I watched the South Park covid special last night.
I don't watch South Park much but
How did Disney not sue them?
Randy has been my favourite character for over a decade and this reminded me why.
SARS CoV-2 coronavirus / Covid-19 (No tin foil hat silliness please)
- Thread starter Don't Kill Bill
- Start date
Randy has been my favourite character for over a decade and this reminded me why.
The government has gone full dystopian. Some Orwell 1984 shit here:
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/indoor-sex-ban-tier-2-couples-living-apart-a4571925.html
How on earth do people still believe these crazy rules are to protect anybody, I do not know. Your civil rights are being taken away little by little and some folks are not paying attention.
I doubt very much this is enforceable, and I hope neighbours don't start snitching like we're living under the Stasi or Nazi regimes.
The government is supposed to handle a public health issue, not get personal like this.
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/indoor-sex-ban-tier-2-couples-living-apart-a4571925.html
How on earth do people still believe these crazy rules are to protect anybody, I do not know. Your civil rights are being taken away little by little and some folks are not paying attention.
I doubt very much this is enforceable, and I hope neighbours don't start snitching like we're living under the Stasi or Nazi regimes.
The government is supposed to handle a public health issue, not get personal like this.
It’s difficult for Boris to do it now because, first, he’d have to admit they were wrong, and he doesn’t like that and, second, Keir Starmer said he should do it - and admitting that Labour were right is even worse. Of course, it’s different in Wales because the Welsh Government is Labour run.
Yeah, I think a lot of people would disagree with the cause or the appropriate response to it. It's not really a no brainer when the political party in power has repeatedly emphasised the importance of economic and social freedom, and their undying commitment to upholding it, in contrast to a tyrannical opposition.
They aren't getting personal, that's just the headline spin. They're limiting spread of a highly contagious and dangerous virus by keeping households apart. If you live with your other half then you can have endless sex for all they care. If you don't live in the same household, there were three choices you had in the summer. Move in together, accept that you may be kept apart again in the future, or break the rules. People were kept apart during lockdown and they knew a second wave was coming so not planning for this eventuality is a bit silly.
Limiting household to household transmission is a cornerstone of dealing with a pandemic. That's what public health officials say, not politicians. And every country that is losing control of the pandemic has been forced to stop people going to others' houses, regardless of their position on the ideological spectrum.
It would be 1984 if this was going to be extended beyond the specific crisis we're jn right now. Everyone knows they won't.
Mate I'm sad for you and all of us. It's already 1984 like if you care to step back and take a look at everything.
And no, I am not listening to those fools from Imperial College - their modelling led by that Ferguson guy has consistently been proven wrong on other past issues. You can do your own research and look it up. It's all out there. The mystery to me is why on earth the government enlisted them to tackle this issue when their track record has shown how incompetent they are. Do you even seek out other opinions from eminent scientist from Harvard, Stanford, Oxford etc? Or are you doing the group think bit and just listening to this crazy government and their cronies?
At least try and consider other points of views. You can research it.
Whilst you're at it, go and read the Coronavirus Act carefully. See if you still feel we're not entering some crazy dystopian shit.
Is there any doubt it will be effective? If you stop people moving around then infection rates will surely drop. The question is what you do during that time so that when the lockdown (or whatever you want to call it) is lifted, you don't just go back to square one. It just buys time, and in the meantime, causes damage to businesses already struggling.
Yes living through a pandemic is a bit dystopian. Helped by the fact it's been a part of dystopian fiction for a long time.
I do seek out opinions from other academics, yeah. There's quite a wide range of opinions on many policies, but quite a strong consensus among those who specialise in epidemiology that limiting household transmission is essential to control the R rate. Like I said it isn't the UK that have done this exclusively, based on Imperial College. It's happened in many countries with their own experts.
This particularly policy is pretty mild as it goes. I happen to think destroying the economy is a bit more drastic than preventing couples living apart from fecking, given it affects a wider group of people for a much longer period of time and has much more severe consequences. But I can see the argument even in favour of that, given the alternative.
At least in 1984 they got some decent social housing and didn't need to use food banks. No chance under this Tory government.
Just got a "Possible covid 19 exposure" notification from the UK NHS Test and trace app and apparently I need to wait for a second notification on whether I'm good or I need to self isolate. Anyone had it before and know how long it takes?
We watched it the other day, it was very funny. They've done some awful stuff about Disney, but then, Disney deserve it.I watched the South Park covid special last night.
I don't watch South Park much but
How did Disney not sue them?
