FabSwingers.com > Forums > Virus > What would you do now.....
What would you do now.....
Jump to: Newest in thread
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"So it's clear, measures in place are not helping. If you were in charge and made new rules and regulations starting from today,what would you do differently? " Removes humans from the equation. Probably. But seriously. What can be done that hasn't already. Except for full integration and herd-immunity and protection of the vulnerable until a workable vaccine is found. Either way it's Catch-22. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Get rid of the compulsory wearing of face coverings outside of clinical settings. The amount of people who touch their face/mask then touch goods/shelves is quite staggering. Masks have their places when put on, worn and disposed of correctly. Tesco is not that place" Agree with this, I think face coverings are only effective in situations where social distancing isn't possible (crowded trains and buses etc). I have noticed a fair few wearers develop a false sense of security too. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"remove all restrictions, let people catch it, some will die, but most will develope imunity, ending the problem" Considering it's been shown that there are long term effects on the body, regardless of age (enlarged heart etc) that's not a good idea. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"remove all restrictions, let people catch it, some will die, but most will develope imunity, ending the problem" You don't think the vulnerable should be protected ? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"im lost with all of this. one week do this, next week do that. they dont know what they are doing that much i do now. im starting to think what they really want is to control everyone's movements and this virus has given them the chance to do it. it doesnt help that all boris thinks is what would trump do." Boris thinks? Are you sure  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"remove all restrictions, let people catch it, some will die, but most will develope imunity, ending the problem You don't think the vulnerable should be protected ?" well they arent really now anyway, and i am part of that group. we cant and wont stop it, we will have to live with it for years to come, the only way is self imunity, same way we become imune to other things, and yes some will suffer, probably me aswell, but most wont | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Boris can't win. Hes damned if he does and damned it he doesn't. Whichever way he goes, someone isn't happy. We feel sorry for the guy. We know what we would like to happen but it won't. " What would you like to happen? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Ask New Zealand nicely if they could look after our shielders for a while. It’s about to be Summer down there so they will have a lovely time under a great PM. " Brilliant idea!  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Safeguard the vulnerable , and those who want life to return to normal let them " And how do you suggest safeguarding the vulnerable without shutting them away? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Ask New Zealand nicely if they could look after our shielders for a while. It’s about to be Summer down there so they will have a lovely time under a great PM. Brilliant idea! "Be a nice change for them from this misery and uncertainty. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Safeguard the vulnerable , and those who want life to return to normal let them " the vunerable arent being safe guarded no, how do you sujest we do it?? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"im lost with all of this. one week do this, next week do that. they dont know what they are doing that much i do now. im starting to think what they really want is to control everyone's movements and this virus has given them the chance to do it. it doesnt help that all boris thinks is what would trump do. Boris thinks? Are you sure "incredible isnt it this mess | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Safeguard the vulnerable , and those who want life to return to normal let them the vunerable arent being safe guarded no, how do you sujest we do it?? " let them decide | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Safeguard the vulnerable , and those who want life to return to normal let them And how do you suggest safeguarding the vulnerable without shutting them away?" Isn't it up to the vulnerable to make choices and decisions how to safeguard themselves? Whether that be wearing masks, avoiding busy places at busy times, keeping their distance from others or indeed staying at home if they wished. It would be up to them to assess their individual risk level and adjust their lives accordingly | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"So it's clear, measures in place are not helping. If you were in charge and made new rules and regulations starting from today,what would you do differently? " Blended learning at schools on week on one week off - strict social distancing at schools. We all know why the infections are rising government and media is just ignoring it. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Safeguard the vulnerable , and those who want life to return to normal let them And how do you suggest safeguarding the vulnerable without shutting them away? Isn't it up to the vulnerable to make choices and decisions how to safeguard themselves? Whether that be wearing masks, avoiding busy places at busy times, keeping their distance from others or indeed staying at home if they wished. It would be up to them to assess their individual risk level and adjust their lives accordingly " But what do you think vulnerable people have been doing? I don't understand why people think this is all about looking after yourself because you can be as careful as you want if other people aren't sticking to the rules then they are put at risk. It's not a simple as making a choice because 67% of the shielding group are in employment. Can't just decide actually am not gonna go to work because it's not safe. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Boris can't win. Hes damned if he does and damned it he doesn't. Whichever way he goes, someone isn't happy. We feel sorry for the guy. We know what we would like to happen but it won't. " I’d quite happily shoot him- incompetence from the word go. Lockdown was too little too late not enough suppression before schools went back that’s why the north are suffering now as their ‘first wave’ was later than the south. 35% of new infections has come from schools and uni the next biggest is workplaces at 17% .... sourced from a report which was publicised on sky. He’s useless and really needs to resign | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Safeguard the vulnerable , and those who want life to return to normal let them And how do you suggest safeguarding the vulnerable without shutting them away? Isn't it up to the vulnerable to make choices and decisions how to safeguard themselves? Whether that be wearing masks, avoiding busy places at busy times, keeping their distance from others or indeed staying at home if they wished. It would be up to them to assess their individual risk level and adjust their lives accordingly But what do you think vulnerable people have been doing? I don't understand why people think this is all about looking after yourself because you can be as careful as you want if other people aren't sticking to the rules then they are put at risk. It's not a simple as making a choice because 67% of the shielding group are in employment. Can't just decide actually am not gonna go to work because it's not safe. " Yep ... many many teachers and support staff are vulnerable - can they decide? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Safeguard the vulnerable , and those who want life to return to normal let them And how do you suggest safeguarding the vulnerable without shutting them away? Isn't it up to the vulnerable to make choices and decisions how to safeguard themselves? Whether that be wearing masks, avoiding busy places at busy times, keeping their distance from others or indeed staying at home if they wished. It would be up to them to assess their individual risk level and adjust their lives accordingly But what do you think vulnerable people have been doing? I don't understand why people think this is all about looking after yourself because you can be as careful as you want if other people aren't sticking to the rules then they are put at risk. It's not a simple as making a choice because 67% of the shielding group are in employment. Can't just decide actually am not gonna go to work because it's not safe. " I thought work places had to be covid secure by law?? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"remove all restrictions, let people catch it, some will die, but most will develope imunity, ending the problem Considering it's been shown that there are long term effects on the body, regardless of age (enlarged heart etc) that's not a good idea. " We always have a group of 'ill' people looking for a disease to blame for their symptoms. ME was often the general label for it. Most of the long covid sufferers never received a positive test and in many cases received negative results put are still convinced they had it. The government are happy to run with it because it gives them another way to try and convince the young or healthy they have something to fear from covid. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Drink more wine " Definitely this  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"remove all restrictions, let people catch it, some will die, but most will develope imunity, ending the problem Considering it's been shown that there are long term effects on the body, regardless of age (enlarged heart etc) that's not a good idea. We always have a group of 'ill' people looking for a disease to blame for their symptoms. ME was often the general label for it. Most of the long covid sufferers never received a positive test and in many cases received negative results put are still convinced they had it. The government are happy to run with it because it gives them another way to try and convince the young or healthy they have something to fear from covid." Is long covid an official recognised medical term/condition ? I've seen it used a lot recently but wasn't sure if it was an official thing, if anyone has been diagnosed with "Long Covid" or not?? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Drink more wine " An answer to many of life’s problems to be fair. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Safeguard the vulnerable , and those who want life to return to normal let them And how do you suggest safeguarding the vulnerable without shutting them away? Isn't it up to the vulnerable to make choices and decisions how to safeguard themselves? Whether that be wearing masks, avoiding busy places at busy times, keeping their distance from others or indeed staying at home if they wished. It would be up to them to assess their individual risk level and adjust their lives accordingly But what do you think vulnerable people have been doing? I don't understand why people think this is all about looking after yourself because you can be as careful as you want if other people aren't sticking to the rules then they are put at risk. It's not a simple as making a choice because 67% of the shielding group are in employment. Can't just decide actually am not gonna go to work because it's not safe. Yep ... many many teachers and support staff are vulnerable - can they decide? " Tell me about it, im one of them.  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Safeguard the vulnerable , and those who want life to return to normal let them And how do you suggest safeguarding the vulnerable without shutting them away? Isn't it up to the vulnerable to make choices and decisions how to safeguard themselves? Whether that be wearing masks, avoiding busy places at busy times, keeping their distance from others or indeed staying at home if they wished. It would be up to them to assess their individual risk level and adjust their lives accordingly But what do you think vulnerable people have been doing? I don't understand why people think this is all about looking after yourself because you can be as careful as you want if other people aren't sticking to the rules then they are put at risk. It's not a simple as making a choice because 67% of the shielding group are in employment. Can't just decide actually am not gonna go to work because it's not safe. I thought work places had to be covid secure by law?? " Nowhere is Covid secure. What about people but are vulnerable but our carers or nurses or work in schools. It is not a simple as you think it is. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"remove all restrictions, let people catch it, some will die, but most will develope imunity, ending the problem Considering it's been shown that there are long term effects on the body, regardless of age (enlarged heart etc) that's not a good idea. We always have a group of 'ill' people looking for a disease to blame for their symptoms. ME was often the general label for it. Most of the long covid sufferers never received a positive test and in many cases received negative results put are still convinced they had it. The government are happy to run with it because it gives them another way to try and convince the young or healthy they have something to fear from covid. Is long covid an official recognised medical term/condition ? I've seen it used a lot recently but wasn't sure if it was an official thing, if anyone has been diagnosed with "Long Covid" or not?? " Yes they have. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Couldn't give a fuck anymore, our parents couldn't give a fuck anymore, our kids couldn't give a fuck anymore. The bloody thing is on the loose and no face covering, social distancing, lockdown, shielding or track and tracing will stop it. Might be completely wrong, but the only way we see out of this is either some miracle of a mass vaccination (which we wouldn't accept accept anyway) or: "may the best immune sistem win" " That is so calous. So You are prepared to offer the vulnerable as sacrificial lambs, And even if there was a vaccine you wouldn't take it to protect others!  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Safeguard the vulnerable , and those who want life to return to normal let them And how do you suggest safeguarding the vulnerable without shutting them away? Isn't it up to the vulnerable to make choices and decisions how to safeguard themselves? Whether that be wearing masks, avoiding busy places at busy times, keeping their distance from others or indeed staying at home if they wished. It would be up to them to assess their individual risk level and adjust their lives accordingly But what do you think vulnerable people have been doing? I don't understand why people think this is all about looking after yourself because you can be as careful as you want if other people aren't sticking to the rules then they are put at risk. It's not a simple as making a choice because 67% of the shielding group are in employment. Can't just decide actually am not gonna go to work because it's not safe. I thought work places had to be covid secure by law?? Nowhere is Covid secure. What about people but are vulnerable but our carers or nurses or work in schools. It is not a simple as you think it is." I didn't say I thought it was simple I asked a question I am a frontline worker myself and have colleagues who were shielding who returned Mid August when shielding ended They wear full ppe as do we all in the line of work we do The employer has a duty of care to them but from what you say this doesn't seem to exist everywhere | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"remove all restrictions, let people catch it, some will die, but most will develope imunity, ending the problem" When you say 'some people', you don't mean you, your partner or your loved ones do you? Just them.. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Couldn't give a fuck anymore, our parents couldn't give a fuck anymore, our kids couldn't give a fuck anymore. The bloody thing is on the loose and no face covering, social distancing, lockdown, shielding or track and tracing will stop it. Might be completely wrong, but the only way we see out of this is either some miracle of a mass vaccination (which we wouldn't accept accept anyway) or: "may the best immune sistem win" That is so calous. So You are prepared to offer the vulnerable as sacrificial lambs, And even if there was a vaccine you wouldn't take it to protect others! "I would imagine it would prioritise in as similar order to the flu vaccine should a covid vaccine ever be found, so the vulnerable, elderly, health workers etc would be offered first Noone should be guilt tripped into sacrificing their right to bodily autonomy on the grounds of "protecting others" | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Couldn't give a fuck anymore, our parents couldn't give a fuck anymore, our kids couldn't give a fuck anymore. The bloody thing is on the loose and no face covering, social distancing, lockdown, shielding or track and tracing will stop it. Might be completely wrong, but the only way we see out of this is either some miracle of a mass vaccination (which we wouldn't accept accept anyway) or: "may the best immune sistem win" " You sound be a real bonus in a proper crisis.. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Couldn't give a fuck anymore, our parents couldn't give a fuck anymore, our kids couldn't give a fuck anymore. The bloody thing is on the loose and no face covering, social distancing, lockdown, shielding or track and tracing will stop it. Might be completely wrong, but the only way we see out of this is either some miracle of a mass vaccination (which we wouldn't accept accept anyway) or: "may the best immune sistem win" That is so calous. So You are prepared to offer the vulnerable as sacrificial lambs, And even if there was a vaccine you wouldn't take it to protect others!
I would imagine it would prioritise in as similar order to the flu vaccine should a covid vaccine ever be found, so the vulnerable, elderly, health workers etc would be offered first
Noone should be guilt tripped into sacrificing their right to bodily autonomy on the grounds of "protecting others" "Add nobody should be told their lives don't matter as much if their immune system is a strong as everybody else! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"remove all restrictions, let people catch it, some will die, but most will develope imunity, ending the problem You don't think the vulnerable should be protected ?" If they feel the need then they can protect themselves, just like any situation | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Couldn't give a fuck anymore, our parents couldn't give a fuck anymore, our kids couldn't give a fuck anymore. The bloody thing is on the loose and no face covering, social distancing, lockdown, shielding or track and tracing will stop it. Might be completely wrong, but the only way we see out of this is either some miracle of a mass vaccination (which we wouldn't accept accept anyway) or: "may the best immune sistem win" That is so calous. So You are prepared to offer the vulnerable as sacrificial lambs, And even if there was a vaccine you wouldn't take it to protect others!
