|
|
Post by LetchworthShrew on May 10, 2020 11:03:41 GMT 1
The government has admitted sending about 50,000 coronavirus tests to the US last week for processing after "operational issues" in UK labs. The Department of Health said sending swabs abroad are among the contingencies to deal with "teething problems". The samples were airlifted to the US in chartered flights from Stansted Airport www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-52603566 |
|
|
|
Post by stfcfan87 on May 10, 2020 11:05:27 GMT 1
The government has admitted sending about 50,000 coronavirus tests to the US last week for processing after "operational issues" in UK labs. The Department of Health said sending swabs abroad are among the contingencies to deal with "teething problems". The samples were airlifted to the US in chartered flights from Stansted Airport www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-52603566Read that, but they also don't know when they will get the results back, which is crazy |
|
|
|
Post by Pilch on May 10, 2020 11:15:18 GMT 1
but why are you moaning at drive thru take aways ? they are pretty much no different to a virus testing station as far as opening up business's this seems like a perfect ready made solution no way would I visit a shop at the moment but I'd feel quite safe venturing out, staying in my car and being handed food thru a gap in the window come on, stop moaning for the sake of it What about the people who work there? Can you social distance in a macdonalds kitchen? its a good point, I sure there are ways but I dont think the chap moaning was worried about the kitchen, sounded more like those sat in cars were bugging him ;-) |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 10, 2020 11:24:13 GMT 1
The government has admitted sending about 50,000 coronavirus tests to the US last week for processing after "operational issues" in UK labs. The Department of Health said sending swabs abroad are among the contingencies to deal with "teething problems". The samples were airlifted to the US in chartered flights from Stansted Airport www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-52603566Good contingency planning, and may be the key to getting to 200k tests.... so gather swabs.... get to airport, 9 hour flight to states , get tested (few hours) and results emailed back.... could all be done while you are in bed.... |
|
|
|
Post by zenfootball2 on May 10, 2020 11:26:53 GMT 1
covid -19 has changed our lives and in so many aspects of how we live our lives,Pandora is out of the box and bearing in mind 16 years after SARS and 39 years after the first case of AIDS we have not found a cure for either, i doubt if we will find a vaccine any day soon. from what we know different age groups have different risk profiles, living with covid-19 in the future will not be risk free for any group. logically it makes no sense to keep the age group the lowest risk in lockdown. whilst everyone should modify there behaviour and continue with using hand sanitiser/washing hands and maintain safe distancing , i doubt that many would continue with that approach after lockdown is eased. www.bmj.com/content/369/bmj.m1327this article was publishe on April first "The overall death rate from covid-19 has been estimated at 0.66%, rising sharply to 7.8% in people aged over 80 and declining to 0.0016% in children aged 9 and under.1 The estimates, calculated by researchers in the UK, used aggregate data on cases and deaths in mainland China. Unlike other estimates, however, they adjusted for undiagnosed cases and the number of people in each age group of a population. The team found that nearly one in five people over 80 infected with covid-19 would probably require hospital admission, compared with around 1% of people under 30. They also estimated that the average time between a person displaying symptoms and dying was 17.8 days, while recovering from the disease was estimated to take slightly longer, with patients being discharged from hospital after an average of 22.6 days. The paper, published in the Lancet Infectious Diseases and funded by the UK Medical Research Council, analysed data from 3665 covid-19 cases in mainland China to estimate the admission rate among different age groups. It reported that 0.04% of 10-19 year olds would probably require hospital care—as would 1.0% of people in their 20s, 3.4% of people aged 30-39, 4.3% aged 40-49, 8.2% aged 50-59, 11.8% in their 60s, 16.6% in their 70s, and 18.4% of those over 80." whilst i doubt we will find a cure you would hope they will find a drug or combination of drugs that reduces the moratality rate looking at these stats % of the population who are high risk will need to be shielded |
|
|
|
Post by Pilch on May 10, 2020 11:36:52 GMT 1
