Coronavirus Super Thread ( merged )

[Nucky Thompson]

17 minutes ago, ri Alban said:

I may be in the wrong/minority, but personally I think the should vaccinate the people of the UK from the youngest up. Maybe shield the old and vulnerable for a month or 2. Just a suggestion to maybe getting us up and running again, quicker. 

No way. Have a look at this link. Hospital admissions by age

 

(19) Public Health England on Twitter: "Hospital admissions for #COVID19 remain highest in those aged 85 and over. Read more in our weekly COVID-19 surveillance report: https://t.co/a6mN93iPod https://t.co/CQC6xaP6NG" / Twitter

[frankblack]

1 hour ago, Taffin said:

 

I'd imagine none, I'm sure I read on here that schools aren't contributing to the spread.

 

It's becoming a bit of a nightmare, pubs and hospitality were the main spreaders, but they are now mainly closed and it's still rising uncontrollably. Schools aren't aren't a risk but will be closing anyway, there's not much left to close. Unless we close supermarkets...which I think has also been said not to be a major risk. Tough one.

 

We keep getting told Schools aren't contibuting yet every few days you see local schools in the media where positive cases are occurring and large numbers have to self-isolate as a result.

 

There is zero compliance with face masks and social distancing, and I say that as someone who lives between a secondary and primary school.

[Enzo Chiefo]

1 hour ago, AlphonseCapone said:

 

There's also been a backlog of results last few days as reported on SG site which will impact overall numbers. 

 

% positive is my preferre measure when tracking. 

Aah OK, I didn't realise there was a backlog. Yes, I agree , the % positive figure is a better measure.  5% is the rate at which the outbreak is still considered "under control" iirc??

[Enzo Chiefo]

37 minutes ago, jonesy said:

Is that right? Is this based on the tests (still no answer for @Tommy Walker's question earlier, from anyone, as far as I can see) or a projected figure? 

 

If so, what's the context? Where are these people? What demographic do they represent? Are they isolating? 

 

Not a go at you, @ri Alban, just a lot of fatigue with stats being used to paint horror stories without much context behind them.

We've heard repeatedly over several weeks now that more than 1% of the population has Covid. Surely if that continues for a couple of months then will a huge majority of the country not have contracted the virus and, in conjunction with vaccinations, we will quickly move to herd immunity. No?? These snapshot rates don't altogether seem credible tbh.

 

 

[Seymour M Hersh]

8 hours ago, Governor Tarkin said:

 

 

Every night's a lock-in at the  @jonesy speakeasy, Seymour; where the regulars may be found fomenting civil disobedience beneath the heavy fog of Cuban cigars and dancing glow of flickering candles.

 

Dancing glow? I was expecting dancing girls and lots of them! 

[AlphonseCapone]

10 minutes ago, Enzo Chiefo said:

Aah OK, I didn't realise there was a backlog. Yes, I agree , the % positive figure is a better measure.  5% is the rate at which the outbreak is still considered "under control" iirc??

 

Aye 5% is the figure quoted by WHO. I think the evidence with our % positive and the latest ONS data, along with relatively stable hospital and ICU numbers is that Scotland is probably doing OK at the moment compared to other parts of the UK. 

[Enzo Chiefo]

4 minutes ago, AlphonseCapone said:

 

Aye 5% is the figure quoted by WHO. I think the evidence with our % positive and the latest ONS data, along with relatively stable hospital and ICU numbers is that Scotland is probably doing OK at the moment compared to other parts of the UK. 

Yes, all good news. 1 in 140 down from 1 in 100 the previous week and quite a bit lower than the other UK nations 

[Jambo-Jimbo]

32 minutes ago, jonesy said:

Interesting approach. What do you reckon about Blair's call for more single shot vaccination based on the claim that the first shot provides 91% immunity whereas the second shot only adds an extra 4%?

 

A few problems I can see with Blair's idea.

 

1. Might need to be approved by the regulators all over again, as it's been granted emergency use based on two doses, not just the one.

