• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Coronavirus

scaramanga said:
You should have the right to isolate if you feel it's needed.

Just as the rest of us should have the right to our freedom.
Click to expand...

I found out about my issue from a routine medical, most people don't have those, it's a fairly common issue, there are a lot of people out there not aware of it for whom covid could start a domino rally.

I don't get the freedom thing, its not curfews and isolation, even at the height of lockdown you could still take the dog for a walk, still go and do your shopping, yeah we have to wear a mask, but we have to wear pants too, its been a slight change in common courtesy.
 
In terms of vulnerable folk shielding and others carrying on as normal, as tough as it maybe, a tiny proportion of investment compared to the losses of lockdown in to well being and protection for these folks would make a lot of sense. Something sensible has to be worked out to give them some quality of life but allow society to function again.
 
awesome dawson said:
Actual protesters around 50, partners, bemused passers by and general people not getting too close to the action (because of fear of catching covid ironically) brings the number up to a couple of hundred. Melbourne is a city of 5m people. Hence my thought that those protests were largely insignificant.

That bogan woman (bogan is an Australian term for chav) was giving it all mouth about her human rights being restricted because she couldn’t go to McDonalds with her friends for lunch, so she decided to organise a protest using Facebook. An illegal protest given the current laws and ongoing pandemic. When confronted about breaking the law she became abusive, then repentant, then sobbed. Maybe she should have thought about her actions before organising an illegal protest when the rest of us are respecting the law and trying to overcome restrictions as quickly as possible. As for her being pregnant, if you stopped the world every time a bogan got pregnant there really wouldn’t much you could do to the woman from the age of 16 to 30. She should use birth control.
Click to expand...

Ok, thanks....
 
LutonSpurs said:
In terms of vulnerable folk shielding and others carrying on as normal, as tough as it maybe, a tiny proportion of investment compared to the losses of lockdown in to well being and protection for these folks would make a lot of sense. Something sensible has to be worked out to give them some quality of life but allow society to function again.
Click to expand...

Absolutely, actually having a working track and trace system, testing at the required capacity and making mask wearing mandatory six months ago would have helped too.

The biggest mistake the government have made is confused messaging.
 
tommysvr said:
My dad is in a high risk category (diabetes, kidney transplant, general health issues.) Staying at home for 6 months to ensure people like him can stay alive? Seems a pretty fair deal.
Click to expand...

Ok, it's not nice to know a close relative or friend is vulnerable to this or any disease.

I guess i approach this like i would when thinking of how people with cancer/on chemotherapy are normally treated:

Should society shield from your dad or should your dad shield from society?
Should society totally close itself off from everyone else and close down for 6 months to protect the likes of your dad?
Or should your dad be protected by shielding himself away from society (or from anyone outside of his bubble)?

Is the economic downturn and negative long-term effects of unemployment, higher suicide rates etc for the vast majority of society worth it to protect the relatively small percentage that are vulnerable like your dad?

Please bare in mind i'm not saying the vulnerable like your dad should be allowed to rot and die etc, i'm asking on a societal level whether the cost of totally shutting down EVERYONE is worth it? Also, switch the ailment/risk from being coronavirus to being someone with cancer (to try and put in more in perspective).
 
Baleforce said:
Absolutely, actually having a working track and trace system, testing at the required capacity and making mask wearing mandatory six months ago would have helped too.

The biggest mistake the government have made is confused messaging.
Click to expand...

This is exactly my sentiment.
 
Legohamster said:
So there is nothing wrong with someone in a key advisory role in line to benefit from the advice he is giving?
Click to expand...

Of course not....unless it's the likes of BoJo or Rees-Mogg are being said to be "due for a windfall or benefit from a hard Brexit through their investments in certain companies or trusts"..then that will be TREASON I TELL THEE!!
 
Baleforce said:
I found out about my issue from a routine medical, most people don't have those, it's a fairly common issue, there are a lot of people out there not aware of it for whom covid could start a domino rally.

I don't get the freedom thing, its not curfews and isolation, even at the height of lockdown you could still take the dog for a walk, still go and do your shopping, yeah we have to wear a mask, but we have to wear pants too, its been a slight change in common courtesy.
Click to expand...
Plenty of people have lost jobs because their employers couldn't open their businesses.
 