I would imagine it would prioritise in as similar order to the flu vaccine should a covid vaccine ever be found, so the vulnerable, elderly, health workers etc would be offered first
Noone should be guilt tripped into sacrificing their right to bodily autonomy on the grounds of "protecting others"
Add nobody should be told their lives don't matter as much if their immune system is a strong as everybody else! "I haven't said anything of the sort. But you need to appreciate that bodily autonomy is a basic human right and noone should be bullied into having a vaccine they don't want, whatever their own personal reason | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Couldn't give a fuck anymore, our parents couldn't give a fuck anymore, our kids couldn't give a fuck anymore. The bloody thing is on the loose and no face covering, social distancing, lockdown, shielding or track and tracing will stop it. Might be completely wrong, but the only way we see out of this is either some miracle of a mass vaccination (which we wouldn't accept accept anyway) or: "may the best immune sistem win" That is so calous. So You are prepared to offer the vulnerable as sacrificial lambs, And even if there was a vaccine you wouldn't take it to protect others!
I would imagine it would prioritise in as similar order to the flu vaccine should a covid vaccine ever be found, so the vulnerable, elderly, health workers etc would be offered first
Noone should be guilt tripped into sacrificing their right to bodily autonomy on the grounds of "protecting others"
Add nobody should be told their lives don't matter as much if their immune system is a strong as everybody else!
I haven't said anything of the sort. But you need to appreciate that bodily autonomy is a basic human right and noone should be bullied into having a vaccine they don't want, whatever their own personal reason "I was responding to someone else I never said you did say it. All im saying is you can't just say Oh well if they die they die but I'm not gonna do anything to help protect the population. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"remove all restrictions, let people catch it, some will die, but most will develope imunity, ending the problem You don't think the vulnerable should be protected ? If they feel the need then they can protect themselves, just like any situation" Yep It should be up to them what risks they are comfortable taking What one vulnerable person may feel is an acceptable risk, the next may not. It should be their right to decide for themselves | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Couldn't give a fuck anymore, our parents couldn't give a fuck anymore, our kids couldn't give a fuck anymore. The bloody thing is on the loose and no face covering, social distancing, lockdown, shielding or track and tracing will stop it. Might be completely wrong, but the only way we see out of this is either some miracle of a mass vaccination (which we wouldn't accept accept anyway) or: "may the best immune sistem win" That is so calous. So You are prepared to offer the vulnerable as sacrificial lambs, And even if there was a vaccine you wouldn't take it to protect others! "Are you saying you're taking vaccines to protect others, but not yourself? How compassionate! As much as we would like to save every life possible, the crude reality is completely different than what some people are living in. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Couldn't give a fuck anymore, our parents couldn't give a fuck anymore, our kids couldn't give a fuck anymore. The bloody thing is on the loose and no face covering, social distancing, lockdown, shielding or track and tracing will stop it. Might be completely wrong, but the only way we see out of this is either some miracle of a mass vaccination (which we wouldn't accept accept anyway) or: "may the best immune sistem win" That is so calous. So You are prepared to offer the vulnerable as sacrificial lambs, And even if there was a vaccine you wouldn't take it to protect others!
I would imagine it would prioritise in as similar order to the flu vaccine should a covid vaccine ever be found, so the vulnerable, elderly, health workers etc would be offered first
Noone should be guilt tripped into sacrificing their right to bodily autonomy on the grounds of "protecting others"
Add nobody should be told their lives don't matter as much if their immune system is a strong as everybody else!
I haven't said anything of the sort. But you need to appreciate that bodily autonomy is a basic human right and noone should be bullied into having a vaccine they don't want, whatever their own personal reason
I was responding to someone else I never said you did say it. All im saying is you can't just say Oh well if they die they die but I'm not gonna do anything to help protect the population.
"Unfortunately people can say that if that is what they believe. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Noone should be guilt tripped into sacrificing their right to bodily autonomy on the grounds of "protecting others" " Spot on | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Couldn't give a fuck anymore, our parents couldn't give a fuck anymore, our kids couldn't give a fuck anymore. The bloody thing is on the loose and no face covering, social distancing, lockdown, shielding or track and tracing will stop it. Might be completely wrong, but the only way we see out of this is either some miracle of a mass vaccination (which we wouldn't accept accept anyway) or: "may the best immune sistem win" That is so calous. So You are prepared to offer the vulnerable as sacrificial lambs, And even if there was a vaccine you wouldn't take it to protect others!
I would imagine it would prioritise in as similar order to the flu vaccine should a covid vaccine ever be found, so the vulnerable, elderly, health workers etc would be offered first
Noone should be guilt tripped into sacrificing their right to bodily autonomy on the grounds of "protecting others"
Add nobody should be told their lives don't matter as much if their immune system is a strong as everybody else!
I haven't said anything of the sort. But you need to appreciate that bodily autonomy is a basic human right and noone should be bullied into having a vaccine they don't want, whatever their own personal reason
I was responding to someone else I never said you did say it. All im saying is you can't just say Oh well if they die they die but I'm not gonna do anything to help protect the population.
Unfortunately people can say that if that is what they believe.
"Then I can say if there not prepared to take a vaccine or do anything to help the virus to be less deadly then they are calous. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Noone should be guilt tripped into sacrificing their right to bodily autonomy on the grounds of "protecting others" Spot on "But it's perfectly acceptable for people to say well if they die they die and I not gonna do anything to stop the spread because that's what these people said. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Noone should be guilt tripped into sacrificing their right to bodily autonomy on the grounds of "protecting others" Spot on
But it's perfectly acceptable for people to say well if they die they die and I not gonna do anything to stop the spread because that's what these people said."Everyone is just as entitled to their opinion as you, however unkind that opinionmay be. If your answer is to try and guilt trip people into a vaccine you will get nowhere, as you show total disregard for the basic human right of bodily autonomy | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"unfortunatly some will die, im not sure the vaccines will work, and if they do, will everyone take them, this is something we will have to live with, shutting down the country and ruining an already shaky econamy is not the answerwe are more in bebt than after the second world war, because of lockdown, how does that help, the bigest problem is over population, and harsh as it sound, if a few die it will be better for those that dont. " We got through the second works war by not giving in even in the darkest times, what your suggesting smacks of let some of the elderly who built the country after that time and others just take the hit so others can get back to their normal.. Debt can be repayed and yes it will take several decades but lives can't be replaced.. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Ask New Zealand nicely if they could look after our shielders for a while. It’s about to be Summer down there so they will have a lovely time under a great PM. " this got me thinking could we go a spin on this many agree we cant just lock shielders in the house forever , but if we are going to be stuck with this for years, could we work towards covid safe areas/ towns? like a bit like a retirement village for vulnerable people ... perimeter fences supplies are quarantined for a while when they come in, people can’t come and go freely but they would be safer to mix amongst themselves it means people have some freedom removed sure but they wouldn't be isolated entirely and other towns could get a but more back to normal probably a crazy idea that wouldnt work but it is starting to look like we need to think a little outside the normal boxes | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Couldn't give a fuck anymore, our parents couldn't give a fuck anymore, our kids couldn't give a fuck anymore. The bloody thing is on the loose and no face covering, social distancing, lockdown, shielding or track and tracing will stop it. Might be completely wrong, but the only way we see out of this is either some miracle of a mass vaccination (which we wouldn't accept accept anyway) or: "may the best immune sistem win" That is so calous. So You are prepared to offer the vulnerable as sacrificial lambs, And even if there was a vaccine you wouldn't take it to protect others!
I would imagine it would prioritise in as similar order to the flu vaccine should a covid vaccine ever be found, so the vulnerable, elderly, health workers etc would be offered first
Noone should be guilt tripped into sacrificing their right to bodily autonomy on the grounds of "protecting others"
Add nobody should be told their lives don't matter as much if their immune system is a strong as everybody else!
I haven't said anything of the sort. But you need to appreciate that bodily autonomy is a basic human right and noone should be bullied into having a vaccine they don't want, whatever their own personal reason
I was responding to someone else I never said you did say it. All im saying is you can't just say Oh well if they die they die but I'm not gonna do anything to help protect the population.
Unfortunately people can say that if that is what they believe.
Then I can say if there not prepared to take a vaccine or do anything to help the virus to be less deadly then they are calous. "You can say whatever the fuck you like It's you trying to force your views on others just because you don't like what they're saying. It won't get you anywhere | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Noone should be guilt tripped into sacrificing their right to bodily autonomy on the grounds of "protecting others" Spot on
But it's perfectly acceptable for people to say well if they die they die and I not gonna do anything to stop the spread because that's what these people said.
Everyone is just as entitled to their opinion as you, however unkind that opinionmay be.
If your answer is to try and guilt trip people into a vaccine you will get nowhere, as you show total disregard for the basic human right of bodily autonomy" | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Ask New Zealand nicely if they could look after our shielders for a while. It’s about to be Summer down there so they will have a lovely time under a great PM. this got me thinking could we go a spin on this many agree we cant just lock shielders in the house forever , but if we are going to be stuck with this for years, could we work towards covid safe areas/ towns? like a bit like a retirement village for vulnerable people ... perimeter fences supplies are quarantined for a while when they come in, people can’t come and go freely but they would be safer to mix amongst themselves it means people have some freedom removed sure but they wouldn't be isolated entirely and other towns could get a but more back to normal probably a crazy idea that wouldnt work but it is starting to look like we need to think a little outside the normal boxes " My that’s a pretty extreme measure locking shielders behind a fence. If we did go down that route we should at least lock them somewhere nice. Perhaps fence of the Cotswolds and a nice bit of coastline | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Couldn't give a fuck anymore, our parents couldn't give a fuck anymore, our kids couldn't give a fuck anymore. The bloody thing is on the loose and no face covering, social distancing, lockdown, shielding or track and tracing will stop it. Might be completely wrong, but the only way we see out of this is either some miracle of a mass vaccination (which we wouldn't accept accept anyway) or: "may the best immune sistem win" That is so calous. So You are prepared to offer the vulnerable as sacrificial lambs, And even if there was a vaccine you wouldn't take it to protect others!
I would imagine it would prioritise in as similar order to the flu vaccine should a covid vaccine ever be found, so the vulnerable, elderly, health workers etc would be offered first
Noone should be guilt tripped into sacrificing their right to bodily autonomy on the grounds of "protecting others"
Add nobody should be told their lives don't matter as much if their immune system is a strong as everybody else!
I haven't said anything of the sort. But you need to appreciate that bodily autonomy is a basic human right and noone should be bullied into having a vaccine they don't want, whatever their own personal reason
I was responding to someone else I never said you did say it. All im saying is you can't just say Oh well if they die they die but I'm not gonna do anything to help protect the population.
Unfortunately people can say that if that is what they believe.
Then I can say if there not prepared to take a vaccine or do anything to help the virus to be less deadly then they are calous.
You can say whatever the fuck you like
It's you trying to force your views on others just because you don't like what they're saying. It won't get you anywhere"Think you need to take a breath I Simply had an opinion I wasn't trying to force anything on anyone might be time to take a little break. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"remove all restrictions, let people catch it, some will die, but most will develope imunity, ending the problem You don't think the vulnerable should be protected ? If they feel the need then they can protect themselves, just like any situation Yep It should be up to them what risks they are comfortable taking What one vulnerable person may feel is an acceptable risk, the next may not. It should be their right to decide for themselves " Exactly...my parents are 86.....out and about most days, but taking precautions...they said they would rather live what is left of their lifes...than waste it sat in doing nothing or not seeing anybody....everybody has their own views. None of us know what we would do when we are their age under the circumstances, words are easy when we are not in their shoes,or anybody elses either | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Couldn't give a fuck anymore, our parents couldn't give a fuck anymore, our kids couldn't give a fuck anymore. The bloody thing is on the loose and no face covering, social distancing, lockdown, shielding or track and tracing will stop it. Might be completely wrong, but the only way we see out of this is either some miracle of a mass vaccination (which we wouldn't accept accept anyway) or: "may the best immune sistem win" That is so calous. So You are prepared to offer the vulnerable as sacrificial lambs, And even if there was a vaccine you wouldn't take it to protect others!
I would imagine it would prioritise in as similar order to the flu vaccine should a covid vaccine ever be found, so the vulnerable, elderly, health workers etc would be offered first
Noone should be guilt tripped into sacrificing their right to bodily autonomy on the grounds of "protecting others"
Add nobody should be told their lives don't matter as much if their immune system is a strong as everybody else!
I haven't said anything of the sort. But you need to appreciate that bodily autonomy is a basic human right and noone should be bullied into having a vaccine they don't want, whatever their own personal reason
I was responding to someone else I never said you did say it. All im saying is you can't just say Oh well if they die they die but I'm not gonna do anything to help protect the population.
Unfortunately people can say that if that is what they believe.
Then I can say if there not prepared to take a vaccine or do anything to help the virus to be less deadly then they are calous.