2. Could potentially end up being like only taking half the course of antibiotics, thus allowing the virus to mutate etc.

3. If the rest of the World administer two doses, then the UK could be ostracized on the grounds that the UK population has not been fully vaccinated.

 

I understand what Blair is saying, but there has to be a reason why two doses are administered rather than just one dose and I don't think it's solely to achieve an extra 4% of immunity, because 91% immunity to start with is more than acceptable, besides I'd imagine that at the very start of the development of the vaccines only one dose would have been used, then that evolved into having to give two doses, there would be I'd guess a very good scientific or medical reason for that.

[milky_26]

6 minutes ago, Jambo-Jimbo said:

 

A few problems I can see with Blair's idea.

 

1. Might need to be approved by the regulators all over again, as it's been granted emergency use based on two doses, not just the one.

2. Could potentially end up being like only taking half the course of antibiotics, thus allowing the virus to mutate etc.

3. If the rest of the World administer two doses, then the UK could be ostracized on the grounds that the UK population has not been fully vaccinated.

 

I understand what Blair is saying, but there has to be a reason why two doses are administered rather than just one dose and I don't think it's solely to achieve an extra 4% of immunity, because 91% immunity to start with is more than acceptable, besides I'd imagine that at the very start of the development of the vaccines only one dose would have been used, then that evolved into having to give two doses, there would be I'd guess a very good scientific or medical reason for that.

Re point 1 I would say not might but would need approved again for use with just one dose

[ri Alban]

1 hour ago, jonesy said:

Is that right? Is this based on the tests (still no answer for @Tommy Walker's question earlier, from anyone, as far as I can see) or a projected figure? 

 

If so, what's the context? Where are these people? What demographic do they represent? Are they isolating? 

 

Not a go at you, @ri Alban, just a lot of fatigue with stats being used to paint horror stories without much context behind them.

This who has had covid. 

[theshed]

1 hour ago, ri Alban said:

I may be in the wrong/minority, but personally I think the should vaccinate the people of the UK from the youngest up. Maybe shield the old and vulnerable for a month or 2. Just a suggestion to maybe getting us up and running again, quicker. 

 

Thats a very good idea as that would get things up and running as older people aren't working anyway so can stay at home 

 

Problem might be the younger people not wanting the vaccine though 

[Governor Tarkin]

17 minutes ago, Seymour M Hersh said:

 

Dancing glow? I was expecting dancing girls and lots of them! 

 

Someone was going to say it, I'm only surprised it took so long.

 

 

[Jambo-Jimbo]

1 hour ago, ri Alban said:

I may be in the wrong/minority, but personally I think the should vaccinate the people of the UK from the youngest up. Maybe shield the old and vulnerable for a month or 2. Just a suggestion to maybe getting us up and running again, quicker. 

 

The vaccines haven't really been tested on kids/teenagers in any large scale trials as yet, they have started them but they are at a very early stage.

 

Why wouldn’t a COVID-19 vaccine be available to kids at the same time as adults?

Children’s immune systems are very different from adults’, and their immune responses can be different at different ages, from infancy through the teenage years.

So far, Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine has only been fully tested on adults. In September, they started including teenagers as young as 16 in an ongoing trial, and last month they began a new trial including children as young as 12. They haven’t yet shared these results, but one thing is sure: More research is needed to make sure any COVID-19 vaccine will be safe and effective for infants, kids and teens.

https://www.connecticutchildrens.org/coronavirus/when-will-the-covid-19-vaccine-be-available-for-kids-and-will-it-be-safe-for-your-family/

 

I believe the Moderna vaccine is around about at the same stage as the Pfizer vaccine, don't know if the Oxford vaccine has been tested on kids yet.

Edited December 24, 2020 by Jambo-Jimbo

[Weakened Offender]

2 hours ago, Konrad von Carstein said:

Since his transformation since April(ish) when he stopped buying bleach by the crateload and got a grip of himself, he has been, on occasion, very sniffy with people who are still wary of Covid , and seems to be playing to  particular gallery on here.