Meanwhile, Thousands of coronavirus 'contact tracers' are only now being recruited by the Government - two weeks after the Health Secretary announced they would be hired. They'll be paid just 28p over the minimum wage. And 25.6 million pairs of Tiger Eye goggles bought for the NHS are not fit for purpose, according to the British Standards Institute: 15.9 million of them have already been distributed, with hospitals now being told to withdraw the remaining 9.7 million from use. more doom and gloom from you I've re-written it to give a different point of view meanwhile, less than 2 weeks after announcing it, the government are already recruiting 'contact tracers' who will earn higher than the minimum wage. Elsewhere, it has been discovered that some of the goggles used by the NHS for many years do not give 100% protection from the current covid 19 virus and have therefore been withdrawn from use. The goggles are from a batch bought back in 2009 and stockpiled. almost 16 million have been used by the NHS for at least part of the last 3 decades. |
|
|
|
Post by northwestman on May 10, 2020 12:10:40 GMT 1
I could have added a 7th point, which would be to conduct a forensic examination of Professor Ferguson's modelling by an independent panel of experts, the members of which are NOT appointed by the government. This sort of stuff, as reported in the Telegraph, is to say the least unsettling: Details of the model Ferguson's team built to predict the epidemic are emerging and they are not pretty. In the respective words of four experienced modellers, the code is “deeply riddled” with bugs, “a fairly arbitrary Heath Robinson machine”, has “huge blocks of code – bad practice” and is “quite possibly the worst production code I have ever seen”. When ministers make statements about coronavirus policy they invariably say that they are “following the science”. In this case, that phrase “the science” effectively means the Imperial College model, forecasting potentially hundreds of thousands of deaths, on the output of which the Government instituted the lockdown in March. At the time of the lockdown, the model had not been released to the scientific community. When Ferguson finally released his code last week, it was a reorganised program different from the version run on March 16. It is not as if Ferguson’s track record is good. In 2001 the Imperial College team’s modelling led to the culling of 6 million livestock and was criticised by epidemiological experts as severely flawed. In various years in the early 2000s Ferguson predicted up to 136,000 deaths from mad cow disease, 200 million from bird flu and 65,000 from swine flu. The final death toll in each case was in the hundreds. In this case, when a Swedish team applied the modified model that Imperial put into the public domain to Sweden’s strategy, it predicted 40,000 deaths by May 1 – 15 times too high. We now know that the model’s software is a 13-year-old, 15,000-line program that simulates homes, offices, schools, people and movements. According to a team at Edinburgh University which ran the model, the same inputs give different outputs, and the program gives different results if it is run on different machines, and even if it is run on the same machine using different numbers of central-processing units. Worse, the code does not allow for large variations among groups of people with respect to their susceptibility to the virus and their social connections. An infected nurse in a hospital is likely to transmit the virus to many more people than an asymptomatic child. Introducing such heterogeneity shows that the threshold to achieve herd immunity with modest social distancing is much lower than the 50-60 per cent implied by the Ferguson model. One experienced modeller tells us that “my own modelling suggests that somewhere between 10 per cent and 30 per cent would suffice, depending on what assumptions one makes.” The almost covert nature of the scientific debate within Sage, the opaque programming methods of the Imperial team, the unavailability of the code for testing and review at the point of decision, the untested assumptions built into the model, all leave us with a worrying question. Did we base one of the biggest peacetime policy decisions on crude mathematical guesswork? |
|
|
|
Post by zenfootball2 on May 10, 2020 12:43:56 GMT 1
i would not normally quote them but it had the info on the age group. if you follow that logic schools would never re -open . Denmark has re opemd its schools and the R number went up 0.2 wich is minimal. if we had a proper test , track and monitor from say 1 , we would know exactly what % of the population had caught covid-19. With that argument why do teachers need PPE then? because the unions have said they wont go back to school without it |
|
|
|
Post by The Shropshire Tenor on May 10, 2020 12:49:57 GMT 1
Meanwhile, the Primark buyers, who know a thing or two about buying goods reasonably fit for purpose and checking quality of cheap foreign factory production are all furloughed.
