Jump to content

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Lord Duckhunter said:

How to fuck up pubs, horrendous. If tonight’s anything to go by there won’t be an ale house industry much longer....

It’s almost as bad as the guy making key decisions on this situation holding shares in the company desperately trying to vaccinate everyone 

Oh...

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/patrick-vallance-vaccine-shares-denies-conflict-interest-a4555141.html%3famp
 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, ecuk268 said:

The exemption doesn't prove anything. Anyone can download one. 

Total farce.

why would anyone without a genuine reason go to the trouble of getting an exemption badge? Those that don't wear a mask do so because they don't believe they work and want everyone to know that, don't they?

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Chez said:

why would anyone without a genuine reason go to the trouble of getting an exemption badge? Those that don't wear a mask do so because they don't believe they work and want everyone to know that, don't they?

Yep, absolutely the only reason, you nailed it!

Definitely not because sometimes people forget to take one with them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I just popped out to takeaway and some cunt with tattooed hands menacingly at counter with no mask.
Wish  they’d throw hot oil over the cunt. Some might call that a disproportionate response  

Link to post
Share on other sites

It is an interesting article, although much of the logic seems to be premised on two outcomes of being infected:

- get Covid and die

- get Covid and back to normal ASAP

Also seems to assume no reinfection is possible.

Are there any reliable studies that show long-term immunity and whether Covid is causing any lasting damage to those it doesn't kill?

Edited by benjii
Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, whelk said:

I just popped out to takeaway and some cunt with tattooed hands menacingly at counter with no mask.
Wish  they’d throw hot oil over the cunt. Some might call that a disproportionate response  

Why did u not just have a word with him?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Fascinating looking back to page 1 of this thread. By no means being in any way judgemental about this. As with everything, there will be polarised opinions and many in between as have been revealed here over the last seven months. Just a bit of a personal reflection more than anything, looking back to a time when my mum (in a care home) was still alive and our family life wasn't overshadowed by my wife's cancer. How things change!

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Winnersaint said:

Fascinating looking back to page 1 of this thread. By no means being in any way judgemental about this. As with everything, there will be polarised opinions and many in between as have been revealed here over the last seven months. Just a bit of a personal reflection more than anything, looking back to a time when my mum (in a care home) was still alive and our family life wasn't overshadowed by my wife's cancer. How things change!

Sounds rough. All the best.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

6 minutes ago, benjii said:

Sounds rough. All the best.

Thanks, it's been an eye opening half a year or so. Definitely made me less judgemental and more reflective. Hasn't necessarily made me agree with the opinions of some on here but it has taught me that there is more to life than sparring on social media and that social media can be a positive force. The most support and information my wife gets is not from Macmillan, although she has a wonderful "telephone buddy" or from the Oncology team, at the Royal Berks although they have been excellent and have a clear treatment plan for her. Most of it is mutual support from  bowel cancer social media sites where she gets to exchange experiences with others in similar circumstances. The only downside is that sadly some with whom she was in touch with at the start of her treatment are no longer with us. Quite a few of them as a result of having vital treatment delayed or postponed due to Covid. My only wish is that whatever happens, the treatment of cancer patients and all others with life threatening illnesses are not put on the back burner again due to Covid prioritisation. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Winnersaint said:

 

Thanks, it's been an eye opening half a year or so. Definitely made me less judgemental and more reflective. Hasn't necessarily made me agree with the opinions of some on here but it has taught me that there is more to life than sparring on social media and that social media can be a positive force. The most support and information my wife gets is not from Macmillan, although she has a wonderful "telephone buddy" or from the Oncology team, at the Royal Berks although they have been excellent and have a clear treatment plan for her. Most of it is mutual support from  bowel cancer social media sites where she gets to exchange experiences with others in similar circumstances. The only downside is that sadly some with whom she was in touch with at the start of her treatment are no longer with us. Quite a few of them as a result of having vital treatment delayed or postponed due to Covid. My only wish is that whatever happens, the treatment of cancer patients and all others with life threatening illnesses are not put on the back burner again due to Covid prioritisation. 

I totally agree. I can't understand why more wasn't done to segregate parts of hospitals into "covid free" zones and allow other important procedures to continue. I suppose simple lack of manpower may have been the main blocker. If I had been in the situation of seeing someone unable to access treatment they would have otherwise have had, I don't know how I would have reacted, but "badly", I expect.

