Jump to content
British Speedway Forum
jrs

Covid-19 Are we being told the truth ?

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Tsunami said:

Could you provide a source for that. 

Personally I find that there is too much overgeneralising on the BSF in general and there are some worse than others. We had it on the EU Referendum thread in particular.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, E I Addio said:

They are weak and unquestioning because they don’t live in the real world. Most of country’s institutions from the Monarchy to the  Boy Scout , seem to be past their sell by date and nothing has come along to replace the stability they once provided, deservedly or not. 
The Great British Public are part of the problem, seduced by celebrity culture and materialism and unable to see beyond the end of their collective nose. Solzhenitsyn was right in many respects.

Can’t comment on the Monarchy but Scouting, never been so popular:

Scouting on the increaseThe Scout Association has revealed the continuing popularity of the Movement, with 15,000 additional members joining in the last year. Census figures reveal a 3.7 per cent increase in youth membership and a 1.7 per cent increase in adult membership.

These figures are the largest increase the Movement has seen for 22 years, and represent the 13,500 young people and 1,500 adults who have joined The Scout Association in the last 12 months.   

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
55 minutes ago, steve roberts said:

Personally I find that there is too much overgeneralising on the BSF in general and there are some worse than others. We had it on the EU Referendum thread in particular.

That’s a generalisation, Steve.  :D

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, dj350z said:

Can’t comment on the Monarchy but Scouting, never been so popular:

Scouting on the increaseThe Scout Association has revealed the continuing popularity of the Movement, with 15,000 additional members joining in the last year. Census figures reveal a 3.7 per cent increase in youth membership and a 1.7 per cent increase in adult membership.

These figures are the largest increase the Movement has seen for 22 years, and represent the 13,500 young people and 1,500 adults who have joined The Scout Association in the last 12 months.   

Well I’ll be jiggered. We live and learn don’t we ? I suppose it just goes to show what a sheltered life I lead these days. DeletE scouts from my post and insert speedway tracks :D

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
4 minutes ago, E I Addio said:

Well I’ll be jiggered. We live and learn don’t we ? I suppose it just goes to show what a sheltered life I lead these days. DeletE scouts from my post and insert speedway tracks :D

So more people are in the Scouts than ever before....

There was me thinking matters had improved since Jimmy Savile 

Sorry - will get my coat :)

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
10 minutes ago, dontforgetthefueltapsbruv said:

So more people are in the Scouts than ever before....

There was me thinking matters had improved since Jimmy Savile 

Sorry - will get my coat :)

Isn't being in the scouts more about learning life skills, like how to survive in a tent when it's raining, or even cooking beans maa? ;)

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, DC2 said:

That’s a generalisation, Steve.  :D

As Agatha Christie wrote “I often wonder why the whole world is so prone to generalise. Generalisations are seldom if ever true and are usually utterly inaccurate.” :t:

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
10 hours ago, E I Addio said:

Just to be clear :

1. How precisely do you define the vulnerable ?

2. How do you identify them

3. Precisely what measures should be taken to protect them

4. Should the measures taken to protect them be voluntary or legally enforceable? If they are to be legally enforceable how do you frame a law to realistically say , for example, anyone aged 64 years and 364 days is ok but on your 65th birthday you self isolate ? 

5.Since we have only had a vaccine a few , months, what, if any measures, apart from “ protecting” the vulnerable would you have taken, bearing in mind we didn’t even have proper PPE at the outset. 

Frankly, my problem with all of this is I dont see how you can  realistically have a half way house lock down. Either you have one or you don’t.

 

A great post and precisely the sort of questions that should have been properly, thoroughly discussed and resolved after the first failed lockdown. Personally I didn't agree with the first one but it happened and it achieved little apart from finding out that plenty of people liked working from home but caused the colossal collateral damage we all know about. Johnson even said in July that he didn't envisage using one again, it was the 'nuclear option', recognising the enormous damage it had caused. If the government recognised this then that was the time alternatives should have been researched, particularly because it was around this time the seasonal nature of the virus was being realised and the likelihood that it would return in the autumn.