You are so busy trying to buy bulk ppe there is no one to even answer emails from British manufacturers wanting to see if they can help.[/quote]
Any buyers would have difficulty in an emergency situation because usual procedures wouldn't be followed.
Buying from a new supplier would normally include:
Sending detailed specs to potential sources.
Receiving samples for evaluation by QC.
Visit to suppliers factory to inspect their production capability.
Arranging logistics
Contract negotiations.
Arranging for your QC or an independent inspectorate to be on site to supervise production and certify quality.
This is a brief summary of what I used to do when buying materials from abroad, not an overnight process. No doubt several steps were omitted by NHS buyers in an emergency.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 10, 2020 13:04:35 GMT 1
i would not normally quote them but it had the info on the age group. if you follow that logic schools would never re -open . Denmark has re opemd its schools and the R number went up 0.2 wich is minimal. if we had a proper test , track and monitor from say 1 , we would know exactly what % of the population had caught covid-19. With that argument why do teachers need PPE then? The Health and Safety at Work Act 1974. |
|
|
|
Post by stfcfan87 on May 10, 2020 13:16:43 GMT 1
I could have added a 7th point, which would be to conduct a forensic examination of Professor Ferguson's modelling by an independent panel of experts, the members of which are NOT appointed by the government. This sort of stuff, as reported in the Telegraph, is to say the least unsettling: Details of the model Ferguson's team built to predict the epidemic are emerging and they are not pretty. In the respective words of four experienced modellers, the code is “deeply riddled” with bugs, “a fairly arbitrary Heath Robinson machine”, has “huge blocks of code – bad practice” and is “quite possibly the worst production code I have ever seen”. When ministers make statements about coronavirus policy they invariably say that they are “following the science”. In this case, that phrase “the science” effectively means the Imperial College model, forecasting potentially hundreds of thousands of deaths, on the output of which the Government instituted the lockdown in March. At the time of the lockdown, the model had not been released to the scientific community. When Ferguson finally released his code last week, it was a reorganised program different from the version run on March 16. It is not as if Ferguson’s track record is good. In 2001 the Imperial College team’s modelling led to the culling of 6 million livestock and was criticised by epidemiological experts as severely flawed. In various years in the early 2000s Ferguson predicted up to 136,000 deaths from mad cow disease, 200 million from bird flu and 65,000 from swine flu. The final death toll in each case was in the hundreds. In this case, when a Swedish team applied the modified model that Imperial put into the public domain to Sweden’s strategy, it predicted 40,000 deaths by May 1 – 15 times too high. We now know that the model’s software is a 13-year-old, 15,000-line program that simulates homes, offices, schools, people and movements. According to a team at Edinburgh University which ran the model, the same inputs give different outputs, and the program gives different results if it is run on different machines, and even if it is run on the same machine using different numbers of central-processing units. Worse, the code does not allow for large variations among groups of people with respect to their susceptibility to the virus and their social connections. An infected nurse in a hospital is likely to transmit the virus to many more people than an asymptomatic child. Introducing such heterogeneity shows that the threshold to achieve herd immunity with modest social distancing is much lower than the 50-60 per cent implied by the Ferguson model. One experienced modeller tells us that “my own modelling suggests that somewhere between 10 per cent and 30 per cent would suffice, depending on what assumptions one makes.” The almost covert nature of the scientific debate within Sage, the opaque programming methods of the Imperial team, the unavailability of the code for testing and review at the point of decision, the untested assumptions built into the model, all leave us with a worrying question. Did we base one of the biggest peacetime policy decisions on crude mathematical guesswork? Well yes, some of the modelling is based on guess work, because this is a new virus and at the time little would have been known about it. But again, why is there the focus on Ferguson's model? This doesn't explain our death rates, the lack of testing or the lack of PPE. Oh silly me, the telegraph is a Boris paper and trying to shift the blame onto other people Interesting the mail seemed to be hinting at a row between Boris and Hancock today and other papers are reporting that a large number of ministers aren't aware of what Boris is going to announce as their viewpoints aren't listened to. Not coming across as a stable government |
