Coronavirus Super Thread ( merged )

[Taffin]

16 minutes ago, Lord BJ said:

 

Agreed. I guess I’m uncomfortable with some of the narrative it’s all.

 

You'll not find me disagreeing with that, the narrative makes me very uneasy at times.

 

I've just tried to block it out now. If people want to work themselves into a rage about other people making their own choices, then let them crack on.

[JudyJudyJudy]

14 minutes ago, Lord BJ said:

 

It’s something that really surprises me. It was once of the first things I got taught by my parents, mainly to stop me fighting with my sister😂. Its one of the main components of empathy which seems to be lacking nowadays as well.

 

Most discussions I have, I’m trying to understand the other persons point of position as opposed to mine which I fully understand. 

 

As I often tell my kids you can be right or you can be happy. I accept I’m no Burns🙈

 

 

 

 

[Gizmo]

1 hour ago, JamesM48 said:

Yes we know kids can get it but it is mainly not a threat to them . End of.  

There is no " assumption" about kids shrugging off the virus. They do. Agree re parents making their informed choice. Its up to them. 

Exactly 

Tell me.  

Kids have died with Covid-19, James. Here in the UK. 

 

1 hour ago, JamesM48 said:

 

 

 

 

James Tierney

 

Well said Neil Clark. You are one of very very few journalists asking the right questions and holding true to journalistic professionalism.

Normalising the abnormal: From ‘We’re not planning Covid passports’ to ‘They may be needed long term’ in 3 easy months

It’s now being suggested that Covid vaccine passports may be needed for the long term in the UK, just three months after the vaccines minister explicitly denied there were any plans to introduce vaccine passports.

There is nothing more permanent than a temporary government programme, the old saying goes, but in light of the past 13 months, we should actually update that to “there is nothing more permanent than a temporary government programme which the government denies it is planning to introduce in the first place.”

The UK government didn’t want to do lockdown in March 2020, or so we were led to believe. The truth, as I highlighted previously, was that the government had already struck a £119-million contract with a major US advertising company urging people to ‘Stay Home, Stay Safe’ a full three weeks earlier.

And when lockdown was introduced it was famously for just three weeks. To “flatten the curve.” Strictly temporary. Thirteen months on, we still can’t sit inside a pub, or leave the country to go on holiday. And councils are recruiting ‘Covid marshals’ to enforce the rules into 2022! Imagine if someone had told you in March 2020 that in May 2021 this would be the case. You probably would have said they had been listening to too much David Icke. But that’s what’s happened. No wonder there was such a ferocious Matthew Hopkins-esque witch-hunter campaign last spring to ban Icke from social media.

Let’s talk face masks. Last spring we were told they weren’t of much use. The government wouldn’t be mandating them. But then we began to see a campaign to get the government to mandate masks.

As late as July 12, Michael Gove ruled out the government making them compulsory in shops.

And guess what happened? On July 14 the government announced that masks would be compulsory in shops. But of course, it would only be a temporary measure, and limited to shops.

Ten months on, face coverings are not only still compulsory in shops, but the mandate has been extended to many other places too. And note well, the government roadmap for the removal of restrictions makes no mention of if/when the mask mandate will ever be repealed. The Daily Telegraph reported this week that masks are likely to remain compulsory even after restrictions are supposed to be lifted on June 21. In March, Mary Ramsay, head of immunisation at Public Health England, said face coverings (and social distancing) would be needed “certainly for a few years.” “People have got used to those lower-level restrictions now, and people can live with them, and the economy can still go on with those less severe restrictions in place,” she said. So much for “it’s only for fifteen minutes a week for a few weeks when you do the weekly shop in Tesco’s”.

Now it’s the turn of vaccine passports. Again, to even mention them in 2020 would have got you smeared as a ‘conspiracy theorist’ (or worse), even when the World Economic Forum was openly promoting its ‘Common Pass’ health passport scheme on social media.

