lynchie
Full Member
- Joined
- Dec 9, 2006
- Messages
- 7,070
Fecking hell I would love to see that in Coppers.
I saw that. Not ideal but the kind of thing you should do anyway. I’m scrupulous about closing to flush after seeing a video years ago where they put fluorescent dye in the bathroom jacks as an experiment. Fecking stuff got everywhere. Including all over the toothbrushes. Bleurgh.
It’s also not a huge surprise that someone who is seriously unwell might shite the virus. Anyone who is that sick should be nowhere near other people anyway. What we don’t know is if the same is true for mild or asymptomatic cases. Hopefully not.
True, even in the work here with very sick people, it seemed like they had to work pretty hard to get some viable virus developing. However, if a tiny risk can encourage people not to splash toilet water all over the place, then I'm absolutely here to fearmonger about it.
![]()
![]()
At least care homes are coming down and ONS are showing data throughout regularly. Italy data stops at 31st of March showing 11k excess deaths with 13k official.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...gher-than-reported-stats-office-idUSKBN22G1WM
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/04/21/world/coronavirus-missing-deaths.html
Good for them, they must be toughies.My 81 year old grandad beat it at home.
My 75 year old, life long smoker, overweight, type 2 diabetic, grandmother was hospitalized, but her two recent tests came back negative.
Nearly outta the woods.
Doubts raised over Oxford coronavirus vaccine after ALL of the monkeys that took part in the trial are found to have contracted the disease
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/science...ine-does-not-stop-infection-experts-warn.html
- All six rhesus monkeys given the vaccine still became infected with Covid-19
- There were also warnings that they may have been able to spread the virus
- Oxford University vaccine has already been steam-rolled into human trials
- A professor from Imperial trial warned vaccine unlikely to be ready before 2021
What would you suggest?I despise the term ‘BAME’.
What would you suggest?
There's currently 30+ kids playing football that I can see from my window. There were 100+ of younger children in the park mostly with their parents. All mixing and playing with each other. Countless more groups of teenagers riding around on bikes or sitting about. All then going back to their families later, going into supermarkets, meeting other friends, etc.
Are the people who are so worried about schools being open actually being serious or living in some kind of delusion where no one's been outside for months? The only significant difference I can see it could possibly make is that it'll free up a lot of parents and mean a lot of struggling families can actually cope a lot easier. it will also stop thousands of poor people losing their jobs when shops inevitably reopen next month.
If someone has some kind of data that tells me otherwise please show me but it seems like a ridiculous thing to be bitching about to me. I would have thought the focus now should be purely on how to continue protecting the most at risk people going forwards, without completely taking their lives away from them. Especting kids to ever be able to go into school without any of them ever being ill is like closing all the roads then saying you wont re-open them until you can guarantee no one will ever crash their car again
https://civilservice.blog.gov.uk/2019/07/08/please-dont-call-me-bame-or-bme/
Good blog post about it. The problem with the term BAME is that barely anyone knows what it stands for. Just be straight up.
There's currently 30+ kids playing football that I can see from my window. There were 100+ of younger children in the park mostly with their parents. All mixing and playing with each other. Countless more groups of teenagers riding around on bikes or sitting about. All then going back to their families later, going into supermarkets, meeting other friends, etc.
Are the people who are so worried about schools being open actually being serious or living in some kind of delusion where no one's been outside for months? The only significant difference I can see it could possibly make is that it'll free up a lot of parents and mean a lot of struggling families can actually cope a lot easier. it will also stop thousands of poor people losing their jobs when shops inevitably reopen next month.
If someone has some kind of data that tells me otherwise please show me but it seems like a ridiculous thing to be bitching about to me. I would have thought the focus now should be purely on how to continue protecting the most at risk people going forwards, without completely taking their lives away from them. Especting kids to ever be able to go into school without any of them ever being ill is like closing all the roads then saying you wont re-open them until you can guarantee no one will ever crash their car again
There's been plenty of articles shared by people that have addressed how you're much more like to spread this in contained areas with prolonged exposure.
