Coronavirus

[Gnasher]

 

[General Dryness]

On 15/04/2020 at 22:59, General Dryness said:

It just seems that people who are on the front line are the ones making those statements. If this contradicts the official stats, you have to wonder why.

 

On 15/04/2020 at 23:01, Spy Bee said:

My cousin is an A&E nurse and very objective about everything. She says that almost everybody is elderly and almost everybody has comorbidities. Of course, there will be a few people who don't fit the profile, as there is with flu, but I don't think we should be causing mass panic. A guy who I work today has been convinced that men in their fifties are the most at risk, presumably from consuming some click bate. He's got himself into a right state!

 

7 hours ago, Sugar Ape said:

More cheery news. 
 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/2020/04/24/strokes-coronavirus-young-patients/

Probably just click bait. Or maybe not.

[1892-LFCWasBorn]

Even reading out the names of the daily deaths can take it's toll. 

[Section_31]

The WHO were saying yesterday there was no reason to believe coronavirus survivors would develop immunity, now they've backtracked based on the fact their tweet caused 'some concern' and now say there will be 'some immunity' but don't know how much. They thanked various people on Twitter for their input including a blogger with 3,000 followers.

 

The fuck? Nobody has a clue what's going on do they? Dr fuck from the university of fuck thinks one thing and another academic who went to college with him but is jealous of the fact he's got a nicer corner office thinks something else.

[johnsusername]

7 hours ago, 3 Stacks said:

You like women shaped like a potato?

I've had worse mate. 

[aRdja]

The tories reckon the government is being put under too much scrutiny at present  Couldn’t make it up.

[s(k)aturation]

58 minutes ago, Section_31 said:

The fuck? Nobody has a clue what's going on do they? Dr fuck from the university of fuck thinks one thing and another academic who went to college with him but is jealous of the fact he's got a nicer corner office thinks something else.

 

That's the only certainty.

 

 

[TheBitch]

15 hours ago, Section_31 said:

Can't stand any of the current cabinet but Patel is the only one I can imagine would kill someone for pleasure.

Makes me love her even more. 

[Butch]

I don't like this fucker but I like how he's calling out some of those fuckers. 

[Section_31]

25 minutes ago, TheBitch said:

Makes me love her even more. 

They should do a new version of the terminator where she's sent back in time to deport her own parents.

 

The final scene could be in an idyllic British town with no crime and a smiling policemen comes home whistling from his beat, he tells his wife he's just had yet another pay rise and phones Barclays bank to make sure it's gone through, a woman called 'Rose' in their Mumbai office picks it up and tells him that it has in fact gone through, wishing him a nice day. The camera pans back....

[Barrington Womble]

1 hour ago, Section_31 said:

The WHO were saying yesterday there was no reason to believe coronavirus survivors would develop immunity, now they've backtracked based on the fact their tweet caused 'some concern' and now say there will be 'some immunity' but don't know how much. They thanked various people on Twitter for their input including a blogger with 3,000 followers.

 

The fuck? Nobody has a clue what's going on do they? Dr fuck from the university of fuck thinks one thing and another academic who went to college with him but is jealous of the fact he's got a nicer corner office thinks something else.

And there in a nutshell is the problem. They all just make it up and if you're lucky enough to live under a government that has picked the experts who guessed right. But it's just a guess.

 

 

[Anubis]

2 hours ago, Section_31 said:

The WHO were saying yesterday there was no reason to believe coronavirus survivors would develop immunity, now they've backtracked based on the fact their tweet caused 'some concern' and now say there will be 'some immunity' but don't know how much. They thanked various people on Twitter for their input including a blogger with 3,000 followers.

 

The fuck? Nobody has a clue what's going on do they? Dr fuck from the university of fuck thinks one thing and another academic who went to college with him but is jealous of the fact he's got a nicer corner office thinks something else.

We haven’t studied it for long enough, and don’t have enough follow up data. It simply hasn’t been around long enough for us to know if people build up immunity or not. 

[1892-LFCWasBorn]

Cuntservatives will not be enforcing 2 week quarantine on people flying in the UK.

 

This is as big as a scandal as late half baked lockdown, PPE fiasco, testing shambles and anything else you want to add to this list.

