Coronavirus (COVID-19)

[Lyle Lanley]

16 minutes ago, Distant Doonhamer said:

For all the understandable cigars out stuff on here which in terms of our situation I’ve no problem with it’s chilling to read about people dying on the street in India outside hospitals with no beds and/or oxygen. Desperate stuff. In global terms this is far from over. That’s not to say we need to hide under the bed here though where things are demonstrably different at this time.

I wonder if it’s possible the UK and the other nations can help India in anyway possible.

[Theroadlesstravelled]

6500 attendance for Sporting Kansas City v Orlando City.

We need to stop shiteing it and let fans back to the fitba.

[Guest]

I wonder if it’s possible the UK and the other nations can help India in anyway possible.

Like give them millions of pounds to fund their space project?

[NorthernLights]

https://www.forbes.com/sites/joewalsh/2021/04/23/israels-covid-deaths-hit-zero-with-almost-60-of-population-vaccinated/?sh=41d0cdb498fa

[Melanius Mullarkey]

6 hours ago, Lyle Lanley said:

I wonder if it’s possible the UK and the other nations can help India in anyway possible.

Where’s the shifty posh hoover salesman when you need him?

[DeeTillEhDeh]

Where’s the shifty posh hoover salesman when you need him?

Singapore?

[Steven W]

5 hours ago, Theroadlesstravelled said:

6500 attendance for Sporting Kansas City v Orlando City.

We need to stop shiteing it and let fans back to the fitba.

Problematic in Scotland as SG and SFA don't want old firm disproportionately affected as would be the case.

[8MileBU]

10 hours ago, madwullie said:

It's a bit disingenuous presenting the data in a way like this tbh - it seems the purpose is more to minimise its effects than to draw any genuine conclusions. Fact is 150k+ people in the UK alone died because of Covid. That's a lot of people, no matter what age they were or which proportion of the population we're talking about. 

Yes, a lot of money has been wasted and a lot of decisions would probably have been taken differently had we the knowledge we have now, I totally agree, but we didn't have that knowledge, we didn't know that vaccines would save the day so quickly, and had we banked on them being so effective so quickly, most people would have been fucking raging at taking that gamble. 

It’s not disingenuous at all. That data covers the last 13 months. It’s been known for months, certainly long before the start of THIS month which age brackets and vulnerable groups most needed protecting. To actively continue crippling an economy, generating  unemployment and forcing businesses to close (some of which won’t open again) is borderline criminal. And that’s on top of spending billions more than necessary on a workforce who could’ve been working instead of being sat at home with their liberties restricted for a large part of the year.

9 hours ago, Marshmallo said:

"Spunked on furlough" 

^^^Fucking oddball with a pea for a brain. 

You don’t agree that billions more than necessary have been spunked on furlough @Marshmallo?

8 hours ago, Todd_is_God said:

But the premise of that post was, ultimately, correct?

Paying the wages of huge numbers of young, healthy people, alongside closing large parts of the economy for over a year was a gross waste of money compared to paying the wages of those most vulnerable who were not able to work from home.

Not only that, but the actions taken to try and prevent absolutely anyone catching Covid almost certainly extended the epidemic and led to more deaths of old people. It didn't save any lives.

Precisely.

[Steven W]

The wee fella due to return to Fun Fours football at Broadwood in a couple of weeks, but the restrictions being enforced by SYFA (and thus by extension the SFA) are so onerous that it's probably going to put paid to the whole thing (again).

You'd think the vaccination process has yet to start, and far from "learning to live with the virus", it feels like we're stuck in a 'restriction rut', with no one willing to be the one who eases / ends, frankly daft, restrictions.

I believe parents may be allowed to watch their kids before too long, but only one per child. FFS

[Billy Jean King]

Personally, I would have removed all restrictions last May and not shut down again until it was clear that the NHS was in danger of being swamped but you are moving dangerously close to "presenting my opinion as fact" territory bud.
You have no idea whether your suggestion would have saved live, killed more people or made no difference.
And you have no background to suggest you know what you are talking about unless you're about to unmask yourself as someone with years of experience of pandemics.

Showing how sporadic your dips in here have been with this post, it's quite literally TiGs MO.

[Todd_is_God]

1 hour ago, oaksoft said:

Personally, I would have removed all restrictions last May and not shut down again until it was clear that the NHS was in danger of being swamped but you are moving dangerously close to "presenting my opinion as fact" territory bud.

You have no idea whether your suggestion would have saved live, killed more people or made no difference.

And you have no background to suggest you know what you are talking about unless you're about to unmask yourself as someone with years of experience of pandemics.

That's fair tbh

[Todd_is_God]

1 hour ago, Billy Jean King said:

1 hour ago, oaksoft said:

Personally, I would have removed all restrictions last May and not shut down again until it was clear that the NHS was in danger of being swamped but you are moving dangerously close to "presenting my opinion as fact" territory bud.
You have no idea whether your suggestion would have saved live, killed more people or made no difference.
And you have no background to suggest you know what you are talking about unless you're about to unmask yourself as someone with years of experience of pandemics.

Showing how sporadic your dips in here have been with this post, it's quite literally TiGs MO.

Absolutely seething that a bunch of nobodies on a football forum have routinely bodied "experts" predictions and opinions on how an actual pandemic would play out.