You can say whatever the fuck you like
It's you trying to force your views on others just because you don't like what they're saying. It won't get you anywhere
Think you need to take a breath I Simply had an opinion I wasn't trying to force anything on anyone might be time to take a little break.". You were trying to guilt trip people into accepting a vaccine 10 minutes ago. Keep it up though, it's comedy gold to read  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Ask New Zealand nicely if they could look after our shielders for a while. It’s about to be Summer down there so they will have a lovely time under a great PM. this got me thinking could we go a spin on this many agree we cant just lock shielders in the house forever , but if we are going to be stuck with this for years, could we work towards covid safe areas/ towns? like a bit like a retirement village for vulnerable people ... perimeter fences supplies are quarantined for a while when they come in, people can’t come and go freely but they would be safer to mix amongst themselves it means people have some freedom removed sure but they wouldn't be isolated entirely and other towns could get a but more back to normal probably a crazy idea that wouldnt work but it is starting to look like we need to think a little outside the normal boxes " I agree we need to think outside the box
But the first flaw in your plan is it all sounds a little familiar..as in care homes.
But keep on that thinking as you normally have some good ideas | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"unfortunatly some will die, im not sure the vaccines will work, and if they do, will everyone take them, this is something we will have to live with, shutting down the country and ruining an already shaky econamy is not the answerwe are more in bebt than after the second world war, because of lockdown, how does that help, the bigest problem is over population, and harsh as it sound, if a few die it will be better for those that dont. We got through the second works war by not giving in even in the darkest times, what your suggesting smacks of let some of the elderly who built the country after that time and others just take the hit so others can get back to their normal.. Debt can be repayed and yes it will take several decades but lives can't be replaced.. " "...Debt can be repayed and yes it will take several decades but lives can't be replaced.." ---------------- | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Couldn't give a fuck anymore, our parents couldn't give a fuck anymore, our kids couldn't give a fuck anymore. The bloody thing is on the loose and no face covering, social distancing, lockdown, shielding or track and tracing will stop it. Might be completely wrong, but the only way we see out of this is either some miracle of a mass vaccination (which we wouldn't accept accept anyway) or: "may the best immune sistem win" That is so calous. So You are prepared to offer the vulnerable as sacrificial lambs, And even if there was a vaccine you wouldn't take it to protect others!
I would imagine it would prioritise in as similar order to the flu vaccine should a covid vaccine ever be found, so the vulnerable, elderly, health workers etc would be offered first
Noone should be guilt tripped into sacrificing their right to bodily autonomy on the grounds of "protecting others"
Add nobody should be told their lives don't matter as much if their immune system is a strong as everybody else!
I haven't said anything of the sort. But you need to appreciate that bodily autonomy is a basic human right and noone should be bullied into having a vaccine they don't want, whatever their own personal reason
I was responding to someone else I never said you did say it. All im saying is you can't just say Oh well if they die they die but I'm not gonna do anything to help protect the population.
Unfortunately people can say that if that is what they believe.
Then I can say if there not prepared to take a vaccine or do anything to help the virus to be less deadly then they are calous.
You can say whatever the fuck you like
It's you trying to force your views on others just because you don't like what they're saying. It won't get you anywhere
Think you need to take a breath I Simply had an opinion I wasn't trying to force anything on anyone might be time to take a little break..
You were trying to guilt trip people into accepting a vaccine 10 minutes ago. Keep it up though, it's comedy gold to read "I made one comment that you have jumped on. Yes you are exceptionally funny, Because some people are allowed an opinion according to you but others are not. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"remove all restrictions, let people catch it, some will die, but most will develope imunity, ending the problem You don't think the vulnerable should be protected ? If they feel the need then they can protect themselves, just like any situation Yep It should be up to them what risks they are comfortable taking What one vulnerable person may feel is an acceptable risk, the next may not. It should be their right to decide for themselves Exactly...my parents are 86.....out and about most days, but taking precautions...they said they would rather live what is left of their lifes...than waste it sat in doing nothing or not seeing anybody....everybody has their own views. None of us know what we would do when we are their age under the circumstances, words are easy when we are not in their shoes,or anybody elses either "This is so encouraging to hear. Rather than people feeling it is their place to speak on behalf of all of "the vulnerable" it should be every ibdividuals choice to make | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Couldn't give a fuck anymore, our parents couldn't give a fuck anymore, our kids couldn't give a fuck anymore. The bloody thing is on the loose and no face covering, social distancing, lockdown, shielding or track and tracing will stop it. Might be completely wrong, but the only way we see out of this is either some miracle of a mass vaccination (which we wouldn't accept accept anyway) or: "may the best immune sistem win" That is so calous. So You are prepared to offer the vulnerable as sacrificial lambs, And even if there was a vaccine you wouldn't take it to protect others!
I would imagine it would prioritise in as similar order to the flu vaccine should a covid vaccine ever be found, so the vulnerable, elderly, health workers etc would be offered first
Noone should be guilt tripped into sacrificing their right to bodily autonomy on the grounds of "protecting others"
Add nobody should be told their lives don't matter as much if their immune system is a strong as everybody else!
I haven't said anything of the sort. But you need to appreciate that bodily autonomy is a basic human right and noone should be bullied into having a vaccine they don't want, whatever their own personal reason
I was responding to someone else I never said you did say it. All im saying is you can't just say Oh well if they die they die but I'm not gonna do anything to help protect the population.
Unfortunately people can say that if that is what they believe.
Then I can say if there not prepared to take a vaccine or do anything to help the virus to be less deadly then they are calous.
You can say whatever the fuck you like
It's you trying to force your views on others just because you don't like what they're saying. It won't get you anywhere
Think you need to take a breath I Simply had an opinion I wasn't trying to force anything on anyone might be time to take a little break..
You were trying to guilt trip people into accepting a vaccine 10 minutes ago. Keep it up though, it's comedy gold to read
I made one comment that you have jumped on. Yes you are exceptionally funny, Because some people are allowed an opinion according to you but others are not. "I enjoy reading everyones opinions. Especially yours | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"remove all restrictions, let people catch it, some will die, but most will develope imunity, ending the problem You don't think the vulnerable should be protected ? If they feel the need then they can protect themselves, just like any situation Yep It should be up to them what risks they are comfortable taking What one vulnerable person may feel is an acceptable risk, the next may not. It should be their right to decide for themselves Exactly...my parents are 86.....out and about most days, but taking precautions...they said they would rather live what is left of their lifes...than waste it sat in doing nothing or not seeing anybody....everybody has their own views. None of us know what we would do when we are their age under the circumstances, words are easy when we are not in their shoes,or anybody elses either
This is so encouraging to hear. Rather than people feeling it is their place to speak on behalf of all of "the vulnerable" it should be every ibdividuals choice to make "I am one of those people so I am not talking for anybody. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Couldn't give a fuck anymore, our parents couldn't give a fuck anymore, our kids couldn't give a fuck anymore. The bloody thing is on the loose and no face covering, social distancing, lockdown, shielding or track and tracing will stop it. Might be completely wrong, but the only way we see out of this is either some miracle of a mass vaccination (which we wouldn't accept accept anyway) or: "may the best immune sistem win" That is so calous. So You are prepared to offer the vulnerable as sacrificial lambs, And even if there was a vaccine you wouldn't take it to protect others!
I would imagine it would prioritise in as similar order to the flu vaccine should a covid vaccine ever be found, so the vulnerable, elderly, health workers etc would be offered first
Noone should be guilt tripped into sacrificing their right to bodily autonomy on the grounds of "protecting others"
Add nobody should be told their lives don't matter as much if their immune system is a strong as everybody else!
I haven't said anything of the sort. But you need to appreciate that bodily autonomy is a basic human right and noone should be bullied into having a vaccine they don't want, whatever their own personal reason
I was responding to someone else I never said you did say it. All im saying is you can't just say Oh well if they die they die but I'm not gonna do anything to help protect the population.
Unfortunately people can say that if that is what they believe.
Then I can say if there not prepared to take a vaccine or do anything to help the virus to be less deadly then they are calous.
You can say whatever the fuck you like
It's you trying to force your views on others just because you don't like what they're saying. It won't get you anywhere
Think you need to take a breath I Simply had an opinion I wasn't trying to force anything on anyone might be time to take a little break..
You were trying to guilt trip people into accepting a vaccine 10 minutes ago. Keep it up though, it's comedy gold to read
I made one comment that you have jumped on. Yes you are exceptionally funny, Because some people are allowed an opinion according to you but others are not.
I enjoy reading everyones opinions. Especially yours "Aww thanks babe  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Couldn't give a fuck anymore, our parents couldn't give a fuck anymore, our kids couldn't give a fuck anymore. The bloody thing is on the loose and no face covering, social distancing, lockdown, shielding or track and tracing will stop it. Might be completely wrong, but the only way we see out of this is either some miracle of a mass vaccination (which we wouldn't accept accept anyway) or: "may the best immune sistem win" That is so calous. So You are prepared to offer the vulnerable as sacrificial lambs, And even if there was a vaccine you wouldn't take it to protect others!
I would imagine it would prioritise in as similar order to the flu vaccine should a covid vaccine ever be found, so the vulnerable, elderly, health workers etc would be offered first
Noone should be guilt tripped into sacrificing their right to bodily autonomy on the grounds of "protecting others"
Add nobody should be told their lives don't matter as much if their immune system is a strong as everybody else!
I haven't said anything of the sort. But you need to appreciate that bodily autonomy is a basic human right and noone should be bullied into having a vaccine they don't want, whatever their own personal reason
I was responding to someone else I never said you did say it. All im saying is you can't just say Oh well if they die they die but I'm not gonna do anything to help protect the population.
Unfortunately people can say that if that is what they believe.
Then I can say if there not prepared to take a vaccine or do anything to help the virus to be less deadly then they are calous.
You can say whatever the fuck you like
It's you trying to force your views on others just because you don't like what they're saying. It won't get you anywhere
Think you need to take a breath I Simply had an opinion I wasn't trying to force anything on anyone might be time to take a little break..
You were trying to guilt trip people into accepting a vaccine 10 minutes ago. Keep it up though, it's comedy gold to read
I made one comment that you have jumped on. Yes you are exceptionally funny, Because some people are allowed an opinion according to you but others are not.
I enjoy reading everyones opinions. Especially yours
Aww thanks babe "You're very welcome | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"remove all restrictions, let people catch it, some will die, but most will develope imunity, ending the problem You don't think the vulnerable should be protected ? If they feel the need then they can protect themselves, just like any situation Yep It should be up to them what risks they are comfortable taking What one vulnerable person may feel is an acceptable risk, the next may not. It should be their right to decide for themselves Exactly...my parents are 86.....out and about most days, but taking precautions...they said they would rather live what is left of their lifes...than waste it sat in doing nothing or not seeing anybody....everybody has their own views. None of us know what we would do when we are their age under the circumstances, words are easy when we are not in their shoes,or anybody elses either
This is so encouraging to hear. Rather than people feeling it is their place to speak on behalf of all of "the vulnerable" it should be every ibdividuals choice to make "Yes, let each decide for themselves...vulnerable or not......we all can manage our own risks | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Get rid of the compulsory wearing of face coverings outside of clinical settings. The amount of people who touch their face/mask then touch goods/shelves is quite staggering. Masks have their places when put on, worn and disposed of correctly. Tesco is not that place" | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Ask New Zealand nicely if they could look after our shielders for a while. It’s about to be Summer down there so they will have a lovely time under a great PM. this got me thinking could we go a spin on this many agree we cant just lock shielders in the house forever , but if we are going to be stuck with this for years, could we work towards covid safe areas/ towns? like a bit like a retirement village for vulnerable people ... perimeter fences supplies are quarantined for a while when they come in, people can’t come and go freely but they would be safer to mix amongst themselves it means people have some freedom removed sure but they wouldn't be isolated entirely and other towns could get a but more back to normal probably a crazy idea that wouldnt work but it is starting to look like we need to think a little outside the normal boxes My that’s a pretty extreme measure locking shielders behind a fence. If we did go down that route we should at least lock them somewhere nice. Perhaps fence of the Cotswolds and a nice bit of coastline "yeah i was imagining a nice gated community inflated up to like small village scale with wee shops and pub and stuff ... not a prison it is extreme but maybe more palatable than locking them in the spare room so the rest of us can go back to normal which is what many are suggesting | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"remove all restrictions, let people catch it, some will die, but most will develope imunity, ending the problem You don't think the vulnerable should be protected ? If they feel the need then they can protect themselves, just like any situation Yep It should be up to them what risks they are comfortable taking What one vulnerable person may feel is an acceptable risk, the next may not. It should be their right to decide for themselves Exactly...my parents are 86.....out and about most days, but taking precautions...they said they would rather live what is left of their lifes...than waste it sat in doing nothing or not seeing anybody....everybody has their own views. None of us know what we would do when we are their age under the circumstances, words are easy when we are not in their shoes,or anybody elses either
This is so encouraging to hear. Rather than people feeling it is their place to speak on behalf of all of "the vulnerable" it should be every ibdividuals choice to make
Yes, let each decide for themselves...vulnerable or not......we all can manage our own risks " | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"So it's clear, measures in place are not helping. If you were in charge and made new rules and regulations starting from today,what would you do differently? " I'd put someone intelligent in overall charge....Steven Fry... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Ask New Zealand nicely if they could look after our shielders for a while. It’s about to be Summer down there so they will have a lovely time under a great PM. this got me thinking could we go a spin on this many agree we cant just lock shielders in the house forever , but if we are going to be stuck with this for years, could we work towards covid safe areas/ towns? like a bit like a retirement village for vulnerable people ... perimeter fences supplies are quarantined for a while when they come in, people can’t come and go freely but they would be safer to mix amongst themselves it means people have some freedom removed sure but they wouldn't be isolated entirely and other towns could get a but more back to normal probably a crazy idea that wouldnt work but it is starting to look like we need to think a little outside the normal boxes I agree we need to think outside the box
But the first flaw in your plan is it all sounds a little familiar..as in care homes.
