Coronavirus Super Thread ( merged )

[Weakened Offender]

Just now, GinRummy said:

I can't clarify it no. Mainly because that isn't what I'm suggesting.

 

Do you think schools should be open? 

[Ray Gin]

1 hour ago, Nucky Thompson said:

There was a news article yesterday on BBC about how kids had forgotten how to use a knife and fork when schools were closed during the first wave. Also some had to go back into nappies.

 

What's that about? What were they eating with at home? 

[GinRummy]

Just now, Weakened Offender said:

 

Do you think schools should be open? 

I think if your policy is to close and restrict places where the virus is spreading then that's what you should do. 

 

I also think some sort of inspection or enforcement should have been attempted in hospitality while national numbers were low. Perhaps preventing the spread of the virus.

 

As far as schools are concerned, Nicola did not know where the virus would spread so should not have been so optimistic about keeping education open.

[Horatio Caine]

1 minute ago, Ray Gin said:

 

What's that about? What were they eating with at home? 

Ah but they get lessons every day on how to eat their meals.  Take away the meals, you take away their memory of how to eat.  Quite sad really...

[Weakened Offender]

5 minutes ago, GinRummy said:

I think if your policy is to close and restrict places where the virus is spreading then that's what you should do. 

 

I also think some sort of inspection or enforcement should have been attempted in hospitality while national numbers were low. Perhaps preventing the spread of the virus.

 

As far as schools are concerned, Nicola did not know where the virus would spread so should not have been so optimistic about keeping education open.

 

So can we agree that you are sort of leaning towards opening the pubs back up and shutting the schools then? 😁

[GinRummy]

1 minute ago, Weakened Offender said:

 

So can we agree that you are sort of leaning towards opening the pubs back up and shutting the schools then? 😁

Only if you get your jollies twisting my words and trying to make me say something I haven't said.

 

If that is the case then be my guest.

[coconut doug]

4 hours ago, GinRummy said:

I never said you did. 

 

In that case, IMO your point is 100% correct.

[OBE]

28 minutes ago, LMc said:

 

I think your last sentence is correct. People who like to bitch/moan/make a scene are always the loudest.

 

Aye, the internet eh? Prior to WWW we were spared. One of the trade off's I suppose, but can always switch off.

[Ray Gin]

11 minutes ago, Horatio Caine said:

Ah but they get lessons every day on how to eat their meals.  Take away the meals, you take away their memory of how to eat.  Quite sad really...

 

A pretty damning indictment of modern day parenting. Nobody should be relying on school teachers to show their child how to eat. 

[Governor Tarkin]

We should 100% close schools and universities and re-open the pubs.

 

We should probably scrap free school meals while we're at it too. No point in keeping children going if they're inviable.

 

[Zico]

31 minutes ago, Captain Sausage said:

There are two reasons that schools will stay open, or only close as the absolute last resort. 
 

1) Economy - kids in schools = parents able to work. It’s not universal, but it’s a massive economic lever to lose if you close schools as 1 or both parents have to stop working to look after their children. 
 

2) Child welfare - it’s pretty eye opening to read some of the comments on this thread. In my opinion, child welfare should trump just about everything else. The damning report into the impact of schools closing in lockdown season 1 and the particular impact on those from disadvantaged backgrounds will have serious ramifications in future. Another go at that will only further the gap in our youth between the haves and have nots. 

Absolutely this, especially your second point. Those who are already disadvantaged suffered disproportionately more when the schools were closed. My missus works with kids with additional support needs, mainly with terrible home lives and living in poverty. The stories are shocking. One of the kids she works with hadnt left his house in six months. 

[frankblack]

29 minutes ago, Captain Sausage said:

There are two reasons that schools will stay open, or only close as the absolute last resort. 
 

1) Economy - kids in schools = parents able to work. It’s not universal, but it’s a massive economic lever to lose if you close schools as 1 or both parents have to stop working to look after their children. 
 

 

What about the people unable to work because of the restrictions?  Higher economic impact there.

 

Most of my friends are working from home because of restrictions so could look after their kids.

