Left Back
-
Posts
6,711 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Store
Posts posted by Left Back
-
-
2 minutes ago, Honest_Man#1 said:
Couple of questions:
- Is death date the only metric for how successful a government has been during the pandemic? That seems a wildly narrow viewpoint as it ignores a multitude of other incredibly important issues (mental health impact, economy etc) they should have been balancing risk against.
- Are we only allowed to compare ourselves to other U.K. nations? Can we not compare against any of the other vast number of countries to evaluate how we have performed? Again seems an incredibly narrow viewpoint to take.
People will always cherry pick data to support the point of view they're trying to get across.
0 -
17 minutes ago, 101 said:
They waited until 80% vaccinated before opening up fully, anyone know when we are expecting to hit 80% of adults double dosed?
ETA I was hoping for a bit earlier than that, 80% seems a high threshold, before releasing everything.
Where are you getting this from? Are you sure it wasn't 80 doses per 100 people?
they've currently jagged 103.7 per 100 people which with their 2 dose strategy is just under 52% of the population
4 -
48 minutes ago, 101 said:
Have they published the data that what levels will be decided on yet?
I actually think that Health Boards makes far more sense than local authorities especially when Test and Protect is being run by health boards but as outbreaks and clusters start to fall there really isn't much for them to do, so perhaps it's a way to get things moving faster if health boards are comfortable with the demand on their services.
Obviously I say this as someone in Fife so it doesn't really make any difference for us.
Health boards won't get a say in this. it will be the criteria set by the SG so doesn't matter what they feel comfortable with.
Using health boards as the area for imposing restrictions will restrict more people. health boards are (mostly) larger population wise.
0 -
25 minutes ago, Tynierose said:
moronic statements naturally from the Greens supporting the elimination proposal irrespective of the effect on peoples lives.
The greens are always happy with anything that shuts down economic activity. Economies kill the planet.
4 -
3 hours ago, mizfit said:
The year is 2030, every adult bar the bizarre anti vaxxers is vaccinated, pubs, bars and restaurants are open, football grounds are full.
Covid infection rates are minimal and those clinically vulnerable are receiving boosters annually and it’s keeping the NHS safe.
Jason Leitch and Devi Shridar start into space, both muttering about unknown variants, tweeting NHS Twitter accounts begging for details on infection rates refusing to accept this has faded into the background.I’d get the fuckers started into space right now. Sod waiting 9 years to launch them into the sun.
1 -
2 minutes ago, Wee Bully said:
No, a day and a half after the announcement, you are literally the first person to mention it.The rest of us were too busy praying to notice.
2 -
10 minutes ago, Todd_is_God said:
I assume the ones where he said an increase in cases was going to be ok as not very many people would end up very ill or dead.
Because people have lost all sense of perspective and having absolutely no covid deaths ever, whatever the cost, is the only thing acceptable to them.
I'd give him a knighthood for that.
0 -
16 minutes ago, madwullie said:
If you're talking about Whitty, they are howling for him to be sacked down south after his comments about the latest model.
what were his comments?
0 -
2 minutes ago, The Master said:
I genuinely don't understand why there's a need to aim for elimination or eradication if the vaccines get us to a position where anyone who does get ill barely knows it, and hospitalisations and deaths are relatively low.
We don't shut down the country for a few months every winter when the flu comes along. Why should this virus be any different?
I absolutely supported the SG's approach at the start; but it seems like there's a reluctance to change that approach in the view of changing circumstances.
It's been said many times but while we have an open border with England (and NI/ROI) preventing community transmission is impossible.
0 -
5 minutes ago, TheScarf said:
She could do with getting an epidemiologist like the Nigels have. That would be a start. A dentist and a medical researcher isn't really cutting it for me.
Thought Gregor smith was a GP?
0 -
11 minutes ago, Jan Vojáček said:
So the FM wants to see a situation where there are no cases of community transmission for three years, in a world where the CMO does not believe the virus can be eradicated?
Rustling so loud it could be heard from Holm Park.
FM is either bandying about words she doesn't know the meaning of, or is deliberately misusing them.
If she said zero community transmission, that is one thing and is the first step to elimination but official elimination ,even if it could be achieved is years away.
Only 2 diseases have ever been eradicated. Eradication takes years/decades and requires a global effort. I'd suspect we're a long way from attempting that so the CMO is likely correct.
ETA. The smallpox eradication programmes started in 1959, the last community transmission happened in 1975 and the disease was declared eradicated in 1980. Even if we could reduce those timeframes for covid are we likely to reduce them dramatically?
0 -
15 minutes ago, Jan Vojáček said:
A lot going on in that article.
A few lines later...
elimination and eradication have very specific definitions in the terms of viruses.
WHO defines elimination as having no domestic transmission for 3 years. eradication is basically elimination on a global scale.
0 -
28 minutes ago, Marten said:
Cricket is a completely different sport. The D/L method doesn't apply to a whole season, just to individual matches. And it's in order to make it fair. If team A gets x overs, then team B should also get x overs to attempt to reach the required amount of runs. If team B can't get that many overs, their target needs to be amended in some way and that's why the D/L method exists. That's completely different from football so the comparison doesn't work.
Also, cricket records all cancelled games as automatic draws which can massively skew a season. That will never be accepted in football.
