Coronavirus Super Thread ( merged )

[OBE]

1 hour ago, Enzo Chiefo said:

That's the easy option Brian. They need to be far more transparent about where it is spreading and what demographic is tending to spread it. I think we all know that non-compliance of existing rules is causing the problem. In that case, punishing the law abiding majority with more restrictions cannot be justified. Unless you think the spread is caused by the interactions not yet banned under Tier 4?? Schools apart, it doesn't seem plausible. 

 

Correct!...get tore intae Wayne, Waynetta and whoever's sprogs. Mum, Dad? and four wean's in the Co-op, all maskless, Snotters dripping from the weans, touching products that won't be purchased.

 

The majority of us are fighting a losing battle when Waynetta fails miserably to see the benefit of shopping alone...

 

 

Edited January 2, 2021 by OBE

[Taffin]

3 minutes ago, frankblack said:

 

I take a view that we now need to start targeting those not following the rules with punative punishments, tighten requirements on face masks, and put emphasis on the big stores and public transport to enforce the rules.

 

Do away with the exemptions that are being abused.

 

I think we need to do a trial of keeping Schools and Universities closed to see what effect that has on figures.

 

There's punitive punishments in place already for rule breaking, the police just don't seem bothered about enforcing them on any great scale. They don't really have the resources to do so with any great effect so I can see why they don't. Ideally, yes, we'd just punish the rule breakers but it's not realistic (just imo of course). The realpolitik of the situation is that the pressure on the NHS is not proportionately spread across all demographics. If we can't make other people keep these people safe, then we need to encourage them to try harder to keep themselves safe too. There seems to be a narrative of someone passing the virus on as active and the 'catcher' being passive, but unless these spreaders are sneaking up on folk and breathing on them then those catching must also have put themselves in a position to have caught it (not always of course, but at this rate of transmission a reasonable number). It's nobodies fault imo, but whilst we have a duty to try and protect others we also have a duty to try and protect ourselves. 

 

Back in March I was nervous about driving anywhere as there were so few cars on the road that you stood out like a sore thumb to be pulled over. Now there are so many exceptions then really you could probably drive around all day and never once be questioned on what you are doing. For example, mid-December I did 1200 miles in a week and never once felt like I may be questioned. I was working so it would have been fine but I equally could have just been visiting people and places etc.

[JudyJudyJudy]

13 minutes ago, frankblack said:

 

I take a view that we now need to start targeting those not following the rules with punative punishments, tighten requirements on face masks, and put emphasis on the big stores and public transport to enforce the rules.

 

Do away with the exemptions that are being abused.

 

I think we need to do a trial of keeping Schools and Universities closed to see what effect that has on figures.

Dearie me.  Where do i start ?  " Punitive punishments" in what way?  " Exemptions" being abused ? Any stats on that ?  There are millions of people with invisible  disabilities who may struggle with mask wearing.  Your stigmatizing an already vulnerable and much maligned group of people in society. You mentioned earlier about " fines" etc.  Do you really think that people who flout the rules will bother about fines?  The courts dont give a flying feck about catching up with criminals who have been fined or as them to pay it back at a quid a week.  The hammer approach wont work. Best to try get the vast majority of people on their side.  The Govt is successfully doing this. 

Edited January 2, 2021 by JamesM48

[OBE]

2 minutes ago, JamesM48 said:

Dearie me.  Where do i start ?  " Punitive punishments" in what way?  " Exemptions" being abused ? Any stats on that ?  There are millions of people with invisible  disabilities who may struggle with mask wearing.  Your stigmatizing an already vulnerable and much maligned group of people in society. You mentioned earlier about " fines" etc.  Do you really think that people who flout the rules will bother about fines?  The courts dont give a flying feck about catching up with criminals who have been fined or as them to pay it back at a quid a week.  The hammer approach wont work. Best to try get the vast majority of people on their side.  The Govt is successfully doing this. 

 

They stay at home, wait in the car or feed the ***king ducks...easy!

