Coronavirus (COVID-19)

[Todd_is_God]

3 minutes ago, super_carson said:

I saw Leitch's comments on BBC here:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-56110282

To be fair, he seems to be somewhat realistic about the cost of any such policy and compromises we might have to make.  The debate is whether or not that is a policy worth following, and that should be left open to the public to decide.  

It is interesting to note, however, at the bottom of the article comments from another Doctor from Edinburgh Uni who is talking about living with the virus and the vaccination programme.  I'm not sure if it's wishful thinking but I do seem to notice more of these types of comment getting traction in the media.  

I actually wouldn't be as annoyed if NS/SG were to say these restrictions may be needed depending on the vaccination programme and are a pragmatic contingency plan and not plan A.   At least that would be an acknowledgment there is a near-future with significantly less restrictions (ideally none) if things work as hoped instead of this "abandon all hope, ye who enter here" messaging.  

He also seems to think four and five day lockdows off the back off a couple of positive tests are a viable long term strategy, even in a highly vaccinated population.

I genuiely don't feel that the "compromises" are worth it for the sake of preventing people becoming mildly ill. That is utter madness, and so far removed from the "protect the NHS" goal the emergency powers were brought in for.

Edited February 18, 2021 by Todd_is_God

[Steven W]

5 minutes ago, Detournement said:

Exactly. Everyone who does essential work or a job which generates real value for the economy still has to go to work. 

All the important parts of the economy have either been continually open or only shut down during spring 2020. There is no economic imperative to reopen pubs or nail bars or gyms. 

 

Whether you're for it or not, surely the only means of getting to zero-covid (or thereabouts) would need an actual proper lockdown, with nigh on everything shut.

1100 cases yesterday (over six weeks into it now) is a damning indictment of this half arsed lockdown.

[Steven W]

4 minutes ago, super_carson said:

I actually wouldn't be as annoyed if NS/SG were to say these restrictions may be needed depending on the vaccination programme and are a pragmatic contingency plan and not plan A.   At least that would be an acknowledgment there is a near-future with significantly less restrictions (ideally none) if things work as hoped instead of this "abandon all hope, ye who enter here" messaging.  

 

I'm beginning to think their stategy / policy is all over the shop to be honest.

[Left Back]

14 minutes ago, Detournement said:

Exactly. Everyone who does essential work or a job which generates real value for the economy still has to go to work. 

All the important parts of the economy have either been continually open or only shut down during spring 2020. There is no economic imperative to reopen pubs or nail bars or gyms. 

 

Of course not.  Now that Sunak has found his magic money tree we can pluck notes off it for ever more. 

The quicker all aspects of the economy are re-opened the less the tax payer will have to find in the future to balance the country's finances and the less jobs are likely to be lost.  This doesn't mean we open up tomorrow but it absolutely is imperative we open up as soon as is reasonably possible.

[Detournement]

Just now, Steven W said:

Whether you're for it or not, surely the only means of getting to zero-covid (or thereabouts) would need an actual proper lockdown, with nigh on everything shut.

1100 cases yesterday (over six weeks into it now) is a damning indictment of this half arsed lockdown.

I'm not talking about Covid levels. I'm talking about how the economy is still functioning in a way which massively benefits the super rich. The stock markets in America hit an all time high two days ago. 

There will be some people like Tim Martin who want to open back up so he can sell pints and battered cod but he's a 4th rate capitalist with an outdated investment model. 

[George Parr]

8 minutes ago, super_carson said:

I saw Leitch's comments on BBC here:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-56110282

To be fair, he seems to be somewhat realistic about the cost of any such policy and compromises we might have to make.  The debate is whether or not that is a policy worth following, and that should be left open to the public to decide.  

It is interesting to note, however, at the bottom of the article comments from another Doctor from Edinburgh Uni who is talking about living with the virus and the vaccination programme.  I'm not sure if it's wishful thinking but I do seem to notice more of these types of comment getting traction in the media.  

I actually wouldn't be as annoyed if NS/SG were to say these restrictions may be needed depending on the vaccination programme and are a pragmatic contingency plan and not plan A.   At least that would be an acknowledgment there is a near-future with significantly less restrictions (ideally none) if things work as hoped instead of this "abandon all hope, ye who enter here" messaging.  