I hope there's some positive news ahead.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, benjii said:

I totally agree. I can't understand why more wasn't done to segregate parts of hospitals into "covid free" zones and allow other important procedures to continue.

I guess it's easy to say with hind sight, but maybe more use could have been made of the Nightingale hospitals which could have housed the Covid patients, whilst regular hospitals carried on treating regular patients.

Maybe that's what will happen second time round...

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, benjii said:

I totally agree. I can't understand why more wasn't done to segregate parts of hospitals into "covid free" zones and allow other important procedures to continue. I suppose simple lack of manpower may have been the main blocker. If I had been in the situation of seeing someone unable to access treatment they would have otherwise have had, I don't know how I would have reacted, but "badly", I expect.

I hope there's some positive news ahead.

Thank you. We both hope so. Having been caught up in this at the start of Covid I'm not sure that things could have been different A cancelled colonoscopy 5 weeks earlier may have led to earlier diagnosis which may have avoided a perforation and spread. That said without that particular complication there may have been no emergency surgery and she would be looking at managing things through chemo. As it is she's had the surgery and the chemo and now we are awaiting a PET scan on Friday to see if the METs in the two areas of spread have reduced. The oncologist used word like 'very favourable' which is hugely encouraging, If nothing else it highlights the variability of cancer treatment across the country. Her treatment has been swift, well planned and consistent from the start. It's being coordinated across the Royal Berks, John Radcliffe and Southampton General. Regrettably this isn't the case even for cancer treatment in normal times in every part of the country let alone in the abnormal situation we find ourself in now and is dependent where you live. Oh, and if you're over 60 do your poo test! 

Edited by Winnersaint
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, benjii said:

It is an interesting article, although much of the logic seems to be premised on two outcomes of being infected:

- get Covid and die

- get Covid and back to normal ASAP

Also seems to assume no reinfection is possible.

Are there any reliable studies that show long-term immunity and whether Covid is causing any lasting damage to those it doesn't kill?

Yep, the focus of many is on living or dying. The explanation I've been given is that this stuff either has no symptoms, mild, bad with complications, or death. The one we get is the luck of the drawer, and too many people assume it'll be no symptoms or mild. 

I know young ish, previously healthy, people left with life long complications from this - arthritis, neurological issues, auto immune issues, diabetes. How many others are suffering we have no idea.

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, egg said:

Yep, the focus of many is on living or dying. The explanation I've been given is that this stuff either has no symptoms, mild, bad with complications, or death. The one we get is the luck of the drawer, and too many people assume it'll be no symptoms or mild. 

I know young ish, previously healthy, people left with life long complications from this - arthritis, neurological issues, auto immune issues, diabetes. How many others are suffering we have no idea.

Are they all on different people? And how do they know they are lifelong?

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 24/09/2020 at 15:04, benjii said:

They are hoping most people aren't ignorant cunts looking to game it.

 

On 24/09/2020 at 19:19, Weston Super Saint said:

Lol.

You know we're talking about the British public right?

I guess their hopes about people not being ignorant cunts were shattered on Saturday night, who know?

https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/1340518/coronavirus-curfew-lockdown-liverpool-london-covid19-second-wave

spacer.png

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, whelk said:

Are they all on different people? And how do they know they are lifelong?

Yes, two people. 

Arthritis is permanent. A 46 yo woman has been told (following scan) that her wrist is like an 85 yo who has had arthritis for 30+ years. No issues pre covid, all down to the attack of covid on the immune system. She also has a loss of sensation which they think is neurological but can't yet be sure, and all sorts of other issues which they think is something akin to an auto immune condition caused by covid. 

Diabetes also is not temporary. He's been told he's stuck with it and again down to the attack on the body of the virus. Only 50, fit and healthy pre covid. 

It's nasty shit. 

Edited by egg
Link to post
Share on other sites

COVID-19 (currently) looks like it affects a vast majority of people who are infected very mildly, if at all. Of the people who do suffer complications, once again the vast majority are those with one or more pre-existing conditions and normally over the age of 70. An even smaller number will unfortunately pass away.

