Coronavirus

[Dons79]

3 minutes ago, minijc said:

My favourite thing through the pandemic is those that are against absolutely everything telling others to "think for themselves" when in reality they don't do that themselves and they actually want others to think like them, it's great.  The same folk are lapping up what a struck off nurse and David fucking Icke are saying, lol.

Funny thing is every cunt knows ike is a full on spastic, but it suits there rhetoric so he’s good to go, normally the same folk ridiculing these fantasists are now fully behind cunts like him and Katie fucking Hopkins ???????

[manboobs109]

7 minutes ago, NEM said:

Don't think many were anti lockdown in March - took a good few months before folk realised they were being fed bullshit.

I was. It was massive over reach from the government right from the start. Banning people from seeing their own families was ludicrous.

[Dons79]

6 minutes ago, manboobs109 said:

I was. It was massive over reach from the government right from the start. Banning people from seeing their own families was ludicrous.

Government has fucked the messaging and policies surrounding this pandemic to almost obtuse levels of ridiculousness. Clarity and leadership was needed during this but I am almost certain that they haven’t and still haven’t a clue and have made their rules up as they have went along, how can a supposed first world country, a leader in a lot of things, have a death rate so high, one of the worst economic projections and still have one of the highest infection rates to date, while having the advantage of being on an island which is easier to protect than being a landlocked country. The rhetoric that this government used on Brexit, TAKE BACK CONTROL, control our borders etc. But then a refusal to shut said borders letting in variant after variant beggars belief.anyway the chaos produced helped them suck all the public money into there own bank accounts, ripping up age old institutions to benefit themselves. Marvellous 

[minijc]

15 minutes ago, NEM said:

Still under your bed pal?

Always mate, maybe pop oot fae under it around xmas.

14 minutes ago, NEM said:

Cloth face masks are 'comfort blankets' that do little to curb Covid spread, Scientist warns (telegraph.co.uk)

See I've read and some of it can't be argued but other parts can, I'd always go with 'something is better than nothing' for me personally a mask is no issue, in enclosed spaces right now I think they should be worn and will wear one if I have to.

11 minutes ago, manboobs109 said:

I was. It was massive over reach from the government right from the start. Banning people from seeing their own families was ludicrous.

Even though that definitely caused the virus to spread and some needless deaths, yeah mad.

[minijc]

6 minutes ago, rocket_scientist said:

You're another who's "read up" about this subject. Can you explain why train passengers going from Edinburgh to London are told when they cross the border that they no longer need to wear face masks whereupon the vast majority take them off?

Can't you see how mad this is?

It is mad but when you have different governments running with different approaches there will be issues like this.

[minijc]

I think the messaging should change and the emphasis should be on encouraging people to not touch their eyes, nose and mouths as much, if someone with the virus coughs or sneezes around you, the viral load still needs to get in to your body, likewise if you touch a surface that has the virus on it you'd have to touch those main areas for it to get in the body. 

Masks, as NEM said will cause more people to ficker about with their eyes, nose and mouths which will increase the likelihood of the virus spreading.  For me we are now at a stage where things have to change, if people want to wear a mask they should be able to do so without people having a go at them, likewise, if those that don't want to wear one should be able to do that without others sneering at them, sadly everyone is too divided, there's too much hate and agendas at play now that no cunt will ever just let others do their own thing.

[NEM]

3 minutes ago, minijc said:

I think the messaging should change and the emphasis should be on encouraging people to not touch their eyes, nose and mouths as much, if someone with the virus coughs or sneezes around you, the viral load still needs to get in to your body, likewise if you touch a surface that has the virus on it you'd have to touch those main areas for it to get in the body. 

Masks, as NEM said will cause more people to ficker about with their eyes, nose and mouths which will increase the likelihood of the virus spreading.  For me we are now at a stage where things have to change, if people want to wear a mask they should be able to do so without people having a go at them, likewise, if those that don't want to wear one should be able to do that without others sneering at them, sadly everyone is too divided, there's too much hate and agendas at play now that no cunt will ever just let others do their own thing.

If folk are coughing and sneezing they should bide at home - basic common sense.

Agree on the division, the authorities have played a blinder there.

[NEM]

4 minutes ago, rocket_scientist said:

Surely it proves that their claims that they're "following the science" are spin and lies... unless the threat truly does manifest in different ways across borders.

They made decisions on a virus that they knew nothing about and their advisers knew nothing about. Still we have a majority of the electorate who believe whatever the governments tell them to believe. That's proper mad, delegating your personal thinking to the "authorities", whether church or state. 

