Coronavirus

[ParisInAKilt]

I was having to wear a mask in work, at first with suspected covid only with all the other ppe and then with all patients, found it very uncomfortable if I’m being honest, obviously you accept the level of discomfort in a clinical setting, although I’d wear one in public in the future if I was unwell with a cold for example 

[kumnio]

Im guessing you had the full surgical mask. My mum works in a ward at Ninewells Hospital in Dundee, her PPE was ridiculous, big mask, face shield, she is a wee 61 year old ex smoker, she survived just fine.

Im convinced that people are just getting it in their mind that they cant breathe with them on, so when they eventually do put one on, they just imagine it suffocating them, as with most things, its in peoples head.

All people are being asked to wear is a piece of cloth covering their face, the ones with fashion logos and football clubs are perfectly comfortable. The Japanese and South Koreans have done it for decades.

No one complains about a sore cock from wearing underwear.

[Hertsscot]

1 hour ago, Orraloon said:

It's now thought that the first death from COVID in the UK was in January. It just didn't get diagnosed at the time. 

I'm not sure what you mean by "interaction" but there is some evidence that having caught one virus, a person is less likely to catch another different one at the same time. When flu season ramps up the number of "common cold" viral infections seems to go down. The reasons for this are not well understood. It could be that different viruses "compete" against each other. Or, maybe when people feel ill they are less likely to be out and about to catch something else. More research is required.

COVID is such a new disease that we know relatively little about it so far. 

That was what I was asking, I appreciate it's new but I 'd not seen any thinking about how Covid related to the more usual  bugs.

[phart]

 

Also i've got anecdotal evidence from three positives i know and it's taken one person 7 days another 5 days and another not been contacted yet for Track and Trace to contact them after a positive case. Although the phone call took over an hour to get all the information so maybe it's just really time intensive. In one case the employer is having to make the call on who isolates etc as no medical/official advice has been forthcoming afer the positive test.

[mccaughey85]

Whilst I don't think covid is harmless and non lethal I do believe that society will have to get back to normal pretty soon or else the economy will suffer too much.

Its not a popular opinion but the whole face mask wearing and everyone acting all holier than thou over it is bullshit. Covid has extremely small death rate among the under 65 population. This is not me suggesting fuck the old ppl but how is wearing a mask and the whole of society being restricted to social distancing measures going to affect older ppl if they are shielding like they should be. I understand that under 65s can die from it as well but there are many things that can kill you and if you feel you are vulnerable then should you be shielding and avoiding contact with the outside world. 

The whole covid situation has really opened my eyes to how many in society can't think for themselves. 

[ParisInAKilt]

1 hour ago, mccaughey85 said:

Whilst I don't think covid is harmless and non lethal I do believe that society will have to get back to normal pretty soon or else the economy will suffer too much.

Its not a popular opinion but the whole face mask wearing and everyone acting all holier than thou over it is bullshit. Covid has extremely small death rate among the under 65 population. This is not me suggesting fuck the old ppl but how is wearing a mask and the whole of society being restricted to social distancing measures going to affect older ppl if they are shielding like they should be. I understand that under 65s can die from it as well but there are many things that can kill you and if you feel you are vulnerable then should you be shielding and avoiding contact with the outside world. 

The whole covid situation has really opened my eyes to how many in society can't think for themselves. 

Im waiting until there’s more information but my gut reaction is the lockdown measures are unnecessary, I could be completely wrong though. 

[mccaughey85]

1 hour ago, ParisInAKilt said:

Im waiting until there’s more information but my gut reaction is the lockdown measures are unnecessary, I could be completely wrong though. 

Its always good to be cautious but I think we have to go back to living normally before the country goes down the pan. Theres just too much industries unable to cope and the knock on effect is going to cripple us. Just take football for example, are fans ever getting back to games this season because if not then Scottish football is fucked. Pubs and clubs are struggling big time as well which affects brewery's and drinks producers. 

[thplinth]

Who knows if the masks work. Just don't rely on the Lancet study for the answer.

Having anything over your mouth and nose is unpleasant. It is restricting your breathing to some extent. If you had respiratory issues (asthma say) I could see how it might provoke a panic attack or a strong feeling of claustrophobia. On a hot day I really find the masks hard to wear at times.

 I think mentally people are fast reaching the 'fuck it, life must go on' point.