 

29 minutes ago, Captain Sausage said:

2) Child welfare - it’s pretty eye opening to read some of the comments on this thread. In my opinion, child welfare should trump just about everything else. The damning report into the impact of schools closing in lockdown season 1 and the particular impact on those from disadvantaged backgrounds will have serious ramifications in future. Another go at that will only further the gap in our youth between the haves and have nots. 

 

Stopping the spread of the infections should be the number one priority, and if the data suggests schools should be shut then that should be the outcome.

[Weakened Offender]

44 minutes ago, Ray Gin said:

Strange how people were really concerned about a generation of intellectually deficient children back in the summer when we weren't 100% sure schools would reopen, yet now people are demanding that they close because they want to go to the pub. 😂

 

It's spooky. 😁

[frankblack]

1 minute ago, Brian Dundas said:

How can you successfully work from home and home school with younger children especially?

 

Put something educational on with Netflix and go and do some work. 😉

 

1 minute ago, Brian Dundas said:

Public health should be the number one priority, for all ages and groups.

 

Agree - which is exactly why the Scottish Government should publish the data to ensure that transparent decision making is being made to tackle the causes of the outbreaks.

[coconut doug]

3 hours ago, Heartsmad1874 said:

You'd have to be pretty stupid to not understand that sending covid positive people into care homes would lead to deaths.

 What was the alternative? Leave them where they are clogging up the hospitals. Probably seemed like the least worse option to put them in care homes. Care home owners clamouring for extra residents at enhanced rates promising better levels of care than hospitals can provide. Medically trained people could not be spared to look after the elderly in hospitals, they had to do something. Unfortunately many care homes didn't manage the situation well and it seems in many cases it was the care homes with their lax standards that brought Covid into the homes and failed to prevent the further spread.

   Of course positive testing patients were transferred  from hospitals and those responsible for this decision should be required to answer for it but many elderly would not have been tested for a variety of reasons or would have been asymptomatic. I dont think it's been established that transferring positive testing Covid patients was government policy but i could be wrong. You might think if it were that that clinicians like the CMO would have had something to say on the matter.

[The Real Maroonblood]

46 minutes ago, GinRummy said:

I can't clarify it no. Mainly because that isn't what I'm suggesting.

It’s a great idea though.🍺🍺🍺

[Taffin]

22 minutes ago, Ray Gin said:

 

A pretty damning indictment of modern day parenting. Nobody should be relying on school teachers to show their child how to eat. 

 

When school is viewed as a childcare provision for parents it's no surprise really that those sort of basics aren't covered in the home. Tragic really.

[Governor Tarkin]

6 minutes ago, The Real Maroonblood said:

It’s a great idea though.🍺🍺🍺

 

[GinRummy]

8 minutes ago, The Real Maroonblood said:

It’s a great idea though.🍺🍺🍺

😁

[Jambo-Jimbo]

1 hour ago, Nucky Thompson said:

There was a news article yesterday on BBC about how kids had forgotten how to use a knife and fork when schools were closed during the first wave. Also some had to go back into nappies.

I don't think schools should close, or pubs that follow the rules for that matter

 

Yeh, I seen that as well.

 

Back in the day it was the parents who used to teach their kids how use a knife & fork and potty trained them.

[Heartsmad1874]

The punishment in Indonesia for not wearing a face mask ranges from push up's to lying in an open coffin  

 

https://metro.co.uk/2020/11/11/indonesias-punishment-for-not-wearing-face-coverings-is-push-ups-13574332/?ito=facebook|social|metroukfacebook&fbclid=IwAR2Rt98t7JT2kzjYsoWEWxqQu-oTcEPk_3-uFS1RgY3S8YZmt-RV1IhxTcw

[Victorian]

How do you measure and balance the damage to child welfare / education from closing the schools against keeping them open if doing so significantly contributes to dragging out the wider crisis? Many more months of tough restrictions,  economic damage,  parents' incomes in jeopardy,  mental health of children and parents,  etc etc.

