Coronavirus (COVID-19)

[ArabianKnight]

7 minutes ago, Tight John McVeigh is a tit said:

 

In fairness he is just following existing unproven threads and makes at least two incorrect statements. The first he puts a time frame as months when at best it was weeks and suggests the institute is in the vicinity of the wet market. The lab is nowhere close. It is well outside Wuhan.

Could there have been a contamination by accident, from the lab possibly, but its a wild statement at this moment in time with little credence.

However the fact that China released the genome sequence of the virus and it was concluded that it was not man made and the genome has now been replicated in the west and still no one is questioning the origin, I think it’s safe to assume, based on current scientific evidence that its bullshit.

 

He shows a map showing how close proximity they are

Also the guy isn't claiming its man made either wtf has that got to do with anything. 

Edited April 20, 2020 by ArabianKnight

[Tight minge]

He shows a map showing how close proximity they are [emoji848] Also the guy isn't claiming its man made either wtf has that got to do with anything. 

 

 

It shows a map, yes, it shows two places, yes. However, it is not the Virology Lab in question.

 

The lab is 20 miles away as the crow flies.

 

eta: The correct location of the lab and the market pulled from Baidu. Logically it would take a huge amount of conspiracy to put such a lab in a heavily populated area.

[DA Baracus]

27 minutes ago, ICTChris said:

Including plenty of P&Bers - 

 

 

Indeed. Harrowing reading from truly filthy fools. Disgusting stuff.

[ayrmad]

1 hour ago, ICTChris said:

Including plenty of P&Bers - 

 

 

Obviously half of respondents lied like f**k, never in a million years do 38% of men wash their hands after going to the toilet. 

[ayrmad]

1 hour ago, madmitch said:

Haven't seen much reference to this. The U.K.'s first instance of community transmission of the virus was March 1.  

Lockdown was announced on March 23rd.  NZ 's first case of community transmission was reported on March 24 the country went into full lockdown on March 27th.  Yet, the UK Govt. claiming that they weren't too slow in responding.  NZ easing lockdown measures next Monday for two weeks then reviewing the alert level at the end of that period. 

Scotland 8187 cases 902 deaths.

NZ  1440 cases 12 deaths.

We had deaths before March 1st.

[welshbairn]

Don't think you can take much from a comparison with New Zealand, there are too many variables, being a bunch of weirdos for one. I've got family there, I know.

Edited April 20, 2020 by welshbairn

[Granny Danger]

54 minutes ago, greendot said:

The government is responding through an official channel to a political attack and you think thats corrupt?  How would you prefer them to the respond?  Through a Civil Servants Facebook site?!?!?!  Surely responding through an official channel is the only way to deal with this??  Doesn't matter what your political bias is respond through an official channel.

It’s a political attack.  They have plenty of ways to respond to it that does not what involve using a tax payer funded mechanism.

Official government platforms are not meant to be used for party political purposes.

[greendot]

2 minutes ago, Granny Danger said:

They have plenty of ways to respond to it that does not what involve using a tax payer funded mechanism.

Such as?

[ICTJohnboy]

1 hour ago, coprolite said:

Sounds like someone's got a Tory fetish. I bet you cracked one off to that Thatcher pic a few pages back didn't you?

 

Certainly not, but I might have made an exception for this one.

 

[Granny Danger]

3 minutes ago, greendot said:

Such as?

You’re obviously as thick as shit if you need me to explain how a politician can get a message across without using an official government channel.  They do it all the time.

Therefore I won’t waste my time discussing it with you further.

[greendot]

Just now, Granny Danger said:

You’re obviously as thick as shit if you need me to explain how a politician can get a message across without using an official government channel.  They do it all the time.

Therefore I won’t waste my time discussing it with you further.

 

The government, funded by the tax payer, so any response they give will be off the tax payer's funded mechanism.  So unfortunately i think it's you that's thick as pig shit I'm afraid........

[ICTJohnboy]

4 minutes ago, Granny Danger said:

You’re obviously as thick as shit if you need me to explain how a politician can get a message across without using an official government channel.  They do it all the time.

Therefore I won’t waste my time discussing it with you further.

 

Oh Granny, sometimes your posts have a somewhat less than flattering, or respectful quality about them.

[coprolite]

1 hour ago, Granny Danger said:

An official government website being used to respond to a political attack.  That is as corrupt as f**k.

 

 

1 hour ago, greendot said:

The government is responding through an official channel to a political attack and you think thats corrupt?  How would you prefer them to the respond?  Through a Civil Servants Facebook site?!?!?!  Surely responding through an official channel is the only way to deal with this??  Doesn't matter what your political bias is respond through an official channel.

I think that the government is entitled to respond as the government to correct factual inaccuracies if they might pose risks. 

Responding point by point like this in an adversarial manner is really inappropriate. 

It reads like a sevco statement knocked up for the trump administration. 

[ICTJohnboy]

16 minutes ago, coprolite said:

 

It reads like a sevco statement knocked up for the trump administration. 

 

Was that submitted by the Texas Rangers?

[O'Kelly Isley III]

It’s a political attack.  They have plenty of ways to respond to it that does not what involve using a tax payer funded mechanism.
Official government platforms are not meant to be used for party political purposes.

Isn't that what the Daily Telegraph exists for ?

[Granny Danger]

37 minutes ago, greendot said:

 

The government, funded by the tax payer, so any response they give will be off the tax payer's funded mechanism.  So unfortunately i think it's you that's thick as pig shit I'm afraid........

All political parties receive a level of public funding for political appointees.  Using said resources to respond is well within the accepted norms.  Using the mechanism they did isn’t.

[madwullie]

5 hours ago, Jacksgranda said:

What % of black/asians are front line medical staff?

Are Covid-19 deaths broken down by profession and race?

That absolute fanny piers Morgan posted this earlier

 

I appreciate this is a bit looks a bit muslimy 

Edited April 20, 2020 by madwullie

[DrewDon]

Fair play to my next door neighbours' daughter, who arrived with shopping for her elderly, high-risk parents about two hours ago and has since decided to join them for a coffee and a chat in their back garden. It's not the first time since lockdown, either. Maybe she's after the inheritance. 

[Mark Connolly]

Read a good line earlier, saying that the spread of covid19 was down to how dense the population is, and to take that however you like.

[madwullie]

2 hours ago, greendot said:

The government is responding through an official channel to a political attack and you think thats corrupt?  How would you prefer them to the respond?  Through a Civil Servants Facebook site?!?!?!  Surely responding through an official channel is the only way to deal with this??  Doesn't matter what your political bias is respond through an official channel.

.gov.uk is not a platform for the government of the day to be political on. It is set up to provide information to UK citizens, nit defend or attack any particular political party that happens to be in charge at that time. 

It is a serious misuse of that domain.