Are you deliberately misunderstanding? I never mentioned amended targets because it wouldn't be relevant here. I was talking purely about a formula for the number of games that can be played if the season is disrupted. I used it as an example of how things could be worked out and made explicit prior to the season starting. I never said football should adopt an exact replica of D/L
1 -
Public Accounts Committee getting stuck into Test & Trace
1 -
21 minutes ago, madwullie said:
I hadn't thought of that tbh.
In saying that, none of the funerals I've ever been to have actually been in a church though - even my gran who practically lived there was just at the crematorium. Do many people have them at the actual place of worship? I genuinely don't know
In England the last few I’ve been to were in the crem. In Scotland it’s been a mixed bag. The last two the service was at the graveside. One about 3 months ago and one pre-pandemic. The one before that the service was in the house before moving to the burial. I was told this was the norm in Fife where it took place.
0 -
1 hour ago, Thereisalight.. said:
Yip its madness. There is an explanation for it though, JL is a bible basher so I'm sure hes been in NS ear saying how safe churches are. Maybe covid isnt as omnipresent as God is
If you’re a teacher in a faith school you should be getting to the back of the vaccination queue. You’re already protected twice.
0 -
1 minute ago, ICTChris said:
They probably would have, if we’d been talking about that.So they’re advocating we all stay locked down forever then? Seem like a sensible bunch.
Let me guess. They still want whatever stuff they do to be open though while banning the stuff they aren’t interested in.
1 -
5 minutes ago, ICTChris said:
The idea that putting in place some body to adjudicate who is responsible for arrests of football fans in the surrounds of grounds on match days is possible or even desirable is crazy.
Fans of non Old Firm clubs are being very naive if they think something like strict liability would only affect Celtic and Rangers. The Offensive Behaviour at Football Act was used to prosecute fans of many different clubs, I’m sure the first person jailed under it was an Ayr Utd fan.
I was talking about this at work today and had colleagues say the season should be cancelled because having more games risks events like the weekend and further spread of the virus and extension of lockdown. Sometimes football fans forget that most people in Scotland don’t care about football and would happily see the season binned, games behind closed doors for the next year and no Euros.Opening up places of worship risks further spread of the virus, more so than football, but they’re being allowed to bash on. Are your colleagues calling for worship to be cancelled as well?
0 -
5 minutes ago, Inanimate Carbon Rod said:
It absolutely is and should be extended to disorder which can be proven to be directly linked to the event. Ie a fight between casuals known to have links to the club a street away from the ground or people singing sectarian songs as the team bus pulls up or racially abusing a rival player as they step off the bus or enter the ground. Or if the club refused to respond to reasonable requests for assistance in incidents like sunday in encouraging people to disperse.
I think theres a really workable strategy in it and its obvious that the OF will have a real opposition to it as their fans cause the vast majority of trouble.I’d class all of those things as being within the match-day environment, except the reasonable request. Anyone with a brain would respond to a reasonable request that takes minutes and costs nothing.
lets say for example Rangers fan were battling Aberdeen fans on a match-day. Do you punish both clubs? How do you determine one side is at fault and not the other if not? It’s not as entirely straightforward as you make out. Where do you draw the line at that? A bunch of Celtic fans on the lash in Edinburgh have a scrap with a bunch of Hearts fans on a non match-day but football caused the scrap. Are the clubs still responsible?
0 -
7 minutes ago, Inanimate Carbon Rod said:
For me and this might be unpopular given the website, but id bring in strict liability for football clubs, they should be responsible for the actions of their fans in the immediate environs of their ground etc. Celtic and Rangers have pandered to the arsehole element of their support giving them wee special areas of the ground to sing their bile from, emboldening them and their behaviour. Bring in proper procedures with independent oversight (ie clear evidence of sectarian singing or racism , crowd disorder etc and the stand gets shut) if it continues its behind closed doors or some other measures. Have the sfa or spfl lead it in conjunction with the authorities. If something like that was brought in and properly implemented without pandering to these types then it would almost solve the problems overnight.
I’m all for strict liability within the confines of the match-day environment but outside of that it’s not the clubs problem.
0 -
1 minute ago, Forest_Fifer said:2 hours ago, Les Cabbage said:So you can meet 3 other people from 1 other household outdoors.
Unless you believe in a mythical man in the sky, if you do you are able to meet 49 people indoors.
Jason Leitch is running this himself eh?
Need to start the Church of Tennants.
Churches do enough for the homeless without becoming their landlords as well.
0 -
Are the new loan rules allowing 4 from one club permanent or just in place for this season? I've never seen it clarified anywhere.
0 -
2 minutes ago, Detournement said:
It would be incredibly petty but they hate working class football fans.
Patrick Harvie's comments today were unbelievable. He thinks that Rangers are responsible for what their fans get up to in George Square but no one in the Scottish Government has to carry the can for sending Covid into care homes. A joke party for middle class wankers.
I'm no lover of Rangers but to say they are responsible is ludicrous, in the same way Celtic weren't responsible for the demonstrations outside their stadium and the antics that entailed.
0 -
4 minutes ago, Aufc said:
The pub is my place of worshipTurning water into wine will be allowed. Wine into water...no chance.
1
Coronavirus (COVID-19)
in The General Nonsense Forum
Posted
Protecting the NHS(the whole reason for lockdown in the first place) meant it was always only about deaths and hospitalisations.
Pre-vaccines case numbers were a predictable indicator of what was coming deaths and hospitalisations wise so people were happy to accept that as an indicator. That direct link has now been broken though which is why people are unhappy about case numbers being used to determine restrictions.