As Egg posted above, it does appear that some otherwise healthy individuals who get badly effected by the Virus may have long lasting or chronic problems moving forward. I am sure that this will be an particular area of research that will be important to understand. Was it bad luck, was it genetic disposition? If the latter, is there a way of reducing the chances of someone who has this genetic weakness from getting complications?

The data and statistics seem to suggest that populations with high instances of obesity (USA and UK) and associated illnesses connected to this are suffering far worse than countries and populations where this is less of an issue. India has a population of 1 billion (near enough) and as of yesterday 6 million* confirmed cases. (0.6% of the whole population - with 95,000 deaths attributed to COVID-19 (so roughly 1.6% of cases end in death).

For comparison the USA, with a population of roughly 330 million has over 7 million confirmed cases (2.1% of the population) and slightly over 209,000 deaths - meaning death in nearly 3% of cases. 

*Obviously this may not be the accurate figure as I don't know the Testing regime in India vs USA

India has a larger % of multi-generational households, far greater poverty and higher population density; yet the US is much much worse. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, wadesmith said:

Based on what?

Based on the fact that the exact number of Indians in the country is not known.  Also based on a large percentage of Indians that live in very rural areas with little to no access to basic medical facilities let alone the testing and reporting facilities that is needed to give precise and accurate figures.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Weston Super Saint said:

Based on the fact that the exact number of Indians in the country is not known.  Also based on a large percentage of Indians that live in very rural areas with little to no access to basic medical facilities let alone the testing and reporting facilities that is needed to give precise and accurate figures.

I did caveat that in my post to be fair. The variants of each countries system for testing and counting those who have passed away from the virus differs quite dramatically. For example if you look at the UK - 439,000 cases confirmed with 42,000 deaths - 10% of cases involve death?!?! Of course in the UK we are counting anyone who dies 28 days after  a positive test (whether or not it had any contributory factor) plus our testing system was an absolute shower at the beginning of March and April meaning that very few people actually got tested, let alone diagnosed. 

However if you average out cases to population; then deaths to cases it tends to suggest that around 1-2% of those who test positive go on to become seriously ill and die. Worse than the flu certainly, but also seemingly to certain age groups and those with underlying conditions. 

To be clear; I follow all the rules related to numbers, social distancing etc, I wear a mask, I limit contact with my parents and older relatives. It obviously badly effects a lot of people, but maybe isn't as bad as the scientific community once feared.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, edprice1984 said:

I did caveat that in my post to be fair. The variants of each countries system for testing and counting those who have passed away from the virus differs quite dramatically. For example if you look at the UK - 439,000 cases confirmed with 42,000 deaths - 10% of cases involve death?!?! Of course in the UK we are counting anyone who dies 28 days after  a positive test (whether or not it had any contributory factor) plus our testing system was an absolute shower at the beginning of March and April meaning that very few people actually got tested, let alone diagnosed. 

However if you average out cases to population; then deaths to cases it tends to suggest that around 1-2% of those who test positive go on to become seriously ill and die. Worse than the flu certainly, but also seemingly to certain age groups and those with underlying conditions. 

To be clear; I follow all the rules related to numbers, social distancing etc, I wear a mask, I limit contact with my parents and older relatives. It obviously badly effects a lot of people, but maybe isn't as bad as the scientific community once feared.

I think those death rate numbers are off - the death rate is around 0.2% and declining. If you look at the extrapolations of real infection rates its about 10 times higher than recorded infections - hence the death rate is ten times lower.  

The number of deaths is fairly well established but there are two numbers for infections - one is infections confirmed by a test and secondly estimates of number of infections nationally by testing a whole randomised population.

Its still the case that the majority of those who have been tested are / were symptomatic - ie much more likely to go on and become seriously ill than an asymptomatic person. Most asymptomatic people dont get tested, obviously, aren't added to the number of cases and therefore the death rate is artificially inflated.

Edited by buctootim
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Weston Super Saint said:

Based on the fact that the exact number of Indians in the country is not known.  Also based on a large percentage of Indians that live in very rural areas with little to no access to basic medical facilities let alone the testing and reporting facilities that is needed to give precise and accurate figures.

Trumps a massive bulshitter.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Buctootim, I agree - My point, I suppose, is that it does appear that the lethality of the virus is well below what was originally feared, but things do get complicated if you are overweight or have pre-existing conditions. Let's be honest here, I don't think 200k Americans is a good look for Trump and certainly the way that the USA is structured (Federal v State) hasn't helped but the fact that a sizeable percentage (pun very much intended) are fat barstewards seems to have had a direct correlation on the number of deaths.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, badgerx16 said:

It seems that it is OK to shop without a mask if your name is Stsnley Johnson and you are the father of the Prime Minister.