 

The article fails to highlight the most important point that the group acknowledged broad agreement would be required across the entire UK to pursue elimination. So their recommendations and Leitch’s comments are a distracting waste of time.

[TheScarf]

I can't believe a fucking dentist is basically directing the Covid policy in this country.

[Billy Jean King]

The thing is, this is what would have to happen if these folk got their way.

The central belt has been in tier 3 (or equivalent) since about September. We'd be left bouncing between tiers 3 and 4 forever if it was up to these loonies.

Whit, it's a citizens assembly ffs, they cannot and will not "get their way"

Folk really are starting to lose all perspective here within this echo chamber.

[Detournement]

Did Sandy Comarty off here not say he was part of the Citizens Assembly?

 

[Todd_is_God]

1 minute ago, Billy Jean King said:

Whit, it's a citizens assembly ffs, they cannot and will not "get their way"

Folk really are starting to lose all perspective here within this echo chamber.

Of course they won't "get their way"

But the SG will undoubtably use these findings to support their views that they have full public support for their strategy.

[Todd_is_God]

4 minutes ago, TheScarf said:

I can't believe a fucking dentist with yellow teeth is basically directing the Covid policy in this country.

FTFY

[Rugster]

13 minutes ago, Steven W said:

Whether you're for it or not, surely the only means of getting to zero-covid (or thereabouts) would need an actual proper lockdown, with nigh on everything shut.

1100 cases yesterday (over six weeks into it now) is a damning indictment of this half arsed lockdown.

You keep going on about the number of cases yesterday but are ignoring the low positivity rate which has already been mentioned. 5.1% 

[Billy Jean King]

Of course they won't "get their way"
But the SG will undoubtably use these findings to support their views that they have full public support for their strategy.

They cannot use "findings" lol of laymen on a Citizens Assembly to support anything. These assemblies have existed for years, they influence hee haw.

[Left Back]

1 minute ago, Billy Jean King said:

Whit, it's a citizens assembly ffs, they cannot and will not "get their way"

Folk really are starting to lose all perspective here within this echo chamber.

They clearly won't.  Can you imagine the scene of Sturgeon announcing at the next review we're going to pursue zero covid.

Yes we have vaccines, yes we have treatments but we're putting you into a lockdown that will be worse than last spring and will last for longer than last spring.  We'll be shutting the borders and you won't be allowed out for at least another year, or probably longer and this includes travel to other parts of the UK as well until the whole world is vaccinated.

Zero covid sailed long ago.  It would be political suicide to try and pursue it now.

[101]

9 minutes ago, Steven W said:

I'm beginning to think their stategy / policy is all over the shop to be honest.

I think it's showing signs of fatigue, understandable but should have been avoided, election will help as it will shake up the Government.

[Todd_is_God]

1 minute ago, Billy Jean King said:

3 minutes ago, Todd_is_God said:

Of course they won't "get their way"
But the SG will undoubtably use these findings to support their views that they have full public support for their strategy.

They cannot use "findings" lol of laymen on a Citizens Assembly to support anything. These assemblies have existed for years, they influence hee haw.

What's the point of them then?

[renton]

2 minutes ago, Todd_is_God said:

What's the point of them then?

To make people think they are being listened to.

[Elixir]

I do wonder at what stage it will be looked back on that torching society because of what the Chinese did, along with blind panic, was in fact the worst policy disaster of the 21st century. Rather than simply accepting there would be trade-offs, that some vulnerable people would unfortunately die, and following pandemic mitigation measures that had been in planning every year prior.

[ayrmad]

On 16/02/2021 at 13:55, Frankie S said:

So social distancing being rolled on well behind its sell-by date after not only the vulnerable but the whole adult population have been vaccinated will result in ‘big opportunities for entrepreneurs’ in the hospitality industry? I’ve heard it all now. No it f***ing won’t, it’ll completely decimate the industry, trashing the entire independent sectors in the pub, restaurant, events and live music industries, sending all but the behemoths like Weatherspoons to the wall.