|
|
|
Post by Northwest Shrew on May 10, 2020 13:36:51 GMT 1
Another thing for me to moan at: Yesterday’s street parties. Many examples on tv of social distancing not being followed. Sharing drinks, the irony of mingling with each other in front of their houses which have Rainbows and slogans saying protect the nhs in their windows. but why are you moaning at drive thru take aways ? they are pretty much no different to a virus testing station as far as opening up business's this seems like a perfect ready made solution no way would I visit a shop at the moment but I'd feel quite safe venturing out, staying in my car and being handed food thru a gap in the window come on, stop moaning for the sake of it I’m moaning because people are blatantly breaking the rules. Whether you think the rules are right or wrong, that’s what’s been set. Do not go out unless it’s to go to work or shopping for essentials . Fried chicken ain’t essential |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 10, 2020 13:44:58 GMT 1
This sort of stuff, as reported in the Telegraph, is to say the least unsettling: Details of the model Ferguson's team built to predict the epidemic are emerging and they are not pretty. In the respective words of four experienced modellers, the code is “deeply riddled” with bugs, “a fairly arbitrary Heath Robinson machine”, has “huge blocks of code – bad practice” and is “quite possibly the worst production code I have ever seen”. When ministers make statements about coronavirus policy they invariably say that they are “following the science”. In this case, that phrase “the science” effectively means the Imperial College model, forecasting potentially hundreds of thousands of deaths, on the output of which the Government instituted the lockdown in March. At the time of the lockdown, the model had not been released to the scientific community. When Ferguson finally released his code last week, it was a reorganised program different from the version run on March 16. It is not as if Ferguson’s track record is good. In 2001 the Imperial College team’s modelling led to the culling of 6 million livestock and was criticised by epidemiological experts as severely flawed. In various years in the early 2000s Ferguson predicted up to 136,000 deaths from mad cow disease, 200 million from bird flu and 65,000 from swine flu. The final death toll in each case was in the hundreds. In this case, when a Swedish team applied the modified model that Imperial put into the public domain to Sweden’s strategy, it predicted 40,000 deaths by May 1 – 15 times too high. We now know that the model’s software is a 13-year-old, 15,000-line program that simulates homes, offices, schools, people and movements. According to a team at Edinburgh University which ran the model, the same inputs give different outputs, and the program gives different results if it is run on different machines, and even if it is run on the same machine using different numbers of central-processing units. Worse, the code does not allow for large variations among groups of people with respect to their susceptibility to the virus and their social connections. An infected nurse in a hospital is likely to transmit the virus to many more people than an asymptomatic child. Introducing such heterogeneity shows that the threshold to achieve herd immunity with modest social distancing is much lower than the 50-60 per cent implied by the Ferguson model. One experienced modeller tells us that “my own modelling suggests that somewhere between 10 per cent and 30 per cent would suffice, depending on what assumptions one makes.” The almost covert nature of the scientific debate within Sage, the opaque programming methods of the Imperial team, the unavailability of the code for testing and review at the point of decision, the untested assumptions built into the model, all leave us with a worrying question. Did we base one of the biggest peacetime policy decisions on crude mathematical guesswork? Well yes, some of the modelling is based on guess work, because this is a new virus and at the time little would have been known about it. But again, why is there the focus on Ferguson's model? This doesn't explain our death rates, the lack of testing or the lack of PPE. Oh silly me, the telegraph is a Boris paper and trying to shift the blame onto other people Interesting the mail seemed to be hinting at a row between Boris and Hancock today and other papers are reporting that a large number of ministers aren't aware of what Boris is going to announce as their viewpoints aren't listened to. Not coming across as a stable government Again, being no expert, I think our death rate has many different reasons, for instance there is no hiding that the majority were based in London, which has one of the biggest airports in the world, which also has one of the highest destination points in the world, unlike Hong Kong as more of a transfer airport. Also change from herd immunity and shielding to lockdown mid term would not have helped. The change in tact came as a direct result from Furgusson throwing his dummy out of the pram, when his modelling was parked by SAGE, as there was not enough evidence to get a majority thought on, so he went direct to the press, saying he has presented to the government and they are ignoring him, this then went viral.... this btw is just my opinion. |