 

Edited April 24, 2021 by Todd_is_God

[madwullie]

11 minutes ago, Todd_is_God said:

Absolutely seething that a bunch of nobodies on a football forum have routinely bodied "experts" predictions and opinions on how an actual pandemic would play out.

 

What a bizarre black and white confrontational world you live in.

 What has actually happened is people have chosen their own expert to follow and parroted whatever they've said throughout. A couple of yours being the laughably discredited Michael Yeadon and Ivor Cummins. 

No-one here has done any original research mate, and your now regular boasting of being ahead of the curve is extremely wild all things considered. 

Edited April 24, 2021 by madwullie

[anotherchance]

7 minutes ago, madwullie said:

What a bizarre black and white confrontational world you live in.

 What has actually happened is people have chosen their own expert to follow and parroted whatever they've said throughout. A couple of yours being the laughably discredited Michael Yeadon and Ivor Cummins. 

No-one here has done any original research mate, and your now regular boasting of being ahead of the curve is extremely wild all things considered. 

Thing is though, the more “positive” experts almost always go into great scientific detail debunking why the prophets of doom are entirely wrong, which almost never happens the other way around.

Scientists by nature work off a worst case scenario, only now they can present it online, people see the letters after their name and it’s picked up by the media or simpletons and presented as what’s going to happen next. Don’t think much on here is based on people proclaiming themselves right, more that certain things have been completely wrong - often mere opinion presented as fact.

Given that it then feeds into publicly policy decision making (fed by people like Devi who advises based on what is best for Devi) then I think people are absolutely right to call stuff out when they see it, given the huge impact these decisions have on people’s lives.

 

[madwullie]

7 minutes ago, anotherchance said:

Thing is though, the more “positive” experts almost always go into great scientific detail debunking why the prophets of doom are entirely wrong, which almost never happens the other way around.

Scientists by nature work off a worst case scenario, only now they can present it online, people see the letters after their name and it’s picked up by the media or simpletons and presented as what’s going to happen next. Don’t think much on here is based on people proclaiming themselves right, more that certain things have been completely wrong - often mere opinion presented as fact.

Given that it then feeds into publicly policy decision making (fed by people like Devi who advises based on what is best for Devi) then I think people are absolutely right to call stuff out when they see it, given the huge impact these decisions have on people’s lives.

 

Of course, There's no issue with people calling stuff out. I've done it myself. I've also got stuff wrong a few times so I tend not to post confidently about how right I always am whenever someone says something slightly negative about my posts. 

[yoda]

I think the main lesson to take from furlough spending is that "the money is there of you want to spend it on other things - like improving the lives of those at the bottom".

Not "mY taXeS WeRE spUNKeD oN KEePiNg PeOple IN pAId eMPLOymenT". Or the P&B classic of "But ZImBAbWe".

Arguing that we shouldn't have done furlough is fine. And in an alternative reality where we didn't lockdown that's a fair argument. But in reality we did lockdown, and furlough was a necessity. I don't think it went far enough but it has, objectively, been a good thing. 

 

[Marshmallo]

6 minutes ago, yoda said:

I think the main lesson to take from furlough spending is that "the money is there of you want to spend it on other things - like improving the lives of those at the bottom".

Not "mY taXeS WeRE spUNKeD oN KEePiNg PeOple IN pAId eMPLOymenT". Or the P&B classic of "But ZImBAbWe".

Arguing that we shouldn't have done furlough is fine. And in an alternative reality where we didn't lockdown that's a fair argument. But in reality we did lockdown, and furlough was a necessity. I don't think it went far enough but it has, objectively, been a good thing. 

 

Hardly surprising to see a total lack of empathy or appreciation for the circumstances of anyone else from a twat who freely brands neighbours etc "scum" on a consistent basis.

Or so I see in quoted posts!

[Lichtie78]

Lovely day. No chance of opening the boozers a couple days early?

[Thereisalight..]

2 hours ago, oaksoft said:

He said it would be eradicated by 2020 and considered himself a second wave skeptic.

He thought it highly unlikely that there would be 120,000 UK deaths between September 2020 and June 2021.

He was wrong on all counts.

Has he now said 2022?

Yeah Christmas 2022 if we tighten up on other things as well including border control as “vaccines alone won’t eradicate it”. I take anything the experts/advisors say with a pinch of salt tbh

[Detournement]

Mark Woolhouse to the Scottish Parliament

Quote

 

Woolhouse said the death rate in Scotland was so high “because we have concentrated so much on lockdown and otherwise trying to suppress the virus”.

He said: “Between half and three quarters of all the people who died during the first lockdown got coronavirus after lockdown began . . . which tells me that we didn’t pay nearly enough attention to doing things beyond lockdown to protect the vulnerable in care homes and the wider community — all we had was shielding, which wasn’t particularly effective and a bit of extra advice for the over 70s.

“We could have put so much more effort into protecting the people that needed protected. . . lockdowns did not save those people and that is something we need to reflect on very hard.”

 

We needed a hard lockdown for everyone over 65 and the Scottish Government to take responsibility for making every single care home Covid secure. We got the opposite where pensioners could stroll down to supermarkets every day as is their habit and the government sent Covid to care homes.