Jump to content

Crowd test events


piffer

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Wrangodog said:

Test event ?  Sounded more like a charity game that they admitted afterwards didn't strictly follow social distancing guidelines. How many went to the Working men's club after the game ? 

300 seems to be the standard crowd number at all these test events, could be a mere coincidence.  Doesn’t fill you with confidence we’ll be attending under normal circumstances anytime soon, without winning a lottery beforehand!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Squirrelhumper said:

Don't really think you can compare the two.

Folk shielding makes sense and 1) they are safer and 2) it helps open up the economy.

We are now looking at full industries closing down, f**k all to do with which ones are fittest.

Theatres, Soft Play venues, Nightclubs - all have been closed and starved of income since March and Furlough ending next month which no chance of them opening up again. That's 100,000's of jobs, that's 100,000's of families about to live on job seekers allowances with no jobs available and zero chance of any appearing soon.

Are patients with Cancer, heart issues etc not as important anymore, as they have been put on the back burner waiting on this second wave which might never happen. How long can that go on as cancer actually kills more folk in Scotland each year than COVID will?

I agree, I don't think we can compare the two. Survival of the fittest is nature red in tooth and claw. You can't wilfully invoke it for one group, but not another.

It's not wrong to advise vulnerable folk to shield. I totally agree, that is sensible.

Some, though, are saying it not for the good of the vulnerable, but because they want life to go back to normal.

The implication then is that if these folk don't shield, they'll die and it will have been their own fault. Because we're going back to normal so f**k you. It doesn't effect us, so f**k you. 

(I should say, this isn't as evident on here as it is on Twitter and Facebook.)

It's sheer hypocrisy to invoke survival of the fittest for people, and then whine that businesses need saved.

They are willing to throw some under the bus to make sure they're ok. 

 

Survival of the fittest is about which organism flourishes in the current environment. The ones which are best adapted to their environment survive, the rest don't.

It's nothing to do with how physically fit a living organism is, or how well-managed a business is. If the environment changes to the point they die out, no matter how strong they were, then they were not fit for that new environment. They couldn't adapt to the change.

But there are two big factors to consider here.

Firstly, in our society we short circuit SOTF because we look after the most vulnerable people. We place more value on human lives than on businesses, which is surely the correct way of doing things? (Did no-one watch the final season of Silicon Valley?)

The second big factor here is also that we can mitigate the changes to the environment, which will make it safer for all. 

By continuing to socially distance, to wear masks for the protection of others thereby limiting droplet spread, by washing out hands, by pupils sanitising desks in schools before and after use etc.

I understand the pressure people are under when it comes to losing jobs. I'm only glad it's not my decision to take. If the right choice was obvious , we wouldn't be in this mess. 

The best we can hope for is that slowly and safely, we get things open soon. 

 

The postponement of cancer treatment etc was, as far as I read, to protect us from a bigger danger. I've heard various people say that it was not taken lightly, and I believe them.

SH, you mentioned you know several folk in the NHS. So do I.

Every single one of them I've talked to dreads the upcoming flu-season.

They are scared of the disease, having seen the devastation it causes to the respiratory system (of people of all ages, with and without co-morbidities). It's not just about deaths, it's about lifelong or chronic after effects (which will have an effect on the future economy, as each case can cost us a fortune to deal with).

The folk I know are frightened of a disease which can transmit rapidly between hosts without some even knowing they have had it.

They are frustrated but not surprised ( as they are part of society too) at the lack of care amongst a population who are getting more and more tired of lockdowns and other preventative measures.

The people affected by the postponement of cancer (and other) treatments are in many cases the same folk you say should be shielding. Getting them in and out of hospital/surgeries etc as normal breaks their shielding, opening them to higher risk of catching (and spreading) Covid-19.

 

TL:DR

It's a Gordian knot of ramifications and consequences. Nobody is going to unaffected in one way or another.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

See when the local fandans are finished swinging their handbags, maybe read this again and try thinking for a change... 9_9

6 hours ago, Mogwai said:

I agree, I don't think we can compare the two. Survival of the fittest is nature red in tooth and claw. You can't wilfully invoke it for one group, but not another.

It's not wrong to advise vulnerable folk to shield. I totally agree, that is sensible.

Some, though, are saying it not for the good of the vulnerable, but because they want life to go back to normal.

The implication then is that if these folk don't shield, they'll die and it will have been their own fault. Because we're going back to normal so f**k you. It doesn't effect us, so f**k you. 

(I should say, this isn't as evident on here as it is on Twitter and Facebook.)

It's sheer hypocrisy to invoke survival of the fittest for people, and then whine that businesses need saved.

They are willing to throw some under the bus to make sure they're ok. 