At the turn of the year, though, even ‘mainstream’ voices began to express concern about the direction of travel. On January 12, UK Vaccines Minister Nadhim Zahawi tweeted, in response to a Daily Telegraph report that vaccine passports would be trialled by thousands of Britons: “We have no plans to introduce vaccine passports. No one has been given or will be required to have a vaccine passport.”

Fast forward three months to April 5 and we have this on the government’s ‘Roadmap Reviews’ update:

The Government believes that COVID-status certification could have an important role to play both domestically and internationally, as a temporary measure.

Note how we’ve gone from calling them ‘vaccine passports’ to ‘Covid-status certification’ – because test results could be used for those who don’t have the vaccine. And note, too, the words “as a temporary measure.” A few days earlier, Culture Minister Oliver Dowden had also stressed this, saying of vaccine passports/Covid health certificates:

“Of course we would never look to do this on a permanent basis, it's just whether it might be a tool in the short term.”

But now, a month later, the idea of vaccine passports being a permanent feature of daily life is being mooted.

“I think they’re here for the long term, we’re finding our way forwards on these both internationally and domestically. But I think the system is going to settle down nationally and internationally as a long-term form of certification and protection,” Professor Christopher Dye, professor of epidemiology at Oxford, told MPs on the Science and Technology Committee this week.

Dye’s main concern seems to be about the language used to describe vaccine passports. “I think we need to describe this in terms of neutral language, and the term ‘passport’ and ‘certificate’ has been difficult,” he said, adding: “A word like ‘pass’ is more neutral.”

I’m sure if William Shakespeare had met the professor he’d have replied: “A rose by any other name would smell as sweet, and a vaccine passport as sour.”

See how it works? Whether we call it boiling the frog, gradualism, or salami tactics, the strategy is:

(a) to rule something out, with Establishment/Deep State gatekeepers smearing those warning of it as ‘cranks’, ’conspiracy theorists’, or ‘crackpots’ (or all three)

(b) It is confirmed that ‘Yes’, it will be implemented (and the ‘cranks’ and ‘conspiracy theorists’ were actually right). But don’t worry, it’s only a temporary, limited measure – so what’s your problem?

(c) Once people get used to the measure, ‘temporary’ becomes not so temporary and ‘limited’ becomes not so limited.

The result is that an extreme, abnormal measure which no one would have supported a few months back, now, because of the strategy used to implement it, becomes accepted – and normalised.

With vaccine passports we need to be aware there is still the psyops element, that the powers-that-be currently want us to think their introduction is inevitable in order to drive up vaccine uptake among younger groups – which would then make vaccine passports workable. There is still a chance that the scheme won’t be implemented, and its supporters are currently calling high, when they hold no picture cards in their hand.

But if vaccine passports are introduced, even for the most limited circumstances, we can be sure of two things. The scheme won’t be ‘limited’ but will be expanded over time into a full-scale digitalised Chinese-style social credit restricted access system, AND it won’t be ‘temporary’.

‘Covid certificates for just one year’?

If that’s how it gets ‘sold’ to us, prepare for the longest year in history. Don’t forget, income tax was only meant to be a temporary measure, too, when first introduced in 1799. All the government needs – and has ever needed with vaccine passports – is a foot in the door.

 

Well said James 

Noticed they put Sturgeon first, as if she was in total charge of the UK's response aye? Did she ever consider herd immunity and have to be shook out of it by modelling stats - no.

The rest, we've already discussed the give an inch, take a mile rights grabs that government's almost always partake in as a response to a major crisis, but my confidence that Westminster will try to introduce vaccine passports is matched by my confidence that the bumbling idiots manage to put together the proper app and backbone to support a roll-out. We don't need conspiracy bams to tell us the grass is green. 

As far as social credit rating systems go, keep an eye on the WEF and any initiatives to kill off physical currency. 



 

[JudyJudyJudy]

39 minutes ago, Costanza said:

End of isn't an argument.

Show me the statistics to back up your stance. I've linked to ONS stats, so if you want to change my mind, do the hard yards and back it up.

