for what? The penalty for breaking the rules is a fine - as far as I'm aware, only disputed cases, repeat offenders or refusal to pay the fines end up in court.

What rules did the 'scumbag at no10' break again?

Phew, that's alright then, crack on folks and break those rules, just make sure you apologise afterwards!

He managed to squeeze him in twice in his opening post on this thread - maybe he's making up for the ones that he's missed

To be fair that is exactly what soggy was trying to elicit with his first post and his 'Muslim' comparison.

And that's just the ones that have been caught

Obviously very little is being done about it, with the exception of the convictions that have happened If only we knew someone who used to work for the CPS who could have had more influence on this.... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_Church_sexual_abuse_cases_by_country

How do you know it isn't already going on with them being better at covering it up. You should show some outrage just in case.

Living in a bubble, lol! https://readfootball.co/2020/06/03/the-footballers-who-have-broken-lockdown-rules/

Lol. The Sweaties are having their pubs closed down again - she really knows how to annoy them doesn't she!

Wow, it's almost as if you're stating the virus isn't actually all that bad

Odd. I'm not sure whether you're calling for tougher sentences for Christian sexual abusers or lighter sentences for Muslim sexual abusers? Surely the sentence is up to the courts?

At 70% efficacy there will be a lot of false negatives - symptoms or not.

Thank you - and I do. Four times in the last nine years but he's been 'all clear' for the past two now.

I think the 'math(sic) of masks' that you have posted has very eloquently corroborated my earlier point about people relying on masks to protect them and their false sense of protection! The 'math of masks' is also fundamentally flawed given that it pays no attention whatsoever to the other ways that the virus can be transmitted. There are also some pretty heavyweight 'caveats' hidden away at the end of the video, but the 'math' is based on masks being at least 50% effective...

Did you read that article or are you just trumpeting it in a 'look at me, how clever am I' way? The first line states : "Cloth face coverings, even homemade masks made of the correct material, are effective in reducing the spread of COVID-19" - it doesn't state what the 'correct' material is, but didn't I state something similar - "I would understand if everyone was made to wear a medical grade face mask - and were trained how to put them on properly". The article states : "Behavioural factors are involved, including how people understand the virus and their perceptions of risk, trust in experts and government, can adversely affect mask wearing" - again, is this not also something I stated with regards to 'understanding' how the virus can be transmitted by other means and not just considering masks? The article then goes on to state - "But, the study shows, some coverings are not as effective as others. Loosely woven fabrics, such as scarves have been shown to be the least effective." as well as "We find that masks made from high quality material such as high-grade cotton, multiple layers and particularly hybrid constructions are effective.". Again, doesn't this pretty much echo what I stated - "the reality is that the overwhelming majority of face masks are a single layer of fabric and ultimately do not do what people falsely believe it will!" What exactly should I be informing Oxford University about my findings when it seems pretty clear from the article that they published on the 8th of July 2020 - incedentally, before face coverings were made mandatory - that they are already aware of the same things as I am!

Yes, people are going to shops, work, schools etc, but since July they have had to wear face masks and the rate of infection is on the way up - some stats say it is rising at the same rate as in March when hardly anyone in the UK even owned a face mask! Lots of people also went to shops and work during May and June when face masks weren't compulsory and the infection rate dropped, odd that isn't it? How about putting some thought in to all the other ways that the disease can be spread - through surfaces, on public transport, touch screens pretty much everywhere etc etc - that people don't even give the first inkling of a thought about, yet think they themselves are protected (as well as everyone else) because they have a face mask on. As I said - and as you and many others on here have amply demonstrated - face masks give a false sense of protection. I would understand if everyone was made to wear a medical grade face mask - and were trained how to put them on properly along with additional infection control - but the reality is that the overwhelming majority of face masks are a single layer of fabric and ultimately do not do what people falsely believe it will!

Are infections rising or falling - simple question that even you can answer....

The point is that masks, as can be seen by the continued rising number of infections, are not an effective means of controlling the virus and ultimately lead to a false sense of protection. Whilst you and your wife have my sympathies for the illness she currently has, the only effective measure that controls the virus is to remove contact with the general population.

So, how are we getting on since face masks were made compulsory, looking good right?