 

Survival of the fittest is about which organism flourishes in the current environment. The ones which are best adapted to their environment survive, the rest don't.

It's nothing to do with how physically fit a living organism is, or how well-managed a business is. If the environment changes to the point they die out, no matter how strong they were, then they were not fit for that new environment. They couldn't adapt to the change.

But there are two big factors to consider here.

Firstly, in our society we short circuit SOTF because we look after the most vulnerable people. We place more value on human lives than on businesses, which is surely the correct way of doing things? (Did no-one watch the final season of Silicon Valley?)

The second big factor here is also that we can mitigate the changes to the environment, which will make it safer for all. 

By continuing to socially distance, to wear masks for the protection of others thereby limiting droplet spread, by washing out hands, by pupils sanitising desks in schools before and after use etc.

I understand the pressure people are under when it comes to losing jobs. I'm only glad it's not my decision to take. If the right choice was obvious , we wouldn't be in this mess. 

The best we can hope for is that slowly and safely, we get things open soon. 

 

The postponement of cancer treatment etc was, as far as I read, to protect us from a bigger danger. I've heard various people say that it was not taken lightly, and I believe them.

SH, you mentioned you know several folk in the NHS. So do I.

Every single one of them I've talked to dreads the upcoming flu-season.

They are scared of the disease, having seen the devastation it causes to the respiratory system (of people of all ages, with and without co-morbidities). It's not just about deaths, it's about lifelong or chronic after effects (which will have an effect on the future economy, as each case can cost us a fortune to deal with).

The folk I know are frightened of a disease which can transmit rapidly between hosts without some even knowing they have had it.

They are frustrated but not surprised ( as they are part of society too) at the lack of care amongst a population who are getting more and more tired of lockdowns and other preventative measures.

The people affected by the postponement of cancer (and other) treatments are in many cases the same folk you say should be shielding. Getting them in and out of hospital/surgeries etc as normal breaks their shielding, opening them to higher risk of catching (and spreading) Covid-19.

 

TL:DR

It's a Gordian knot of ramifications and consequences. Nobody is going to unaffected in one way or another.

No-one is going to the football (or a gig or the theatre etc.) in great numbers anytime soon because it's just too risky. And yes that's terrible, bit that's the way it is!

Anyone saying they're prepared to take the risk hasn't seen folk struggling for a breath hooked up to a machine. And lots that get over even a mild case, can hardly walk up a flight of stairs, the long haul effects being pretty drastic!

The answer cannot simply be "f**k you, open up because I want to go!"

No-one is immune from catching it or spreading it, so we need to stop being so selfish, things aren't returning to "normal" anytime soon, this novel Coronavirus needs novel thinking, however hard that may be!

Edited by Scooter
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Scooter said:

See when the local fandans are finished swinging their handbags, maybe read this again and try thinking for a change... 9_9

No-one is going to the football (or a gig or the theatre etc.) in great numbers anytime soon because it's just too risky. And yes that's terrible, bit that's the way it is!

Anyone saying they're prepared to take the risk hasn't seen folk struggling for a breath hooked up to a machine. And lots that get over even a mild case, can hardly walk up a flight of stairs, the long haul effects being pretty drastic!

The answer cannot simply be "f**k you, open up because I want to go!"

No-one is immune from catching it or spreading it, so we need to stop being so selfish, things aren't returning to "normal" anytime soon, this novel Coronavirus needs novel thinking, however hard that may be!

So if you had your way the whole of Britain would be stuck in their homes forever in case we spread a virus that so far 99.9% of the population has survived.

there is no absolute proof that lockdowns work as there is no real evidence that they don’t.

there is a very strong likelihood that this virus was around for a lot longer than first thought.i have family members who were really ill with the flu back in December and looking back had all of the symptoms of COVID.

IMO lockdowns etc don’t work as ultimately we need workers out there as society would breakdown otherwise.

You could argue that those that advocate lockdowns etc are the ones that are being selfish. Those same folk will still want their Tesco. Com delivery, will still want Scottish gas to come to their house if their boiler breaks down. So it’s ok for some to go out into this dangerous place while others don’t.
 

we were told that lockdown was essential to protect the NHS (who do a fantastic job) well they have coped so far so why continue with restrictions. See if the NHS is under resourced then why not invest the billions wasted on schemes and tests and we could really have something to be proud about. Not just something that has been used to prioritise COVID patients. If we don’t have an economy how long do you think these services will last????

people are getting complete and utterly sick of the measures in place and some can see what lies ahead if we don’t get back to normal. And it’s not just your local fandans.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Richaway said:

 

there is a very strong likelihood that this virus was around for a lot longer than first thought.i have family members who were really ill with the flu back in December and looking back had all of the symptoms of COVID.