|
|
|
Post by northwestman on May 10, 2020 13:54:03 GMT 1
Well yes, some of the modelling is based on guess work, because this is a new virus and at the time little would have been known about it. But again, why is there the focus on Ferguson's model? This doesn't explain our death rates, the lack of testing or the lack of PPE. Oh silly me, the telegraph is a Boris paper and trying to shift the blame onto other people Interesting the mail seemed to be hinting at a row between Boris and Hancock today and other papers are reporting that a large number of ministers aren't aware of what Boris is going to announce as their viewpoints aren't listened to. Not coming across as a stable government No way has the Telegraph been letting him off on those subjects. In fact, the paper is so anti Boris as far as his dealings with the coronavirus crisis are concerned that a number of readers are complaining of a change in editorial policy. |
|
|
|
Post by northwestman on May 10, 2020 14:01:25 GMT 1
Again, being no expert, I think our death rate has many different reasons, for instance there is no hiding that the majority were based in London, which has one of the biggest airports in the world, which also has one of the highest destination points in the world, unlike Hong Kong as more of a transfer airport. Also change from herd immunity and shielding to lockdown mid term would not have helped. The change in tact came as a direct result from Furgusson throwing his dummy out of the pram, when his modelling was parked by SAGE, as there was not enough evidence to get a majority thought on, so he went direct to the press, saying he has presented to the government and they are ignoring him, this then went viral.... this btw is just my opinion. Is there any evidence that SAGE rejected Ferguson's modelling? If so, I'd be very interested to see it. However, I strongly suspect that is one of the many files that this Government still hasn't released into the public domain. |
|
|
|
Post by Pilch on May 10, 2020 14:14:57 GMT 1
but why are you moaning at drive thru take aways ? they are pretty much no different to a virus testing station as far as opening up business's this seems like a perfect ready made solution no way would I visit a shop at the moment but I'd feel quite safe venturing out, staying in my car and being handed food thru a gap in the window come on, stop moaning for the sake of it I’m moaning because people are blatantly breaking the rules. Whether you think the rules are right or wrong, that’s what’s been set. Do not go out unless it’s to go to work or shopping for essentials . Fried chicken ain’t essential as I mentioned, I would find it safer going to a drive thru KFC than I would going to sainsburys with the current state of things including the economy, I dont think your argument is valid at all, its just petty and sounds snobbish to be honest why are you not moaning about garden centres being opened ? or tips being opened or parks open |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 10, 2020 14:19:01 GMT 1
Again, being no expert, I think our death rate has many different reasons, for instance there is no hiding that the majority were based in London, which has one of the biggest airports in the world, which also has one of the highest destination points in the world, unlike Hong Kong as more of a transfer airport. Also change from herd immunity and shielding to lockdown mid term would not have helped. The change in tact came as a direct result from Furgusson throwing his dummy out of the pram, when his modelling was parked by SAGE, as there was not enough evidence to get a majority thought on, so he went direct to the press, saying he has presented to the government and they are ignoring him, this then went viral.... this btw is just my opinion. Is there any evidence that SAGE rejected Ferguson's modelling? If so, I'd be very interested to see it. However, I strongly suspect that is one of the many files that this Government still hasn't released into the public domain. I think the evidence is there just by the way it came out.... the Government says it was following SAGE advice, of which Furgusson is a member, then some days later his model is released to the press.... and it contradicts everything SAGE is advising.... |