There does seem to be a lot of shady maneuvering going on that is not motivated by doing the right thing but by making the most money. 

Some of the things being done in Australia right now are very draconian. Saw them arrest a heavily pregnant woman for a facebook post challenging the lockdown or some similar pish.

All the things the UK did were so late, so lacking in cohesiveness, so half arsed, with the people giving advice not following it themselves a lot of the time.

Can't trust any of these fuckers IMHO. There is a lot of things being politicized that should not be and it looks like a boat load of corruption as well.

Plus we don't know where this really came from. Not sure we ever will.

The whole thing is a shitshow.

[phart]

7 hours ago, mccaughey85 said:

Whilst I don't think covid is harmless and non lethal I do believe that society will have to get back to normal pretty soon or else the economy will suffer too much.

Its not a popular opinion but the whole face mask wearing and everyone acting all holier than thou over it is bullshit. Covid has extremely small death rate among the under 65 population. This is not me suggesting fuck the old ppl but how is wearing a mask and the whole of society being restricted to social distancing measures going to affect older ppl if they are shielding like they should be. I understand that under 65s can die from it as well but there are many things that can kill you and if you feel you are vulnerable then should you be shielding and avoiding contact with the outside world. 

The whole covid situation has really opened my eyes to how many in society can't think for themselves. 

Over 65 is still 12 million people in the UK though, in Scotland it's just over 1 million. Also shielding finished end of July or August 1st.

It's a mad balancing act with everyone on a sliding scale where everything should be. I'm not envious of the folk who have to make the decision on where policy should be set, it doesn't matter where it is set you'll have a lot of folk pissed off with where you set it. Each group convinced their opinion where it is to be set is the correct place and everyone else is a sheep or uninformed or whatever.

 

[wee-toon-red]

8 hours ago, mccaughey85 said:

Whilst I don't think covid is harmless and non lethal I do believe that society will have to get back to normal pretty soon or else the economy will suffer too much.

Its not a popular opinion but the whole face mask wearing and everyone acting all holier than thou over it is bullshit. Covid has extremely small death rate among the under 65 population. This is not me suggesting fuck the old ppl but how is wearing a mask and the whole of society being restricted to social distancing measures going to affect older ppl if they are shielding like they should be. I understand that under 65s can die from it as well but there are many things that can kill you and if you feel you are vulnerable then should you be shielding and avoiding contact with the outside world. 

The whole covid situation has really opened my eyes to how many in society can't think for themselves. 

I'm not keen on the idea that we lock away the elderly and vulnerable so that "the rest of us" can go about our normal business to be honest. I'd rather we all acted with a degree of responsibility, whether that's wearing masks, keeping our distance or whatever, so that everyone has a chance at some form of normality.

[phart]

4 minutes ago, wee-toon-red said:

I'm not keen on the idea that we lock away the elderly and vulnerable so that "the rest of us" can go about our normal business to be honest. I'd rather we all acted with a degree of responsibility, whether that's wearing masks, keeping our distance or whatever, so that everyone has a chance at some form of normality.

I think personal circumstances will also bias your view on the correct way forward. The economy tanking doesn't affect me really (Directly), I have zero debt, extremely low cost of living etc, however i'm a full-time carer for a 92 year old so my concerns are in that direction. If I owned a business, had pressing bills to pay a lot of financial burden then i'm sure I would think differently.

Then folk just weigh shit differently , it's what makes the decision so hard to make.

I agree, essentially, internment for 19% of the population to make life easier for the rest of the population doesn't sit right with me. Your mileage may vary as they say though.

[mccaughey85]

51 minutes ago, phart said:

Over 65 is still 12 million people in the UK though, in Scotland it's just over 1 million. Also shielding finished end of July or August 1st.

It's a mad balancing act with everyone on a sliding scale where everything should be. I'm not envious of the folk who have to make the decision on where policy should be set, it doesn't matter where it is set you'll have a lot of folk pissed off with where you set it. Each group convinced their opinion where it is to be set is the correct place and everyone else is a sheep or uninformed or whatever.

 

 

12 minutes ago, phart said:

I think personal circumstances will also bias your view on the correct way forward. The economy tanking doesn't affect me really (Directly), I have zero debt, extremely low cost of living etc, however i'm a full-time carer for a 92 year old so my concerns are in that direction. If I owned a business, had pressing bills to pay a lot of financial burden then i'm sure I would think differently.