[1892-LFCWasBorn]

Rachel Reeves was very impressive on Marr. She's boss.

[Gnasher]

10 hours ago, redinblack62 said:

She is one stupid cunt

It's not just the shoplifting problem shes cured, football violence cases have dropped dramatically compared to this time last year, as have road rage offences.

[Bruce Spanner]

5 minutes ago, 1892-LFCWasBorn said:

Rachel Reeves was very impressive on Marr. She's boss.

Very assured.

 

Was nice to see.

[Section_31]

1 hour ago, Section_31 said:

They should do a new version of the terminator where she's sent back in time to deport her own parents.

 

The final scene could be in an idyllic British town with no crime and a smiling policemen comes home whistling from his beat, he tells his wife he's just had yet another pay rise and phones Barclays bank to make sure it's gone through, a woman called 'Rose' in their Mumbai office picks it up and tells him that it has in fact gone through, wishing him a nice day. The camera pans back....

 

 

 

"She laid off 17 police officers that night. Men with families...children. Don't you care?" 

 

 

 

"Patel's parents were hounded out of Uganda. Forest Whitakker was chasing them down the street in a kilt with a meat cleaver. A furniture van pulled up with 'Small office, HOME office' written on the side, there was a woman driving and she said 'come with me if you want to live."

[Dr Arthur De Sabre]

7 hours ago, skaro said:

 

Yep.

Unfortunately, with my propensity to have a pop at both sides of the political divide (read twenty-five years of my letters to The Australian/The Age) - I guess I fall into @Jairzinho's hated category of "centrist".

And yes, this complaining thing is a pandemic too.

Even at the highest levels - you look at the US at the moment - you've got a buffoon in charge, pure and simple. He has been an incompetent, bumbling dick for 40 years... you'd thing such a palpably shit operator would be easy to shift, wouldn't you?

And yet, rather than peddling genuine and alternative government, the overwhelming pre-occupation seems to be "argumentum ad hominem" against Trump - opponents trying to humiliate him, make fun of him, impeach him, destroy him.

This sort of tit-for-tat shit suits Trump down to the ground - that's just playing his game.

We all know he's incompetent. We all know he's a fool. He proves that himself, over and over and over again.

Why sink to his level of personal attacks, revenge and character assassination?

Fuck that. Waste of time.

Just be an unarguable alternative, get yourself elected... and Trump's goes back to being a failed businessmen and former boss on "The Apprentice".

Trouble is, the "let's get Trump" industry is as bad as the "Trump" industry, and it just gives the rust belt another excuse for indignation with the political system - and 4 more years of Trump I fear.

His opponents are their own worst enemies in my book.

And that's my overall issue with the political talent pool.

Good at opposing, good at complaining, good at witch-hunting (yep, just like Trump)... and therefore not a clear and distinct and irresistible alternative to the status quo.

 

I think the politics over here is a little bit less partisan between voting labour and liberal, possibly that is due to the level of involvement I have with the locals politically and where we have lived since we’ve been over.

I just don’t get the right side of politics, I don’t see the logic, if you have people suffering, homeless that has to impact your overall well being,  you cannot have empathy and consider it a well society with this shit going on, even people who ignore it must still be impacted by it on some level.

but this is the endemic problem that applies to trump and others of his ilk, people ignore it, it doesn’t impact them directly, they laug( off his actions at is happening over there, yet it does affect us globally, it does impact everyone as does Kim il Jong in North Korea, as they impact global security, and so help send the clock closer to midnight.

We as societies need to hold our politicians to much more rigorous scrutiny, and force them to change or be changed. And people in the centre need to do this by risking something, rather than trying to protect what they have.

[Pidge]

1 hour ago, Anubis said:

We haven’t studied it for long enough, and don’t have enough follow up data. It simply hasn’t been around long enough for us to know if people build up immunity or not. 

Are you suggesting the emergence of a previously unknown disease might not be easily resolved through a neat, immediate consensus?  Shocking, if true.

[Pureblood]

2 minutes ago, Pidge said:

Are you suggesting the emergence of a previously unknown disease might not be easily resolved through a neat, immediate consensus?  Shocking, if true.

That doesn't mean we can't anticipate it and mitigate against it based upon best known practice or using the precautionary principle. Countries like New Zealand, Czechia and Germany have shown it can be done. 