I've seen this sort of thing posted before and it goes no way in explaining why hospitals began to become stretched and death tolls started rocketing to way above normal levels in March time. Especially considering all the big indoor family get togethers around the festive period, you would have thought January would have been a terrible month if this were in circulation at that stage. Seems implausible to me. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Stuart said:

Are you a reputable source Mr Affluent Aberdeenshire Man ? Does potential poverty issues concern you?

1.  You've no idea if I am affluent or not

2. As I've never ever voted Tory then poverty which I've had to ensure when younger during Thatchers years (holes in shoes, patches clothes and an empty belly) does concern me.

3. Stop being such a complete knob 

Public health has ro be priority during a oandemic.  And the NHS only coped because of the drastic decisions made regarding other services it offerred.  The virus ain't going quietly into the night, its spreading again and I suspect during the flu season this year we will see many more folks suffering from normal flu because they've had covid and their lungs and body in general has been smashed by it.

But because you want to go to tje football everyone else is to take the risk?

Absolutely ridiculously selfish.

Edited by Beaker71
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Beaker71 said:

1.  You've no idea if I am affluent or not

2. As I've never ever voted Tory then poverty which I've had to ensure when younger during Thatchers years (holes in shoes, patches clothes and an empty belly) does concern me.

3. Stop being such a complete knob 

Public health has ro be priority during a oandemic.  And the NHS only coped because of the drastic decisions made regarding other services it offerred.  The virus ain't going quietly into the night, its spreading again and I suspect during the flu season this year we will see many more folks suffering from normal flu because they've had covid and their lungs and body in general has been smashed by it.

But because you want to go to tje football everyone else is to take the risk?

Absolutely ridiculously selfish.

Not only the football also want to go to the gym, go on a supporters bus, go to Spain , go to the pub. All the things that get the economy booming again.

get the red cards going tonto!!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, Richaway said:

Not only the football also want to go to the gym, go on a supporters bus, go to Spain , go to the pub. All the things that get the economy booming again.

get the red cards going tonto!!!!

Well at least you can admit you’re being selfish and not interested in the health of others as long as you can do as you wish.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Skora11 said:

Well at least you can admit you’re being selfish and not interested in the health of others as long as you can do as you wish.

Utter pish

see if I’m unwell I’ll be first to stay at home

i wash my hands,Sanatise everything including my entire workstation every day.

I get temperature checked everyday on entry and exit at my work.

if everyone did the same we would be in a far better place.

its selfish folk that want to shut the economy down.

i

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Richaway said:

So if you had your way the whole of Britain would be stuck in their homes forever in case we spread a virus that so far 99.9% of the population has survived.

there is no absolute proof that lockdowns work as there is no real evidence that they don’t.

there is a very strong likelihood that this virus was around for a lot longer than first thought.i have family members who were really ill with the flu back in December and looking back had all of the symptoms of COVID.

IMO lockdowns etc don’t work as ultimately we need workers out there as society would breakdown otherwise.

You could argue that those that advocate lockdowns etc are the ones that are being selfish. Those same folk will still want their Tesco. Com delivery, will still want Scottish gas to come to their house if their boiler breaks down. So it’s ok for some to go out into this dangerous place while others don’t.
 

we were told that lockdown was essential to protect the NHS (who do a fantastic job) well they have coped so far so why continue with restrictions. See if the NHS is under resourced then why not invest the billions wasted on schemes and tests and we could really have something to be proud about. Not just something that has been used to prioritise COVID patients. If we don’t have an economy how long do you think these services will last????

people are getting complete and utterly sick of the measures in place and some can see what lies ahead if we don’t get back to normal. And it’s not just your local fandans.

 

Stopped reading when you said 99.9% of people survive. You couldn't even get that "fact" correct.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Beaker71 said:

1.  You've no idea if I am affluent or not

2. As I've never ever voted Tory then poverty which I've had to ensure when younger during Thatchers years (holes in shoes, patches clothes and an empty belly) does concern me.

3. Stop being such a complete knob 

Public health has ro be priority during a oandemic.  And the NHS only coped because of the drastic decisions made regarding other services it offerred.  The virus ain't going quietly into the night, its spreading again and I suspect during the flu season this year we will see many more folks suffering from normal flu because they've had covid and their lungs and body in general has been smashed by it.

But because you want to go to tje football everyone else is to take the risk?

Absolutely ridiculously selfish.

Nothing to do with going to the football it’s about making sure my kids have something to leave school for, it’s about ensuring I can continue being self employed and shutting down the economy will do nothing for this. You say the NHS coped, probably did but at what cost to cancer patients and others in the future. Not downing this virus but it’s time to get on with things as the bigger picture is more scary. I bet most of these people who support the government measures are all getting paid to isolate regardless.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...