 

🤡

 

Perfect. 👌

[coconut doug]

6 hours ago, JamesM48 said:

Spot on Enzo . It’s a mass hysteria regarding the only inevitable thing in life , death . Well that and taxes .  I read an interesting article about this issue basically saying how arrogant is man ( sic ) thinking he can avoid the grim reaper ! Quality of life over length of life surely . My heart breaks for those poor old folk stuck in old folks homes not allowed to see their families on Xmas day when they might not even survive until Easter next year . Surely they have the capacity anc right to choose ? Sadly they haven’t due to the over arching principle of keeping them alive at all costs irrespective of quality of life . There will be a lot of miserable , lonely and sad older people tomorrow 

 

Why don't you take your mother out the "old folks home" and maybe your freedom loving pals could do the same with theirs. What a choice these oldies have. They must allow any Tom dick or Harry to infest their home in the name of a right to choose just because their relatives who abandoned them to the institution in the first place want to assuage their consciences.  What an absolute cheek these old people have thinking they can avoid death for a wee while longer. 

  Imagine a government trying to prevent their death while simultaneously restricting the opening hours at the boozer. Inhuman, that's what it is, brought about by krankie and the cult who are too scared to realise that the old must die if the young are to prosper.

  

 

[Jambo-Jimbo]

6 minutes ago, jonesy said:

If my sons continue their nippy antics on and into this evening then I'm more than happy to offer them up as guinea pigs. Greater good, and all that.

 

Getting hyper waiting on Santa?  Well remember those days when mine were wee.

[JudyJudyJudy]

3 hours ago, Robbofan99 said:

@jamesm48   

 

Noticed you getting a fair dooin on this today.    Ignore them mate. I find your posts intelligent , informative and interesting.  You have been truthful about your change of views about wee Sturgeon and her management of this pandemic. sorry mismanagement.  I do find your posts can be a bit " out there" , " off kilter" and " whacky" but thats what makes you interesting. Considering most of your critics  repeat the same " Lockdowns work" drone every day ad nausea  without considering any alternatives I would say you and a few others are spot on.  Hope you have a good Xmas.

 

 

Cheers very kind comments 👍

[frankblack]

20 minutes ago, coconut doug said:

 

Why don't you take your mother out the "old folks home" and maybe your freedom loving pals could do the same with theirs. What a choice these oldies have. They must allow any Tom dick or Harry to infest their home in the name of a right to choose just because their relatives who abandoned them to the institution in the first place want to assuage their consciences.  What an absolute cheek these old people have thinking they can avoid death for a wee while longer. 

  Imagine a government trying to prevent their death while simultaneously restricting the opening hours at the boozer. Inhuman, that's what it is, brought about by krankie and the cult who are too scared to realise that the old must die if the young are to prosper.

  

 

 

I actually agree with you on this.

 

On top of it all, they don't have enough of the vaccines to do the general population, with only Pfizer currently approved and in limited supply.

 

The Oxford vaccine is the key and by the sounds of it that isn't imminent due to the ongoing testing.

[JudyJudyJudy]

2 hours ago, Taffin said:

 

Don't agree with that. He's been pretty supportive and respectful on this thread to people who are wary about it. Where he's been sniffy is in regards to people who won't accept another viewpoint and continually champion the government advice and pro-lockdown stuff whilst trying to ridicule others who think lockdowns do more harm than good. His responses about hiding behind sofa's and stuff are churlish but his frustration (imo) is at the condescending judgement from those who support maximum intrusion into liberty to combat the virus, not at people who are afraid of it.

 

Do I agree with him? In parts, yes. Is that easy to say when not at risk from the virus really? Also yes.

 

Whether people like it or not, a point in time will either come when we have this under control or we have to accept the death toll. I hope more than anything it's the first one, but time is running out before the second one starts to feel like the less destructive one on a global scale.

