Jump to content

Coronavirus


Recommended Posts

11 minutes ago, Weston Super Saint said:

Not a lot of that makes sense.

Children don't pose a lower risk (of transmission), hence why they closed the schools, keep up.

Children do have a lower risk profile when it comes to ending up in hospital seriously ill.

Perhaps you've got yourself all confused and muddled up the two completely different concepts.

https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/article/we-now-know-how-much-children-spread-coronavirus

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

I see your point and the study from April to June last year (published in November) proves it perfectly.

It doesn't include any of the new, more virulent stains of the disease though, which according to UK scientists are spread far more readily amongst children.

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Weston Super Saint said:

 NotbthebresI see your point and the study from April to June last year (published in November) proves it perfectly.

It doesn't include any of the new, more virulent stains of the disease though, which according to UK scientists are spread far more readily amongst children.

I am not the researcher you are - sorry don’t have the commitment. Happy to change opinion if you find evidence to the contrary as that is what I have been led to believe,

Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, Weston Super Saint said:

I see your point and the study from April to June last year (published in November) proves it perfectly.

It doesn't include any of the new, more virulent stains of the disease though, which according to UK scientists are spread far more readily amongst children.

All of this is beside the point. You're trying to justify something you know to be wrong by basically saying, "yeah but other people are doing it too."

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

Had some very good news today. My best mate (aka to some on here as my black mate) has finally been given a medical discharge. I’ve posted on here a couple of times about it. He was apparently one of the worst cases they’ve ever seen in the country. Been in hospital for 9 weeks, on and ECMO and ventilator for 7 at one point they said he needs a miracle to survive. We’ll we got a miracle, after a drain on his lungs 4 weeks ago suddenly he improved and the change and improvement has been dramatic. He’s still very weak, can’t get out of bed by himself and will be in hospital for another few weeks for physio and treatment on his kidneys which may never fully recover but he’s alive, he’s coming home and we spoke today for the first time since he came out of the coma he’s been in for 2 months. Unfortunately he’s an arsenal fan so of course the first thing I told him was how we’d knocked them out the cup :). I guess the message is however bad it looks there is always a chance however small and also whatever people say take it seriously you don’t know how it’s going to effect you until it’s too late, he’s 44 no health conditions but was as close to death as you can get, but has somehow pulled through. That could have bern any of us. 

That’s great news. Please pass on our best wishes from all of us.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Weston Super Saint said:

Not sure what your point is!

Because a country with a very long history of human rights violations has introduced vaccine passports, then the UK economy couldn't possibly recover quickly without them as well?

Nice to see you've ignored the question about medical ethics, too tough for you?

I don’t see any issue with medical ethics, you already need a vaccination to enter certain countries or do certain jobs, this is no different.

We are supposed to be on a war footing, a collective effort. We just have to accept that there will be some restrictions on personal freedom, just like they did during the war.

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

Had some very good news today. My best mate (aka to some on here as my black mate) has finally been given a medical discharge. I’ve posted on here a couple of times about it. He was apparently one of the worst cases they’ve ever seen in the country. Been in hospital for 9 weeks, on and ECMO and ventilator for 7 at one point they said he needs a miracle to survive. We’ll we got a miracle, after a drain on his lungs 4 weeks ago suddenly he improved and the change and improvement has been dramatic. He’s still very weak, can’t get out of bed by himself and will be in hospital for another few weeks for physio and treatment on his kidneys which may never fully recover but he’s alive, he’s coming home and we spoke today for the first time since he came out of the coma he’s been in for 2 months. Unfortunately he’s an arsenal fan so of course the first thing I told him was how we’d knocked them out the cup :). I guess the message is however bad it looks there is always a chance however small and also whatever people say take it seriously you don’t know how it’s going to effect you until it’s too late, he’s 44 no health conditions but was as close to death as you can get, but has somehow pulled through. That could have bern any of us. 

That's fantastic. News like this puts into perspective the idiotic sparring of other posts that this one is embedded amongst.

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

All of this is beside the point. You're trying to justify something you know to be wrong by basically saying, "yeah but other people are doing it too."

I'm not trying to justify anything I know to be wrong, that's just you comforting yourself.

There is nothing compelling anyone to have the vaccine, it's not illegal to not have it.  Right and wrong doesn't come into despite HRH telling everyone to do their 'duty'.