 

Impossible to weigh up but there is a legitimate argument for closing the schools if doing so yields benefits elsewhere.  Obviously not forever or for a long period of time but for a long enough period if it significantly helps to suppress the wave.  Especially now that there are vaccines about to materialise.

[Dazo]

33 minutes ago, Weakened Offender said:

 

It's spooky. 😁

Spooky, as in made up ? 

[Heartsmad1874]

1 minute ago, Victorian said:

How do you measure and balance the damage to child welfare / education from closing the schools against keeping them open if doing so significantly contributes to dragging out the wider crisis? Many more months of tough restrictions,  economic damage,  parents' incomes in jeopardy,  mental health of children and parents,  etc etc.

 

Impossible to weigh up but there is a legitimate argument for closing the schools if doing so yields benefits elsewhere.  Obviously not forever or for a long period of time but for a long enough period if it significantly helps to suppress the wave.  Especially now that there are vaccines about to materialise.

Also find it crazy that people on here have been saying their kids are having to sit in freezing cold classrooms due to needing windows open and i think schools still want to do learning outside where they can also. Imagine that in December? Not feasible, they should find a way to extend the Christmas holidays by a few weeks imo.

[Victorian]

7 minutes ago, Heartsmad1874 said:

Also find it crazy that people on here have been saying their kids are having to sit in freezing cold classrooms due to needing windows open and i think schools still want to do learning outside where they can also. Imagine that in December? Not feasible, they should find a way to extend the Christmas holidays by a few weeks imo.

 

Yep.  Surely the sensible thing is to see if they can close the schools in advance of the Christmas break.  Close in early December right through to sometime in January.  As pointed out,  the childcare / time off from work issue is a problem.

 

It all depends on how much schools are contributing to the wave.  If it's significant then maybe the balance falls towards closing them to gain the benefits of suppressing quicker and further.  'Game changers' on the horizon add weight to the argument.

 

If the parents' employment issues could be addressed,  there's a case for closing schools for a couple of months.

Edited November 11, 2020 by Victorian

[JudyJudyJudy]

1 minute ago, Victorian said:

 

Yep.  Surely the sensible thing is to see if they can close the schools in advance of the Christmas break.  Close in early December right through to sometime in January.  As pointed out,  the childcare / time of from work issue is a problem.

 

It all depends on how much schools are contributing to the wave.  If it's significant then maybe the balance falls towards closing them to gain the benefits of suppressing quicker and further.  'Game changers' on the horizon add weight to the argument.

 

If the parents' employment issues could be addressed,  there's a case for closing schools for a couple of months.

Schools provide a “ safe environment “ for many vulnerable children . Many children value the warmth , care and safety they get from attending school as they don’t get it at home due to various reasons . Children need a place to feel adults will listen to them and not be abusive .  Therefore is it worth it closing schools for lengthy periods of time to place them back in toxic home environments? 

[Weakened Offender]

3 minutes ago, Victorian said:

 

Yep.  Surely the sensible thing is to see if they can close the schools in advance of the Christmas break.  Close in early December right through to sometime in January.  As pointed out,  the childcare / time off from work issue is a problem.

 

It all depends on how much schools are contributing to the wave.  If it's significant then maybe the balance falls towards closing them to gain the benefits of suppressing quicker and further.  'Game changers' on the horizon add weight to the argument.

 

If the parents' employment issues could be addressed,  there's a case for closing schools for a couple of months.

 

I wouldn't be surprised if they kept the schools open as late as possible towards Christmas and then kept them closed through January until half term. Full lockdown in January to tidy up the mess from the festive season. 

[Don Dan]

Lest we forget!!

[theshed]

12 minutes ago, Heartsmad1874 said:

Also find it crazy that people on here have been saying their kids are having to sit in freezing cold classrooms due to needing windows open and i think schools still want to do learning outside where they can also. Imagine that in December? Not feasible, they should find a way to extend the Christmas holidays by a few weeks imo.

When I was young I used to love it when the heating burst as we’d get sent home 

 

[The Mighty Thor]

1 hour ago, Ray Gin said:

Strange how people were really concerned about a generation of intellectually deficient children back in the summer when we weren't 100% sure schools would reopen, yet now people are demanding that they close because they want to go to the pub. 😂

I've no great desire to go to the pub. The schools should close because they are the main vector of transmission. Its really that simple. 