Based on the evidence, kids are lower risk than adults but can still be infected and have long term conditions so therefore I'm saying I'd be for kids getting the vaccine if the vaccine is proven to be low risk.

I found the article . The medical professional rather conveniently  didn’t have actual numbers of children impacted by long covid . At the end of article another professional states some issues but nothing to be concerned about . 
 

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/society/2021/mar/02/long-covid-uk-children-date-cause-concern-scientists-say

[JudyJudyJudy]

1 minute ago, Gizmo said:

Kids have died with Covid-19, James. Here in the UK. 

 

Noticed they put Sturgeon first, as if she was in total charge of the UK's response aye? Did she ever consider herd immunity and have to be shook out of it by modelling stats - no.

The rest, we've already discussed the give an inch, take a mile rights grabs that government's almost always partake in as a response to a major crisis, but my confidence that Westminster will try to introduce vaccine passports is matched by my confidence that the bumbling idiots manage to put together the proper app and backbone to support a roll-out. We don't need conspiracy bams to tell us the grass is green. 

As far as social credit rating systems go, keep an eye on the WEF and any initiatives to kill off physical currency. 



 

6 children and all with serious underlying health conditions and when you say “ kids” I assume u mean under 16 as over 16s to 18 have also been added to fatality rates 

[Taffin]

2 minutes ago, JamesM48 said:

6 children and all with serious underlying health conditions and when you say “ kids” I assume u mean under 16 as over 16s to 18 have also been added to fatality rates 

 

2021 is the year we should try to eradicate death in some people's eyes.

[JudyJudyJudy]

2 minutes ago, Taffin said:

 

2021 is the year we should try to eradicate death in some people's eyes.

Yes it appears so. The aim seems to be immortality ! Death has become even more of a thing to be scared of,  in fact terrified off when it’s the most inevitable thing in our lives . 

[Gizmo]

4 minutes ago, Taffin said:

 

2021 is the year we should try to eradicate death in some people's eyes.

 

2 minutes ago, JamesM48 said:

Yes it appears so. The aim seems to be immortality ! Death has become even more of a thing to be scared of,  in fact terrified off when it’s the most inevitable thing in our lives . 

Not as inevitable, it seems, as the snidey, exaggerated replies to reasonable posts that has become the norm on this thread. 🙄  
 

[Taffin]

5 minutes ago, Gizmo said:

 

Not as inevitable, it seems, as the snidey, exaggerated replies to reasonable posts that has become the norm on this thread. 🙄  
 

 

Is it exaggerated though? You're on about the risk from Covid to kids...if James is right and only 6 have died from it and all had underlying illness as sad as that is, it's madness to expose them to the risk of a vaccine that may we'll have a higher death rate.

 

[Gizmo]

3 minutes ago, Taffin said:

 

Is it exaggerated though? You're on about the risk from Covid to kids...if James is right and only 6 have died from it and all had underlying illness as sad as that is, it's madness to expose them to the risk of a vaccine that may we'll have a higher death rate.

 

Did you miss the post where I posted that parents need good data to assess the risk of covid-19 (death, long covid) v vaccination risk so they could make an informed decision, in your haste to get a snide dig in? 

[Taffin]

3 minutes ago, Gizmo said:

Did you miss the post where I posted that parents need good data to assess the risk of covid-19 (death, long covid) v vaccination risk so they could make an informed decision, in your haste to get a snide dig in? 

 

Great, so we agree. That data doesn't exist, until it does people need to make up their own minds.

 

 

[JudyJudyJudy]

25 minutes ago, Gizmo said:

 

Not as inevitable, it seems, as the snidey, exaggerated replies to reasonable posts that has become the norm on this thread. 🙄  
 

Says the guy who called a person a conspiracy theory “ bam “ in an early posting . 

[Nucky Thompson]

Kids die of cancer and lots of other things a lot more than covid. To say 'kids 'die' of it too is just daft. Off course some vulnerable kids will die.