Oh we at least agree on the economy. It's completely fecked. We are in deep trouble. Let's be honest, it's like 97 or more percent of people recover from this virus. The statistics are out there in various places (too lazy to go find them now),. My problem is in light of that recovery rate, aren't the measures disproportionate when we consider the low percentage of deaths? The deaths are horrible, but unfortunately, apart from protecting the vulnerable as much as you can, the rest of us have to get on (with precautions), but we have to live.There are people out there with cancer snd other diseases who will most certainly die because they can't get treatment. I consider cancer to be far more deadly than this virus (as bad as it gets for a small percentage). I've been reading about suicides and mental health issues, and folks losing their livelihood on account of this lockdown. It's doing more harm than good. We need to have a balance. I suspect though the government is loving having such autonomy over our lives, not to mention awarding lucrative contracts to their cronies to supply equipment and handle track and trace, which is a bloody disaster.
It is a mess.
I've had loads. Unless it says you need to isolate you're good.
What a surprise.
University staff angry that Covid teaching advice was 'ignored'
Following Sage’s guidance on online education would have prevented campus outbreaks, say unions
https://www.theguardian.com/educati...angry-that-covid-teaching-advice-was-ignored?
University staff angry that Covid teaching advice was 'ignored'
Following Sage’s guidance on online education would have prevented campus outbreaks, say unions
https://www.theguardian.com/educati...angry-that-covid-teaching-advice-was-ignored?
Well worth posting. The FT have done a great job presenting statistics right from the start, and I applaud their decision to make them free to view on-line as well.
Come on vaccines!
It also stops hospitals reaching maximum capacity, so reduces deaths.
But you are right, the government should have prepared better during the last lockdown.
Thanks mate
I think we're all asking the question "are the measures proportionate?" over and over again, as often as our brain allows us too without making us insane. It's a constant backdrop even when we're not actively mulling over it. I think it's important to bear in mind that applies to everyone, including the decision makers. Unless you can think of a particularly persuasive conspiracy theory for why so many governments simultaneously want to destroy their own economies, then you have to acknowledge the fact they feel forced to do this. It doesn't follow a particular political ideology, it doesn't depend on the experts consulted, it doesn't even relate much to the size of the economy before or duing the pandemic. The restrictions you're complaining about are largely ubiquitous in countries in similar situations.
Public health officials repeatedly stress that not having these restrictions would not be a solution to cancer treatment and other things. It's a false dichotomy. If we let the virus spread without controlling it, we simply don't have enough doctors and enough time in the day to deal with all of them while also providing care to non-covid patients. And because of the way we need to control the spreads in hospitals, which have frequently acted as hotspots, the space needs to be used up much more inefficiently for non-covid patients too. Because while "only" a small proportion of people die, far too many end in hospitals for us to have the resources to cope.
We saw what that was like in parts of Northern Italy, we got close to that in parts of the UK, and that was while these countries were in lockdown. They could only just about manage the surge that came before lockdown, if they allowed the cases to keep building exponentially at the same time, they wouldn't have coped. That can't just be brushed off as a theoretical scenario at this stage. Since then, there have been local regions pushed to the brink in many countries, relying on neighbouring regions to deal with covid and non-covid overflows. You had @Sarni recently mentioning that ambulances are over-occupied and can't respond to some heart attacks. That's not because of the restrictions that's because of the virus. Urgent care in those scenarios can be life and death, and it is directly affected by the spread of the virus.
You can't simultaneously say you worry about how people are dying from things besides covid, while also proposing strategies that create more non-covid deaths. And aside from having poorer care for non-covid patients, overwhelmed hospitals would be much worse at dealing with covid patients, and that "low" death rate would get higher.
And that's all if you just focus on one aspect - the death rate - and one strategy - accepting the deaths and letting it run its course. There are plenty of reports that people who don't die from covid have a terrible time of things, well into recovery. That's not something to just brush off as a non-consequence. And even in places that have taken a more relaxed approach are watching their economies take huge hits. It sucks but the reality is the problems you point out with this strategy apply to almost all strategies. The fact we're in a pandemic is what's causing this pain, not political choices. That doesn't mean there aren't things we should do differently, but it's plainly clear that these problems underpin almost every choice in this situation.
The most obvious example for a country who just wanted to open up and put the economy first is the US. While Sweden have been proposed as the best economic model, the UK has just never been in a comparable position. They have been in a similar position to the US. Trump made it clear that he wouldn't let "the cure be worse than the disease", he derided public health measures, he encouraged stakes to ignore federal health policy, etc. Yet here we are, months on, the economy is still in tatters and people are as fearful now as they were almost 6 months ago. It didn't matter that he wanted to put the economy first, the reality of the pandemic is you can't just flip that switch. You have to deal with the health crisis to deal with the economic crisis too.
