Coronavirus (COVID-19)

[Silvio Tattiescone]

19 minutes ago, virginton said:

It becomes completely unbelievable when someone actually sets out the protocol that staff and care home management are obliged to follow that contradicts your step-sprog's account at every turn.

Gosh. Disband the police force. Nobody is ever going to do anything wrong because there are laws they're obliged to follow. 

 

Good thing employers always follow the rules, we can get the unions in the bin too then. 

[true_rover]

The 28 days positive may be misleading in some cases - people who would have died in any case who happened to test positive.

What would be more relevant would be the average expected length of life lost due to Covid-19 death.

Is anyone researching this?

It was looked at during the first wave - it's around a decade.

https://abcnews.go.com/Health/people-coronavirus-dying-10-years-earlier-naturally-study/story?id=70511494

[NotThePars]

 

 

Could be that the English one works better with an old phone. My camera doesn't work with QR on its own, I have to launch a QR app first. The English one does that in one go.

 

There’s folk claiming that the English app isn’t firing out warnings to people who are living with others that have tested positive and notified the app which, if true, kinda negates any argument about ease of access if it doesn’t do the one thing it’s supposed to do

 

Aye, because the idea that people are daft and act selfishly during a pandemic is completely unbelievable right enough. 

 

It’s more that it reads exactly like something birthed from Stuart Dickson’s mind palace. Maybe need to be more creative.

[MuckleMoo]

Some positive news in regards to immunity.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/17/health/coronavirus-immunity.html

Early days yet and not peer reviewed but could be a game changer if it's accurate

[vikingTON]

23 minutes ago, welshbairn said:

You think it's unbelievable that a staff member wouldn't follow the isolation protocols?

It's unbelievable that care home management and employees who are so seething about this employee's conduct are also going to overlook their own statutory requirement to report this misconduct and therefore put *their own* heads on the block if it comes out, absolutely. Particularly as our source didn't actually mention any of these rather important details in his sweetie wummin account in the first place.

It hardly takes Columbo to work out that we're just dealing with a standard, ten a penny workplace gobshite then. Just like all the hospital staff and bin lorry workers who think that the SG runs their lockdown announcements past them every week, only to be proven wrong with their bullshit claims every single time.

Edited November 18, 2020 by vikingTON

[gav-ffc]

17 minutes ago, Gordon EF said:

Hasn't the last decade been regularly peppered with stories of companies who run care homes being ruthless profiteering b*****ds who don't give a f**k about either staff or residents?

Were we all expecting them to act like angels during the pandemic? I've no doubt that the number of deaths in care homes will largely be down to how shittily they're run.

100% the management will do anything to not report incidents to stop the care inspectorate to come and visit and lower scores that then decreases that managements bonus and budget for the year.

[Gordon EF]

I don't think politicians are trying to be seen to "save Christmas", primarily. I think they know the majority of the population are just going to be c***s and ignore the rules over Christmas no matter what so they're trying their best to minimise this obvious and looming disaster.

[vikingTON]

21 minutes ago, NewBornBairn said:

Gosh. Disband the police force. Nobody is ever going to do anything wrong because there are laws they're obliged to follow. 

 

Good thing employers always follow the rules, we can get the unions in the bin too then. 

At least philpy usually takes getting called out for his nonsense with greater dignity than this. 

[101]

23 minutes ago, Gordon EF said:

Hasn't the last decade been regularly peppered with stories of companies who run care homes being ruthless profiteering b*****ds who don't give a f**k about either staff or residents?

Were we all expecting them to act like angels during the pandemic? I've no doubt that the number of deaths in care homes will largely be down to how shittily they're run.

You would expect better from a council home though. In a private home I guess there is no guarantee of above the legal requirements for sick pay where as I would expect a council home to pay folk their full wage.

I would expect anyone working in health, social care and education to be extremely careful during a global pandemic due to the face they are either meeting with a Hugh number of people more than the rest of the public and/or dealing with the most vulnerable in society.

[Silvio Tattiescone]

It's as if in the real world there are no shite employers and no shite staff. Whoddathunkit? 

[welshbairn]

1 minute ago, NewBornBairn said:

It's as if in the real world there are no shite employers and no shite staff. Whoddathunkit? 

Vicky has a heart warming faith in the essential goodness and protocol abiding nature of humanity, and Santa probably. It would be cruel to disabuse him of this.

[Gordon EF]

1 minute ago, NewBornBairn said:

It's as if in the real world there are no shite employers and no shite staff. Whoddathunkit? 

It's a general theme of public expectation and particularly during the pandemic. It seems like we all expect these companies and organisations to be run efficiently, competently and ethically. 

Who's genuinely walking around thinking that fits with their experience of people in the workplace?

A really significant number of people in positions at all levels of businesses and organisations are just completely incompetent and out of their depth, and more on top of that are arrogant and/or greedy and/or lazy. That often makes doing simple things under normal circumstances difficult, never mind extremely difficult things in very stressful circumstances.