But keep on that thinking as you normally have some good ideas "with care homes, the carers were coming and going into non care home spaces and could bring the virus in ... this would have to be more exclusive snd closed in ... so the “workers” providers would have to stay there too... but as many have said there are plenty young people (and their families) that have been shielding so its not like we would be saying ok all you old folk have to get back out to work to keep yourselves going i should also say this is a kind of daft utopia idea im having and not a serious suggestion | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I'm one of those people who would suffer badly if I caught it. People I'm close to would suffer as well. I think we're being incredibly selfish just thinking of ourselves and those close to us. Pandemics are good for the population as a whole precisely because they do kill people like me who are net drains on society. That's the long term benefit of them. There's a demographic time bomb in the western world because we have too many old people. Covid could solve that. Yes it's horrible for individuals affected but I think it's selfish not to see the bigger picture" I feel very sad that you consider yourself a net drain on society.  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I'm one of those people who would suffer badly if I caught it. People I'm close to would suffer as well. I think we're being incredibly selfish just thinking of ourselves and those close to us. Pandemics are good for the population as a whole precisely because they do kill people like me who are net drains on society. That's the long term benefit of them. There's a demographic time bomb in the western world because we have too many old people. Covid could solve that. Yes it's horrible for individuals affected but I think it's selfish not to see the bigger picture I feel very sad that you consider yourself a net drain on society. "It was a statement of fact. NHS spends more on me than I pay in tax. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I'm one of those people who would suffer badly if I caught it. People I'm close to would suffer as well. I think we're being incredibly selfish just thinking of ourselves and those close to us. Pandemics are good for the population as a whole precisely because they do kill people like me who are net drains on society. That's the long term benefit of them. There's a demographic time bomb in the western world because we have too many old people. Covid could solve that. Yes it's horrible for individuals affected but I think it's selfish not to see the bigger picture I feel very sad that you consider yourself a net drain on society.
It was a statement of fact. NHS spends more on me than I pay in tax."Ok. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I'm one of those people who would suffer badly if I caught it. People I'm close to would suffer as well. I think we're being incredibly selfish just thinking of ourselves and those close to us. Pandemics are good for the population as a whole precisely because they do kill people like me who are net drains on society. That's the long term benefit of them. There's a demographic time bomb in the western world because we have too many old people. Covid could solve that. Yes it's horrible for individuals affected but I think it's selfish not to see the bigger picture I feel very sad that you consider yourself a net drain on society.
It was a statement of fact. NHS spends more on me than I pay in tax."but in a varied society there will be people who pay more than they use ... it balances itself out and there is nothing wrong with that for example i have a fairly decent job so my tax bill follows that... relatively healthy - maybe visit a doctor once or twice a year, don't find personal need for police (although they obviously i do still get a benefit from police existing and deterring crime) , no kids so not using the education system, no social service need etc etc ... lots of things tax pays for i am not taking my moneys worth so to speak ... however i don’t think it follows that to start getting my moneys worth or reduce my bill we should just let a virus kill people who are in a net deficit ... it would be so heartless | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I'm one of those people who would suffer badly if I caught it. People I'm close to would suffer as well. I think we're being incredibly selfish just thinking of ourselves and those close to us. Pandemics are good for the population as a whole precisely because they do kill people like me who are net drains on society. That's the long term benefit of them. There's a demographic time bomb in the western world because we have too many old people. Covid could solve that. Yes it's horrible for individuals affected but I think it's selfish not to see the bigger picture" i am also one that is likely to be badly affected, but agree with your post, we have to many people in the world let the fittest survive. its how nature works, and if i have to go then so be it | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I'm one of those people who would suffer badly if I caught it. People I'm close to would suffer as well. I think we're being incredibly selfish just thinking of ourselves and those close to us. Pandemics are good for the population as a whole precisely because they do kill people like me who are net drains on society. That's the long term benefit of them. There's a demographic time bomb in the western world because we have too many old people. Covid could solve that. Yes it's horrible for individuals affected but I think it's selfish not to see the bigger picture" No one is immune to it, and you shouldn't believe you'll suffer badly if you catch it. In no way you should feel selfish for trying to protect yourself and the people around you, nor feel like you are drain on the society. We might have come across as very selfish with previous comments on this thread, but believe me that is not the case. The point we were trying to make is that life must go on, people should stop living in fear from something which might or might not kill them and enjoy every single day we are given. The fear that has been brought to most is damaging more lifes than the actual virus itself. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"unfortunatly some will die, im not sure the vaccines will work, and if they do, will everyone take them, this is something we will have to live with, shutting down the country and ruining an already shaky econamy is not the answerwe are more in bebt than after the second world war, because of lockdown, how does that help, the bigest problem is over population, and harsh as it sound, if a few die it will be better for those that dont. We got through the second works war by not giving in even in the darkest times, what your suggesting smacks of let some of the elderly who built the country after that time and others just take the hit so others can get back to their normal.. Debt can be repayed and yes it will take several decades but lives can't be replaced.. "...Debt can be repayed and yes it will take several decades but lives can't be replaced.." ---------------- "SEVERAL DECADES?  That’s 2-3 generations. Are you seriously suggesting it’s ok to ensure that 3 generations of children have no future to save a number of people who’ll all be long dead by then?
Essentially we have 2 options here. The first and best is that we wait it out for 6 months imposing restrictions as and when necessary - whilst supporting those who lose livelihoods due to said restrictions. When a vaccine is made available we roll it out with the most vulnerable who work in public facing jobs receiving it first - as they’re taking the greatest risk.
However - if no vaccine is forthcoming we need to accept that we as humans and the economy can’t survive indefinitely unless we are allowed to live ‘normal’ lives again - both socially and in work.
In that case as the economy strengthens by having the healthy working and spending again - more money will be available to help those at greatest risk. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"unfortunatly some will die, im not sure the vaccines will work, and if they do, will everyone take them, this is something we will have to live with, shutting down the country and ruining an already shaky econamy is not the answerwe are more in bebt than after the second world war, because of lockdown, how does that help, the bigest problem is over population, and harsh as it sound, if a few die it will be better for those that dont. We got through the second works war by not giving in even in the darkest times, what your suggesting smacks of let some of the elderly who built the country after that time and others just take the hit so others can get back to their normal.. Debt can be repayed and yes it will take several decades but lives can't be replaced.. "...Debt can be repayed and yes it will take several decades but lives can't be replaced.." ----------------
SEVERAL DECADES? That’s 2-3 generations. Are you seriously suggesting it’s ok to ensure that 3 generations of children have no future to save a number of people who’ll all be long dead by then?
Essentially we have 2 options here. The first and best is that we wait it out for 6 months imposing restrictions as and when necessary - whilst supporting those who lose livelihoods due to said restrictions. When a vaccine is made available we roll it out with the most vulnerable who work in public facing jobs receiving it first - as they’re taking the greatest risk.
However - if no vaccine is forthcoming we need to accept that we as humans and the economy can’t survive indefinitely unless we are allowed to live ‘normal’ lives again - both socially and in work.
In that case as the economy strengthens by having the healthy working and spending again - more money will be available to help those at greatest risk. "your in the wrong forum, talking sence has no place here | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"unfortunatly some will die, im not sure the vaccines will work, and if they do, will everyone take them, this is something we will have to live with, shutting down the country and ruining an already shaky econamy is not the answerwe are more in bebt than after the second world war, because of lockdown, how does that help, the bigest problem is over population, and harsh as it sound, if a few die it will be better for those that dont. We got through the second works war by not giving in even in the darkest times, what your suggesting smacks of let some of the elderly who built the country after that time and others just take the hit so others can get back to their normal.. Debt can be repayed and yes it will take several decades but lives can't be replaced.. "...Debt can be repayed and yes it will take several decades but lives can't be replaced.." ----------------
SEVERAL DECADES? That’s 2-3 generations. Are you seriously suggesting it’s ok to ensure that 3 generations of children have no future to save a number of people who’ll all be long dead by then?
Essentially we have 2 options here. The first and best is that we wait it out for 6 months imposing restrictions as and when necessary - whilst supporting those who lose livelihoods due to said restrictions. When a vaccine is made available we roll it out with the most vulnerable who work in public facing jobs receiving it first - as they’re taking the greatest risk.
However - if no vaccine is forthcoming we need to accept that we as humans and the economy can’t survive indefinitely unless we are allowed to live ‘normal’ lives again - both socially and in work.
In that case as the economy strengthens by having the healthy working and spending again - more money will be available to help those at greatest risk. "We only just finished paying for the slave trade and WW2 in the past few years, saying it will take a long time does not mean the end of the economy in paying it back.. Life will go on.. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"remove all restrictions, let people catch it, some will die, but most will develope imunity, ending the problem" Businesses will still close due to staff being ill, once they recover and might be fit to work. Either way the loss of business is the same, only quicker. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" The fear that has been brought to most is damaging more lifes than the actual virus itself. " Totally agree. I'm not worried about catching it. If it happens, it happens | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" The fear that has been brought to most is damaging more lifes than the actual virus itself. Totally agree. I'm not worried about catching it. If it happens, it happens " We agree too. The media and the scaremongering have a lot to answer for. People sit and absorb the news they are fed with instead of listening to facts and thinking about the bigger picture. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" The fear that has been brought to most is damaging more lifes than the actual virus itself. Totally agree. I'm not worried about catching it. If it happens, it happens We agree too. The media and the scaremongering have a lot to answer for. People sit and absorb the news they are fed with instead of listening to facts and thinking about the bigger picture." Talkradio on DAB is the only station that speaks common sense. The rest just peddle a fear based narrative to terrorise people into submission & compliance & the sherple willingly lap it all up. You only have to look through the comments on here to see this. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" The fear that has been brought to most is damaging more lifes than the actual virus itself. Totally agree. I'm not worried about catching it. If it happens, it happens We agree too. The media and the scaremongering have a lot to answer for. People sit and absorb the news they are fed with instead of listening to facts and thinking about the bigger picture. Talkradio on DAB is the only station that speaks common sense. The rest just peddle a fear based narrative to terrorise people into submission & compliance & the sherple willingly lap it all up. You only have to look through the comments on here to see this. " See when you come out with vacuous bollocks like this then anyone with a different view comments with such phrases as vacuous bollocks.. Sitting so high upon your perch of knowledge you need oxygen.. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" It's not a simple as making a choice because 67% of the shielding group are in employment. Can't just decide actually am not gonna go to work because it's not safe. " Sorry, that doesn't fly. Employers have a duty of care which includes making necessary provision for the saftey of staff. Workplaces should have rules in force to limit the risk and those most at risk should be permitted and indeed required to work from home. If that's not possible for a particular role then the employer must assess whether there are other roles the employee can perform which are compatible with their shielding status. And yes, you can legally refuse to work in an unsafe environment. Right now, that won't apply as shielding has officially stopped but were it reintroduced then that would once again be a valid reason not to go to work. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" The fear that has been brought to most is damaging more lifes than the actual virus itself. Totally agree. I'm not worried about catching it. If it happens, it happens We agree too. The media and the scaremongering have a lot to answer for. People sit and absorb the news they are fed with instead of listening to facts and thinking about the bigger picture. Talkradio on DAB is the only station that speaks common sense. The rest just peddle a fear based narrative to terrorise people into submission & compliance & the sherple willingly lap it all up. You only have to look through the comments on here to see this. See when you come out with vacuous bollocks like this then anyone with a different view comments with such phrases as vacuous bollocks.. Sitting so high upon your perch of knowledge you need oxygen.. " It’s a truth you and many don’t want to face. We are going to have to learn to live with this virus & let people catch it. The overwhelming majority of people will not get sick. Trying to run away from it will cause an untold number of deaths long term. As long as you & others kid yourselves we can stop it happening, we’re going to hell in a handcart. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" The fear that has been brought to most is damaging more lifes than the actual virus itself. Totally agree. I'm not worried about catching it. If it happens, it happens We agree too. The media and the scaremongering have a lot to answer for. People sit and absorb the news they are fed with instead of listening to facts and thinking about the bigger picture. Talkradio on DAB is the only station that speaks common sense. The rest just peddle a fear based narrative to terrorise people into submission & compliance & the sherple willingly lap it all up. You only have to look through the comments on here to see this. See when you come out with vacuous bollocks like this then anyone with a different view comments with such phrases as vacuous bollocks.. Sitting so high upon your perch of knowledge you need oxygen.. It’s a truth you and many don’t want to face. We are going to have to learn to live with this virus & let people catch it. The overwhelming majority of people will not get sick. Trying to run away from it will cause an untold number of deaths long term. As long as you & others kid yourselves we can stop it happening, we’re going to hell in a handcart. " I know we are going to have to learn to live with it and without fear, we did do with terrorism, hiv etc.. How does one run away from something like a virus, we certainly haven't been doing that or hiding in fear like most of the country we and I suspect like yourself are plodding on as best we can.. They the government are not going to do what would be their biggest and latest u turn on the policy they have chosen, not as we go into winter.. So we are stuck with this till the spring at the earliest.. Btw, well done for not using sheeple in your response.. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" It's not a simple as making a choice because 67% of the shielding group are in employment. Can't just decide actually am not gonna go to work because it's not safe. Sorry, that doesn't fly. Employers have a duty of care which includes making necessary provision for the saftey of staff. Workplaces should have rules in force to limit the risk and those most at risk should be permitted and indeed required to work from home. If that's not possible for a particular role then the employer must assess whether there are other roles the employee can perform which are compatible with their shielding status. And yes, you can legally refuse to work in an unsafe environment. Right now, that won't apply as shielding has officially stopped but were it reintroduced then that would once again be a valid reason not to go to work." You really don't know what your talking about. You keep thinking but it's that simple on black-and-white but you don't have to live it. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Safeguard the vulnerable , and those who want life to return to normal let them And how do you suggest safeguarding the vulnerable without shutting them away?" Apart from locking down the entire country, getting just the vulnerable to isolate is the best way. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Honestly, I think it's now purely a matter of practicality. It's an uncomfortable, even unpleasant thing to think that we are in a position where there is nothing we can do but that is exactly where we are. It is very, very obvious that we cannot 'control' covid and retain any sort of meaningful social interaction within our society. It is also obvious that long term prohibition of social activities is not viable, socially or economically. A vaccine is unlikely be distributed to all, certainly not for a considerable time. So, what choice do we have :- We can bankrupt the country, destroy people's mental & physical health and try to sustain a lockdown/release/lockdown strategy indefinately or We can face reality, beef up our health systems as best we can, tell people the truth about the levels of infection and risks (facts, not scare stories), give advice on how to limit the risk to yourself and others, make rapid, on-demand asymptomatic testing readily available and ditch all the restrictions. Most people are reasonably responsible most of the time, the country couldn't function otherwise. If we can say to people 'if you are going to be in contact with more vulnerable members of your family, get tested first' then most will probably do it - nobody wants to 'kill granny' I'm not suggestimg that's a perfect answer, or even necessarily a good one but it's a start. We need to start thinking our way out of this mess. We have technology on our side. We have the ability to communicate messages to lots of people easily & quickly. We have knowledge far beyond what those facing the last major pandemic could even dream of. There are many more tools in the box than the lockdown hammer - why aren't we using them?" alot of what you say in this post makes sense but when you ask why aren't we using the other tools ... my guess would be because they rely on people taking more personal responsibility... and we are proving over and over that even with the scare stories and restrictions in law people dont want to act right so what chance have got if the only thing compelling them to is trust you say most people are responsible most of the time ... and its probably true ... but in the case that most only means more are than are not... unfortunately though behaviour doesn’t catch on contagiously or run on the inverse curve to the virus ... most is not enough... it needs to be almost all people, almost all of the time ... or quickly the balance flips , the virus curve takes off and most people doing what they can is no longer enough | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" You really don't know what your talking about. You keep thinking but it's that simple on black-and-white but you don't have to live it." There isn't a single thing I said that isn't factually correct. You used working as a reason why people can't shield, I disagreed and explained why. I employ people (at least just now) and I'm very aware of my duty of care to employees. I have an employee who was shielding. I made the necessary adjustments so that they could do their job from home, like I was legally obliged to do. I'm not arguing (at least here) for or against a return to shielding but I am saying that working & shieldimg don't have to be incompatible. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Safeguard the vulnerable , and those who want life to return to normal let them And how do you suggest safeguarding the vulnerable without shutting them away? Apart from locking down the entire country, getting just the vulnerable to isolate is the best way. " For who? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Safeguard the vulnerable , and those who want life to return to normal let them And how do you suggest safeguarding the vulnerable without shutting them away? Isn't it up to the vulnerable to make choices and decisions how to safeguard themselves? Whether that be wearing masks, avoiding busy places at busy times, keeping their distance from others or indeed staying at home if they wished. It would be up to them to assess their individual risk level and adjust their lives accordingly But what do you think vulnerable people have been doing? I don't understand why people think this is all about looking after yourself because you can be as careful as you want if other people aren't sticking to the rules then they are put at risk. It's not a simple as making a choice because 67% of the shielding group are in employment. Can't just decide actually am not gonna go to work because it's not safe. I thought work places had to be covid secure by law?? " They do but the wording "Covid Secure" only means the establishment has been risk assessed and government guideline control measures have been put in place to reduce the risk of infection.... nothing can be secured from Covid unless it's shut and not used. The wording is wrong and misleading | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" You really don't know what your talking about. You keep thinking but it's that simple on black-and-white but you don't have to live it. There isn't a single thing I said that isn't factually correct. You used working as a reason why people can't shield, I disagreed and explained why. I employ people (at least just now) and I'm very aware of my duty of care to employees. I have an employee who was shielding. I made the necessary adjustments so that they could do their job from home, like I was legally obliged to do. I'm not arguing (at least here) for or against a return to shielding but I am saying that working & shieldimg don't have to be incompatible." No I didn't I said that shielding is totally an unreasonable request. Shutting away 25% of the population is unacceptable. Use example of working aged people because the assumption is that those that are most vulnerable are old or at death's door but not the case. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Couldn't give a fuck anymore, our parents couldn't give a fuck anymore, our kids couldn't give a fuck anymore. The bloody thing is on the loose and no face covering, social distancing, lockdown, shielding or track and tracing will stop it. Might be completely wrong, but the only way we see out of this is either some miracle of a mass vaccination (which we wouldn't accept accept anyway) or: "may the best immune sistem win" That is so calous. So You are prepared to offer the vulnerable as sacrificial lambs, And even if there was a vaccine you wouldn't take it to protect others!
I would imagine it would prioritise in as similar order to the flu vaccine should a covid vaccine ever be found, so the vulnerable, elderly, health workers etc would be offered first
Noone should be guilt tripped into sacrificing their right to bodily autonomy on the grounds of "protecting others"
Add nobody should be told their lives don't matter as much if their immune system is a strong as everybody else!
I haven't said anything of the sort. But you need to appreciate that bodily autonomy is a basic human right and noone should be bullied into having a vaccine they don't want, whatever their own personal reason
I was responding to someone else I never said you did say it. All im saying is you can't just say Oh well if they die they die but I'm not gonna do anything to help protect the population.
Unfortunately people can say that if that is what they believe.
Then I can say if there not prepared to take a vaccine or do anything to help the virus to be less deadly then they are calous. "I feel the same about those who don’t wear a face mask. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" You really don't know what your talking about. You keep thinking but it's that simple on black-and-white but you don't have to live it. There isn't a single thing I said that isn't factually correct. You used working as a reason why people can't shield, I disagreed and explained why. I employ people (at least just now) and I'm very aware of my duty of care to employees. I have an employee who was shielding. I made the necessary adjustments so that they could do their job from home, like I was legally obliged to do. I'm not arguing (at least here) for or against a return to shielding but I am saying that working & shieldimg don't have to be incompatible." that might be possible in your industry but how does a chef / doctor/ waitress/ bus driver/ bricky work from home? just because employers should do what they can, doesn’t mean it is even possible | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Safeguard the vulnerable , and those who want life to return to normal let them And how do you suggest safeguarding the vulnerable without shutting them away? Apart from locking down the entire country, getting just the vulnerable to isolate is the best way. " I agree with this | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Couldn't give a fuck anymore, our parents couldn't give a fuck anymore, our kids couldn't give a fuck anymore. The bloody thing is on the loose and no face covering, social distancing, lockdown, shielding or track and tracing will stop it. Might be completely wrong, but the only way we see out of this is either some miracle of a mass vaccination (which we wouldn't accept accept anyway) or: "may the best immune sistem win" That is so calous. So You are prepared to offer the vulnerable as sacrificial lambs, And even if there was a vaccine you wouldn't take it to protect others!
I would imagine it would prioritise in as similar order to the flu vaccine should a covid vaccine ever be found, so the vulnerable, elderly, health workers etc would be offered first
Noone should be guilt tripped into sacrificing their right to bodily autonomy on the grounds of "protecting others"
Add nobody should be told their lives don't matter as much if their immune system is a strong as everybody else!
I haven't said anything of the sort. But you need to appreciate that bodily autonomy is a basic human right and noone should be bullied into having a vaccine they don't want, whatever their own personal reason
I was responding to someone else I never said you did say it. All im saying is you can't just say Oh well if they die they die but I'm not gonna do anything to help protect the population.
Unfortunately people can say that if that is what they believe.
Then I can say if there not prepared to take a vaccine or do anything to help the virus to be less deadly then they are calous.
I feel the same about those who don’t wear a face mask."Oh well that's a shame that you don't have compassion for people that can't wear one. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Safeguard the vulnerable , and those who want life to return to normal let them And how do you suggest safeguarding the vulnerable without shutting them away? Apart from locking down the entire country, getting just the vulnerable to isolate is the best way. I agree with this "You agree with making 25% of the population prisoners in their own home so you can live your life however you wish. WOW! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Safeguard the vulnerable , and those who want life to return to normal let them And how do you suggest safeguarding the vulnerable without shutting them away? Apart from locking down the entire country, getting just the vulnerable to isolate is the best way. I agree with this
You agree with making 25% of the population prisoners in their own home so you can live your life however you wish. WOW!"OK so your view is making the other 75% of the population "your figures" prisoners in their own home that don't require the same levels the the other 25% really do require to stay safer. Even bigger WOW! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Safeguard the vulnerable , and those who want life to return to normal let them And how do you suggest safeguarding the vulnerable without shutting them away? Apart from locking down the entire country, getting just the vulnerable to isolate is the best way. I agree with this
You agree with making 25% of the population prisoners in their own home so you can live your life however you wish. WOW!
OK so your view is making the other 75% of the population "your figures" prisoners in their own home that don't require the same levels the the other 25% really do require to stay safer. Even bigger WOW! "I have never said that. Everybody has to make sacrifices not just the most long verbal. I have never said we should go back into full lockdown. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Couldn't give a fuck anymore, our parents couldn't give a fuck anymore, our kids couldn't give a fuck anymore. The bloody thing is on the loose and no face covering, social distancing, lockdown, shielding or track and tracing will stop it. Might be completely wrong, but the only way we see out of this is either some miracle of a mass vaccination (which we wouldn't accept accept anyway) or: "may the best immune sistem win" That is so calous. So You are prepared to offer the vulnerable as sacrificial lambs, And even if there was a vaccine you wouldn't take it to protect others!
I would imagine it would prioritise in as similar order to the flu vaccine should a covid vaccine ever be found, so the vulnerable, elderly, health workers etc would be offered first
Noone should be guilt tripped into sacrificing their right to bodily autonomy on the grounds of "protecting others"
Add nobody should be told their lives don't matter as much if their immune system is a strong as everybody else!
I haven't said anything of the sort. But you need to appreciate that bodily autonomy is a basic human right and noone should be bullied into having a vaccine they don't want, whatever their own personal reason
I was responding to someone else I never said you did say it. All im saying is you can't just say Oh well if they die they die but I'm not gonna do anything to help protect the population.
Unfortunately people can say that if that is what they believe.
Then I can say if there not prepared to take a vaccine or do anything to help the virus to be less deadly then they are calous.
I feel the same about those who don’t wear a face mask.
Oh well that's a shame that you don't have compassion for people that can't wear one. "Can’t or won’t? Do you really think the majority like wearing one? You’re not willing to wear a mask a very small amount of time yet expect people to put their lives on hold for you. Remind me again who’s the selfish one? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Safeguard the vulnerable , and those who want life to return to normal let them And how do you suggest safeguarding the vulnerable without shutting them away? Apart from locking down the entire country, getting just the vulnerable to isolate is the best way. I agree with this
You agree with making 25% of the population prisoners in their own home so you can live your life however you wish. WOW!
OK so your view is making the other 75% of the population "your figures" prisoners in their own home that don't require the same levels the the other 25% really do require to stay safer. Even bigger WOW!
I have never said that.
Everybody has to make sacrifices not just the most long verbal. I have never said we should go back into full lockdown. "What sacrifices have you made? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Safeguard the vulnerable , and those who want life to return to normal let them And how do you suggest safeguarding the vulnerable without shutting them away? Apart from locking down the entire country, getting just the vulnerable to isolate is the best way. I agree with this
You agree with making 25% of the population prisoners in their own home so you can live your life however you wish. WOW!
OK so your view is making the other 75% of the population "your figures" prisoners in their own home that don't require the same levels the the other 25% really do require to stay safer. Even bigger WOW!
I have never said that.
Everybody has to make sacrifices not just the most long verbal. I have never said we should go back into full lockdown. "What is you suggestion then? You've disagreed with protecting the vulnerable and letting the rest of society get on with life so what is your solution? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Couldn't give a fuck anymore, our parents couldn't give a fuck anymore, our kids couldn't give a fuck anymore. The bloody thing is on the loose and no face covering, social distancing, lockdown, shielding or track and tracing will stop it. Might be completely wrong, but the only way we see out of this is either some miracle of a mass vaccination (which we wouldn't accept accept anyway) or: "may the best immune sistem win" That is so calous. So You are prepared to offer the vulnerable as sacrificial lambs, And even if there was a vaccine you wouldn't take it to protect others!