 

In the UK, the leadership has been submissive to the disease. Our government has meekly rolled over and pretty much accepted a worst case scenario without putting up much of a fight, in all probability leading to the worst death toll in Europe. 

[Pidge]

13 hours ago, TK421 said:

I didn't suggest there was?  I just commented that I think there is a sound scientific basis for using them, contrary to Dr Jenny Harries who claims that the science is "weak" on this point. 

 

I would like to see a broader and consensus based approach if the science is "being followed", not a narrow approach based on modelling which has proven to be dubious at best, at utmost best. 

You have consistently suggested that measures taken haven't gone far enough, the use of PPE by the individual outside of their homes has been the clearest example of that. Sorry if me connecting the dots here is not reflective of your opinion, but that's what I was referring to.

 

The models you keep mentioning are the ones that are publicly available, it is transparent and open and others have drawn from, built on or taken other approaches. Imperial have followed that course throughout as far as I can tell. The other discussions - the governmental ones - SAGE etc (which may well include further input from Imperial but we don't know that or to what degree) are less clear and deserve scrutiny, but settling for easy targets lets them off the hook.

 

What consensus are you talking about? Why do you assume that this model is the sole source of information here?

[Pidge]

8 minutes ago, TK421 said:

That doesn't mean we can't anticipate it and mitigate against it based upon best known practice or using the precautionary principle. Countries like New Zealand, Czechia and Germany have shown it can be done. 

 

In the UK, the leadership has been submissive to the disease. Our government has meekly rolled over and pretty much accepted a worst case scenario without putting up much of a fight, in all probability leading to the worst death toll in Europe. 

I didn't suggest we couldn't - nor that we shouldn't have.

 

I was joking about the perception of scientists disagreeing with each other being [just] about self-promotion, rather than the engine that secures scientific progress.

 

I agree with your second paragraph, sadly. But even that is absolutely not the worst-case, the path we were seemingly driving along could well have been magnitudes worse.

[Pureblood]

10 minutes ago, Pidge said:

You have consistently suggested that measures taken haven't gone far enough, the use of PPE by the individual outside of their homes has been the clearest example of that. Sorry if me connecting the dots here is not reflective of your opinion, but that's what I was referring to.

 

The models you keep mentioning are the ones that are publicly available, it is transparent and open and others have drawn from, built on or taken other approaches. Imperial have followed that course throughout as far as I can tell. The other discussions - the governmental ones - SAGE etc (which may well include further input from Imperial but we don't know that or to what degree) are less clear and deserve scrutiny, but settling for easy targets lets them off the hook.

 

What consensus are you talking about? Why do you assume that this model is the sole source of information here?

I disagree that the government has been transparent and open with its scientific advice.  If I recall correctly, earlier this year Labour (Corbyn) had to resort to pressuring the government to publish the advice it was basing its policy on. That shouldn't be necessary - everything should be as transparent as possible so that the public can have confidence in the government's approach. 

 

As you say, SAGE is run in a clandestine manner with political influences such as Cummings in attendance.  To me this is not remotely acceptable.  So no, let's not let SAGE off the hook if they have such an integral role in determining policy.  Instead they should be scrutinised openly and held to the highest standards of scientific, legal and political accountability.

 

I'm talking about broad scienctific consensus based upon the largest pool of views and studies available, not cherry picking advice from one or two individuals or institutions and hiding behind a closed shop like SAGE. 

[Gnasher]

4 hours ago, Section_31 said:

The WHO were saying yesterday there was no reason to believe coronavirus survivors would develop immunity, now they've backtracked based on the fact their tweet caused 'some concern' and now say there will be 'some immunity' but don't know how much. They thanked various people on Twitter for their input including a blogger with 3,000 followers.

 

The fuck? Nobody has a clue what's going on do they? Dr fuck from the university of fuck thinks one thing and another academic who went to college with him but is jealous of the fact he's got a nicer corner office thinks something else.

Tk421 knows. He knows it all, what he dosnt know is not ......you know the rest.

[Anubis]

33 minutes ago, Pidge said:

Are you suggesting the emergence of a previously unknown disease might not be easily resolved through a neat, immediate consensus?  Shocking, if true.

I was disappointed myself.