It's especially mad when the authorities have repeatedly been caught exaggerating, lying and breaking their own ridiculous rules countless times.

 

[Guest milne_afc]

5 minutes ago, Bad_Mobby said:

you probably can’t get lifted if you get caught on camera punching someone/robbing a shoppie/raping someone

 

The 3 R’s

Rob, rape and arsing around 

[minijc]

3 minutes ago, NEM said:

If folk are coughing and sneezing they should bide at home - basic common sense.

Agree on the division, the authorities have played a blinder there.

You'd think so but so many folk are selfish as fuck and don't care, that's another thing that this pandemic has exposed.

3 minutes ago, rocket_scientist said:

Surely it proves that their claims that they're "following the science" are spin and lies... unless the threat truly does manifest in different ways across borders.

They made decisions on a virus that they knew nothing about and their advisers knew nothing about. Still we have a majority of the electorate who believe whatever the governments tell them to believe. That's proper mad, delegating your personal thinking to the "authorities", whether church or state. 

I'd say that the tories have given up and are going against a lot of science, them sneaking around buying up even more mortuary space would suggest that as well.  This doesn't mean that the SNP are right here and doing good but they have been clearer with their plans for going forward, not many things have changed on a whim.

[Guest]

1 hour ago, manboobs109 said:

It was perfectly sensible then as it is now. All that "your killing people" chat to people hiking up a hill etc. It was as stupid then as it is now.

Yes, you had drama queens etc. 
 

Weren't you suggesting herd immunity though? Different proposition. 

[Zeus]

I'm feart to cough or sneeze outwith my own home these days

[dazzy_deff]

Disaster for the hay fever sufferers. Hide at home for the entirety of summer. 

[Zeus]

I've been trebling up on the antihistamines 

[Studebaker-90]

2 minutes ago, Zeus said:

I'm feart to cough or sneeze outwith my own home these days

I sneeze quite a lot due to hay fever shit sinuses. I like to do it loudly as possible close to others. 

[manboobs109]

48 minutes ago, ConsiCanBoogie1903 said:

Yes, you had drama queens etc. 
 

Weren't you suggesting herd immunity though? Different proposition. 

Nope. Protect the vulnerable was my mantra.

[manboobs109]

1 hour ago, minijc said:

Always mate, maybe pop oot fae under it around xmas.

See I've read and some of it can't be argued but other parts can, I'd always go with 'something is better than nothing' for me personally a mask is no issue, in enclosed spaces right now I think they should be worn and will wear one if I have to.

Even though that definitely caused the virus to spread and some needless deaths, yeah mad.

Definitely?

[Zeus]

20 minutes ago, Sooper-hanz said:

Does that not knock you out?  

Na, the proper prescription stuff probably does. 

Nae the off the shelf tabs 

[Guest]

13 minutes ago, manboobs109 said:

Nope. Protect the vulnerable was my mantra.

Even though they l were pretty clear that wouldn't work, for heaps of reasons. 
 

What do you class as vulnerable? What you suggested then, was that they basically lock away the frail, and let everyone else try gain herd immunity. 
 

It wouldn't have worked and wouldn't lead to many deaths. The problem for me, was that they lifted lockdowns too soon. Just allowing it to peak and trough. Kicking the can further down the line each time, making it even worse.  

[minijc]

18 minutes ago, manboobs109 said:

Definitely?

Yes

[manboobs109]

16 minutes ago, Sooper-hanz said:

Here moobz how did I get on with the mrs Moobz assessment in the cats thread? I await some feedback . Thanks. 

Spot on Hanzoid.

[manboobs109]

11 minutes ago, ConsiCanBoogie1903 said:

Even though they l were pretty clear that wouldn't work, for heaps of reasons. 
 

What do you class as vulnerable? What you suggested then, was that they basically lock away the frail, and let everyone else try gain herd immunity. 
 

It wouldn't have worked and wouldn't lead to many deaths. The problem for me, was that they lifted lockdowns too soon. Just allowing it to peak and trough. Kicking the can further down the line each time, making it even worse.  

50% of deaths in hospital caught it in hospital. About 50% of the deaths were in care homes. If time and money were spent on these problems instead of paying perfectly healthy people thousands of pounds to stay at home we might have had better outcomes.

I've never understood the reasoning that it's easier to stop everyone getting it rather than just the people we know are vulnerable.