What would be wrong would be forcing people to declare their medical history by insisting on a vaccine passport.

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

I don’t see any issue with medical ethics, you already need a vaccination to enter certain countries or do certain jobs, this is no different.

We are supposed to be on a war footing, a collective effort. We just have to accept that there will be some restrictions on personal freedom, just like they did during the war.

Going to a nightclub or a pub is not the same as International travel :mcinnes:

'War footing' :mcinnes:

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

I am not the researcher you are - sorry don’t have the commitment. Happy to change opinion if you find evidence to the contrary as that is what I have been led to believe,

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-55406939

Quote

Scientists are urgently investigating hints the new variant of coronavirus spreads more easily in children.

 

Children almost universally shrug off the virus, but the variant could alter the role they, and schools, play in spreading the virus.

Earlier strains of coronavirus found it harder to infect children than adults.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, Weston Super Saint said:

Going to a nightclub or a pub is not the same as International travel :mcinnes:

'War footing' :mcinnes:

Same principle, no one pisses their pants and cries about medical ethics when they are forced to get a vaccine to travel somewhere or do their job.

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

Same principle, no one pisses their pants and cries about medical ethics when they are forced to get a vaccine to travel somewhere or do their job.

I'm not sure there are any jobs where you are 'forced' to get a vaccine.

How many times do I need to point out that INTERNATIONAL travel is not the same as going to the pub or a nightclub?  Are you unable to see the difference between travelling to another country - that may well have different laws - and going for a pint?

Not only that, there are very few countries that INSIST on a vaccine and the relevant certificate before entry is allowed.  The majority are only 'recommendations' to protect the traveller which individuals can choose whether they have or not - does that remind you of any other vaccine currently in the news?

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

That's two people who won't be able to pass on the infection to someone who has been vaccinated.  That's how vaccinations work.

I've highlighted the relevant bit from my previous question that you've ignored...

Surely the answer to this is unvaccinated people can pass on the infection to each other.

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

Not a lot of that makes sense.

Children don't pose a lower risk (of transmission), hence why they closed the schools, keep up.

Children do have a lower risk profile when it comes to ending up in hospital seriously ill.

Perhaps you've got yourself all confused and muddled up the two completely different concepts.

https://www.ecdc.europa.eu/en/covid-19/questions-answers/questions-answers-school-transmission

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

Same principle, no one pisses their pants and cries about medical ethics when they are forced to get a vaccine to travel somewhere or do their job.

Yes... but at the moment getting a COVID vaccination is not an option for a lot of people. They couldn’t buy one even if they wanted to.

Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Whitey Grandad said:

Yes... but at the moment getting a COVID vaccination is not an option for a lot of people. They couldn’t buy one even if they wanted to.

Just have to wait won’t they. I’m a fit early 40s so it’s going to be a while before I get one but if places want to open up to vaccinated people I would rather that than have them go bust. 

It looks like it will be July at the earliest before everyone gets offered one so I expect it will be sometime next year before we are all done with both doses. IF vaccine passports means we can open some stuff up as normal (like Israel are) then surely that makes sense.

Edited by aintforever
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Fan The Flames said:

Surely the answer to this is unvaccinated people can pass on the infection to each other.

Which was exactly my point.

So why are people who have had / intend to have, the vaccination getting so upset about those that don't?

It's like going out in a winter storm, fully clad in oil skins and wellie boots and complaining that they've seen the postman wearing shorts!

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Fan The Flames said:

This quote from that article appears to echo the point I was making with the link and quote below....

Quote

Children do not seem to be more susceptible to the new variant of concern for SARS-CoV-2 initially detected in the United Kingdom, which seems to be more transmissible in both children and adults.

 

3 hours ago, Weston Super Saint said:
Quote

Scientists are urgently investigating hints the new variant of coronavirus spreads more easily in children.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Weston Super Saint said:

Which was exactly my point.

So why are people who have had / intend to have, the vaccination getting so upset about those that don't?

It's like going out in a winter storm, fully clad in oil skins and wellie boots and complaining that they've seen the postman wearing shorts!

But you're missing the point, if it's still transmitting then it's still hanging around, we don't know how long the vaccine lasts for and the last thing we won't is another lockdown. Also if it's still transmitting then it's still mutating, with the possibility of a strain that the vaccine doesn't cover or even a hard core super strain. Just looking after yourself isn't as fail safe as you think.