|
|
|
Post by northwestman on May 10, 2020 14:29:12 GMT 1
Is there any evidence that SAGE rejected Ferguson's modelling? If so, I'd be very interested to see it. However, I strongly suspect that is one of the many files that this Government still hasn't released into the public domain. I think the evidence is there just by the way it came out.... the Government says it was following SAGE advice, of which Furgusson is a member, then some days later his model is released to the press.... and it contradicts everything SAGE is advising.... And one day, it may be established as to whether the Swedish approach was the right one, and that we'd have survived this coronavirus crisis by social distancing, just being sensible, allowing herd immunity to be developed, and not having the economy trashed. The only black mark as far as Sweden is concerned is their care homes, and that's certainly not an area where we've done any better. |
|
|
|
Post by stfcfan87 on May 10, 2020 14:43:04 GMT 1
Well yes, some of the modelling is based on guess work, because this is a new virus and at the time little would have been known about it. But again, why is there the focus on Ferguson's model? This doesn't explain our death rates, the lack of testing or the lack of PPE. Oh silly me, the telegraph is a Boris paper and trying to shift the blame onto other people Interesting the mail seemed to be hinting at a row between Boris and Hancock today and other papers are reporting that a large number of ministers aren't aware of what Boris is going to announce as their viewpoints aren't listened to. Not coming across as a stable government No way has the Telegraph been letting him off on those subjects. In fact, the paper is so anti Boris as far as his dealings with the coronavirus crisis are concerned that a number of readers are complaining of a change in editorial policy. Anti Boris or anti government? I've seen some critical pieces of Ferguson, sage, hancock, other ministers, but explicit criticism of Boris's role & leadership? |
|
|
|
Post by Northwest Shrew on May 10, 2020 14:53:58 GMT 1
I’m moaning because people are blatantly breaking the rules. Whether you think the rules are right or wrong, that’s what’s been set. Do not go out unless it’s to go to work or shopping for essentials . Fried chicken ain’t essential as I mentioned, I would find it safer going to a drive thru KFC than I would going to sainsburys with the current state of things including the economy, I dont think your argument is valid at all, its just petty and sounds snobbish to be honest why are you not moaning about garden centres being opened ? or tips being opened or parks open Tips and garden centres aren’t open? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 10, 2020 14:55:36 GMT 1
No way has the Telegraph been letting him off on those subjects. In fact, the paper is so anti Boris as far as his dealings with the coronavirus crisis are concerned that a number of readers are complaining of a change in editorial policy. Anti Boris or anti government? I've seen some critical pieces of Ferguson, sage, hancock, other ministers, but explicit criticism of Boris's role & leadership? I think fair criticism is his faith in others to carry out jobs, and his poor media responses, I think that if he acknowledges mistakes, which there has been plenty will abate the media mayhem, and he is being naive in his handling |
|
|
|
Post by Valerioch on May 10, 2020 14:56:27 GMT 1
but why are you moaning at drive thru take aways ? they are pretty much no different to a virus testing station as far as opening up business's this seems like a perfect ready made solution no way would I visit a shop at the moment but I'd feel quite safe venturing out, staying in my car and being handed food thru a gap in the window come on, stop moaning for the sake of it I’m moaning because people are blatantly breaking the rules. Whether you think the rules are right or wrong, that’s what’s been set. Do not go out unless it’s to go to work or shopping for essentials . Fried chicken ain’t essential Spot on People love blaming the government saying their messaging hasn’t been clear. Don’t get me wrong this mornings slogan is a disaster. But from day 1 of “lockdown”, they can’t have been clearer. Stay home, unless once a day exercise, unless once a week essential shop, unless an emergency/prescription run It’s really not that hard. People blame s**te messaging as an excuse to be pricks and break the rules. They know who they are, hopefully karma will get them one day |
|
|
|
Post by northwestman on May 10, 2020 15:04:04 GMT 1
|
|
|
|
Post by staffordshrew on May 10, 2020 15:11:11 GMT 1
It's not like the financial crisis when Gordon Brown seemed to step up to the plate and lead, Boris has so far not done much on that score. The 1 person who seemed to lead from this government was Rishi Sunak, but he has to sort out the future of furlough now.