Then folk just weigh shit differently , it's what makes the decision so hard to make.

I agree, essentially, internment for 19% of the population to make life easier for the rest of the population doesn't sit right with me. Your mileage may vary as they say though.

Does shielding not mean self isolation? The older generation should be self isolating imo. Especially if they have serious medical issues. 

Yeh I agree that it's not easy to set the rules in a situation like this which is unprecedented. 

The economy taking a tanking will eventually make its way round to you. Might take a while but it will affect everyone as the whole system is interlinked. Ppl talk about the economy as if its a just a bunch of numbers on a screen but it's essentially represents the survival of humans and if it crashes and normal ppl don't have money to keep it going then it eventually makes its way round to the primary industries that essentially feed and cloth us. 

I am not suggesting internment for 19 percent of the population but I would allow anyone who would like to self isolate to do so with financial support from the government. Its just not practical for the whole countries population to adhere to these social distancing rules that are destroying industry because a couple thousand ppl have died(in Scotland). Every year the old and vulnerable die of flu, obviously the death rate is higher with covid but I wouldn't say its at a level high enough to pretty much close down industries such as pubs, restaurants, tourism etc. 

Its not a popular opinion and it sounds heartless but its just not practical and necessary imo to social distance for another 6 months or so. 

[Orraloon]

9 minutes ago, mccaughey85 said:

 

Does shielding not mean self isolation? The older generation should be self isolating imo. Especially if they have serious medical issues. 

Yeh I agree that it's not easy to set the rules in a situation like this which is unprecedented. 

The economy taking a tanking will eventually make its way round to you. Might take a while but it will affect everyone as the whole system is interlinked. Ppl talk about the economy as if its a just a bunch of numbers on a screen but it's essentially represents the survival of humans and if it crashes and normal ppl don't have money to keep it going then it eventually makes its way round to the primary industries that essentially feed and cloth us. 

I am not suggesting internment for 19 percent of the population but I would allow anyone who would like to self isolate to do so with financial support from the government. Its just not practical for the whole countries population to adhere to these social distancing rules that are destroying industry because a couple thousand ppl have died(in Scotland). Every year the old and vulnerable die of flu, obviously the death rate is higher with covid but I wouldn't say its at a level high enough to pretty much close down industries such as pubs, restaurants, tourism etc. 

Its not a popular opinion and it sounds heartless but its just not practical and necessary imo to social distance for another 6 months or so. 

If we assume you are not trolling, (Which is possibly a wrong assumption?) your posts reek of ignorance and might help explain why so many folk seem to be ignoring the social distancing guidelines. Some folk seem to be getting fed up of it, some folk have ignored it from day one, and we might be getting to a stage where more and more folk are willing to accept 10s of thousands of more people dying just to get the economy going again.

[phart]

21 minutes ago, mccaughey85 said:

 

Does shielding not mean self isolation? The older generation should be self isolating imo. Especially if they have serious medical issues. 

Yeh I agree that it's not easy to set the rules in a situation like this which is unprecedented. 

The economy taking a tanking will eventually make its way round to you. Might take a while but it will affect everyone as the whole system is interlinked. Ppl talk about the economy as if its a just a bunch of numbers on a screen but it's essentially represents the survival of humans and if it crashes and normal ppl don't have money to keep it going then it eventually makes its way round to the primary industries that essentially feed and cloth us. 

I am not suggesting internment for 19 percent of the population but I would allow anyone who would like to self isolate to do so with financial support from the government. Its just not practical for the whole countries population to adhere to these social distancing rules that are destroying industry because a couple thousand ppl have died(in Scotland). Every year the old and vulnerable die of flu, obviously the death rate is higher with covid but I wouldn't say its at a level high enough to pretty much close down industries such as pubs, restaurants, tourism etc. 

Its not a popular opinion and it sounds heartless but its just not practical and necessary imo to social distance for another 6 months or so. 

Yeah the advice ended end of July start of August.

Self isolation would mean not leaving the house if everything went back to normal and for it to be effective all folk coming into contact with over 65's would have to do that as well especially if everything reverted back to pre-covid.

As i say it's hard to say what the right course of action is. I'm pretty much self isolating anyway and have been since early March. I go shopping once a week at a non-peak time. I do my running very early round an unused car park. I've met friends like 3 times outside the only house i've went to is my other friends but he paid for Covid testing and was negative so felt safe.