I’m an entrepreneur in the aforementioned industries, and here’s what social distancing means to me - my live music venue in Edinburgh has a 200 capacity, this will be reduced to approx 28 max, depending on seating configurations determined by group size bookings. That might even be reduced further due to social distancing required amongst musicians necessitating a larger stage, and more than 2m social distancing being required between vocalists and brass instrument players due to greater droplet dispersion from those musicians. Our 90 capacity room downstairs might seat 16 socially distanced, if it’s lucky. My live music venue in Dumfries has a 350 capacity and could prob accommodate 60 socially distanced. So, I wonder what touring bands venues can afford to book on those capacities? None is the short answer. We could maybe put on a local pub band for free, if they agreed to get paid in beers.

Scale up and the Usher Hall in Edinburgh is a 2000 capacity venue and its socially-distanced capacity is approx 350. So The Usher Hall can now afford to put on bands that would normally play a small club venue, with hugely greater running costs. It just doesn’t work,  no matter how you try to present it as an ‘opportunity. ‘ An opportunity to lose huge piles of money and fold almost immediately without extensive government support. ‘Ah, but streaming’ people might say, as if charging for a virtual ticket for streamed content (when so much music is already available for free on the internet) is the panacea for all the industries’ ills. It’s not, and it never will be.

With social distancing you can file live music, festivals, and other large scale events in the bin, you can also forget the Edinburgh Festival and Fringe, other than a few stage-managed heavily-subsidised (mainly outdoor) PR events (which seems to be the plan this year). It’s just not going to happen, and the Fringe’s whole raison d’etre is to promote small scale independent venues and small scale events. Many pubs have function suites that rely on gigs, birthday parties, weddings and other social events. This vital source of revenue will be decimated by social  distancing, and the last thing pubs that have already been closed for most of the last 12 months need to survive as we get back to ‘normal’ is disappearing revenue streams.

As ever social distancing will have a disproportionately disastrous effect on smaller independent venues and pubs, and favour larger chains with larger premises. If you have barn-sized outlets like Wetherspoons, you might just survive, given most of the competition is going to go under with SD and you’re already bulk buying stock for your nationwide chain at next to nothing and enjoying vast economies of scale.

To get any return from a socially-distanced future, you’ll need cavernous aircraft hangar-style pubs or huge beer gardens, which by their nature are at a premium in city centres and attract far higher rates and commercial rents. The rates freezes won’t last forever, and while commercial rents will probably adjust downwards, city centre rents are hugely onerous and that allied to other overheads result in minimal margins for pubs and restaurants (most city centre hospitality outlets make their profit in the last 10% of their turnover, and that’s without social distancing).

I half-joked back in March 2020 that people would crawl out of their bunkers once this was all over to find in our dystopian not so brave new world that the only pubs left standing are ****ing Wetherspoons, but it’s no longer a joke, it’s an ever-increasing possibility.

Your venues will be some of the harder problems to overcome IF we've to live with SD going forward, my point about entrepreneurs was more about solutions to overcome SD. 

Drive by most hospitality venues and you'll see a few fans stuck to an outside wall, inside you'll likely see tables and chairs alongside some built in booths, currently most will have some forms of perspex dotted about, the fans and perspex are their to control and adjust the airflow in these venues, I'm just a layman but surely their must be the possibility of innovation creating a new way to control airflow whilst extracting and or neutralising any airborne nasties, having a booth that has no perspex separating it from the next one but rather an invisible pod created by a new system that keeps most of the crap from moving between different sections. 

The above, if possible, wouldn't eradicate Covid or similar in a venue but it would reduce it significantly. 

[Todd_is_God]

2 minutes ago, 101 said:

I think it's showing signs of fatigue, understandable but should have been avoided, election will help as it will shake up the Government.

I don't think it will shake up anything, as it's unlikely that there will be less SNP members, and the opposition have been no challenge to the strategy at all to date. Unlike down south, there does not appear to be any MSPs, and certainly not and representatives of the governing party, who disagree with the strategy.

You could say that is largely influenced by trying not to rock the boat and turn people off potentially voting for you, but at the same time there's little point in sitting on your hands at party level until after an election where you might pick up some swing voters who are looking for a different approach.

Other than the extremely unlikely scenario of a Conservative victory, I cannot see the SG elections making any difference to the covid strategy.