 

[frankblack]

8 minutes ago, JamesM48 said:

Dearie me.  Where do i start ?  " Punitive punishments" in what way?  " Exemptions" being abused ? Any stats on that ?  There are millions of people with invisible  disabilities who may struggle with mask wearing.  Your stigmatizing an already vulnerable and much maligned group of people in society. You mentioned earlier about " fines" etc.  Do you really think that people who flout the rules will bother about fines?  The courts dont give a flying feck about catching up with criminals who have been fined or as them to pay it back at a quid a week.  The hammer approach wont work. Best to try get the vast majority of people on their side.  The Govt is successfully doing this. 

 

That really isn't true.

 

When I went into the chemist a few months ago to pick up a prescription and had to wait in a corner while it was prepared I saw a guy in his 20s finish a cigarrette outside the door then walk in straight to the counter without a mask.

 

You see school kids head into the local chippy, convenience store, etc at lunchtimes maskless in their masses, as they do on buses.

 

There must be a lot of people with bad asthma that can't wear a face mask or even a shield which doesn't contact the mouth or nose.

 

As long as exemptions are allowed these abuses of the rules will continue.

[Samuel Camazzola]

1 hour ago, frankblack said:

 

I think Schools do now need to be taken to online only until at least February to see if the numbers start dropping.  They also need to stop kids mixing outside school, as what I've witnessed shows shows no regard for following the existing rules even before the tiers.

 

The governments really don't have any other cards to play unless they start enforcing the rules for the first time ever.

Online learning for the youngest age groups doesn't work and they need a classroom environment for the bulk of a week. 

[frankblack]

4 minutes ago, Samuel Camazzola said:

Online learning for the youngest age groups doesn't work and they need a classroom environment for the bulk of a week. 

 

While that is clearly not ideal, I don't think that is an option while the virus is out of control, and schools seem to be riddled.

[Samuel Camazzola]

1 minute ago, frankblack said:

 

While that is clearly not ideal, I don't think that is an option while the virus is out of control, and schools seem to be riddled.

From experience (and from the views shared by many including teachers), the option of classroom teaching for primary 1 to 3 needs to be there. 

 

Some will take the choice to take their kids out of school but vital learning at these age groups should not be impacted badly as it was before. 

[Victorian]

Pretty soon they'll be forced into closing the schools.  The advisors will force it as there are no other big levers left.  To avoid more chaos they'll be better off doing it now rather than the schools returning for 1 or 2 weeks and then closing again.  They'll be closed for an extended period.

[frankblack]

1 minute ago, Samuel Camazzola said:

From experience (and from the views shared by many including teachers), the option of classroom teaching for primary 1 to 3 needs to be there. 

 

Some will take the choice to take their kids out of school but vital learning at these age groups should not be impacted badly as it was before. 

 

I know the teaching unions in England are battling against reopening the primary schools.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-55511662

[Nucky Thompson]

37 minutes ago, frankblack said:

 

 

 

I think we need to do a trial of keeping Schools and Universities closed to see what effect that has on figures.

Schools have been shut for a fortnight

The positivity percentage was around 5% when they were open, it's since they've been shut that the numbers have soared.

Schools need to be open

[Ray Gin]

47 minutes ago, frankblack said:

 

It clearly didn't hence we are in the current situation when we should have a competent track and trace, enforcement of rules, and shutdown of the ports.

 

We literally went from over 100 deaths a day to zero. 

[frankblack]

4 minutes ago, Nucky Thompson said:

Schools have been shut for a fortnight

The positivity percentage was around 5% when they were open, it's since they've been shut that the numbers have soared.

Schools need to be open

 

What is the lag between infections and symptions showing?

[Nucky Thompson]

Just now, frankblack said:

 

What is the lag between infections and symptions showing?

It's meant to be 5 days

[OBE]

1 minute ago, frankblack said:

 

What is the lag between infections and symptions showing?

 

5 to 7 days...I ken!

[frankblack]

2 minutes ago, Ray Gin said:

 

We literally went from over 100 deaths a day to zero. 