Indeed - and also OK  to attend a dinner party with more than 6 people if you are currently an MP and former Leader of the Labour Party.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, SFC1906 said:

Indeed - and also OK  to attend a dinner party with more than 6 people if you are currently an MP and former Leader of the Labour Party.

It just shows the collective arrogance of those people who ask us to elect and trust them.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, badgerx16 said:

It just shows the collective arrogance of those people who ask us to elect and trust them.

Even the whiter-than-white Scottish separatists are up to it...

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, trousers said:

Depends how hollow said apology is, I guess?

Much less hollow than claiming she was testing her eyesight or shaking everybody by the hand shortly after telling everyone else not to. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, aintforever said:

She’s an idiot for doing it but at least she admitted she’s done wrong and apologised.

Phew, that's alright then!  She only took and 8 and a bit hour train (who knows how many people she met during that time) to London, then spent the day in Parliament - not many 'at risk' punters there she could have infected! - then, the day after receiving a positive test she took another 8 and a bit hour train ride back to Scotland.

Since she apologised that should be fine!  Hopefully she won't be able to put her £1k fine on expenses now she's been suspended ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Weston Super Saint said:

Phew, that's alright then!  She only took and 8 and a bit hour train (who knows how many people she met during that time) to London, then spent the day in Parliament - not many 'at risk' punters there she could have infected! - then, the day after receiving a positive test she took another 8 and a bit hour train ride back to Scotland.

Since she apologised that should be fine!  Hopefully she won't be able to put her £1k fine on expenses now she's been suspended ;)

It’s obviously not alright, no one said it was - hopefully she gets fired.

Had she lied and tried to make out she had done nothing wrong it would be worse though, especially if she was actually working at no10 making the laws.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, aintforever said:

Had she lied and tried to make out she had done nothing wrong it would be worse though, especially if she was actually working at no10 making the laws.

😹

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Weston Super Saint said:

Phew, that's alright then!  She only took and 8 and a bit hour train (who knows how many people she met during that time) to London, then spent the day in Parliament - not many 'at risk' punters there she could have infected! - then, the day after receiving a positive test she took another 8 and a bit hour train ride back to Scotland.

 

She voted remain, so will never be a guilty as Cummins in their eyes. The virus is much more contagious when contracted by leavers and particularly so in people who organised leave campaigns. Therefore, driving in your car when infested is far worse than going to and from Scotland on a train after attending work. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

See the spineless weasels still struggling to comprehend the Cummings situation 

Amusing how everything is seen through the lens of Brexit. Pitifully sad

 

Edited by whelk
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, whelk said:

See the spineless weasels still struggling to comprehend the Cummings situation 

Amusing how everything is seen through the Ken’s of Brexit. Pitifully sad

 

Exactly. I'd never even heard of her before this happened, let alone how she voted on any issue  

Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, Lord Duckhunter said:

She voted remain, so will never be a guilty as Cummins in their eyes. The virus is much more contagious when contracted by leavers and particularly so in people who organised leave campaigns. Therefore, driving in your car when infested is far worse than going to and from Scotland on a train after attending work. 

Like anyone had actually heard of her, let alone know which way she voted in 2016. :lol:

She's obviously as guilty as Cummings and should do the right thing and resign. At least the Scottish leader has the balls to do say the right thing and not lie and make embarrassing excuses.

"This is utterly indefensible. It's hard to express just how angry I feel on behalf of people across the country making hard sacrifices every day to help beat Covid." - what our 'leader' should have said.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Little did she know in June when she roundly condemned Cummings that she herself would be responsible for an even greater breach, travelling a much further distance by train and even attending the House too. I hadn't heard of her either, but one only has to read that she is a SNP MP to realise what her position is on Brexit and the government's performance on the Chinese virus and indeed anything else. She typifies the muddled thinking of the SNP, whose essence is to campaign to leave one union, whilst wishing to remain in another.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

View Terms of service (Terms of Use) and Privacy Policy (Privacy Policy) and Forum Guidelines ({Guidelines})