The UK government are striving for balance. That's why they're rejecting the public health measures suggested by SAGE, because they don't think it strikes that right balance. But they might be wrong again, and they might have to cause even more severe economic consequences because the virus keeps spreading.
Last edited:
Understand Italy has had its highest number of daily cases and no longer confined to particular regions. Unless we accept draconian lockdown measures as per China model Europe is well and truly fecked.
Last edited:
More testing is going on in a day than back then in a week. The number of deaths is still on dozens per day, while in April it went to almost a thousand.
Of course it is bad and it is going to get worse before it gets better, but I do not think it is gonna be as bad as in spring (talking about the number of deaths and people in ICU, not the number of official infections).
I do not get your point.
Almost everything in science is an estimate with a confidence interval.
As the confidence intervals gets tighter, the more good your estimate is. Estimates are not "unknown".
My god, even a thousand person wedding is insane with no virus...
If these deaths are still in the dozens next month then we can call it a mild second wave vis-a-vis Italy. However the people catching and testing positive now could wind up dead next month.
It might be bad, and there might be another lockdowns but I would be surprised if it ever gets as bad as in last spring. Checking just the number of confirmed infections is totally pointless when the number of testings has increased so much since then. Back then, even with clear symptoms and potentially having been in contact with confirmed cases was not guaranteed to get a test, while now you can easily get a test without any symptoms at all.
UK figures - 67 deaths, 16,982 cases
Yes - I'm not saying it's not going to be necessary or useful.
The time needs to be used productively. I don't know what's happening with track and trace in Wales, but it'd need to be used here to get things running properly, otherwise it's just kicking the can down the road and crippling businesses.
It’s utterly baffling. Even getting 1000 people for a normal couple would be an extremely heavy lift.
what are you hiding sparky?
Dutch king goes on holiday to greece
public outcry
King comes home
Utter kunt
public outcry
King comes home
Utter kunt
Pretty good watch. Thanks for that.
What it boils down to is Spain depends so much on tourism that the risk was deemed to be worth taking in opening up the country, which obviously failed big time and sending students back to school has basically caused this second outbreak to be so high which should of been avoided.
The jury is still out if they're trying their own model or if the government is as useless as suggested in the video. Whatever the reason Madrid was/is the epicenter and was left far too late to at least try and control the virus.
From 2 days ago we're back once again to all bars and restaurants being closed but I don't think it's going to reach the complete lockdown restrictions imposed at the start of the pandemic because basically Spain can't afford it.
How are Spanish population behaving in general?
Is their rebellion or are people willing to accept the restrictions?
In general the people are accepting the restrictions. No one (at least in barcelona) is going out without masks not only for their own safety but also because its impossible to go into shops, use public transport etc etc without them. There were demonstrations from people in the hospitality business but there were no reported problems.
Spain can be quite volatile as proved last year in Catalunya with the political prisoners riots but I don't think it's ever going to reach those heights with covid.
There's a lot of friction between Catalunya and Madrid so I suppose it all depends on what the Spanish government think "what's best" for the Catalan people.
The problem with Spain it goes deeper than that. Life is unaffordable and thats the reality of things. This causes among the 2 most dens cities in europe (Barcelona the first), people living in smaller spaces sometimes without windows. At the same time, lots of people are working payed under the table what don't allow them to access to economic help and can't afford to test positive and go work regardless.
Being true that there is friction between Catalunya and Spain, currently there is mostly nothing on that and is most right against left. The spanish government is left (oficially because is mostly centered) and the local Madrid government is extreme right - right coalition and they are contradicting themselves constantly making any direction and strategy impossible to be trusted. Spain is a cainite country
Being true that there is friction between Catalunya and Spain, currently there is mostly nothing on that and is most right against left. The spanish government is left (oficially because is mostly centered) and the local Madrid government is extreme right - right coalition and they are contradicting themselves constantly making any direction and strategy impossible to be trusted. Spain is a cainite country
Deaths are far from the only issue as lots of people get long term problems and in any case the death rate will skyrocket if ICU's become over whelmed. And 3% of the UK's population is just shy of 2 million people. This is a health problem and should first and foremost be dealt with as such. The economic costs that entails should then be mitigated. You shouldn't start from the $ value and work back for ethical reason's imo. Overwhelmed hospitals will also prevent people with things like cancer getting the treatment so things would be worse, not better. And economically controlling the spread also makes sense.
Last edited:
Places hit hardest in the northern spring are those copping it again now on average.
Hospital admissions rising in most European countries