Some people need to let go of this covid fear and get back to living 

Edited May 2, 2021 by Nucky Thompson

[Nucky Thompson]

10 minutes ago, Lord BJ said:

It’s the disingenuous nature of that argument, that I find strange. Almost as strange as the faux offence posters are indulging in.

 

Anyway hopefully you’ve managed to get away for the bank holiday weekend 👍

I have mate.

Got the holiday home that I've had for 10 years now.

It's a total Godsend 

Hopefully you've had a good one too

[JudyJudyJudy]

55 minutes ago, Nucky Thompson said:

Kids die of cancer and lots of other things a lot more than covid. To say 'kids 'die' of it too is just daft. Off course some vulnerable kids will die.

Some people need to let go of this covid fear and get back to living 

Very true 

[JimmyCant]

9 hours ago, milky_26 said:

i wont post my views on what i think of those people as i would get a period of time in jkb slammer. Your point re this behaviour manifesting due to it going unchecked is correct and no doubt can and may escalate to things like the attacking of buses that we have seen recently

I often have this grim reaper fantasy/dream where I’m dying of some untreatable illness and I spend my last 6 months ridding the country of various horrible people who deserve that fate. It’s usually some kind of bolt thing which quietly pierces their skull. Sometimes it’s just a touch of the hand though. The police know about this power and let me carry on.What a superpower to have !! These people might be deserving of such a fate if the mood took me and I had the time.

Edited May 2, 2021 by JimmyCant

[jambo89]

This threads become and echo chamber which is a real shame. 

[DETTY29]

2 hours ago, Lord BJ said:

It seems social distancing is likely to come to a end, in England, on 21 June. It appears face covering may continue after this period. 

What Dominic Raab said yesterday.

 

On 21 June, the plan is to remove all remaining "legal limits" on social contact.

 

 

Speaking later to the BBC, Mr Raab said "some safeguards" could remain in place once legal restrictions come to an end, such as the continued wearing of face masks and social distancing.

 

Edit

 

From May 17 in England headlines today that funeral limits are being removed. (BBC No limits on morners).

 

A couple of paragraphs in and it is clarified that it is subject to venue social distancing restrictions.

 

I've got to admit I got confused or misunderstood that June was 'social limits' removal not social distancing.

Edited May 3, 2021 by DETTY29

[Taffin]

The noises coming out do certainly sound like a bit of a departure from the roadmap and it's 21st June aims.

 

Maybe something has threatened the achievement of the 4 conditions they set out but they've not yet told us. Who knows. Either that or they've just changed their minds.

[DETTY29]

37 minutes ago, Taffin said:

The noises coming out do certainly sound like a bit of a departure from the roadmap and it's 21st June aims.

 

Maybe something has threatened the achievement of the 4 conditions they set out but they've not yet told us. Who knows. Either that or they've just changed their minds.

I don't think it has.

 

21 June and end June Scotland means the vast majority of business can open to one extent or another.

 

Then the next phase kicks in as to what needs to be done to increase capacities.

 

 

[Taffin]

1 minute ago, DETTY29 said:

I don't think it has.

 

21 June and end June Scotland means the vast majority of business can open to one extent or another.

 

Then the next phase kicks in as to what needs to be done to increase capacities.

 

 

 

It was aimed to be the end of legal limits on social contact and lift restriction on large events. Capacity limits, distancing and/or masks are all limit on social contact and large events.

 

I'm not saying they've mislead or anything as they were clear it was their aim, not a commitment, but it's certainly a move away from what they hoped to deliver in the roadmap.

 

It remains to be seen why, as the below criteria seems to be going to plan: 

 

- The vaccine deployment programme continues successfully. (Tick)

- Evidence shows vaccines are sufficiently effective in reducing hospitalisations and deaths in those vaccinated. (Tick)

- Infection rates do not risk a surge in hospitalisations which would put unsustainable pressure on the NHS. (Tick)

- Our assessment of the risks is not fundamentally changed by new Variants of Concern. (At face value, tick, unless they know something we don't yet)

[DETTY29]

15 minutes ago, Taffin said:

 

It was aimed to be the end of legal limits on social contact and lift restriction on large events. Capacity limits, distancing and/or masks are all limit on social contact and large events.

