Coronavirus (COVID-19)

[renton]

Just now, Sergeant Wilson said:

Does he actually think after he sits down, I did well there, made my point, got the party line across and pointed out the flaws in theirs?

When I have to address a group I know when I fucked up. Labour would be better with nobody, just say they don't have a contribution.

Possibly, but I doubt it'd be that succinct. 

[101]

1 minute ago, DeeTillEhDeh said:

UsForThem's FB page is eye-bleedingly awful right now.

Full of covid deniers, anti-vaxxers and "Eh hate Krankie" types.

When are the gulags being built? I forgot that schools being shut as well as the entire country in lockdown due to an infectious disease is the same as ethnic cleansing. It's actually offensive to those who died in Gulags and Concentration Camps to compare anything that we are living through to them.

Craig Scaife and Fiona Taylor are well on their way to holocaust denial by the look of their views.

[Jacksgranda]

3 minutes ago, welshbairn said:

If J+J and Novavax get approval it could be a game changer.

How many times is this "game" getting "changed"?

[Distant Doonhamer]

 
He'd be out of his depth in a puddle of his own piss.

FTFY.

[Steven W]

I know NS didn't specifically mention football, but she did say 'stay at home'. I tend to think this therefore passes the onus onto the SFA / JRG. I wouldn't think football going ahead regardless is necessarily a shoe in. They'll also need to act fast (by their standards) as two Scottish Cup games due on Wednesday.

[Robin.Hood]

Let the panic buying commence 

[DiegoDiego]

As she just said, the aim to have the elderly and vulnerable done by May and that looks like about 2million people.

Over a third of the population are elderly or vulnerable? Some fucking country we live in.

[Binos]

3 minutes ago, Jambomo said:

It wouldn’t have though. As she just said, the aim to have the elderly and vulnerable done by May and that looks like about 2million people. The 100,000 wouldn’t touch that.

Its also the case you need the NHS etc to  remain healthy and well to keep the rest of the service going. We don’t want vital other treatment (I.e cancer treatment etc) stopped or delayed because the staff are sick. These people are absolutely necessary. 

I hear what you're saying

But there is no way vulnerable groups account for 2 million of the population, surely

[renton]

7 minutes ago, Binos said:

Yes, but if we had vaccinated 100,000 of the actual most vulnerable it would statistically have almost eradicated the likelihood of deaths, which is the whole point

Delaying the vaccination of those groups just prolongs everything

That will only work if you had advanced notice on which 100,000 were going to die.

[Granny Danger]

Just now, 101 said:

When are the gulags being built? I forgot that schools being shut as well as the entire country in lockdown due to an infectious disease is the same as ethnic cleansing. It's actually offensive to those who died in Gulags and Concentration Camps to compare anything that we are living through to them.

Craig Scaife and Fiona Taylor are well on their way to holocaust denial by the look of their views.

Anyone know when the tenders for the gulags are going out?  Asking for a friend.

[101]

3 minutes ago, Jambomo said:

It wouldn’t have though. As she just said, the aim to have the elderly and vulnerable done by May and that looks like about 2million people. The 100,000 wouldn’t touch that.

Its also the case you need the NHS etc to  remain healthy and well to keep the rest of the service going. We don’t want vital other treatment (I.e cancer treatment etc) stopped or delayed because the staff are sick. These people are absolutely necessary. 

Spot on in fact if folk don't turn up to get vaccinated they should do some kind of tannoy call to get any member of staff jabed even stuff like porters being off sick must cause havoc

[Binos]

Just now, renton said:

That will only work if you had advanced notice on which 100,000 were going to die.

We have a good idea by now of the types of people most at risk

[Scotty Tunbridge]

The beeb can f**k off with their hyperbole, ‘A lockdown similar to March will be in effect from midnight.’ It is nothing like March still.

[renton]

Just now, Binos said:

We have a good idea by now of the types of people most at risk

The point being that there is well more than 100k who would fit the risk profile. 

[Binos]

2 minutes ago, renton said:

The point being that there is well more than 100k who would fit the risk profile. 

How many?

[Jacksgranda]

2 minutes ago, DiegoDiego said:

Over a third of the population are elderly or vulnerable? Some fucking country we live in.

There's 8 in our terrace of four bungalows (at least there would be if the two who bought the house next door actually moved in) and 6 of us fall into the old/vulnerable category. (Some both.)