 

Cheers 👍

[JudyJudyJudy]

2 hours ago, Konrad von Carstein said:

Fairly put...

 

I guess my response was (whatever the opposite of tempered is) by being accused of being part of a pile on, James is, I assume big enough and ugly enough to call out bullying, if/when it happens on here without handers.

Problem is there have been a few comments from posters I’ve never heard of before jumping on the band wagon started by you and a few others.  Unsure if that’s bullying per sa but it’s certainly gas lighting regarding my comments about covid and or my presentation on this forum . 

[Nucky Thompson]

Just now, frankblack said:

 

 

 

The Oxford vaccine is the key and by the sounds of it that isn't imminent due to the ongoing testing.

27th or 28th December seems to be the common belief from a few scientists or people connected to the Oxford vaccine.

It's ultimately down to the MHRA though 

[Governor Tarkin]

16 minutes ago, jonesy said:

Possibly. Not sure what their excuse is in the middle of April when they're still acting like nutcases is, though  

 

Their old man is a nutcase?

 

[Nucky Thompson]

39,036 new positive cases in the UK. 507,384 tests that produced results

574 deaths. 200 less than yesterday

[JudyJudyJudy]

34 minutes ago, coconut doug said:

 

Why don't you take your mother out the "old folks home" and maybe your freedom loving pals could do the same with theirs. What a choice these oldies have. They must allow any Tom dick or Harry to infest their home in the name of a right to choose just because their relatives who abandoned them to the institution in the first place want to assuage their consciences.  What an absolute cheek these old people have thinking they can avoid death for a wee while longer. 

  Imagine a government trying to prevent their death while simultaneously restricting the opening hours at the boozer. Inhuman, that's what it is, brought about by krankie and the cult who are too scared to realise that the old must die if the young are to prosper.

  

 

What a completely moronic answer . You haven’t got a clue . That response makes absolutely no sense to my comments . 

[Konrad von Carstein]

54 minutes ago, JamesM48 said:

Problem is there have been a few comments from posters I’ve never heard of before jumping on the band wagon started by you and a few others.  Unsure if that’s bullying per sa but it’s certainly gas lighting regarding my comments about covid and or my presentation on this forum . 

 Started by me? Jesus Christ...

 

Whatever, look have a nice Xmas and the best 2021 you can...

[GinRummy]

55 minutes ago, JamesM48 said:

What a completely moronic answer . You haven’t got a clue . That response makes absolutely no sense to my comments . 

Dinnae let it bother you mate. Develop a thick skin and remember you don’t need to answer every post fired in your direction. You’re entitled to your opinion and to change your mind as often as you please 👍

[JudyJudyJudy]

1 minute ago, GinRummy said:

Dinnae let it bother you mate. Develop a thick skin and remember you don’t need to answer every post fired in your direction. You’re entitled to your opinion and to change your mind as often as you please 👍

Yeah thanks for that . Yeah your right I shouldn’t need to answer every post directed at me but I’m kinda too polite I suppose . I’ll keep posting mate . Merry Xmas to you 

[GinRummy]

Just now, JamesM48 said:

Yeah thanks for that . Yeah your right I shouldn’t need to answer every post directed at me but I’m kinda too polite I suppose . I’ll keep posting mate . Merry Xmas to you 

And you man 

[coconut doug]

1 hour ago, JamesM48 said:

What a completely moronic answer . You haven’t got a clue . That response makes absolutely no sense to my comments . 

 

Well let me explain again. This is what you said.  "My heart breaks for those poor old folk stuck in old folks homes not allowed to see their families on Xmas day when they might not even survive until Easter next year . Surely they have the capacity anc right to choose ?" and you are frequently posting messages of this nature.

Those people who live in "old folks homes" as you describe them live collectively. Any decision made about Covid by any individual is very likely to impact on the rest of the residents. For this reason alone they should not be allowed to make decisions about who can visit them. These old people live in the same rooms as many other residents and are attended to by several health and care workers already. Covid has devastated many care homes in large part because of this. Once the disease is in the Care home it is much more difficult to stop the spread than in almost any other place.