 

I'm not saying they've mislead or anything as they were clear it was their aim, not a commitment, but it's certainly a move away from what they hoped to deliver in the roadmap.

 

It remains to be seen why, as the below criteria seems to be going to plan: 

 

- The vaccine deployment programme continues successfully. (Tick)

- Evidence shows vaccines are sufficiently effective in reducing hospitalisations and deaths in those vaccinated. (Tick)

- Infection rates do not risk a surge in hospitalisations which would put unsustainable pressure on the NHS. (Tick)

- Our assessment of the risks is not fundamentally changed by new Variants of Concern. (At face value, tick, unless they know something we don't yet)

The key terms are 'remove all legal limits on social contacts' which I suppose means no more 30, 50, 100 figures.  

 

And 'ease restrictions' for large events, which isn't remove of course.

 

The former is probably a bit more ambiguous than the latter.

-----------------------------

 

Social contact

By Step 4 which will take place no earlier than 21 June, the government hopes to be in a position to remove all legal limits on social contact.

Business, activities and events

We hope to reopen remaining premises, including nightclubs, and ease the restrictions on large events and performances that apply in Step 3. 

 

Edited May 3, 2021 by DETTY29

[Taffin]

2 minutes ago, DETTY29 said:

The key terms are 'remove all legal limits on social contacts' which I suppose means no more 30, 50, 100 figures.  

 

And 'ease restrictions' for large events, which isn't remove of course.

 

The former is probably a bit more ambiguous than the latter.

-----------------------------

 

Social contact

By Step 4 which will take place no earlier than 21 June, the government hopes to be in a position to remove all legal limits on social contact.

Business, activities and events

We hope to reopen remaining premises, including nightclubs, and ease the restrictions on large events and performances that apply in Step 3. 

 

 

We hope to reopen nightclubs, and lift restrictions on large events and performances that apply in Step 3.

 

Lift is very different from ease imo. Lift means remove, ease means make less harsh. Raab's comments suggest they won't be lifting those limits.

 

[JudyJudyJudy]

Hold the phone folks ! Just when u thought it was safe to go back in the water there is a “ new “ bombshell ! 
 

#covidisaorborne is trending on Twitter . Apparently new WHO report states it is well airborne and they are urging caution in confined spaces like you guessed , that old whipimg boy hospitality . Stating that 6 feet is more safe difference etc . Many like myself on it showing some degree of scepticism at the timing of this too . The SG will be happy 

[DETTY29]

10 minutes ago, Taffin said:

 

We hope to reopen nightclubs, and lift restrictions on large events and performances that apply in Step 3.

 

Lift is very different from ease imo. Lift means remove, ease means make less harsh. Raab's comments suggest they won't be lifting those limits.

 

The terminology certainly doesn't help.

 

Media today is talking of overseas travel being 'lifted' on 17 May when in reality outside of what you can do just now for key work, life events you may just about be able to go to Israel, Iceland or Gibraltar for a leisure holiday, subject to x,y,z.

Edited May 3, 2021 by DETTY29

[DETTY29]

3 minutes ago, JamesM48 said:

Hold the phone folks ! Just when u thought it was safe to go back in the water there is a “ new “ bombshell ! 
 

#covidisaorborne is trending on Twitter . Apparently new WHO report states it is well airborne and they are urging caution in confined spaces like you guessed , that old whipimg boy hospitality . Stating that 6 feet is more safe difference etc . Many like myself on it showing some degree of scepticism at the timing of this too . The SG will be happy 

No they won't.

 

It's another headache they (we all) really could do without.

[Dazo]

5 minutes ago, JamesM48 said:

Hold the phone folks ! Just when u thought it was safe to go back in the water there is a “ new “ bombshell ! 
 