I would imagine it would prioritise in as similar order to the flu vaccine should a covid vaccine ever be found, so the vulnerable, elderly, health workers etc would be offered first
Noone should be guilt tripped into sacrificing their right to bodily autonomy on the grounds of "protecting others"
Add nobody should be told their lives don't matter as much if their immune system is a strong as everybody else!
I haven't said anything of the sort. But you need to appreciate that bodily autonomy is a basic human right and noone should be bullied into having a vaccine they don't want, whatever their own personal reason
I was responding to someone else I never said you did say it. All im saying is you can't just say Oh well if they die they die but I'm not gonna do anything to help protect the population.
Unfortunately people can say that if that is what they believe.
Then I can say if there not prepared to take a vaccine or do anything to help the virus to be less deadly then they are calous.
I feel the same about those who don’t wear a face mask.
Oh well that's a shame that you don't have compassion for people that can't wear one.
Can’t or won’t? Do you really think the majority like wearing one? You’re not willing to wear a mask a very small amount of time yet expect people to put their lives on hold for you.
Remind me again who’s the selfish one?"You really don't understand do you. You have been advised before that there is a reason certain people are exempt it is not your business to decide who that is. You have no idea what you are talking about yet you had the nerve to spout on another thread that people force their opinions on others. I suggest you educate yourself and maybe have a little compassion. You also said on a thread yesterday you have no sympathy with anyone but has had to be shut away for a few months because people live their whole lives like that. Seems to me but you are not prepared to consider anybody elses opinions or their life experience and you just dismiss people. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Safeguard the vulnerable , and those who want life to return to normal let them And how do you suggest safeguarding the vulnerable without shutting them away? Apart from locking down the entire country, getting just the vulnerable to isolate is the best way. I agree with this
You agree with making 25% of the population prisoners in their own home so you can live your life however you wish. WOW!
OK so your view is making the other 75% of the population "your figures" prisoners in their own home that don't require the same levels the the other 25% really do require to stay safer. Even bigger WOW!
I have never said that.
Everybody has to make sacrifices not just the most long verbal. I have never said we should go back into full lockdown.
What is you suggestion then?
You've disagreed with protecting the vulnerable and letting the rest of society get on with life so what is your solution? "I haven't dismissed protecting the vulnerable. I have simply said the solution is not to shut away a quarter of the population. I don't know what the answer is but I do know that people are showing a lack of compassion and only thinking about themselves. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Safeguard the vulnerable , and those who want life to return to normal let them And how do you suggest safeguarding the vulnerable without shutting them away? Apart from locking down the entire country, getting just the vulnerable to isolate is the best way. I agree with this
You agree with making 25% of the population prisoners in their own home so you can live your life however you wish. WOW!
OK so your view is making the other 75% of the population "your figures" prisoners in their own home that don't require the same levels the the other 25% really do require to stay safer. Even bigger WOW!
I have never said that.
Everybody has to make sacrifices not just the most long verbal. I have never said we should go back into full lockdown.
What sacrifices have you made? "Absolutely none of your business. You don't know me you don't know my situation and I am sick to the back teeth of you constantly ripping apart everything I say. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Safeguard the vulnerable , and those who want life to return to normal let them And how do you suggest safeguarding the vulnerable without shutting them away? Apart from locking down the entire country, getting just the vulnerable to isolate is the best way. I agree with this
You agree with making 25% of the population prisoners in their own home so you can live your life however you wish. WOW!
OK so your view is making the other 75% of the population "your figures" prisoners in their own home that don't require the same levels the the other 25% really do require to stay safer. Even bigger WOW!
I have never said that.
Everybody has to make sacrifices not just the most long verbal. I have never said we should go back into full lockdown.
What is you suggestion then?
You've disagreed with protecting the vulnerable and letting the rest of society get on with life so what is your solution?
I haven't dismissed protecting the vulnerable. I have simply said the solution is not to shut away a quarter of the population.
I don't know what the answer is but I do know that people are showing a lack of compassion and only thinking about themselves."Normally people state an idea is wrong because their able to suggest a different approach, not just say something is wrong yet have no solution of their own  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Safeguard the vulnerable , and those who want life to return to normal let them And how do you suggest safeguarding the vulnerable without shutting them away? Apart from locking down the entire country, getting just the vulnerable to isolate is the best way. I agree with this
You agree with making 25% of the population prisoners in their own home so you can live your life however you wish. WOW!
OK so your view is making the other 75% of the population "your figures" prisoners in their own home that don't require the same levels the the other 25% really do require to stay safer. Even bigger WOW!
I have never said that.
Everybody has to make sacrifices not just the most long verbal. I have never said we should go back into full lockdown.
What is you suggestion then?
You've disagreed with protecting the vulnerable and letting the rest of society get on with life so what is your solution?
I haven't dismissed protecting the vulnerable. I have simply said the solution is not to shut away a quarter of the population.
I don't know what the answer is but I do know that people are showing a lack of compassion and only thinking about themselves.
Normally people state an idea is wrong because their able to suggest a different approach, not just say something is wrong yet have no solution of their own "Who has any real solution to this whole pandemic. So because I don't know how to solve it I am not allowed in opinion? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Safeguard the vulnerable , and those who want life to return to normal let them And how do you suggest safeguarding the vulnerable without shutting them away? Apart from locking down the entire country, getting just the vulnerable to isolate is the best way. I agree with this
You agree with making 25% of the population prisoners in their own home so you can live your life however you wish. WOW!
OK so your view is making the other 75% of the population "your figures" prisoners in their own home that don't require the same levels the the other 25% really do require to stay safer. Even bigger WOW!
I have never said that.
Everybody has to make sacrifices not just the most long verbal. I have never said we should go back into full lockdown.
What is you suggestion then?
You've disagreed with protecting the vulnerable and letting the rest of society get on with life so what is your solution?
I haven't dismissed protecting the vulnerable. I have simply said the solution is not to shut away a quarter of the population.
I don't know what the answer is but I do know that people are showing a lack of compassion and only thinking about themselves.
Normally people state an idea is wrong because their able to suggest a different approach, not just say something is wrong yet have no solution of their own
Who has any real solution to this whole pandemic. So because I don't know how to solve it I am not allowed in opinion?"Never said that | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Safeguard the vulnerable , and those who want life to return to normal let them And how do you suggest safeguarding the vulnerable without shutting them away? Apart from locking down the entire country, getting just the vulnerable to isolate is the best way. I agree with this
You agree with making 25% of the population prisoners in their own home so you can live your life however you wish. WOW!"What part of the current strategy that has pretty much been in place since march albeit with some tinkering do you think is working? From what I can see we've been fumbling about in the dark for 7 months now and are no further forward but by all means if you can tell us in what way this strategy is working then I'm all ears. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Safeguard the vulnerable , and those who want life to return to normal let them And how do you suggest safeguarding the vulnerable without shutting them away? Apart from locking down the entire country, getting just the vulnerable to isolate is the best way. I agree with this
You agree with making 25% of the population prisoners in their own home so you can live your life however you wish. WOW!
OK so your view is making the other 75% of the population "your figures" prisoners in their own home that don't require the same levels the the other 25% really do require to stay safer. Even bigger WOW!
I have never said that.
Everybody has to make sacrifices not just the most long verbal. I have never said we should go back into full lockdown.
What sacrifices have you made?
Absolutely none of your business.
You don't know me you don't know my situation and I am sick to the back teeth of you constantly ripping apart everything I say."It's a reasonable question. You're suggesting we should all make scarifices for your benefit, so it's fair that someone ask what sacrifices you're prepared to make. Like it or not, the vulnerable are a minority. That doesn't mean they should be ignored or disrespected or are unvalued but it does mean that society won't be run solely for their benefit or protection. And that's not callous, it's practicality. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Safeguard the vulnerable , and those who want life to return to normal let them And how do you suggest safeguarding the vulnerable without shutting them away? Apart from locking down the entire country, getting just the vulnerable to isolate is the best way. I agree with this
You agree with making 25% of the population prisoners in their own home so you can live your life however you wish. WOW!
OK so your view is making the other 75% of the population "your figures" prisoners in their own home that don't require the same levels the the other 25% really do require to stay safer. Even bigger WOW!
I have never said that.
Everybody has to make sacrifices not just the most long verbal. I have never said we should go back into full lockdown.
What sacrifices have you made?
Absolutely none of your business.
You don't know me you don't know my situation and I am sick to the back teeth of you constantly ripping apart everything I say.
It's a reasonable question. You're suggesting we should all make scarifices for your benefit, so it's fair that someone ask what sacrifices you're prepared to make.
Like it or not, the vulnerable are a minority. That doesn't mean they should be ignored or disrespected or are unvalued but it does mean that society won't be run solely for their benefit or protection.
And that's not callous, it's practicality. "Very true | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Safeguard the vulnerable , and those who want life to return to normal let them And how do you suggest safeguarding the vulnerable without shutting them away? Apart from locking down the entire country, getting just the vulnerable to isolate is the best way. I agree with this
You agree with making 25% of the population prisoners in their own home so you can live your life however you wish. WOW!
OK so your view is making the other 75% of the population "your figures" prisoners in their own home that don't require the same levels the the other 25% really do require to stay safer. Even bigger WOW!
I have never said that.
Everybody has to make sacrifices not just the most long verbal. I have never said we should go back into full lockdown.
What sacrifices have you made?
Absolutely none of your business.
You don't know me you don't know my situation and I am sick to the back teeth of you constantly ripping apart everything I say.
It's a reasonable question. You're suggesting we should all make scarifices for your benefit, so it's fair that someone ask what sacrifices you're prepared to make.
Like it or not, the vulnerable are a minority. That doesn't mean they should be ignored or disrespected or are unvalued but it does mean that society won't be run solely for their benefit or protection.
And that's not callous, it's practicality. "No we just have justify ourselves What exactly are people sacrificing that I haven't had to sacrifice. Prime Minister made it very clear that asking people to shield some the other people can just go about as normal is unreasonable. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Safeguard the vulnerable , and those who want life to return to normal let them And how do you suggest safeguarding the vulnerable without shutting them away? Apart from locking down the entire country, getting just the vulnerable to isolate is the best way. I agree with this
You agree with making 25% of the population prisoners in their own home so you can live your life however you wish. WOW!
OK so your view is making the other 75% of the population "your figures" prisoners in their own home that don't require the same levels the the other 25% really do require to stay safer. Even bigger WOW!
I have never said that.
Everybody has to make sacrifices not just the most long verbal. I have never said we should go back into full lockdown.
What sacrifices have you made?
Absolutely none of your business.
You don't know me you don't know my situation and I am sick to the back teeth of you constantly ripping apart everything I say.
It's a reasonable question. You're suggesting we should all make scarifices for your benefit, so it's fair that someone ask what sacrifices you're prepared to make.
Like it or not, the vulnerable are a minority. That doesn't mean they should be ignored or disrespected or are unvalued but it does mean that society won't be run solely for their benefit or protection.
And that's not callous, it's practicality.
Very true "And can you give me an example of one country that has shielded the vulnerable so everyone else can just live their lives? There isn't one and the reason there isn't one is because it is not practical and not a solution. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Safeguard the vulnerable , and those who want life to return to normal let them And how do you suggest safeguarding the vulnerable without shutting them away? Apart from locking down the entire country, getting just the vulnerable to isolate is the best way. I agree with this
You agree with making 25% of the population prisoners in their own home so you can live your life however you wish. WOW!
OK so your view is making the other 75% of the population "your figures" prisoners in their own home that don't require the same levels the the other 25% really do require to stay safer. Even bigger WOW!
I have never said that.
Everybody has to make sacrifices not just the most long verbal. I have never said we should go back into full lockdown.
What sacrifices have you made?
Absolutely none of your business.
You don't know me you don't know my situation and I am sick to the back teeth of you constantly ripping apart everything I say.
It's a reasonable question. You're suggesting we should all make scarifices for your benefit, so it's fair that someone ask what sacrifices you're prepared to make.
Like it or not, the vulnerable are a minority. That doesn't mean they should be ignored or disrespected or are unvalued but it does mean that society won't be run solely for their benefit or protection.
And that's not callous, it's practicality.
No we just have justify ourselves
What exactly are people sacrificing that I haven't had to sacrifice.
Prime Minister made it very clear that asking people to shield some the other people can just go about as normal is unreasonable."Yes and look just how well we're doing because of Boris's ideas lol Well I've suggested what I think is the best way forward, you disagree without having any other solutions so it's a debate stopper lol | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Safeguard the vulnerable , and those who want life to return to normal let them And how do you suggest safeguarding the vulnerable without shutting them away? Apart from locking down the entire country, getting just the vulnerable to isolate is the best way. I agree with this
You agree with making 25% of the population prisoners in their own home so you can live your life however you wish. WOW!
OK so your view is making the other 75% of the population "your figures" prisoners in their own home that don't require the same levels the the other 25% really do require to stay safer. Even bigger WOW!
I have never said that.
Everybody has to make sacrifices not just the most long verbal. I have never said we should go back into full lockdown.
What sacrifices have you made?