       Many of these institutions are called Care homes because their residents need care. Dementia sufferers are among the most susceptible to Covid and they can be found in their highest concentrations in care homes. They cannot be expected to observe normal precautions against the spread of Covid. Many residents no longer have responsibility for much of their lives and relatives or the care home will have power of attorney over them because decision making is deemed too difficult for them. Many are simply forgetful and cannot be relied upon to observe social distancing and other precautionary measures.

  The care home has responsibility for them in many cases and when residents move in they are or should be made aware of this. 

  So just to recap many do not have the capacity to choose who visits and none of them should be allowed to make that decision anyway for the reasons above. If their families don't like it they can take them out of the home as some have done. Arguing the contrary is to disregard the number one human right which is the right to life itself. There is no doubt whatsoever that allowing visitors into care homes will cost lives because of increased chance of catching the disease so anybody advocating or implementing such an approach would be in contravention of the Human Rights Act. 

  Sorry if that all sounds a bit smug or cowardly (words you have used to describe those of us who disagree with you) but i'm not really that convinced that your heart is breaking any more than anybody else's It' not an ideal situation for any of us but most of us are doing the best we can in difficult circumstances but with a real hope that things could get significantly better quite quickly. Care home residents are among the first to get vaccines in Scotland because they are the most vulnerable in society. Giving them the right to choose is giving them the right to sign the death warrants of their peers. Like so many false freedoms in our society it is the most vulnerable who will pay the highest price.

[Governor Tarkin]

10 minutes ago, Brian Dundas said:

I saw that there have been 640 deaths of healthcare workers from Covid, such a tragedy losing your life to try and help others. Which of these other diseases or conditions that kill every year take so many healthcare professionals with it?

 

The answer is none, obviously. 

[GinRummy]

16 minutes ago, coconut doug said:

 

Well let me explain again. This is what you said.  "My heart breaks for those poor old folk stuck in old folks homes not allowed to see their families on Xmas day when they might not even survive until Easter next year . Surely they have the capacity anc right to choose ?" and you are frequently posting messages of this nature.

Those people who live in "old folks homes" as you describe them live collectively. Any decision made about Covid by any individual is very likely to impact on the rest of the residents. For this reason alone they should not be allowed to make decisions about who can visit them. These old people live in the same rooms as many other residents and are attended to by several health and care workers already. Covid has devastated many care homes in large part because of this. Once the disease is in the Care home it is much more difficult to stop the spread than in almost any other place.

       Many of these institutions are called Care homes because their residents need care. Dementia sufferers are among the most susceptible to Covid and they can be found in their highest concentrations in care homes. They cannot be expected to observe normal precautions against the spread of Covid. Many residents no longer have responsibility for much of their lives and relatives or the care home will have power of attorney over them because decision making is deemed too difficult for them. Many are simply forgetful and cannot be relied upon to observe social distancing and other precautionary measures.

  The care home has responsibility for them in many cases and when residents move in they are or should be made aware of this. 

  So just to recap many do not have the capacity to choose who visits and none of them should be allowed to make that decision anyway for the reasons above. If their families don't like it they can take them out of the home as some have done. Arguing the contrary is to disregard the number one human right which is the right to life itself. There is no doubt whatsoever that allowing visitors into care homes will cost lives because of increased chance of catching the disease so anybody advocating or implementing such an approach would be in contravention of the Human Rights Act. 

  Sorry if that all sounds a bit smug or cowardly (words you have used to describe those of us who disagree with you) but i'm not really that convinced that your heart is breaking any more than anybody else's It' not an ideal situation for any of us but most of us are doing the best we can in difficult circumstances but with a real hope that things could get significantly better quite quickly. Care home residents are among the first to get vaccines in Scotland because they are the most vulnerable in society. Giving them the right to choose is giving them the right to sign the death warrants of their peers. Like so many false freedoms in our society it is the most vulnerable who will pay the highest price.