#covidisaorborne is trending on Twitter . Apparently new WHO report states it is well airborne and they are urging caution in confined spaces like you guessed , that old whipimg boy hospitality . Stating that 6 feet is more safe difference etc . Many like myself on it showing some degree of scepticism at the timing of this too . The SG will be happy 

This surely isn’t news ? Unless I’m missing something hasn’t it always been airborne and wasn’t the safest distance always been 2m ? 

[Dazo]

15 minutes ago, Taffin said:

 

We hope to reopen nightclubs, and lift restrictions on large events and performances that apply in Step 3.

 

Lift is very different from ease imo. Lift means remove, ease means make less harsh. Raab's comments suggest they won't be lifting those limits.

 

Maybe he worded it badly ? Things seem to be going really well so as you say unless we aren’t being told something things should’ve on track. 

[JudyJudyJudy]

1 minute ago, Dazo said:

This surely isn’t news ? Unless I’m missing something hasn’t it always been airborne and wasn’t the safest distance always been 2m ? 

Well thats what i thought too but apparently it is now official that it is airborne and can be infectious even when someone is apart at 6 feet in confined places.  The WHO also are stating masks should be continued etc. Its only gonna end when we say no. Its ludicrous now. 

 

 

[Dazo]

1 minute ago, JamesM48 said:

Well thats what i thought too but apparently it is now official that it is airborne and can be infectious even when someone is apart at 6 feet in confined places.  The WHO also are stating masks should be continued etc. Its only gonna end when we say no. Its ludicrous now. 

 

 

I find it difficult to get bothered about this particular piece of news. Don’t think it will change anything going forward. 

[JudyJudyJudy]

1 minute ago, Dazo said:

I find it difficult to get bothered about this particular piece of news. Don’t think it will change anything going forward. 

No im not either and I am not bringing it up to cause anxiety I just groaned when I read about it and now wonder what some Govt might do with the information as It is official confirmation from WHO regarding its transmission . Here is the article which explains it more fully. 

 

https://ca.news.yahoo.com/staying-6-feet-apart-indoors-112732760.html?soc_src=social-sh&soc_trk=tw&tsrc=twtr

[JudyJudyJudy]

3 hours ago, Barack said:

Yeah, I can see a few in society permanently wearing masks for one reason or another, like those from Asia, as you say, who did it as a matter of course long before such things as a pandemic. And that's their perogative. Think it will be a far more regular sight on UK streets than it ever was.

 

Believe both doses are about 22% of the adult population currently, from 68 million who are over the age of 16. So not really long to go. That's achieved in 4 month's give or take. Current rate...I think people can take an educated guess as to achieving over 50% for both, & the time-frame. Assuming no disasters with production & distribution. Which given there is Moderna & Novivax(?) still due, I can't envisage that.

 

I'm fine to wear one, until such time as I'm told to not bother on a day-to-day basis. I'm of the opinion; that whilst it's a pain in the arse now, given my 2nd jab will be sometime in mid-July, the % will be a lot closer to the figures I've said. I expect that by the time I go to Scotland for two weeks in September, the necessity shouldn't be needed anymore.

 

All the government's want "normality". That's it for millions of people too.  Like lockdown, if it's taken too far too long, then it just gains less public compliance. 

Yes the mask wearing is gradually coming to an end hopefully.  I never wear mine outside now . I was at the museum last week and never wore one inside it and neither did any of my family.  I will still wear them on buses and shops if smaller shops but its time to be moving on now.  Yes i agree that some will still wear them and thats fine. Not an issue but they should be ok with those who dont want to wear them. Anyway the irony of todays news about airborne transmission is that the report is also critical of mask wearing unless the masks are medical ones.  So if the normal cheap masks werent as efffective why werent more people infected then ?? 

[Mars plastic]

11 minutes ago, JamesM48 said:

Yes the mask wearing is gradually coming to an end hopefully.  I never wear mine outside now . I was at the museum last week and never wore one inside it and neither did any of my family.  I will still wear them on buses and shops if smaller shops but its time to be moving on now.  Yes i agree that some will still wear them and thats fine. Not an issue but they should be ok with those who dont want to wear them. Anyway the irony of todays news about airborne transmission is that the report is also critical of mask wearing unless the masks are medical ones.  So if the normal cheap masks werent as efffective why werent more people infected then ?? 