|
|
|
|
Post by staffordshrew on May 10, 2020 15:17:39 GMT 1
I’m moaning because people are blatantly breaking the rules. Whether you think the rules are right or wrong, that’s what’s been set. Do not go out unless it’s to go to work or shopping for essentials . Fried chicken ain’t essential Spot on People love blaming the government saying their messaging hasn’t been clear. Don’t get me wrong this mornings slogan is a disaster. But from day 1 of “lockdown”, they can’t have been clearer. Stay home, unless once a day exercise, unless once a week essential shop, unless an emergency/prescription run It’s really not that hard. People blame s**te messaging as an excuse to be pricks and break the rules. They know who they are, hopefully karma will get them one day So we have seen B&Qs and KFCs allowed to just re-open up with no thought to the queues that would form and you say the message from government could not be clearer? |
|
|
|
Post by Valerioch on May 10, 2020 15:22:19 GMT 1
Spot on People love blaming the government saying their messaging hasn’t been clear. Don’t get me wrong this mornings slogan is a disaster. But from day 1 of “lockdown”, they can’t have been clearer. Stay home, unless once a day exercise, unless once a week essential shop, unless an emergency/prescription run It’s really not that hard. People blame s**te messaging as an excuse to be pricks and break the rules. They know who they are, hopefully karma will get them one day So we have seen B&Qs and KFCs allowed to just re-open up with no thought to the queues that would form and you say the message from government could not be clearer? What sort of sad existence of a person runs to KFC the second it reopens when they know full well what we’ve been told the last 6 weeks For what it’s worth my my post wasn’t really about that. As Pilch correctly says, you can easily self isolate from your car at a drive thru It was more aimed at the Covidiots meeting friends/family at houses or parks or at street parties and not distancing. It’s really not that hard to understand the policy “stay at home”, and the implications if people don’t |
|
|
|
Post by Pilch on May 10, 2020 15:24:39 GMT 1
as I mentioned, I would find it safer going to a drive thru KFC than I would going to sainsburys with the current state of things including the economy, I dont think your argument is valid at all, its just petty and sounds snobbish to be honest why are you not moaning about garden centres being opened ? or tips being opened or parks open Tips and garden centres aren’t open? the tip at battlefield was opened last week, I saw it on tv b&q has always been available to click and collect I think Halfords has been open throughout too |
|
|
|
Post by northwestman on May 10, 2020 15:26:37 GMT 1
What sort of idiot queues outside a tip for hours?
It can't be that desperate to offload rubbish surely?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 10, 2020 15:31:57 GMT 1
What sort of idiot queues outside a tip for hours? It can't be that desperate to offload rubbish surely? No,they just fly tip instead ☹ |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 10, 2020 15:35:32 GMT 1
I’m moaning because people are blatantly breaking the rules. Whether you think the rules are right or wrong, that’s what’s been set. Do not go out unless it’s to go to work or shopping for essentials . Fried chicken ain’t essential Spot on People love blaming the government saying their messaging hasn’t been clear. Don’t get me wrong this mornings slogan is a disaster. But from day 1 of “lockdown”, they can’t have been clearer. Stay home, unless once a day exercise, unless once a week essential shop, unless an emergency/prescription run It’s really not that hard. People blame s**te messaging as an excuse to be pricks and break the rules. They know who they are, hopefully karma will get them one day How is today’s slogan a disaster? |
|