I've got no problem with airlines banning non-vaccinated travellers, less wackos and religious nutters to share the plane with.

Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Weston Super Saint said:

This quote from that article appears to echo the point I was making with the link and quote below....

 

 

You missed this bit;

The majority of children do not develop symptoms when infected with the virus, or they develop a very mild form of the disease.

so whilst the new variant is more transmissable (and more could just mean a few percentages) the viral load is still low enough for children to be a lower risk.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Until the entire world is vaccinated then it will still be hanging around and mutating.  As they said at one of the briefings last week, this is going to be around for a decade or more.

As you've already pointed out, it will only be transmitting to people who haven't been vaccinated due to a refusal (unless there is a super mutation), the majority of whom are in the 18-29 age group so not likely to affect the NHS, which is the only reason the country closed down in the first place...

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Fan The Flames said:

You missed this bit;

The majority of children do not develop symptoms when infected with the virus, or they develop a very mild form of the disease.

so whilst the new variant is more transmissable (and more could just mean a few percentages) the viral load is still low enough for children to be a lower risk.

I didn't feel I needed to cover it again, as I already pointed this out in the post you quoted....

9 hours ago, Weston Super Saint said:

Not a lot of that makes sense.

Children don't pose a lower risk (of transmission), hence why they closed the schools, keep up.

Children do have a lower risk profile when it comes to ending up in hospital seriously ill.

Perhaps you've got yourself all confused and muddled up the two completely different concepts.

Not sure how you can equate viral load being a lower risk in the same sentence where you state the variants are more transmissable by children.

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

Just have to wait won’t they. I’m a fit early 40s so it’s going to be a while before I get one but if places want to open up to vaccinated people I would rather that than have them go bust. 

It looks like it will be July at the earliest before everyone gets offered one so I expect it will be sometime next year before we are all done with both doses. IF vaccine passports means we can open some stuff up as normal (like Israel are) then surely that makes sense.

That’s my position too but it’s easy for me of course. We should open up everything as soon as possible. As one who has been (partly) vaccinated I don’t mind mixing with those who aren’t.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Fan The Flames said:

Maybe we should we have vaccine passports to access this forum.

It's a pity Steve hasn't introduced a simple football based knowledge check before allowing people on the main board.

Edited by The Cat
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, The Cat said:

It's a pity Steve hasn't introduced a simple football based knowledge check before allowing people on the main board.

He’d lose out on a lot of fivers if he did

Link to post
Share on other sites

It doesn’t seem right to me that having suffered lockdown to protect the over 60’s, nippers will now be banned from pubs, clubs, international travel, cinemas because we haven’t got down to vaccinating them. Once the whole adult population has had the opportunity to be vaccinated, then there’s a discussion to be had.
 

Personally, with the BAME community , women up the duff  & illegal immigrants high up the list on non Vaxers, I can’t see this pinko government going for vaccine passports as government policy. What I can see them doing is allowing companies to insist on a negative test that day or proof of vaccine. The hassle of obtaining a negative test result over and over,  will mean vaccine passport by the back door. Not Government policy, but a nod and a wink.  I can also see them insisting certain professions have one (as I believe they do with hepatitis already) but that Plimlico plank maybe on a sticky wicket if he’s saying a blanket no jab/no job. Again, the way round this would be daily negative test, or proof of vaccine. 
 

 

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

I didn't feel I needed to cover it again, as I already pointed this out in the post you quoted....

Not sure how you can equate viral load being a lower risk in the same sentence where you state the variants are more transmissable by children.

It's not hard, children can transmit but what they transmit is a lower viral load so they are a lower risk. The new variant is more transmissable, but more could be 1% more it could be 10%, no one knows the figures yet. But the load and the transmissability from children is still low enough for them to be deemed a low risk. You are the one trying to equate a child and an unvaccinated adult, when no scientific body is.

Whilst the vacination program is ongoing and before we've got to the point were we are ready to live with it, governments and business may want to take a cautious approach. You were scratching your head and your balls wondering why and I just pointed out why they might think that way. Personally I'm relaxed either way, as I said if airlines don't want to take the unvaccinated, I'm not going to be marching on Downing Street. But if you want to moan about this disgrace then fill your boots.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Fan The Flames said:

It's not hard, children can transmit but what they transmit is a lower viral load so they are a lower risk. The new variant is more transmissable, but more could be 1% more it could be 10%, no one knows the figures yet. 