Mask wearers are utterly fascinating specimens, especially the bairns who are literally at zero risk. In fact, their parents should be fined for them wearing them.

[Jambo-Jimbo]

37 minutes ago, JamesM48 said:

Hold the phone folks ! Just when u thought it was safe to go back in the water there is a “ new “ bombshell ! 
 

#covidisaorborne is trending on Twitter . Apparently new WHO report states it is well airborne and they are urging caution in confined spaces like you guessed , that old whipimg boy hospitality . Stating that 6 feet is more safe difference etc . Many like myself on it showing some degree of scepticism at the timing of this too . The SG will be happy 

 

The W.H.O. must be staying in Peebles.

 

This isn't news, well not new news, just a quick search on the internet and there are science articles from March 2020 going on about that Covid-19 poses a higher risk indoors, indeed UK government advice from late last year were advising people to keep their windows open and to improve indoor ventilation etc etc etc.

 

As said they must be in Peebles just now.

[Ray Gin]

39 minutes ago, Dazo said:

This surely isn’t news ? Unless I’m missing something hasn’t it always been airborne and wasn’t the safest distance always been 2m ? 

 

Correct. This is not new news.

 

[Ray Gin]

43 minutes ago, DETTY29 said:

No they won't.

 

It's another headache they (we all) really could do without.

 

It's exactly the same headache we've had since this began. Masks were introduced because we knew it was airborne a year ago.

[Taffin]

46 minutes ago, DETTY29 said:

The terminology certainly doesn't help.

 

Media today is talking of overseas travel being 'lifted' on 17 May when in reality outside of what you can do just now for key work, life events you may just about be able to go to Israel, Iceland or Gibraltar for a leisure holiday, subject to x,y,z.

 

Yeh it's all a bit confusing.

 

Also, I realise what you quoted may have been the Scottish aims(?).

 

I was meaning what England's doing based on the press reports being from people involved in Westminster. Has there been similar rumblings of divergence from plan in Scotland too?

[Taffin]

41 minutes ago, Dazo said:

Maybe he worded it badly ? Things seem to be going really well so as you say unless we aren’t being told something things should’ve on track. 

 

Hopefully he's just being cautious because as you say, it looks like the conditions of their roadmap are very much on track and should deliver everything they were aiming for, at the earliest date they proposed.

[JudyJudyJudy]

6 minutes ago, Mars plastic said:

Mask wearers are utterly fascinating specimens, especially the bairns who are literally at zero risk. In fact, their parents should be fined for them wearing them.

Yes i find it tragic to see children masked up. Im Glad that my relatives who have kids have sense and dont do this. 

[Enzo Chiefo]

1 hour ago, JamesM48 said:

Hold the phone folks ! Just when u thought it was safe to go back in the water there is a “ new “ bombshell ! 
 

#covidisaorborne is trending on Twitter . Apparently new WHO report states it is well airborne and they are urging caution in confined spaces like you guessed , that old whipimg boy hospitality . Stating that 6 feet is more safe difference etc . Many like myself on it showing some degree of scepticism at the timing of this too . The SG will be happy 

Nothing new, James. Remember all those ridiculous graphics where one sneeze travels twice round the world. Probably just the WHO keeping the scaremongering going a bit longer, on behalf of interested parties. Doesn't matter if it's airborne, the vaccine is killing it's relevance and the hospitality industry will be booming again in just a few weeks.  Great to see the crowds back in the clubs, cheek by jowl, in Liverpool over the weekend. 

[Victorian]

Like all respiratory viruses,  it has always been 'airborne' and has never been 'airborne'.  It's only ever been and will remain 'airborne' for as long as it remains viable and infectious while suspended in the air in droplets of whatever size are known to allow it to survive.  It cannot permanently survive in the air.  Some people continue to see the word airborne and relate to too many post-apocalyptic films and imagine the wrong thing completely.