What are ‘false freedoms’?

[Doctor FinnBarr]

4 hours ago, coconut doug said:

 

Why don't you take your mother out the "old folks home" and maybe your freedom loving pals could do the same with theirs. What a choice these oldies have. They must allow any Tom dick or Harry to infest their home in the name of a right to choose just because their relatives who abandoned them to the institution in the first place want to assuage their consciences.  What an absolute cheek these old people have thinking they can avoid death for a wee while longer. 

  Imagine a government trying to prevent their death while simultaneously restricting the opening hours at the boozer. Inhuman, that's what it is, brought about by krankie and the cult who are too scared to realise that the old must die if the young are to prosper.

  

 

 

Don't ****en start me ya ignorant twat, my dad (95) is in care because of dementia and forgetting he can't climb stairs after breaking a hip 2 years ago. Twice we were going to move in with him to try and bring him home (setting up a downstairs bedroom for him with a commode), twice we had to sleep on an airbed at the bottom of the stairs to stop him trying to climb the stairs and possibly killing/hurting himself. We asked social services to provide a 2/3 hour cover between me going to my backshift and the wife coming home from her dayshift, canny be done, they only come in to admin meds. We're now being forced to sell his house to pay for care (a house we bought I hasten to add but he didn't change it into my name)but now we have ***** like you claiming I abandoned him in a home? Hang your head in shame Doug.

I was going to say more but Doug is a worthless piece of shit that doesn't deserve a reply

 

Edited December 24, 2020 by FinnBarr Saunders
raging

[Victorian]

17 minutes ago, coconut doug said:

 

Well let me explain again. This is what you said.  "My heart breaks for those poor old folk stuck in old folks homes not allowed to see their families on Xmas day when they might not even survive until Easter next year . Surely they have the capacity anc right to choose ?" and you are frequently posting messages of this nature.

Those people who live in "old folks homes" as you describe them live collectively. Any decision made about Covid by any individual is very likely to impact on the rest of the residents. For this reason alone they should not be allowed to make decisions about who can visit them. These old people live in the same rooms as many other residents and are attended to by several health and care workers already. Covid has devastated many care homes in large part because of this. Once the disease is in the Care home it is much more difficult to stop the spread than in almost any other place.

       Many of these institutions are called Care homes because their residents need care. Dementia sufferers are among the most susceptible to Covid and they can be found in their highest concentrations in care homes. They cannot be expected to observe normal precautions against the spread of Covid. Many residents no longer have responsibility for much of their lives and relatives or the care home will have power of attorney over them because decision making is deemed too difficult for them. Many are simply forgetful and cannot be relied upon to observe social distancing and other precautionary measures.

  The care home has responsibility for them in many cases and when residents move in they are or should be made aware of this. 

  So just to recap many do not have the capacity to choose who visits and none of them should be allowed to make that decision anyway for the reasons above. If their families don't like it they can take them out of the home as some have done. Arguing the contrary is to disregard the number one human right which is the right to life itself. There is no doubt whatsoever that allowing visitors into care homes will cost lives because of increased chance of catching the disease so anybody advocating or implementing such an approach would be in contravention of the Human Rights Act. 

  Sorry if that all sounds a bit smug or cowardly (words you have used to describe those of us who disagree with you) but i'm not really that convinced that your heart is breaking any more than anybody else's It' not an ideal situation for any of us but most of us are doing the best we can in difficult circumstances but with a real hope that things could get significantly better quite quickly. Care home residents are among the first to get vaccines in Scotland because they are the most vulnerable in society. Giving them the right to choose is giving them the right to sign the death warrants of their peers. Like so many false freedoms in our society it is the most vulnerable who will pay the highest price.

 

A well thought out,  coherent and respectful post.  Do not bet the house on an equally well thought out,  coherent and respectful response.