At the same time Recessions cost lives as well there's a pretty direct correlation between poverty and life expectancy etc. I'd suggest the way the economy is set up is more a problem than restrictions, if the economy wasn't set up the way it was there would be more funds available to ameliorate the cost of covid restrictions but that's another debate all together.

Personally i'd favour lives over the economy since that's the context of the argument here.

[mccaughey85]

5 minutes ago, Orraloon said:

If we assume you are not trolling, (Which is possibly a wrong assumption?) your posts reek of ignorance and might help explain why so many folk seem to be ignoring the social distancing guidelines. Some folk seem to be getting fed up of it, some folk have ignored it from day one, and we might be getting to a stage where more and more folk are willing to accept 10s of thousands of more people dying just to get the economy going again.

Well I knew there would be one ignorant person who ironically calls me ignorant meanwhile doesn't explain why. Its not a case of letting 10s of thousands die to get the economy going again. Its a harsh fact that the world must go on and vulnerable ppl should be self isolating or take the risks like everyone else. I have said that I believe that vulnerable ppl should be given financial support to self isolate until we get a vaccine. The idea that society has to social distance and wear masks is not universally agreed on by the medical and scientific community. 

The whole situation has brought out ppl like yourself who think they are better than other ppl because they don't agree with social distancing and mask wearing. You need to step back and not be so arrogant and accept other ppls opinions on the subject. 

[mccaughey85]

11 minutes ago, phart said:

Yeah the advice ended end of July start of August.

Self isolation would mean not leaving the house if everything went back to normal and for it to be effective all folk coming into contact with over 65's would have to do that as well especially if everything reverted back to pre-covid.

As i say it's hard to say what the right course of action is. I'm pretty much self isolating anyway and have been since early March. I go shopping once a week at a non-peak time. I do my running very early round an unused car park. I've met friends like 3 times outside the only house i've went to is my other friends but he paid for Covid testing and was negative so felt safe.

At the same time Recessions cost lives as well there's a pretty direct correlation between poverty and life expectancy etc. I'd suggest the way the economy is set up is more a problem than restrictions, if the economy wasn't set up the way it was there would be more funds available to ameliorate the cost of covid restrictions but that's another debate all together.

Personally i'd favour lives over the economy since that's the context of the argument here.

 If you don't want covid because you have underlying health issues then self isolation is probably the best way to ensure that. 

How would a vulnerable over 65 come into contact with other ppl if they are self isolating?

If an over 65 decides to self isolate and has a carer who visits then surely the best option is for the carer to be tested daily and for the over 65 not to have visitors. Sounds harsh but I haven't chosen to visit my grandmother due to the chance I might pass covid onto her. Its a shit situation but she's not the healthiest and I could end up passing it onto her. How is society not wearing a mask or social distancing going to cause her to get covid if she is self isolating?

I believe it's not about choosing lives over the economy, it's just a case of making the vulnerable self isolate while most of society gets back to normal. Obviously not a very nice thing for the older population or the vulnerable but if I was vulnerable myself then I would want to self isolate.

Just to point out, I didn't mind lockdown and social distancing measures as a way to help the NHS from getting overwhelmed but I think we need to start to move away from social distancing and masks and let society move back to normal or we will end up in bigger debt than what we are already. 

[ParisInAKilt]

People will be adversely affected in ways we might not imagine if we “don’t get the economy going again” 

[Orraloon]

10 minutes ago, mccaughey85 said:

Well I knew there would be one ignorant person who ironically calls me ignorant meanwhile doesn't explain why. Its not a case of letting 10s of thousands die to get the economy going again. Its a harsh fact that the world must go on and vulnerable ppl should be self isolating or take the risks like everyone else. I have said that I believe that vulnerable ppl should be given financial support to self isolate until we get a vaccine. The idea that society has to social distance and wear masks is not universally agreed on by the medical and scientific community. 

The whole situation has brought out ppl like yourself who think they are better than other ppl because they don't agree with social distancing and mask wearing. You need to step back and not be so arrogant and accept other ppls opinions on the subject. 

My comment about ignorance stems from the fact that you seem to think that 20% of the population shouldn't be allowed to leave their own house. It may well have to come to that but that isn't part of the current rules. 

The word "ignorance" is often taken as an insult. It shouldn't be. We are all ignorant about vastly more stuff than we aren't.