 

It would appear to be a highly complicated bit of science to understand the complete nature and implications of the virus being transmitted between people in indoor spaces.  The area,  the volume of space,  the extent of any ventilation,  the number of people,  the spacing of people,  the activity of people,  the wearing of masks.  It looks like there's only a limited amount of knowledge and understanding within science.  It seems very unlikely that those outside of science have the first clue regarding these matters.  Not that it ever stops some from thinking they have all the answers.

[Konrad von Carstein]

34 minutes ago, Mars plastic said:

Mask wearers are utterly fascinating specimens, especially the bairns who are literally at zero risk. In fact, their parents should be fined for them wearing them.

Hiya Tucker,  hiya pal

[JudyJudyJudy]

7 minutes ago, Enzo Chiefo said:

Nothing new, James. Remember all those ridiculous graphics where one sneeze travels twice round the world. Probably just the WHO keeping the scaremongering going a bit longer, on behalf of interested parties. Doesn't matter if it's airborne, the vaccine is killing it's relevance and the hospitality industry will be booming again in just a few weeks.  Great to see the crowds back in the clubs, cheek by jowl, in Liverpool over the weekend. 

Hi Enzo . I just saw it trending on twitter as it appeared to be almost breaking  news.  when in fact it isn't.  

[Victorian]

3 minutes ago, Barack said:

Be interested to see the data from the Liverpool test events. Especially the 2nd, which was much more open air. I'm sceptical that all of the 5k that were there, will follow up as asked, with a PCR test after it. I wonder what number of infected will be classed as a "success" from that number. 

 

On that, and I might be being utterly stupid here...(obvious punchline is obvious)...but if there are any cases in amongst all of them, who has to self-isolate as close contacts?

 

There were cameras & ventilation testing equipment all over the place, alongside other scientists measuring other parameters. If X went with 3 friends, would it just be them? Can't expect 5k to self-isolate, surely? Anyone know?*

 

*This explanation might have been covered by the event organisers, so apologies if it's been addressed. 

 

 

 

 

Looks like a very important event in terms of research but I think it will only yield very limited information.  My non-expert hunch is that only 'in the wild' events will yield the right information.  A series of unmitigated gatherings of different form and scale.  

[Dagger Is Back]

38 minutes ago, JamesM48 said:

Hi Enzo . I just saw it trending on twitter as it appeared to be almost breaking  news.  when in fact it isn't.  

 

Almost like the way you posted the 'news' on here in that case? It's always been airborne hence the requirement for masks and two metres. Nothing to see here quite frankly

[JudyJudyJudy]

17 minutes ago, Dagger Is Back said:

 

Almost like the way you posted the 'news' on here in that case? It's always been airborne hence the requirement for masks and two metres. Nothing to see here quite frankly

THE WHO Have officially said it is airborn so that is the news. But most knew long before it was. 

[heartstastic]

https://www.bitchute.com/video/Y7nRyN6CvqZJ/

 

Had your fill of Covid advertising?...you ain't seen nothing yet.

[Konrad von Carstein]

Just now, jonesy said:

Tucker Carlson's passionate yet eloquent monologue about reporting parents for making their kids wear masks outside was spot on.

Jonesy, I say the following with no offence intended;

 

Away and shite!

Carlson is a weapons grade arsehole!

[DETTY29]

1 hour ago, Ray Gin said:

 

It's exactly the same headache we've had since this began. Masks were introduced because we knew it was airborne a year ago.

Thanks.

 

It is indeed.

Edited May 3, 2021 by DETTY29

[DETTY29]

1 hour ago, Taffin said:

 

Yeh it's all a bit confusing.

 

Also, I realise what you quoted may have been the Scottish aims(?).

 

I was meaning what England's doing based on the press reports being from people involved in Westminster. Has there been similar rumblings of divergence from plan in Scotland too?

Taken directly from Gov.uk

 

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/covid-19-response-spring-2021/covid-19-response-spring-2021-summary#step-4---not-before-21-june