Absolutely none of your business.
You don't know me you don't know my situation and I am sick to the back teeth of you constantly ripping apart everything I say.
It's a reasonable question. You're suggesting we should all make scarifices for your benefit, so it's fair that someone ask what sacrifices you're prepared to make.
Like it or not, the vulnerable are a minority. That doesn't mean they should be ignored or disrespected or are unvalued but it does mean that society won't be run solely for their benefit or protection.
And that's not callous, it's practicality.
Very true
And can you give me an example of one country that has shielded the vulnerable so everyone else can just live their lives?
There isn't one and the reason there isn't one is because it is not practical and not a solution."Some Countries have delt with the virus by having no lockdown at all | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Safeguard the vulnerable , and those who want life to return to normal let them And how do you suggest safeguarding the vulnerable without shutting them away? Apart from locking down the entire country, getting just the vulnerable to isolate is the best way. I agree with this
You agree with making 25% of the population prisoners in their own home so you can live your life however you wish. WOW!
OK so your view is making the other 75% of the population "your figures" prisoners in their own home that don't require the same levels the the other 25% really do require to stay safer. Even bigger WOW!
I have never said that.
Everybody has to make sacrifices not just the most long verbal. I have never said we should go back into full lockdown.
What sacrifices have you made?
Absolutely none of your business.
You don't know me you don't know my situation and I am sick to the back teeth of you constantly ripping apart everything I say.
It's a reasonable question. You're suggesting we should all make scarifices for your benefit, so it's fair that someone ask what sacrifices you're prepared to make.
Like it or not, the vulnerable are a minority. That doesn't mean they should be ignored or disrespected or are unvalued but it does mean that society won't be run solely for their benefit or protection.
And that's not callous, it's practicality.
Very true
And can you give me an example of one country that has shielded the vulnerable so everyone else can just live their lives?
There isn't one and the reason there isn't one is because it is not practical and not a solution.
Some Countries have delt with the virus by having no lockdown at all "2 countries. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Safeguard the vulnerable , and those who want life to return to normal let them And how do you suggest safeguarding the vulnerable without shutting them away? Apart from locking down the entire country, getting just the vulnerable to isolate is the best way. I agree with this
You agree with making 25% of the population prisoners in their own home so you can live your life however you wish. WOW!
OK so your view is making the other 75% of the population "your figures" prisoners in their own home that don't require the same levels the the other 25% really do require to stay safer. Even bigger WOW!
I have never said that.
Everybody has to make sacrifices not just the most long verbal. I have never said we should go back into full lockdown.
What sacrifices have you made?
Absolutely none of your business.
You don't know me you don't know my situation and I am sick to the back teeth of you constantly ripping apart everything I say.
It's a reasonable question. You're suggesting we should all make scarifices for your benefit, so it's fair that someone ask what sacrifices you're prepared to make.
Like it or not, the vulnerable are a minority. That doesn't mean they should be ignored or disrespected or are unvalued but it does mean that society won't be run solely for their benefit or protection.
And that's not callous, it's practicality.
Very true
And can you give me an example of one country that has shielded the vulnerable so everyone else can just live their lives?
There isn't one and the reason there isn't one is because it is not practical and not a solution.
Some Countries have delt with the virus by having no lockdown at all
2 countries. "At least 4 countries I think, so while it doesn't quite hit your benchmark of naming a single country that has shielded the vulnerable and let everyone else get on with life, 4 countries have just let everyone get on with life and have left the "life choices" to their own citizens | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Safeguard the vulnerable , and those who want life to return to normal let them And how do you suggest safeguarding the vulnerable without shutting them away? Apart from locking down the entire country, getting just the vulnerable to isolate is the best way. I agree with this
You agree with making 25% of the population prisoners in their own home so you can live your life however you wish. WOW!
OK so your view is making the other 75% of the population "your figures" prisoners in their own home that don't require the same levels the the other 25% really do require to stay safer. Even bigger WOW!
I have never said that.
Everybody has to make sacrifices not just the most long verbal. I have never said we should go back into full lockdown.
What sacrifices have you made?
Absolutely none of your business.
You don't know me you don't know my situation and I am sick to the back teeth of you constantly ripping apart everything I say.
It's a reasonable question. You're suggesting we should all make scarifices for your benefit, so it's fair that someone ask what sacrifices you're prepared to make.
Like it or not, the vulnerable are a minority. That doesn't mean they should be ignored or disrespected or are unvalued but it does mean that society won't be run solely for their benefit or protection.
And that's not callous, it's practicality.
Very true
And can you give me an example of one country that has shielded the vulnerable so everyone else can just live their lives?
There isn't one and the reason there isn't one is because it is not practical and not a solution.
Some Countries have delt with the virus by having no lockdown at all
2 countries.
At least 4 countries I think, so while it doesn't quite hit your benchmark of naming a single country that has shielded the vulnerable and let everyone else get on with life, 4 countries have just let everyone get on with life and have left the "life choices" to their own citizens "Only 2 countries have had no restrictions whatsoever. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Safeguard the vulnerable , and those who want life to return to normal let them And how do you suggest safeguarding the vulnerable without shutting them away? Apart from locking down the entire country, getting just the vulnerable to isolate is the best way. I agree with this
You agree with making 25% of the population prisoners in their own home so you can live your life however you wish. WOW!
OK so your view is making the other 75% of the population "your figures" prisoners in their own home that don't require the same levels the the other 25% really do require to stay safer. Even bigger WOW!
I have never said that.
Everybody has to make sacrifices not just the most long verbal. I have never said we should go back into full lockdown.
What sacrifices have you made?
Absolutely none of your business.
You don't know me you don't know my situation and I am sick to the back teeth of you constantly ripping apart everything I say.
It's a reasonable question. You're suggesting we should all make scarifices for your benefit, so it's fair that someone ask what sacrifices you're prepared to make.
Like it or not, the vulnerable are a minority. That doesn't mean they should be ignored or disrespected or are unvalued but it does mean that society won't be run solely for their benefit or protection.
And that's not callous, it's practicality.
Very true
And can you give me an example of one country that has shielded the vulnerable so everyone else can just live their lives?
There isn't one and the reason there isn't one is because it is not practical and not a solution.
Some Countries have delt with the virus by having no lockdown at all
2 countries.
At least 4 countries I think, so while it doesn't quite hit your benchmark of naming a single country that has shielded the vulnerable and let everyone else get on with life, 4 countries have just let everyone get on with life and have left the "life choices" to their own citizens
Only 2 countries have had no restrictions whatsoever. "Little to no restrictions there's been at least 4 countries but you only dared me to name one lol | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"What has amazed us is how easily people give up there freedom" was always amazed about how as a society we heeded the smoking ban.. thank heavens for that d | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Safeguard the vulnerable , and those who want life to return to normal let them And how do you suggest safeguarding the vulnerable without shutting them away? Isn't it up to the vulnerable to make choices and decisions how to safeguard themselves? Whether that be wearing masks, avoiding busy places at busy times, keeping their distance from others or indeed staying at home if they wished. It would be up to them to assess their individual risk level and adjust their lives accordingly But what do you think vulnerable people have been doing? I don't understand why people think this is all about looking after yourself because you can be as careful as you want if other people aren't sticking to the rules then they are put at risk. It's not a simple as making a choice because 67% of the shielding group are in employment. Can't just decide actually am not gonna go to work because it's not safe. " Exactly, I think some people cannot see outside their own little world ? Its I am alright Jack and sod the vulnerable | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Well,if we are to believe?1 metre apart,face mask and wash your hands.Then I see no reason not to carry on as normal. Protect the vulnerable, we can all help with that.The measures in place aren't working, personally I believe this is doing more harm than good. " The thing is we can't carry on as normal because the nhs will be overwhelmed if too many people get sick at the same time. Lockdown and social distancing measures are not intended to kill the virus or stop its spead. The aim is to limit spread and protect frontline medical services. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"But aren't we safe if we wear a mask,1 metre apart n wash our hands ?" No one has ever said we will not get covid if we wash our hands and wear a mask. I will repeat again it is aimed at limiting spread not irradiating it. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"But aren't we safe if we wear a mask,1 metre apart n wash our hands ?" And actually it is 2 meters apart except in places where it is not possible in which case one meter minimum. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Nothing then is working, let's face it,we are well f*cked !" I don't know what you expect to work. We can't just eradicate a virus just because we don't want it. All we can do is stick to restrictions that are in place, wait for therapeutics to improve, have a workable track, test and trace procedure and hope for a vaccine. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Safeguard the vulnerable , and those who want life to return to normal let them And how do you suggest safeguarding the vulnerable without shutting them away? Apart from locking down the entire country, getting just the vulnerable to isolate is the best way. I agree with this
You agree with making 25% of the population prisoners in their own home so you can live your life however you wish. WOW!
OK so your view is making the other 75% of the population "your figures" prisoners in their own home that don't require the same levels the the other 25% really do require to stay safer. Even bigger WOW!
I have never said that.
Everybody has to make sacrifices not just the most long verbal. I have never said we should go back into full lockdown.
What sacrifices have you made?
Absolutely none of your business.
You don't know me you don't know my situation and I am sick to the back teeth of you constantly ripping apart everything I say.
It's a reasonable question. You're suggesting we should all make scarifices for your benefit, so it's fair that someone ask what sacrifices you're prepared to make.
Like it or not, the vulnerable are a minority. That doesn't mean they should be ignored or disrespected or are unvalued but it does mean that society won't be run solely for their benefit or protection.
And that's not callous, it's practicality. "
People are so quick to accuse others of being mean, nasty etc when in reality they are just being honest and realistic | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Boris can't win. Hes damned if he does and damned it he doesn't. Whichever way he goes, someone isn't happy. We feel sorry for the guy. We know what we would like to happen but it won't. " | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"remove all restrictions, let people catch it, some will die, but most will develope imunity, ending the problem" . Here here well said totally agree | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Couldn't give a fuck anymore, our parents couldn't give a fuck anymore, our kids couldn't give a fuck anymore. The bloody thing is on the loose and no face covering, social distancing, lockdown, shielding or track and tracing will stop it. Might be completely wrong, but the only way we see out of this is either some miracle of a mass vaccination (which we wouldn't accept accept anyway) or: "may the best immune sistem win" That is so calous. So You are prepared to offer the vulnerable as sacrificial lambs, And even if there was a vaccine you wouldn't take it to protect others!
I would imagine it would prioritise in as similar order to the flu vaccine should a covid vaccine ever be found, so the vulnerable, elderly, health workers etc would be offered first
Noone should be guilt tripped into sacrificing their right to bodily autonomy on the grounds of "protecting others"
Add nobody should be told their lives don't matter as much if their immune system is a strong as everybody else!
I haven't said anything of the sort. But you need to appreciate that bodily autonomy is a basic human right and noone should be bullied into having a vaccine they don't want, whatever their own personal reason
I was responding to someone else I never said you did say it. All im saying is you can't just say Oh well if they die they die but I'm not gonna do anything to help protect the population.
Unfortunately people can say that if that is what they believe.
Then I can say if there not prepared to take a vaccine or do anything to help the virus to be less deadly then they are calous.
I feel the same about those who don’t wear a face mask.
Oh well that's a shame that you don't have compassion for people that can't wear one.
Can’t or won’t? Do you really think the majority like wearing one? You’re not willing to wear a mask a very small amount of time yet expect people to put their lives on hold for you.
Remind me again who’s the selfish one?"Masks obviously don’t work. Since they’ve been introduced we’ve seen the rise of infection. Funny coincidence isn’t it. Besides, your eyes are still exposed. It can still infect through your eyes. People think they have a mask on and it’s stopping them catching it, or spreading it to others. Wake up. Lol | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"But aren't we safe if we wear a mask,1 metre apart n wash our hands ? No one has ever said we will not get covid if we wash our hands and wear a mask. I will repeat again it is aimed at limiting spread not irradiating it. " Which is pointless & just drags this mess on for ever more. You can’t track & trace now when you have such a level of spread. Chasing shadows. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Masks obviously don’t work. Since they’ve been introduced we’ve seen the rise of infection. Funny coincidence isn’t it. Besides, your eyes are still exposed. It can still infect through your eyes. People think they have a mask on and it’s stopping them catching it, or spreading it to others. Wake up. Lol" Masks are to protect others not to protect the wearer. You cannot cough through your eyes. IF people went home when the pubs closed instead of grouping in the street outside things could be different. Until people understand and behave responsibly covid will spread. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Boris can't win. Hes damned if he does and damned it he doesn't. Whichever way he goes, someone isn't happy. We feel sorry for the guy. We know what we would like to happen but it won't. " Boris the buffoon. How anyone can defend this idiot is beyond me. He has done nothing right since the outset of this pandemic, starting with no lockdown of borders to very late lockdown of borders to the ppi fiasco and his world beating track and trace system ha!! The guy is totally not up for this job and even his own party are presently questioning that though the whole cabinet is useless. Not one thing have they got right in protecting the public. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"But aren't we safe if we wear a mask,1 metre apart n wash our hands ? No one has ever said we will not get covid if we wash our hands and wear a mask. I will repeat again it is aimed at limiting spread not irradiating it. Which is pointless & just drags this mess on for ever more. You can’t track & trace now when you have such a level of spread. Chasing shadows. " | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"remove all restrictions, let people catch it, some will die, but most will develope imunity, ending the problem. Here here well said totally agree " It’s the only realistic way out of this. At no point in history have pandemic’s been fought with lockdowns. All they do is delay the inevitable outcome but cause more deaths long term. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Couldn't give a fuck anymore, our parents couldn't give a fuck anymore, our kids couldn't give a fuck anymore. The bloody thing is on the loose and no face covering, social distancing, lockdown, shielding or track and tracing will stop it. Might be completely wrong, but the only way we see out of this is either some miracle of a mass vaccination (which we wouldn't accept accept anyway) or: "may the best immune sistem win" That is so calous. So You are prepared to offer the vulnerable as sacrificial lambs, And even if there was a vaccine you wouldn't take it to protect others!