 

And right back up again when the SG sent Schools and Unis back to mingle with no regard to the rules.

 

You can't keep lockdown forever or the economy will tank and unemployment rocket.  I don't think furlough is something the SG can count on indefinitely.

[JudyJudyJudy]

30 minutes ago, OBE said:

 

They stay at home, wait in the car or feed the ***king ducks...easy!

 

Another wonderful,  caring emphatic response .  You really havent a clue

[Nucky Thompson]

There's a lot of infections happening in hospitals. 

Do we shut them to all non covid patients?

[frankblack]

1 minute ago, Nucky Thompson said:

It's meant to be 5 days

 

1 minute ago, OBE said:

 

5 to 7 days...I ken!

 

Cheers.

 

Goes back to my constant demand to have more meaningful data to target the problem.  The stats we get released are as useful as a chocolate teacup and deliberately obscure.

[JudyJudyJudy]

18 minutes ago, frankblack said:

seem to be riddled.

evidence ?????

[Ray Gin]

2 minutes ago, frankblack said:

 

And right back up again when the SG sent Schools and Unis back to mingle with no regard to the rules.

 

You can't keep lockdown forever or the economy will tank and unemployment rocket.  I don't think furlough is something the SG can count on indefinitely.

 

We don't need to lockdown forever. Vaccine programme has started. 

[frankblack]

Just now, Nucky Thompson said:

There's a lot of infections happening in hospitals. 

Do we shut them to all non covid patients?

 

We would need to identify what procedures are not working and fix them.

[OBE]

Just now, JamesM48 said:

Another wonderful,  caring emphatic response .  You really havent a clue

 

This is a war, get the vulnerable/infirm away from the front-line.

[frankblack]

2 minutes ago, JamesM48 said:

evidence ?????

 

Just going by the number of local reports of schools having positive infections and requiring pupils to self-isolate.  On the run-up to Christmas the number of schools mentioned were increasing to a worrying level.

 

Scroll down Edinburgh Live for example up until schools broke up.

Edited January 2, 2021 by frankblack

[JudyJudyJudy]

10 minutes ago, Nucky Thompson said:

Schools have been shut for a fortnight

The positivity percentage was around 5% when they were open, it's since they've been shut that the numbers have soared.

Schools need to be open

Another one not thinking things through Nucky. Just coming out with soundbites.  Whose going to look after the millions of kids who wont be at school if they are closed?  Many of their parents will be at work .  And we have to think of children's well being and mental health too.  

[Victorian]

1 minute ago, frankblack said:

 

And right back up again when the SG sent Schools and Unis back to mingle with no regard to the rules.

 

You can't keep lockdown forever or the economy will tank and unemployment rocket.  I don't think furlough is something the SG can count on indefinitely.

 

Furlough could be extended for literally many months to come.  Even years.  An enormous cost of course but it might be a lesser cost than the economic damage done if the current mess drags on and on and on.   Thankfully and hopefully it shouldn't be necessary for furlough,  in some form,  to exist beyond this year.  

[frankblack]

1 minute ago, JamesM48 said:

Another one not thinking things through Nucky. Just coming out with soundbites.  Whose going to look after the millions of kids who wont be at school if they are closed?  Many of their parents will be at work .  And we have to think of children's well being and mental health too.  

 

The majority won't because they have to work from home or are on furlough.

[OBE]

2 minutes ago, JamesM48 said:

evidence ?????

 

My wife's school Dpt, there's currently nine of sixteen teachers nursing covid.

[JudyJudyJudy]

2 minutes ago, OBE said:

 

This is a war, get the vulnerable/infirm away from the front-line.

Thats exactly what I have been saying.  I wouldn't use the " war " analogy though.  I have said from the beginning pour all the resources into supporting the vulnerable and elderly by ensuring they dont need to go out to get their messages etc.  It would have been the best option.  Anyway thats horse has bolted. People with disabilities and those exempt from face masks may not have supports so have no option to go out to shops etc. 