[Have some faith in Magic]

4 minutes ago, DiegoDiego said:

Over a third of the population are elderly or vulnerable? Some fucking country we live in.

Counting folk over 50 as elderly is a bit of a stretch. 

[Sherrif John Bunnell]

8 minutes ago, DeeTillEhDeh said:

UsForThem's FB page is eye-bleedingly awful right now.

Full of covid deniers, anti-vaxxers and "Eh hate Krankie" types.

I take it the Rockefellers are the new Rothschilds when it comes to nutters trying to disguise their antisemitism?

[GNU_Linux]

4 minutes ago, 101 said:

When are the gulags being built?

P&B favourite Rigside of course.

[djchapsticks]

2 hours ago, craigkillie said:

This hits the nail on the head. The big problem with the "just a few more weeks" or "just another couple of months" patter, is that it has been "just another X" basically since about May. You can't keep producing these elastic deadlines and then be surprised when people get fed up.

There has been nowhere near enough acknowledgement from politicians of the emotional toll all this is taking on people. I'm not talking about the faux concern about suicide rates and mental health from the anti-lockdown loonies, but just generally the accumulation of wee things that have been missing for peoples lives for nearly a year at this stage. These things will be different for everyone. For me it's been mainly around having a baby - from me being unable to go to any scans right at the start, to being ushered out of the hospital about an hour after she was born and then only being able to visit for an hour when both she and my wife were at their most vulnerable, not being able to kiss her because I was wearing a mask. Every pre- and post-natal baby class has been cancelled or pushed to a substandard online thing, even though the main purpose of a lot of them is the social aspect. No chance for family to spend any sort of time with here, which also has the double whammy that we've then been more or less left alone to deal with  everything, unable to get support from family or even a couple of hours respite where they take her out in the pram or something like that.

Now I'm in a lucky position where I have a good, very flexible, job and a really understanding boss, and where I'm able to afford lots of the wee things that make this a tiny bit easier, and I also generally have good mental health, so I've been able to cope with all of that reasonably well. However, there are lots of parents out there who aren't as lucky, and who really need a bit of help, but they're not getting it. I don't think there has really been any specific message aimed at people in this position, it's all been take, take, take with not much give. That's just my personal circumstances too, there will be others who have had different, probably much worse, things going on in their lives which have not been properly addressed.

I like Sturgeon, I think that unlike many politicians she actually comes across like a real human being and I do get the sense that she does have a proper sense of compassion. However, aside from the "it makes me want to cry" type stuff, she hasn't actually done anything to encourage a public conversation about the restrictions, about where the balance in personal freedoms v public health concerns lies, or about how the Scottish government actually plans to bring us back to normality in the longer term. People getting on board with short-term restrictions is totally different to long-term ones, and that hasn't been really explored at all. What if there was another pandemic and we didn't find a vaccine for five years, or ever, would there ever be a point where they have to go "OK, there is still a risk attached to this disease, but we can't simply hide away from it forever". Lots of things that we do in our "normal" lives have a risk attached, but society has determined that the benefit outweighs the risk.

 

It really gives me a huge amount of solace to see people actually taking a step back and not only considering these questions but be brave enough to voice these concerns without fear of being tarred with a certain brush. Too many folk are very quick to label you a 'covid-denier' or 'anti-lockdown' if you're seen to ask these questions but everything being asked is relevant and pertinent as the long-term implications of every further delay, every further additional measure is potentially significant and far-reaching.

Your last paragraph in particular was a question I first posed on here back at a point where 'just a bit longer' was being proposed and yet the vaccine was in development so only still theoretical. The question of 'what if there's no vaccine - what then?' was never once asked to those in power, especially at a time when there needed to be hard questions in relation to a potential plan B or plan C. Regardless of what happens and how it happens from here on in, we are now very much at the end game in terms of the public's understanding and sympathy with regards to lockdowns and restrictions because although for now they can use the vaccine programme as a common goal and definitive end-point, if that for whatever reason comes off the table, there's absolutely no chance of getting folk back onside from there.

If the vaccine cannot be rolled out effectively, if the efficacy is not as strong as studies suggest, if the virus mutating causes a drop in effectiveness, I genuinely believe there's no going back to a directive of 'stay indoors and wait it out whilst we see what we can do'. The risk assessment will need to be carried out and the awkward decisions of what poses an acceptable risk in terms of cases and deaths (as exists for literally every other endemic virus) will need to be made as people will simple want to get back to picking up the pieces of what will be left of their lives at that point.