SG can shut down whatever they like but they'll never get on top of it with more of a burst water main than a leaking tap in play. 

[Ray Gin]

5 minutes ago, The Mighty Thor said:

I've no great desire to go to the pub. The schools should close because they are the main vector of transmission. Its really that simple. 

SG can shut down whatever they like but they'll never get on top of it with more of a burst water main than a leaking tap in play. 

 

Source?

[JudyJudyJudy]

6 minutes ago, Ray Gin said:

 

Source?

Exactly 

[Taffin]

6 minutes ago, jonesy said:

 

I would assume that you a) don't have young children or b) have jobs which you can do from home and not have issues relating to being interrupted by the kids?

 

As you know, my personal preference is to not close schools, or anything else.

 

However, if we are closing things, schools should close too if it's deemed necessary on the basis of public health, not whether it makes it hard for their parents. As you said earlier, parents need to take responsibility for their offspring. School isn't state provided childcare.

Edited November 11, 2020 by Taffin

[Victorian]

1 minute ago, jonesy said:

 

I would assume that you a) don't have young children or b) have jobs which you can do from home and not have issues relating to being interrupted by the kids?

 

Assume to your heart's content.  I recognised the issue in both posts that I put up on the subject.  Time off from work and home working interuptions are real hurdles but maybe the benefits of eliminating an ongoing source of transmission will be worth it.  Not to everyone.  It's a legitimate argument.

[Taffin]

Just now, jonesy said:

I think we've largely been on the same page for a lot of this, but I would politely disagree with the last sentence, Taff. While it certainly shouldn't be considered childcare, it is part of the fabric of society. Removal of school provision has knock on effects that will have a negative impact well beyond the kids.

 

Oh absolutely, which is probably why we are aligned on this in general. It's absolutely part of the fabric of society, but a society we've (government) decided must be destroyed to combat this threat. I don't think we should do it, absolutely not. I just think that if the destruction of society is being considered a necessary tool, then the knock on effects on parents from closing schools, shouldn't be sacrosanct.

 

All of that said, I'm in favour of everyone getting back to work, schools being open and living and breathing the very fabric of society you talk of.

[Victorian]

Van-Tam "not aware" of any arrangements whereby vaccine will be made available to the private sector.  But for ministers to decide.

 

 

So it begins...

[OmiyaHearts]

1 hour ago, The Real Maroonblood said:

It’s a great idea though.🍺🍺🍺

Imagine it. Pubs and restaurants open with no parents and children in them.

 

Like something from a dream.

[The Mighty Thor]

33 minutes ago, Ray Gin said:

 

Source?

Last PHE outbreak by source data from last week. SG choose not to provide this information. 

If you have data that shows they're not, then I'd be delighted to see it.

[Taffin]

1 minute ago, Victorian said:

Van-Tam "not aware" of any arrangements whereby vaccine will be made available to the private sector.  But for ministers to decide.

 

 

So it begins...

 

Also interesting to see their proposed prioritisation of vaccine rollout. What happened to all the supposed young, fit and healthy people dropping like flies that we were given spurious examples of in the media...

 

That wouldn't be turning out to have been scaremongering all along? Surely not.

[Malinga the Swinga]

2 hours ago, Captain Sausage said:

There are two reasons that schools will stay open, or only close as the absolute last resort. 
 

1) Economy - kids in schools = parents able to work. It’s not universal, but it’s a massive economic lever to lose if you close schools as 1 or both parents have to stop working to look after their children. 
 

2) Child welfare - it’s pretty eye opening to read some of the comments on this thread. In my opinion, child welfare should trump just about everything else. The damning report into the impact of schools closing in lockdown season 1 and the particular impact on those from disadvantaged backgrounds will have serious ramifications in future. Another go at that will only further the gap in our youth between the haves and have nots. 

Yep, school is a refuge for many and they should only be closed as last resort. 