 

You claim it's not "hard" but then admit you don't actually know what the figure is. It "could" be 98%. 

I'm assuming you don't have any kids if you're not fussed if airlines don't want to take the unvaccinated - would certainly ruin the holiday plans of lots of families.

Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, Weston Super Saint said:

You claim it's not "hard" but then admit you don't actually know what the figure is. It "could" be 98%. 

I'm assuming you don't have any kids if you're not fussed if airlines don't want to take the unvaccinated - would certainly ruin the holiday plans of lots of families.

Bad trolling pal. It's not 98% and the 'unvaccinated' wouldn't include children, but you know that.

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Fan The Flames said:

Bad trolling pal. It's not 98% and the 'unvaccinated' wouldn't include children, but you know that.

It's equally as likely to be 98% as your 1%.

Given that schools have been closed since January and aren't going to reopen until March due to the increased amount of transmissions amongst children, it's more likely to be around the 50% mark - unless you are claiming the Government 'panicked'.

You have no idea whether children will or won't be given a vaccine passport - the countries muting the need for one are saying that travellers must "prove" they have received a vaccine.  It will be impossible for children to prove that as they are currently not going to be vaccinated.

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Lord Duckhunter said:

It doesn’t seem right to me that having suffered lockdown to protect the over 60’s, nippers will now be banned from pubs, clubs, international travel, cinemas because we haven’t got down to vaccinating them. Once the whole adult population has had the opportunity to be vaccinated, then there’s a discussion to be had.
 

Personally, with the BAME community , women up the duff  & illegal immigrants high up the list on non Vaxers, I can’t see this pinko government going for vaccine passports as government policy. What I can see them doing is allowing companies to insist on a negative test that day or proof of vaccine. The hassle of obtaining a negative test result over and over,  will mean vaccine passport by the back door. Not Government policy, but a nod and a wink.  I can also see them insisting certain professions have one (as I believe they do with hepatitis already) but that Plimlico plank maybe on a sticky wicket if he’s saying a blanket no jab/no job. Again, the way round this would be daily negative test, or proof of vaccine. 
 

 

I wonder if they do evening classes in Duck speak.

Who / what  is a "Pimlico plank" ? Is it new Cockney rhyming slang for a J. Arthur Rank???

 

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

 

5995AA53-EE59-43E0-91A7-7FB55B839BD5.jpeg

Nothing wrong with Charlie. Done well for himself by hard work, and expects people to graft for their money. Taken a firm stand on anti vaxers too. Shit hair though. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Lord Duckhunter said:

It doesn’t seem right to me that having suffered lockdown to protect the over 60’s, nippers will now be banned from pubs, clubs, international travel, cinemas because we haven’t got down to vaccinating them. Once the whole adult population has had the opportunity to be vaccinated, then there’s a discussion to be had.
 

Personally, with the BAME community , women up the duff  & illegal immigrants high up the list on non Vaxers, I can’t see this pinko government going for vaccine passports as government policy. What I can see them doing is allowing companies to insist on a negative test that day or proof of vaccine. The hassle of obtaining a negative test result over and over,  will mean vaccine passport by the back door. Not Government policy, but a nod and a wink.  I can also see them insisting certain professions have one (as I believe they do with hepatitis already) but that Plimlico plank maybe on a sticky wicket if he’s saying a blanket no jab/no job. Again, the way round this would be daily negative test, or proof of vaccine. 
 

 

I don't see that really being an issue. If the government meets their target of having everyone offered the vaccine by the end of July, it's not going to be an issue for very long, if most stuff doesn't restart until mid May anyway. I can't see anything wrong with your second paragraph personally. It's not even a nod and a wink, simply a basic fact of life that if you make stupid decisions, you have to live with the consequences. I hope that 'Plimlico plank' sticks to his guns. If I was a restaurant manager and someone came to me asking for a job, who didn't believe in washing his hands after taking a dump, I'd send them packing.

Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Lighthouse said:

 It's not even a nod and a wink, simply a basic fact of life that if you make stupid decisions, you have to live with the consequences. I hope that 'Plimlico plank' sticks to his guns. If I was a restaurant manager and someone came to me asking for a job, who didn't believe in washing his hands after taking a dump, I'd send them packing.