[GinRummy]

1 minute ago, FinnBarr Saunders said:

 

Don't ****en start me ya ignorant twat, my dad (95) is in care because of dementia and forgetting he can't climb stairs after breaking a hip 2 years ago. Twice we were going to move in with him to try and bring him home (setting up a downstairs bedroom for him with a commode), twice we had to sleep on an airbed at the bottom of the stairs to stop him trying to climb the stairs and possibly killing/hurting himself. We asked social services to provide a 2/3 hour cover between me going to my backshift and the wife coming home from her dayshift, canny be done, they only come in to admin meds. We're now being forced to sell his house to pay for care (a house we bought I hasten to add but he didn't change it into my name)but now we have ***** like you claiming I abandoned him in a home? Hang your head in shame Doug.

My old man is the same. Got mobility issues and suffers from vascular dementia. Kept forgetting and pulling himself up of his seat or out of bed and falling. Ended up in a care homes in Broxburn. ****ing grim. He was an absolute ***** when he was younger but still horrible seeing him so helpless in old age. ☹️

[JudyJudyJudy]

2 minutes ago, Victorian said:

 

A well thought out,  coherent and respectful post.  Do not bet the house on an equally well thought out,  coherent and respectful response.

[Victorian]

Well I got that wrong.

[Dawnrazor]

2 minutes ago, Brian Dundas said:

............. all those 80 year old nurses. 

Would.

[GinRummy]

4 minutes ago, Brian Dundas said:

Didn’t think so, probably all those 80 year old nurses. 

What is the average age of healthcare workers who have died of Covid?

[JudyJudyJudy]

9 minutes ago, FinnBarr Saunders said:

 

Don't ****en start me ya ignorant twat, my dad (95) is in care because of dementia and forgetting he can't climb stairs after breaking a hip 2 years ago. Twice we were going to move in with him to try and bring him home (setting up a downstairs bedroom for him with a commode), twice we had to sleep on an airbed at the bottom of the stairs to stop him trying to climb the stairs and possibly killing/hurting himself. We asked social services to provide a 2/3 hour cover between me going to my backshift and the wife coming home from her dayshift, canny be done, they only come in to admin meds. We're now being forced to sell his house to pay for care (a house we bought I hasten to add but he didn't change it into my name)but now we have ***** like you claiming I abandoned him in a home? Hang your head in shame Doug.

I was going to say more but Doug is a worthless piece of shit that doesn't deserve a reply

 

Well said . Sorry to hear this distressing story about your dad and the issues inherent with his care . Unfortunately he seems to think residents are not individuals with individual needs and abilities and capacities . Obviously when I was advocating residents should have a right to meet with family then said family and residents would be tested before and after . Perhaps the said residents could have respite with their adult children ? Then be tested before going back into the home ? or maybe just do what Sturgeon did and send residents with covid back into homes ? 

[coconut doug]

13 minutes ago, Victorian said:

 

A well thought out,  coherent and respectful post.  Do not bet the house on an equally well thought out,  coherent and respectful response.

 

Cheers.

[JudyJudyJudy]

10 minutes ago, Victorian said:

Well I got that wrong.

[coconut doug]

1 minute ago, JamesM48 said:

Well said . Sorry to hear this distressing story about your dad and the issues inherent with his care . Unfortunately he seems to think residents are not individuals with individual needs and abilities and capacities . Obviously when I was advocating residents should have a right to meet with family then said family and residents would be tested before and after . Perhaps the said residents could have respite with their adult children ? Then be tested before going back into the home ? or maybe just do what Sturgeon did and send residents with covid back into homes ? 

 

I've been there with nearly all of that you describe. My point was not personal. It was about whether or not residents should be able to make theses decisions for themselves. If the ones who can perhaps make these decisions are suffering so much then perhaps they could be taken out of the home. It is a better option than condemning many of their peers to premature death. Respite even while we see how the vaccine goes.

[Victorian]

Have a great day tomorrow everyone.  The next one will be the best ever.