 

[Todd_is_God]

29 minutes ago, true_rover said:

It was looked at during the first wave - it's around a decade.

https://abcnews.go.com/Health/people-coronavirus-dying-10-years-earlier-naturally-study/story?id=70511494

 

I don't understand how they calculate this tbh, and I note the article stated it hadn't yet been peer reviewed.

But applying the findings here where the average age of a Covid victim in Scotland is 82. If 82 is above the average life expectancy, how can it also be true that the average woman who died lost 13 years of life?

Both statistics may be correct, but I would suggest they are perhaps not accurate when combined.

[Gordon EF]

7 minutes ago, Todd_is_God said:

I don't understand how they calculate this tbh, and I note the article stated it hadn't yet been peer reviewed.

But applying the findings here where the average age of a Covid victim in Scotland is 82. If 82 is above the average life expectancy, how can it also be true that the average woman who died lost 13 years of life?

Both statistics may be correct, but I would suggest they are perhaps not accurate when combined.

It's not that mental. Life expectancy for people who've made it to 82 is considerably higher than 82, for example.

Otherwise, the average number of years lost to Covid would be -1 and it'd actually be making people live longer.

13 years does sound very high though.

Edited November 18, 2020 by Gordon EF

[vikingTON]

16 minutes ago, NewBornBairn said:

It's as if in the real world there are no shite employers and no shite staff. Whoddathunkit? 

'Real world' - house!

Shite employers treat their employees and clients badly: they make sure to cover their own backs though to make sure that they aren't held criminally responsible for the actions of their employees. That's Management 1A right there for nothing.

The idea that they've chosen to circle the wagons around a worker who they're privately furious at - in the face of statutory protocol telling them exactly what they are obliged to do - is not credible. It does not follow that because employers break laws that they would do this in this case because the incentives are massively outweighed by the consequences of being caught.

The idea that your stepson is talking shite on the other hand is very likely indeed and is in fact by far the most straightforward explanation. 

Edited November 18, 2020 by vikingTON

[Gaz]

With all this chat of saving Christmas I'm reminded of the raging Yoon I used to work with who claimed the SNP had photoshopped the cracks in the Forth Road Bridge a few years ago so that they could 'repair' it in double-quick time (there wasn't actually anything wrong with it) and announce they'd 'saved Christmas'.

[Bairnardo]

2 hours ago, virginton said:

 

 

Didn't realise that philpy was your stepson tbh.

What is it about a global pandemic anyway that compels so many people to make bullshit insider takes based on a place of work? The 'Falkirk's going into lockdown coz ma wife works at the hospital' exchange was even more ludicrous from start to finish. 

Absolutely, with the exception that that's not what actually happened. More solid posting from yourself.

Edited November 18, 2020 by Bairnardo

[101]

6 minutes ago, Gaz said:

With all this chat of saving Christmas I'm reminded of the raging Yoon I used to work with who claimed the SNP had photoshopped the cracks in the Forth Road Bridge a few years ago so that they could 'repair' it in double-quick time (there wasn't actually anything wrong with it) and announce they'd 'saved Christmas'.

Brilliant  life must be amazing being that obsessed.

[Szamo's_Ammo]

Quote

The calls to protect staff and move to a model of blended learning were echoed by the Educational Institute of Scotland (EIS) general secretary Larry Flanagan.

He said: “The EIS is clear that, in areas that are now at level four, the current policy of keeping schools operating as normal on a full-time basis is at odds with delivering effective virus suppression.

“It is not only about the safety of schools themselves, it’s about the role of schools in terms of local community transmission.

“It’s difficult to imagine somewhere with more social mixing than schools and pupils and staff then go back into their communities and their homes and families.

“We have been repeatedly told at CERG (Covid Education Recovery Group) that blended and remote learning remain active contingencies, but the First Minister appears to be ruling them out entirely, even at level four.

“Teachers understand the importance of schools to the lives of young people and would wish to see schools open but not at any cost – safety and Covid security need to be guiding concerns also.”

I doubt anyone could disagree in good faith with the comments made here by the NASUWT teaching union, STUC or the Educational Institute for Scotland.

Quote

“In truth, we have schools in areas such as Glasgow and Clyde which are riven by staff shortages and by massive numbers of self-isolating pupils.

We're not even in winter yet!

The fingers in the ears approach by the Scottish government is an absolute farce.

Edited November 18, 2020 by Szamo's_Ammo

[welshbairn]

38 minutes ago, Todd_is_God said:

I don't understand how they calculate this tbh, and I note the article stated it hadn't yet been peer reviewed.

But applying the findings here where the average age of a Covid victim in Scotland is 82. If 82 is above the average life expectancy, how can it also be true that the average woman who died lost 13 years of life?

Both statistics may be correct, but I would suggest they are perhaps not accurate when combined.

Average life expectancy is calculated from birth. If you've already made it to 82 it will be a lot higher.

P.S. Fun wee calculator here..

http://www.riskprediction.org.uk/index_lifeexp.php

Edited November 18, 2020 by welshbairn