Some of the neglect has no place in 21st century. 

[Victorian]

1 minute ago, Taffin said:

 

Also interesting to see their proposed prioritisation of vaccine rollout. What happened to all the supposed young, fit and healthy people dropping like flies that we were given spurious examples of in the media...

 

That wouldn't be turning out to have been scaremongering all along? Surely not.

 

As we already know,  young,  fit & healthy are at very low risk.  But there are plenty of examples of course.  The real issue is the not-so-young.  Severe disease begins to rise sharply ftom the over 50s upwards.  The key demographic is the section of society in middle age,  some of whom function with underlying health conditions along a spectrum.

[OmiyaHearts]

What's the issue with closing schools for a period, having kids educated at home from their teacher via video, while their parents also work from home?

 

If parents can't work from home, then their child(ren) could go to school - A much emptier school where social distancing is manageable and can be enforced easier.

[Taffin]

2 minutes ago, Victorian said:

 

As we already know,  young,  fit & healthy are at very low risk.  But there are plenty of examples of course.  The real issue is the not-so-young.  Severe disease begins to rise sharply ftom the over 50s upwards.  The key demographic is the section of society in middle age,  some of whom function with underlying health conditions along a spectrum.

 

Agree totally, however there was clearly a concerted media effort though to make out that even your 'gym going, athletic, mid-20 year old' was also at severe risk because they'd managed to find one or two who tragically hadn't had such good outcomes.

 

Edited November 11, 2020 by Taffin

[Malinga the Swinga]

44 minutes ago, jonesy said:

Thanks for confirming, Coco.

Pretty much sums it up. Blame old people, blame care homes but never, never ever, never ever ever blame government decision makers. 

[Ron Burgundy]

5 minutes ago, Taffin said:

 

Agree totally, however there was clearly a concerted media effort though to make out that even your 'gym going, athletic, mid-20 year old' was also at severe risk because they'd managed to find one or two who tragically hadn't had such good outcomes.

 

I wish they would be as consistent in getting the message out that the average age of covid death is higher than the national life expectancy. Just for balance and to stop people having hissy fits about this rampant killer which sweeps all before it and kills so indiscriminately.

[Victorian]

8 minutes ago, Taffin said:

 

Agree totally, however there was clearly a concerted media effort though to make out that even your 'gym going, athletic, mid-20 year old' was also at severe risk because they'd managed to find one or two who tragically hadn't had such good outcomes.

 

 

Well it aint one or two.  At no point were these people described as at severe risk.  That's a re-write of history.  The narrative was that everyone is at risk.

[Heartsmad1874]

64 deaths. Not good.

 

 

[Malinga the Swinga]

8 minutes ago, OmiyaHearts said:

What's the issue with closing schools for a period, having kids educated at home from their teacher via video, while their parents also work from home?

 

If parents can't work from home, then their child(ren) could go to school - A much emptier school where social distancing is manageable and can be enforced easier.

When the teacher is doing video lesson, who is teaching the kids who are at school? 

What about kids who don't have access to Internet or latest devices. Not all families can afford ipad, laptop. Do we just ignore them and allow them to become more disadvantaged. 

What do you do if school the only place kids can learn. Parents at home may not give a toss about kids and just ignore them. 

Closing schools would be almost okay if all children had perfect families and everything they require at home. Sadly, that isn't the case,and we risk dividing society into haves and have nots even more than it is at present. 

[Taffin]

3 minutes ago, Victorian said:

 

Well it aint one or two.  At no point were these people described as at severe risk.  That's a re-write of history.  The narrative was that everyone is at risk.

 

The inference absolutely was severe risk, by sharing stories of people the general public would think of as young, fit and healthy having tragically died from it.

 

Regard the part in bold, that's not much better because it isn't true. Not everyone is at risk from it as we've seen from numerous professional footballers testing positive with absolutely no symptoms and no ongoing issues afterwards.

[The Real Maroonblood]

28 minutes ago, OmiyaHearts said:

Imagine it. Pubs and restaurants open with no parents and children in them.

 

Like something from a dream.