Baleforce said:
Absolutely, actually having a working track and trace system, testing at the required capacity and making mask wearing mandatory six months ago would have helped too.

The biggest mistake the government have made is confused messaging.
Click to expand...

Word for word spot on.

Johnson is in to much of a desire to be seen as this great liberal to do the right thing. Why we did not follow the south koreans and use face masks at the beginning is absolutely mystifying.
 
scaramanga said:
Plenty of people have lost jobs because their employers couldn't open their businesses.
Click to expand...

that sucks, I know, my wife owns a business which organises and manages indoor gatherings for large numbers of people

such events were fudged though, even if they hadn't been restricted not enough people would risk it to make them financially viable

the government could have done a better job here, with targeted support, rather than just furloughing people for 6 months and buying everyone a Nando's
 
glorygloryeze said:
Ok, it's not nice to know a close relative or friend is vulnerable to this or any disease.

I guess i approach this like i would when thinking of how people with cancer/on chemotherapy are normally treated:

Should society shield from your dad or should your dad shield from society?
Should society totally close itself off from everyone else and close down for 6 months to protect the likes of your dad?
Or should your dad be protected by shielding himself away from society (or from anyone outside of his bubble)?

Is the economic downturn and negative long-term effects of unemployment, higher suicide rates etc for the vast majority of society worth it to protect the relatively small percentage that are vulnerable like your dad?

Please bare in mind i'm not saying the vulnerable like your dad should be allowed to rot and die etc, i'm asking on a societal level whether the cost of totally shutting down EVERYONE is worth it? Also, switch the ailment/risk from being coronavirus to being someone with cancer (to try and put in more in perspective).
Click to expand...

Cancer isn’t contagious.

Edit: For what it's worth, I don't think you're necessarily wrong, but only because it's too late to do anything. You're not coming back from 4000 cases per day at this point. But just because the UK completely failed to control this from day one doesn't mean lockdown isn't worth it. It absolutely is, but it's got to be part of a proper plan to control your borders, to trace and isolate, to penalise those who have tested positive and continue to go about in their community.

Unless you do it to an extreme level, it's not worth doing it at all. And in the UKs case, you're destroying your economy and you're seeing many deaths.
 
Last edited:
Legohamster said:
So Vallance it turns out has shares in a Vaccine company?

No wonder they are pushing for the Vaccine being the only answer

He needs to go if its true, its a massive conflict of interest
Click to expand...

A vaccine is the only answer though alongside other treatments. You know GSK are the world leaders in development and production of vaccines, fairly obvious they're going to develop one for Covid and as British company I'm glad they're doing so. The UK have hedged their bets and bought a load of different vaccines so I don't really see the issue here.

Even if he didn't push for a vaccine they'd develop one anyway for the rest of the world and their share price would still go up accordingly.
 
tommysvr said:
Cancer isn’t contagious.

Edit: For what it's worth, I don't think you're necessarily wrong, but only because it's too late to do anything. You're not coming back from 4000 cases per day at this point. But just because the UK completely failed to control this from day one doesn't mean lockdown isn't worth it. It absolutely is, but it's got to be part of a proper plan to control your borders, to trace and isolate, to penalise those who have tested positive and continue to go about in their community.

Unless you do it to an extreme level, it's not worth doing it at all. And in the UKs case, you're destroying your economy and you're seeing many deaths.
Click to expand...

I hear what you say about cancer not being contagious, i was choosing that example as those who are sufferers are vulnerable from an infection control point of view when on treatment in much the same way as people like your father would be vulnerable from an infection control point of view from contracting coronavirus. I could have chosen TB, seasonal flu as the ailment, which are contagious, but i hope you get my point.

More and more, when i look at both the UK and Australia, Sweden's more pragmatic approach seems the approach that the UK should have taken tbh. They haven't destroyed their Economy and their rates of deaths/infections seem now lower than the UK (though of course things can change now we're going into the winter).

I still maintain that extended lockdown and totally shutting down of all or large parts of society and the economy for a disease that has a very low mortality and morbidity rate (compared to many other diseases such as TB, seasonal flu or Malaria) seems way over the top
 
Last edited:
SteveAWOL said:
Guess professor Sridhar has had a change of heart, or received a torrent of abuse...

View attachment 9479
Click to expand...

tenor.gif


I guess the plot thickens.....wonder what the reason will be in the end for her deleting her tweet...

tenor.gif
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back