I would imagine it would prioritise in as similar order to the flu vaccine should a covid vaccine ever be found, so the vulnerable, elderly, health workers etc would be offered first
Noone should be guilt tripped into sacrificing their right to bodily autonomy on the grounds of "protecting others"
Add nobody should be told their lives don't matter as much if their immune system is a strong as everybody else!
I haven't said anything of the sort. But you need to appreciate that bodily autonomy is a basic human right and noone should be bullied into having a vaccine they don't want, whatever their own personal reason
I was responding to someone else I never said you did say it. All im saying is you can't just say Oh well if they die they die but I'm not gonna do anything to help protect the population.
Unfortunately people can say that if that is what they believe.
Then I can say if there not prepared to take a vaccine or do anything to help the virus to be less deadly then they are calous.
I feel the same about those who don’t wear a face mask.
Oh well that's a shame that you don't have compassion for people that can't wear one.
Can’t or won’t? Do you really think the majority like wearing one? You’re not willing to wear a mask a very small amount of time yet expect people to put their lives on hold for you.
Remind me again who’s the selfish one?
Masks obviously don’t work. Since they’ve been introduced we’ve seen the rise of infection. Funny coincidence isn’t it. Besides, your eyes are still exposed. It can still infect through your eyes. People think they have a mask on and it’s stopping them catching it, or spreading it to others. Wake up. Lol"How is it the mask wearing Asian countries like Taiwan Thailand Vietnam enen China have the virus under control,people wearing masks protect you. You wearing one protects others. Not acknowledging this fact is the action of a very selfish person who has no respect for others | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Safeguard the vulnerable , and those who want life to return to normal let them And how do you suggest safeguarding the vulnerable without shutting them away? Isn't it up to the vulnerable to make choices and decisions how to safeguard themselves? Whether that be wearing masks, avoiding busy places at busy times, keeping their distance from others or indeed staying at home if they wished. It would be up to them to assess their individual risk level and adjust their lives accordingly " Well for me that would mean i can't work. Then can't pay mortgage and other bills, can't get food or medications and i would have to live apart and alone .....just because others don't want to wear masks ..... or i chose to die from covid !! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"remove all restrictions, let people catch it, some will die, but most will develope imunity, ending the problem. Here here well said totally agree It’s the only realistic way out of this. At no point in history have pandemic’s been fought with lockdowns. All they do is delay the inevitable outcome but cause more deaths long term. " Yeah let’s not help the elderly have a few extra months or years fuck it let them die now - makes no difference. Also why care aboht the NHS - let them go through hell and suffer watching people die needlessly abs alone. Let them expose themselves to horrific levels of viral load I mean they signed up for it right? Holy crap the selfishness on this thread is astounding!!!!! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Couldn't give a fuck anymore, our parents couldn't give a fuck anymore, our kids couldn't give a fuck anymore. The bloody thing is on the loose and no face covering, social distancing, lockdown, shielding or track and tracing will stop it. Might be completely wrong, but the only way we see out of this is either some miracle of a mass vaccination (which we wouldn't accept accept anyway) or: "may the best immune sistem win" That is so calous. So You are prepared to offer the vulnerable as sacrificial lambs, And even if there was a vaccine you wouldn't take it to protect others!
I would imagine it would prioritise in as similar order to the flu vaccine should a covid vaccine ever be found, so the vulnerable, elderly, health workers etc would be offered first
Noone should be guilt tripped into sacrificing their right to bodily autonomy on the grounds of "protecting others"
Add nobody should be told their lives don't matter as much if their immune system is a strong as everybody else!
I haven't said anything of the sort. But you need to appreciate that bodily autonomy is a basic human right and noone should be bullied into having a vaccine they don't want, whatever their own personal reason
I was responding to someone else I never said you did say it. All im saying is you can't just say Oh well if they die they die but I'm not gonna do anything to help protect the population.
Unfortunately people can say that if that is what they believe.
Then I can say if there not prepared to take a vaccine or do anything to help the virus to be less deadly then they are calous.
I feel the same about those who don’t wear a face mask.
Oh well that's a shame that you don't have compassion for people that can't wear one.
Can’t or won’t? Do you really think the majority like wearing one? You’re not willing to wear a mask a very small amount of time yet expect people to put their lives on hold for you.
Remind me again who’s the selfish one?
Masks obviously don’t work. Since they’ve been introduced we’ve seen the rise of infection. Funny coincidence isn’t it. Besides, your eyes are still exposed. It can still infect through your eyes. People think they have a mask on and it’s stopping them catching it, or spreading it to others. Wake up. Lol
How is it the mask wearing Asian countries like Taiwan Thailand Vietnam enen China have the virus under control,people wearing masks protect you. You wearing one protects others. Not acknowledging this fact is the action of a very selfish person who has no respect for others "Do you think they have better mask/face/hand hygiene than this country? Maybe they wear them and dispose of them safely and correctly | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Couldn't give a fuck anymore, our parents couldn't give a fuck anymore, our kids couldn't give a fuck anymore. The bloody thing is on the loose and no face covering, social distancing, lockdown, shielding or track and tracing will stop it. Might be completely wrong, but the only way we see out of this is either some miracle of a mass vaccination (which we wouldn't accept accept anyway) or: "may the best immune sistem win" " That's nice of you ! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Honestly, I think it's now purely a matter of practicality. It's an uncomfortable, even unpleasant thing to think that we are in a position where there is nothing we can do but that is exactly where we are. It is very, very obvious that we cannot 'control' covid and retain any sort of meaningful social interaction within our society. It is also obvious that long term prohibition of social activities is not viable, socially or economically. A vaccine is unlikely be distributed to all, certainly not for a considerable time. So, what choice do we have :- We can bankrupt the country, destroy people's mental & physical health and try to sustain a lockdown/release/lockdown strategy indefinately or We can face reality, beef up our health systems as best we can, tell people the truth about the levels of infection and risks (facts, not scare stories), give advice on how to limit the risk to yourself and others, make rapid, on-demand asymptomatic testing readily available and ditch all the restrictions. Most people are reasonably responsible most of the time, the country couldn't function otherwise. If we can say to people 'if you are going to be in contact with more vulnerable members of your family, get tested first' then most will probably do it - nobody wants to 'kill granny' I'm not suggestimg that's a perfect answer, or even necessarily a good one but it's a start. We need to start thinking our way out of this mess. We have technology on our side. We have the ability to communicate messages to lots of people easily & quickly. We have knowledge far beyond what those facing the last major pandemic could even dream of. There are many more tools in the box than the lockdown hammer - why aren't we using them?" You talk a lot sense. You're obviously a wise man. We agree with you. There is no easy answer but the country needs to get back to some form of normality for the good of everyone. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"unfortunatly some will die, im not sure the vaccines will work, and if they do, will everyone take them, this is something we will have to live with, shutting down the country and ruining an already shaky econamy is not the answerwe are more in bebt than after the second world war, because of lockdown, how does that help, the bigest problem is over population, and harsh as it sound, if a few die it will be better for those that dont. We got through the second works war by not giving in even in the darkest times, what your suggesting smacks of let some of the elderly who built the country after that time and others just take the hit so others can get back to their normal.. Debt can be repayed and yes it will take several decades but lives can't be replaced.. " Well said | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"So it's clear, measures in place are not helping. If you were in charge and made new rules and regulations starting from today, what would you do differently? " I think it's hard to say that the measures are not helping, we don't know what it would be like without them. It is really hard to balance the hardship of harder restrictions with the reduction in contact that is necessary to reduce the infection rate. A total Lockdown where nobody leaves their house at all would be hugely beneficial, but also horrible. On the other hand, scrapping all restrictions would probably get us to a resolution earlier... but there would be huge loss of life. Cal | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Honestly, I think it's now purely a matter of practicality. It's an uncomfortable, even unpleasant thing to think that we are in a position where there is nothing we can do but that is exactly where we are. It is very, very obvious that we cannot 'control' covid and retain any sort of meaningful social interaction within our society. It is also obvious that long term prohibition of social activities is not viable, socially or economically. A vaccine is unlikely be distributed to all, certainly not for a considerable time. So, what choice do we have :- We can bankrupt the country, destroy people's mental & physical health and try to sustain a lockdown/release/lockdown strategy indefinately or We can face reality, beef up our health systems as best we can, tell people the truth about the levels of infection and risks (facts, not scare stories), give advice on how to limit the risk to yourself and others, make rapid, on-demand asymptomatic testing readily available and ditch all the restrictions. Most people are reasonably responsible most of the time, the country couldn't function otherwise. If we can say to people 'if you are going to be in contact with more vulnerable members of your family, get tested first' then most will probably do it - nobody wants to 'kill granny' I'm not suggestimg that's a perfect answer, or even necessarily a good one but it's a start. We need to start thinking our way out of this mess. We have technology on our side. We have the ability to communicate messages to lots of people easily & quickly. We have knowledge far beyond what those facing the last major pandemic could even dream of. There are many more tools in the box than the lockdown hammer - why aren't we using them? You talk a lot sense. You're obviously a wise man. We agree with you. There is no easy answer but the country needs to get back to some form of normality for the good of everyone." Define normality..... I’m working my kids are at school there isn’t much we aren’t doing now that we were doing last year. The only difference is I’m not meeting for casual sex. Hardly a major sacrifice ......... we are at some form of normality the extras in life people are pushing for may not be possible for a while. The Second World War was 6 years this has been 6 months and people can’t deal with making any kind of sacrifice - what is wrong with people??? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"remove all restrictions, let people catch it, some will die, but most will develope imunity, ending the problem. Here here well said totally agree It’s the only realistic way out of this. At no point in history have pandemic’s been fought with lockdowns. All they do is delay the inevitable outcome but cause more deaths long term. Yeah let’s not help the elderly have a few extra months or years fuck it let them die now - makes no difference. Also why care aboht the NHS - let them go through hell and suffer watching people die needlessly abs alone. Let them expose themselves to horrific levels of viral load I mean they signed up for it right? Holy crap the selfishness on this thread is astounding!!!!! " No. The ignorance is staggering. WAKE UP | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"remove all restrictions, let people catch it, some will die, but most will develope imunity, ending the problem. Here here well said totally agree It’s the only realistic way out of this. At no point in history have pandemic’s been fought with lockdowns. All they do is delay the inevitable outcome but cause more deaths long term. Yeah let’s not help the elderly have a few extra months or years fuck it let them die now - makes no difference. Also why care aboht the NHS - let them go through hell and suffer watching people die needlessly abs alone. Let them expose themselves to horrific levels of viral load I mean they signed up for it right? Holy crap the selfishness on this thread is astounding!!!!! No. The ignorance is staggering. WAKE UP " Oh dear we have a capital letter wake up ..... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Honestly, I think it's now purely a matter of practicality. It's an uncomfortable, even unpleasant thing to think that we are in a position where there is nothing we can do but that is exactly where we are. It is very, very obvious that we cannot 'control' covid and retain any sort of meaningful social interaction within our society. It is also obvious that long term prohibition of social activities is not viable, socially or economically. A vaccine is unlikely be distributed to all, certainly not for a considerable time. So, what choice do we have :- We can bankrupt the country, destroy people's mental & physical health and try to sustain a lockdown/release/lockdown strategy indefinately or We can face reality, beef up our health systems as best we can, tell people the truth about the levels of infection and risks (facts, not scare stories), give advice on how to limit the risk to yourself and others, make rapid, on-demand asymptomatic testing readily available and ditch all the restrictions. Most people are reasonably responsible most of the time, the country couldn't function otherwise. If we can say to people 'if you are going to be in contact with more vulnerable members of your family, get tested first' then most will probably do it - nobody wants to 'kill granny' I'm not suggestimg that's a perfect answer, or even necessarily a good one but it's a start. We need to start thinking our way out of this mess. We have technology on our side. We have the ability to communicate messages to lots of people easily & quickly. We have knowledge far beyond what those facing the last major pandemic could even dream of. There are many more tools in the box than the lockdown hammer - why aren't we using them? You talk a lot sense. You're obviously a wise man. We agree with you. There is no easy answer but the country needs to get back to some form of normality for the good of everyone. Define normality..... I’m working my kids are at school there isn’t much we aren’t doing now that we were doing last year. The only difference is I’m not meeting for casual sex. Hardly a major sacrifice ......... we are at some form of normality the extras in life people are pushing for may not be possible for a while. The Second World War was 6 years this has been 6 months and people can’t deal with making any kind of sacrifice - what is wrong with people??? Some of us can't even go and sit in our parents gardens, yet we can sit in the pubs with our friends. That to us is ridiculous." And certainly a hell of a long way from normality. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