None of your questions have an easy or simple answer that can be answered in a few lines; multiple agencies would need to work together to come up with workable solutions. There was time in the summer to attempt this. Any solution could and probably would be deemed as harsh or unfair on some but surely would be better than using a blunt object that effects and restricts everyone. That nothing was done in summer and that the Great Barrington Declaration was dismissed without debate with a few glib words leading to the government falling back on what they had already admitted was hugely damaging was a disgrace. 

But we are where we are now and hopefully vaccines and the ending of the virus season will see the end of lockdowns. It's all academic saying what should have happened, what's happened can't be changed but we can just hope that lessons are learnt - though with this lot in charge I won't hold my breath. A plan should be being worked on right now for future use, just in case.

I fully realise I haven't directly answered any of your questions and will probably be criticised for not doing so. I don't consider myself qualified to give a thorough answer, I'll leave that to the  people who fully understand the subject and all the potential pitfalls. At least now there is some real life evidence from those areas which didn't pursue lockdown  to consider too. But it got to be done. Saying it's impossible or too hard and instead relying on failed and damaging lockdowns again is just not good enough. 

 

Edited by Shrub
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
16 hours ago, E I Addio said:
  • According to LBC earlier, a survey suggests that two in every five over 18’s that caught Covid had broken the rules. That’s assuming we believe surveys , anymore than we believe anecdotal evidence that over 65’s sit out on park benches at this time of year in the mud and the freezing cold and the pee-ing down with rain moaning about young people breaking the rules, when they could be indoors watching Sky Sport and moaning about the cricket and rugby with a bottle Mackesons :)

https://www.lbc.co.uk/news/more-than-40-per-cent-over-80s-admit-breaking-covid-lockdown-rules-after-vaccine/

I'm assuming it's this ONS survey that you're referring to - I think you may have slightly misheard.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
16 hours ago, Blupanther said:

The pathetic propaganda is relentless, back under the kitchen table for the covid cult...:rofl:

 

Once we stop locking down and messing up nature, COVID 19 will settle into an endemic state where it becomes part of a cocktail of respiratory viruses that live with us. We must learn to live with it. Our species has done this before. We can do it once again.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post

200,000 NHS staff are refusing to take the jab. I’ll clap for that...

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
11 hours ago, Shrub said:

A great post and precisely the sort of questions that should have been properly, thoroughly discussed and resolved after the first failed lockdown. Personally I didn't agree with the first one but it happened and it achieved little apart from finding out that plenty of people liked working from home but caused the colossal collateral damage we all know about. Johnson even said in July that he didn't envisage using one again, it was the 'nuclear option', recognising the enormous damage it had caused. If the government recognised this then that was the time alternatives should have been researched, particularly because it was around this time the seasonal nature of the virus was being realised and the likelihood that it would return in the autumn.

None of your questions have an easy or simple answer that can be answered in a few lines; multiple agencies would need to work together to come up with workable solutions. There was time in the summer to attempt this. Any solution could and probably would be deemed as harsh or unfair on some but surely would be better than using a blunt object that effects and restricts everyone. That nothing was done in summer and that the Great Barrington Declaration was dismissed without debate with a few glib words leading to the government falling back on what they had already admitted was hugely damaging was a disgrace. 

But we are where we are now and hopefully vaccines and the ending of the virus season will see the end of lockdowns. It's all academic saying what should have happened, what's happened can't be changed but we can just hope that lessons are learnt - though with this lot in charge I won't hold my breath. A plan should be being worked on right now for future use, just in case.

I fully realise I haven't directly answered any of your questions and will probably be criticised for not doing so. I don't consider myself qualified to give a thorough answer, I'll leave that to the  people who fully understand the subject and all the potential pitfalls. At least now there is some real life evidence from those areas which didn't pursue lockdown  to consider too. But it got to be done. Saying it's impossible or too hard and instead relying on failed and damaging lockdowns again is just not good enough. 

 

One of the best posts on this partricular thread. :t:

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
32 minutes ago, Blupanther said:

200,000 NHS staff are refusing to take the jab. I’ll clap for that...

Appalling.

Presumably they don’t want PPE either.  :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Privacy Policy