[John Findlay]

4 minutes ago, JamesM48 said:

Another one not thinking things through Nucky. Just coming out with soundbites.  Whose going to look after the millions of kids who wont be at school if they are closed?  Many of their parents will be at work .  And we have to think of children's well being and mental health too.  

Arent millions of parents working from home?

[frankblack]

Just now, JamesM48 said:

Thats exactly what I have been saying.  I wouldn't use the " war " analogy though.  I have said from the beginning pour all the resources into supporting the vulnerable and elderly by ensuring they dont need to go out to get their messages etc.  It would have been the best option.  Anyway thats horse has bolted. People with disabilities and those exempt from face masks may not have supports so have no option to go out to shops etc. 

 

There are options such as online shopping and services for people self-isolating.

[JudyJudyJudy]

3 minutes ago, Victorian said:

Thankfully and hopefully it shouldn't be necessary for furlough,  in some form,  to exist beyond this year.  

Really ?  A whole year of furlough ?  

[JudyJudyJudy]

3 minutes ago, frankblack said:

 

The majority won't because they have to work from home or are on furlough.

Yes " work from home" which means they cannot adequately supervise their children if they are working from home and also give them the attention they need. 

[frankblack]

1 minute ago, JamesM48 said:

Yes " work from home" which means they cannot adequately supervise their children if they are working from home and also give them the attention they need. 

 

Most employers will take this into account.  Its a pandemic - its the least worst option just now.

[steve123]

Speaking to a mate who is a Consultant today and he thinks it completely the wrong thing to delete the vacines the way they are.

 

Have to be honest before listening to him I would have been all gor it and thought it made sense.

[Victorian]

Just now, JamesM48 said:

Really ?  A whole year of furlough ?  

 

Yes.  It's a myth that furlough can't be extended for a considerable time.  The cost of furlough represents a small part of the overall cost of this pandemic.  The cost is funded by previously unthinkable borrowing which will be repaid over many decades.  The government bonds and sovereign wealth fund borrowing will be part of our economic book balancing for at least 50 years.

[JudyJudyJudy]

4 minutes ago, frankblack said:

 

There are options such as online shopping and services for people self-isolating.

Not everyone is online. ! Particularly older people.  Not getting at you but your making massive assumptions about people and their capacity. 

[JudyJudyJudy]

1 minute ago, Victorian said:

 

Yes.  It's a myth that furlough can't be extended for a considerable time.  The cost of furlough represents a small part of the overall cost of this pandemic.  The cost is funded by previously unthinkable borrowing which will be repaid over many decades.  The government bonds and sovereign wealth fund borrowing will be part of our economic book balancing for at least 50 years.

 Never thought about that. Just assumed it would end April/ May this year. 

[frankblack]

1 minute ago, JamesM48 said:

Not everyone is online. ! Particularly older people.  Not getting at you but your making massive assumptions about people and their capacity. 

 

As I said there are other services to get food to the vulnerable that I believe don't depend on being online.

[JudyJudyJudy]

1 minute ago, frankblack said:

 

As I said there are other services to get food to the vulnerable that I believe don't depend on being online.

Yes there are .  But many more needed.  

[frankblack]

1 minute ago, Brian Dundas said:

PHS do think that rates go up when schools are closed, so any closures would need to also mean a ban on children meeting up outside of school or it’s pointless shutting them. 

 

That is my big worry.  I've mentioned my area where I cross East Craigs and you see large groups of kids from different families all mixing and the parents also gabbing away like the pandemic never happened.

 

Its worrying when there are reported cases at the primary at the back of those houses and positive cases in that school before Christmas and in the local area.

[Nucky Thompson]

7 minutes ago, frankblack said:

 

The majority won't because they have to work from home or are on furlough.

I would say the majority are still working.

Office staff can work from home, but not a lot of other people can.

 

If kids can't go to school, people will just get grandparents to watch them and that's a recipe for disaster.

They are better off learning in a secure setting like school

[Victorian]

1 minute ago, JamesM48 said:

 Never thought about that. Just assumed it would end April/ May this year. 