[Guest]

13 minutes ago, manboobs109 said:

50% of deaths in hospital caught it in hospital. About 50% of the deaths were in care homes. If time and money were spent on these problems instead of paying perfectly healthy people thousands of pounds to stay at home we might have had better outcomes.

I've never understood the reasoning that it's easier to stop everyone getting it rather than just the people we know are vulnerable.

Because you're then counting on folk to avoid their vulnerable relatives, friends etc etc. 
 

How to you propose to shield a great deal of the population from everyone else? 

What about those who have underlying health conditions they aren't aware of? Who aren't obviously "vulnerable" but might get very ill if they catch it? 
 

 

[Don Fonte]

14 minutes ago, manboobs109 said:

50% of deaths in hospital caught it in hospital. About 50% of the deaths were in care homes. If time and money were spent on these problems instead of paying perfectly healthy people thousands of pounds to stay at home we might have had better outcomes.

I've never understood the reasoning that it's easier to stop everyone getting it rather than just the people we know are vulnerable.

The more I read your posts on this the more I think you're just jealous you couldn't get furlough.

You'd have loved sitting on your arse all day and getting paid for it you workshy cunt.

[NEM]

8 minutes ago, ConsiCanBoogie1903 said:

Because you're then counting on folk to avoid their vulnerable relatives, friends etc etc. 
 

How to you propose to shield a great deal of the population from everyone else? 

What about those who have underlying health conditions they aren't aware of? Who aren't obviously "vulnerable" but might get very ill if they catch it? 
 

 

Having to do that anyway

[manboobs109]

25 minutes ago, ConsiCanBoogie1903 said:

Because you're then counting on folk to avoid their vulnerable relatives, friends etc etc. 
 

How to you propose to shield a great deal of the population from everyone else? 

What about those who have underlying health conditions they aren't aware of? Who aren't obviously "vulnerable" but might get very ill if they catch it? 
 

 

Did people not avoid their vulnerable relatives? Did I imagine all that chat?

[manboobs109]

25 minutes ago, Don Fonte said:

The more I read your posts on this the more I think you're just jealous you couldn't get furlough.

You'd have loved sitting on your arse all day and getting paid for it you workshy cunt.

I got my grants and that. Get another one start of next month. It was a load of toss from the start, everyone sees it now but POTY saw it from the very beginning.

[manboobs109]

1 minute ago, Sooper-hanz said:

I didn't have try to avoid my elderly relatives as they were very insistent themselves that they wished no visitors. Most older folk were like that imo. 

Yip and they were correct to do so. Ones who were lonely and would've loved a perfectly healthy loved one in to visit should not have been barred by law though. It was cruel and unnecessary.

[Matt Armstrong's Dog]

My local (like many others) has been taking down patrons names and contact details on paper-based forms as soon as they enter the establishment.

I asked a bar staff member if the forms were then submitted to Test and Protect Scotland at the end of each day via either scanning and emailing, taking photographs of the forms then emailing, or by the trusty facsimile machine, just in case any of the patrons test positive for Coronavirus thereafter. 

I was told no and that they hold onto the forms for 3 weeks then they get destroyed. A bit odd and pointless I thought. 

An older lad I know who I was in the company of recently has tested positive for the virus and is in intensive care at ARI. However, I have received no phone call from Test and Protect, nor had my Test and Protect app ping. 

I had a PCR test last week and have tested negative. 

What's the fucking point of taking down your details  or installing the app if you are then not contacted by Test and Protect Scotland if you've been in close proximity of someone who has tested positive??

[Joe pike]

21 minutes ago, Matt Armstrong's Dog said:

My local (like many others) has been taking down patrons names and contact details on paper-based forms as soon as they enter the establishment.

I asked a bar staff member if the forms were then submitted to Test and Protect Scotland at the end of each day via either scanning and emailing, taking photographs of the forms then emailing, or by the trusty facsimile machine, just in case any of the patrons test positive for Coronavirus thereafter. 

I was told no and that they hold onto the forms for 3 weeks then they get destroyed. A bit odd and pointless I thought. 

An older lad I know who I was in the company of recently has tested positive for the virus and is in intensive care at ARI. However, I have received no phone call from Test and Protect, nor had my Test and Protect app ping. 

I had a PCR test last week and have tested negative. 

What's the fucking point of taking down your details  or installing the app if you are then not contacted by Test and Protect Scotland if you've been in close proximity of someone who has tested positive??

Almost like Sturgeon makes things up.