I’m not disagreeing. However, can you see modern politicians implementing a policy that affects BAME & undocumented immigrants a lot more than whitey? Once it becomes apparent the the vast majority of anti Vacers aren’t David Icke like loons, but in fact the BAME community & immigrants, can you see this flying, because I can’t. 

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

I’m not disagreeing. However, can you see modern politicians implementing a policy that affects BAME & undocumented immigrants a lot more than whitey? Once it becomes apparent the the vast majority of anti Vacers aren’t David Icke like loons, but in fact the BAME community & immigrants, can you see this flying, because I can’t. 

I can't see it being implemented.  Imagine another eat out to help out scheme being implemented which excludes anyone under the age of 30!

I definitely can't see places like Spain and Greece implementing it either.  They are desperate for tourists to visit.

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

I’m not disagreeing. However, can you see modern politicians implementing a policy that affects BAME & undocumented immigrants a lot more than whitey? Once it becomes apparent the the vast majority of anti Vacers aren’t David Icke like loons, but in fact the BAME community & immigrants, can you see this flying, because I can’t. 

It won't be BAME & undocumented immigrants that's stops libertarian Boris from doing it. 

As you say it will be more back door stuff, like imposing a period of isolation if you aren't vaccinated and go to a country with a low vaccination level. Which will be ok because no one will check up you on you anyway.

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

I’m not disagreeing. However, can you see modern politicians implementing a policy that affects BAME & undocumented immigrants a lot more than whitey? Once it becomes apparent the the vast majority of anti Vacers aren’t David Icke like loons, but in fact the BAME community & immigrants, can you see this flying, because I can’t. 

I don’t see any sense in that, why would Boris be scared of a small minority of illegal immigrants, who can’t even vote. Also, this isn’t a large number of BAME being anti-vaxxers, it’s a large number of anti-vaxxers being BAME, which is completely different. Vaccine passports won’t be seen as racist and I think anyone who tried to argue that was the case would be widely disregarded.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Lighthouse said:

I don’t see any sense in that, why would Boris be scared of a small minority of illegal immigrants, who can’t even vote. Also, this isn’t a large number of BAME being anti-vaxxers, it’s a large number of anti-vaxxers being BAME, which is completely different. Vaccine passports won’t be seen as racist and I think anyone who tried to argue that was the case would be widely disregarded.

We’ll have to agree to disagree. 
 

You wait until wokies start realising BAME folk are missing out on jobs, visits to shops, pubs and cinemas disproportionately. 

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

We’ll have to agree to disagree. 
 

You wait until wokies start realising BAME folk are missing out on jobs, visits to shops, pubs and cinemas disproportionately. 

Coronavirus has already been labeled as racist as it effects BAMEs more severely. I’m sure there will be uproar once they realise they are being discriminated against for not having the jab.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Forgive my simplicity, but why are people jetting back and forth between the UK and Brazil at the moment anyway? I'm not really sure why there is a need for any international travel apart from for logistical reasons. The quarantine hotels are probably something we should have implemented in the autumn, I heard some tales of those being required to use them complaining about it, which strikes me as very odd.

Link to post
Share on other sites

There was an article about a woman who had flown to Brazil to comfort her father who was ill.  She was complaining that she couldn't get a place in a quarantine hotel.

Not sure why she was allowed to travel to Brazil in the first place. If my old man got ill, I wouldn't be allowed to travel the 140 miles to go and see him, let alone stay the night.

Link to post
Share on other sites

There is a Brazilian lad based in the UK who works for my company. He went back to Brazil at Christmas and whilst there they closed the borders so couldn't get back until mid February. I wonder if he is the missing carrier. :lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Weston Super Saint said:

There was an article about a woman who had flown to Brazil to comfort her father who was ill.  She was complaining that she couldn't get a place in a quarantine hotel.

Not sure why she was allowed to travel to Brazil in the first place. If my old man got ill, I wouldn't be allowed to travel the 140 miles to go and see him, let alone stay the night.

My mother is now over 101 and lives about 101 miles away. I’d love to go and see her but the only way I can do that is if she dies.

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, whelk said:

Force everyone who has been to Brazil in last 3 months to come forward or is that going to upset the libertarians?

No need for that!

The details of everyone who has been to Brazil in the last three months will be stored on the immigration database.

Simply arrange for a middle of the night knock for them all and stick 'em in a cell for two weeks.

Shouldn't be any issues with civil liberties there ;) 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Lighthouse changed the title to Coronavirus

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})