 

Currently April but it will be extended in some form during the start of the recovery.  If things go well then it shouldn't need to be too long and can be phased out.  Eventually the government will cut adrift the businesses and jobs that only still exist due to support.  The government will assume that gaps in the economy will be replaced.  Supply always meets demand.  Hopefully they'll look at much better benefits and universal income.

[frankblack]

Just now, Nucky Thompson said:

I would say the majority are still working.

Office staff can work from home, but not a lot of other people can.

 

If kids can't go to school, people will just get grandparents to watch them and that's a recipe for disaster.

They are better off learning in a secure setting like school

 

I see where you are coming from, but I also take on board Brian's point above where the kids and parents are mixing at and outside the school which seems to be a disaster.

[Captain Sausage]

Anyone seen the ding dong between a nurse and the Royal College of Peadiatrics and Child Health? 
 

Nurse (KCH matron) caught insinuating that kids wards at UCLH are full with COVID cases - a claim that was dismissed as ‘simply not true’ and ‘irresponsible in the extreme’. 
 

An absolute charlatan who should be struck off. This virus is causing enough problems without fearmongering which goes against all the statistics available. She’s dug herself in and is pulling a Ferrier on it.  
 

 

[Enzo Chiefo]

1 hour ago, OBE said:

 

Correct!...get tore intae Wayne, Waynetta and whoever's sprogs. Mum, Dad? and four wean's in the Co-op, all maskless, Snotters dripping from the weans, touching products that won't be purchased.

 

The majority of us are fighting a losing battle when Waynetta fails miserably to see the benefit of shopping alone...

 

 

You're right OBE. My experience of the mask refuseniks in Tesco is that quite often it's just as you describe, usually attired in cottons - I think back in the 80s, as a teenager, we would have described them as "scaffs" although, now, they see themselves as followers of fashion 😀. Quite often it is a couple or a family although the last couple of people I have seen have been individuals wandering about, talking on their phones, doing feck all shopping and generally looking for attention.  Imo,they should be told to leave and removed, willingly or forcibly.

[Enzo Chiefo]

1 hour ago, Ray Gin said:

 

It did have success. 

It intefered with the virus and enabled it to mutate whereas, had we shielded the vulnerable, it may well have followed the normal course and weakened. It's a stretch to say it was a success

[Enzo Chiefo]

47 minutes ago, Victorian said:

 

Yes.  It's a myth that furlough can't be extended for a considerable time.  The cost of furlough represents a small part of the overall cost of this pandemic.  The cost is funded by previously unthinkable borrowing which will be repaid over many decades.  The government bonds and sovereign wealth fund borrowing will be part of our economic book balancing for at least 50 years.

That's not the point. Furlough is not a panacea, it only helps employees not the business owners who still have rent and various other fixed contracts still to pay. It's a short term fix which forces the risk-takers to dip into their savings to cover their costs and lack of earnings.  There is not a furlough scheme in the world that can compensate for the custom,  turnover and profit that every business relies on. That, in turn, generates corporation tax, income tax, NIC and VAT receipts that the Treasury needs to fund, for example the NHS.

[Jambo-Jimbo]

1 hour ago, frankblack said:

 

We would need to identify what procedures are not working and fix them.

 

Testing and isolating new admissions before putting them in occupied wards, should have been one of the top priorities, that and testing staff.

Just look what happened at the Borders General Hospital for an example.

 

 

[coconut doug]

3 minutes ago, Enzo Chiefo said:

It intefered with the virus and enabled it to mutate whereas, had we shielded the vulnerable, it may well have followed the normal course and weakened. It's a stretch to say it was a success

 

So Covid tore up the virus rule book because we locked down, but this wouldn't have happened if we had shielded the vulnerable(which we did) and then the the virus wouldn't have mutated in the way it did.

 

Did you not tell us frequently that the virus was mutating and that it would burn itself out?

 

In short you are telling us gov policy created the new strain.