Playing in the park in the open for a bit isn't comparable to a school day. I find the argument of 'well people are breaking the rules anyway' as a terrible one to support opening schools.
https://civilservice.blog.gov.uk/2019/07/08/please-dont-call-me-bame-or-bme/
Good blog post about it. The problem with the term BAME is that barely anyone knows what it stands for. Just be straight up.
Plus lumping such a big group of diverse people seems strange and even lazy. Even within the ethnicities you have more groups which are different to the others.
There's been plenty of articles shared by people that have addressed how you're much more like to spread this in contained areas with prolonged exposure.
Playing in the park in the open for a bit isn't comparable to a school day. I find the argument of 'well people are breaking the rules anyway' as a terrible one to support opening schools.
As well as the much higher risk of transmission indoors, the other important difference between kids mingling in school and mingling in the park is that school re-opening puts employees of the state (teachers) in a situation with a reasonable chance of getting very sick. And some of them will probably die. Which is a big deal when you could argue that finishing this school year at home won’t do the kids much harm at all.
I may have caught it. Will most likely find out between today or tomorrow.
But you can work on minimising obvious risks. For a start, they aren't sending al kids back to school. I wouldn't expect any teacher in any at risk category to be expected to go into a school. There isn't even any need for them too at this point.
Outdoors and indoors does make a difference, but you can regulate how many people are in a classroom and how long for, and how close they are to each other. It's not exactly rocket science. You can't regulate hundreds of children playing in a sand pit with half the parents in there with them. You can kick them out of the park if you want but I'm not even sure what that achieves.
The point I'm getting at here is there is NO situation where it's possible to open schools and there be absolutely no increased risk of anything. There wont be at any point in the forseable future and possibly ever again. It is like trying to eliminate anyone at school ever spreading the cold or flu ever again. So someone needs to come up with a compromise and whining about it while offering no middle ground is not going to help anyone or result in anything other than open conflict, because keeping them closed is simply not an option, and offering completely unrealistic arguments just means the government will ignore it and open them as planned.
It might not do SOME kids much harm from an education point of view to keep the schools closed until after the summer holidays, but what would then be the solution for all the people living in poverty who need to work and support their children during this time, given that businesses are starting to go back to operating normally even now? Once you're after the summer holidays a lot of these people wont be on furlough or have near the same level of support as now (which a lot of them are finding a huge struggle as it is, based on demands for things lie food banks). Last time there were reliable figures you're talking about literally millions of families. Schools are a very important factor in all this. And Pogue you know full well that circumstances like this have a MASSIVE effect on a child.
I also missed 2 months of school around this time when I was 15 due to my mum being very ill and I can tell you it was quite a big problem. Not so much education wise maybe as I managed to just about blag my way through, but certainly from a social and development point of view.
The mindset really does need to change at some point as it feels to me like people are still living in a fantasy world where the virus is just going to go away. That's been off the table since before we were even in lockdown. The arguments people are putting forwards for why you can't open a school are all argument that will still apply in a month's time, two months time, six months time. At this point it's ideas and solutions that are needed, not just repeating the same stuff over and over.
But you can work on minimising obvious risks. For a start, they aren't sending al kids back to school. I wouldn't expect any teacher in any at risk category to be expected to go into a school. There isn't even any need for them too at this point.
Outdoors and indoors does make a difference, but you can regulate how many people are in a classroom and how long for, and how close they are to each other. It's not exactly rocket science. You can't regulate hundreds of children playing in a sand pit with half the parents in there with them. You can kick them out of the park if you want but I'm not even sure what that achieves.
The point I'm getting at here is there is NO situation where it's possible to open schools and there be absolutely no increased risk of anything. There wont be at any point in the forseable future and possibly ever again. It is like trying to eliminate anyone at school ever spreading the cold or flu ever again. So someone needs to come up with a compromise and whining about it while offering no middle ground is not going to help anyone or result in anything other than open conflict, because keeping them closed is simply not an option, and offering completely unrealistic arguments just means the government will ignore it and open them as planned.