[Doctor FinnBarr]

7 minutes ago, JamesM48 said:

Well said . Sorry to hear this distressing story about your dad and the issues inherent with his care . Unfortunately he seems to think residents are not individuals with individual needs and abilities and capacities . Obviously when I was advocating residents should have a right to meet with family then said family and residents would be tested before and after . Perhaps the said residents could have respite with their adult children ? Then be tested before going back into the home ? or maybe just do what Sturgeon did and send residents with covid back into homes ? 

I was allowed a garden visit during the nice weather (only me though) then we progressed onto inside visits (again only me). Inside visits are totally pointless due to him being really deaf and relying on looking at lips which canny be done with a mask on. Video calls are the way to go with Whitdale.

[JudyJudyJudy]

4 minutes ago, FinnBarr Saunders said:

I was allowed a garden visit during the nice weather (only me though) then we progressed onto inside visits (again only me). Inside visits are totally pointless due to him being really deaf and relying on looking at lips which canny be done with a mask on. Video calls are the way to go with Whitdale.

It’s surely about the quality of these visits . That doesn’t appear to be the case with your dad . Sorry to hear this 

[Doctor FinnBarr]

4 minutes ago, coconut doug said:

 

I've been there with nearly all of that you describe. My point was not personal. It was about whether or not residents should be able to make theses decisions for themselves. If the ones who can perhaps make these decisions are suffering so much then perhaps they could be taken out of the home. It is a better option than condemning many of their peers to premature death. Respite even while we see how the vaccine goes.

 

Any reason you ignored my post about us abandoning people in care homes Doug?

a

 

[coconut doug]

5 minutes ago, FinnBarr Saunders said:

 

Any reason you ignored my post about us abandoning people in care homes Doug?

a

 

Sorry linked to James' post instead of yours.

 

 

[Doctor FinnBarr]

3 minutes ago, JamesM48 said:

It’s surely about the quality of these visits . That doesn’t appear to be the case with your dad . Sorry to hear this 

 

It is quality James but the mask stuff confuses him I think, window visits are better when we can take his grandaughter/great grandaughter to visit him but even thats been banned over the Xmas/NY period

[luckydug]

4 hours ago, jonesy said:

The bit in bold is a deliberate misrepresentation of the argument. Would expect better from you, but it is Xmas Eve.

 

Totally agree about old folks' homes, though. Our culture has a weird and selfish way of coping with old age. Not blaming any individuals on here, by the way. It's just we are set up to live in the smallest possible family units and pass responsibility for care onto anyone who will take minimum wage to do so. I interview a large number of care workers and they often reveal that they couldn't believe they are paid to do things that, in many cultures around the world, are done by family without a second thought.

My old grannie developed cancer and came to live with us in two bedroom prefab. This was back in 1955 and she stayed with us till she died in 1959. She was very ill and had the main bedroom to herself, mum and dad had to sleep on the bed settee in the living room and us three boys had to share the other bedroom. 

Our situation wasn't uncommon in those days. People looked after their elderly parents as there was not so many care homes as now. 

My parents never gave a second thought to not looking after Grannie it was expected and not grudged on the families part. 

There is no way they would have left Grannie to die in a care home. 

[Nucky Thompson]

1 hour ago, FinnBarr Saunders said:

 

Don't ****en start me ya ignorant twat, my dad (95) is in care because of dementia and forgetting he can't climb stairs after breaking a hip 2 years ago. Twice we were going to move in with him to try and bring him home (setting up a downstairs bedroom for him with a commode), twice we had to sleep on an airbed at the bottom of the stairs to stop him trying to climb the stairs and possibly killing/hurting himself. We asked social services to provide a 2/3 hour cover between me going to my backshift and the wife coming home from her dayshift, canny be done, they only come in to admin meds. We're now being forced to sell his house to pay for care (a house we bought I hasten to add but he didn't change it into my name)but now we have ***** like you claiming I abandoned him in a home? Hang your head in shame Doug.

I was going to say more but Doug is a worthless piece of shit that doesn't deserve a reply

 

I'm with you mate, but I would just ignore that Murrell bot