It might not do SOME kids much harm from an education point of view to keep the schools closed until after the summer holidays, but what would then be the solution for all the people living in poverty who need to work and support their children during this time, given that businesses are starting to go back to operating normally even now? Once you're after the summer holidays a lot of these people wont be on furlough or have near the same level of support as now (which a lot of them are finding a huge struggle as it is, based on demands for things lie food banks). Last time there were reliable figures you're talking about literally millions of families. Schools are a very important factor in all this. And Pogue you know full well that circumstances like this have a MASSIVE effect on a child.
I also missed 2 months of school around this time when I was 15 due to my mum being very ill and I can tell you it was quite a big problem. Not so much education wise maybe as I managed to just about blag my way through, but certainly from a social and development point of view.
The mindset really does need to change at some point as it feels to me like people are still living in a fantasy world where the virus is just going to go away. That's been off the table since before we were even in lockdown. The arguments people are putting forwards for why you can't open a school are all argument that will still apply in a month's time, two months time, six months time. At this point it's ideas and solutions that are needed, not just repeating the same stuff over and over.
Rebekah Jones said in an email to CBS12 News that her removal was "not voluntary" and that she was removed from her position because she was ordered to censor some data, but refused to "manually change data to drum up support for the plan to reopen."
Jones made the announcement May 5 in a farewell email to researchers and other members of the public who had signed up to receive updates on the data portal, according to Florida Today. She said that for "reasons beyond my division's control," her office is no longer managing the dashboard, involved in its publication, fixing errors or answering any questions.
[...]
But over the last few weeks, it "crashed and went offline, data disappeared with no explanation and access to the underlying data sheets became difficult."
Jones told CBS12 News that since she's been removed, the dashboard still hasn't been fully repaired.
I've yet to see any actual scientific evidence that it's a considerable risk, and nothing to suggest it comes close to outweighing the problems with not opening them. If you have anything that tells me otherwise please show me as I'm actually quite open to finding out more one way or the other. All the "articles" I've seen are just baseless assumptions or are using deliberately misleading information.
Again "this" isn't comparable to "that" isn't an argument unless you've got something impartial that backs it up. 100 kids playing in a confined area, constantly coming and going (meaning you're actually talking about multiple hundreds, 100+ parents standing there with them is obviously comparable on some level. None of these people are expert doctors or scientists who've come up with some detailed risk analysis as to why this is not a problem but a regulated and controlled classroom is. I find it completely bonkers. It's an argument based on fear and paranoia, and people who just want a stick to beat the government with.
People will always break the rules and that's not really the point. The point is what people's idea of what a "safe" situation to send a kid back to school actually is. I've seen a lot of people say it isn't a safe situation, but none of them tell me what a safe situation would be that is actually even remotely realistic...and none of them explain to me how just not opening them as a result is going to work in anyone's favour.
Do I just hand gel 400 times a day and bring back the sleepless ezcema raging nights.
Without getting into a lot of the detail of what you’re saying one massive reason why the UK might not be ready to open schools again this term is because this epidemic is still absolutely raging in your country. Plus your ability to test and track community spread seems to be a good bit behind most of the rest of the world.
With a bit of luck things will be very different in September. A lot can change for the better in a couple of months, even though we all know a treatment or vaccine won’t be available in that timeframe.
EDIT: Should also add, I’m sorry to hear about your shitty experience aged 15. But I’m sure you’d agree that missing two months of school while all your peers were still going is a hell of a lot tougher than it would be for kids all missing out on school at the same time.
And again. I have no idea what people seem to think the plan is at this point. I keep saying it and I'm still yet to see an answer. We went into lockdown to help the NHS cope. The mantra around containing or basically eliminating the virus had figures of around 20,000 deaths attached to it in order for it to be succesful...we're on our way to it being over 100,000, and possibly much higher depending on how severe the likely second wave will be. .
nature is healing, we are the virusThey've only gone and pedestrianised the Curry Mile! Never thought I'd see the day.
I'll post a pic when I get back home.