The current upsurge in the Greater Glasgow area is thought to have been fueled by house parties. Banning house parties doesn't have a huge effect on the economy. Do you think it's OK for 20% of the population to be confined to their owns homes so that folk can have house parties again?

 

 

[TDYER63]

1 hour ago, phart said:

I think personal circumstances will also bias your view on the correct way forward. The economy tanking doesn't affect me really (Directly), I have zero debt, extremely low cost of living etc, however i'm a full-time carer for a 92 year old so my concerns are in that direction. If I owned a business, had pressing bills to pay a lot of financial burden then i'm sure I would think differently.

Then folk just weigh shit differently , it's what makes the decision so hard to make.

I agree, essentially, internment for 19% of the population to make life easier for the rest of the population doesn't sit right with me. Your mileage may vary as they say though.

This is pretty much how I feel, but again, I am unaffected by it as my job has been safe so it is easy for me to take the moral stance. 
My gripe is with the folk who are complaining about losing basic rights for what will hopefully be a pretty short period of their lives.
This does not include the people who are genuinely concerned about the economy.
 

What we dont hear about however is the large number of companies who are making a fortune out of this pandemic, I work in finance believe me there are plenty. We only ever hear about the job losses.
And what about the people who are being paid furlough money by the government AND being able to take on another job ? As usual the money is not evenly distributed. 
 

I was out looking for a new sofa on Saturday, the sofa shops were heaving. Probably because , like me, folk have been sitting on their arses for months and sick of their living rooms, but it wasnt a sign of people struggling for cash.
I dread however to think what it will be like in 6 months time when furlough has stopped and unemployment kicks in . It’s an absolutely shit situation. 

[phart]

17 minutes ago, mccaughey85 said:

 If you don't want covid because you have underlying health issues then self isolation is probably the best way to ensure that. 

How would a vulnerable over 65 come into contact with other ppl if they are self isolating?

If an over 65 decides to self isolate and has a carer who visits then surely the best option is for the carer to be tested daily and for the over 65 not to have visitors. Sounds harsh but I haven't chosen to visit my grandmother due to the chance I might pass covid onto her. Its a shit situation but she's not the healthiest and I could end up passing it onto her. How is society not wearing a mask or social distancing going to cause her to get covid if she is self isolating?

I believe it's not about choosing lives over the economy, it's just a case of making the vulnerable self isolate while most of society gets back to normal. Obviously not a very nice thing for the older population or the vulnerable but if I was vulnerable myself then I would want to self isolate.

Just to point out, I didn't mind lockdown and social distancing measures as a way to help the NHS from getting overwhelmed but I think we need to start to move away from social distancing and masks and let society move back to normal or we will end up in bigger debt than what we are already. 

People coming to the house to bring food, provide medical aid etc.

So 19% of the population have to go into solitary confinement for the sake of the economy.  That's a hard sell.

Not sure why masks are a problem at all. I can see the point about the economy etc but wearing a mask is hardly a big ask especially if you're advocating a million people self isolate. You million folk self isolate so i can stop wearing  a mask, sounds a bit ludicrous to be honest.

 

[mccaughey85]

8 minutes ago, Orraloon said:

My comment about ignorance stems from the fact that you seem to think that 20% of the population shouldn't be allowed to leave their own house. It may well have to come to that but that isn't part of the current rules. 

The word "ignorance" is often taken as an insult. It shouldn't be. We are all ignorant about vastly more stuff than we aren't.

The current upsurge in the Greater Glasgow area is thought to have been fueled by house parties. Banning house parties doesn't have a huge effect on the economy. Do you think it's OK for 20% of the population to be confined to their owns homes so that folk can have house parties again?

 

 

In reality it wouldn't be 20 percent, alot of ppl would be happy to take the risk and carry on with life as normal, it would only be a small percentage of the population who I would fully support their right to self isolation and I would be happy for them to be given financial support to do this. 

House parties are not going to cause someone to die from covid if that person is currently self isolating. 

[ParisInAKilt]

Does raise the question of personal liberty v public safety, the videos of people being brutally arrested for apparently not complying with the authorities is troubling. 

Ive a soft spot for those complaining. 

Whatever the origin of covid etc the powers that shouldn’t be will have learned a lot about how most of us behave and follow orders without questioning anything 

[mccaughey85]

2 minutes ago, phart said:

People coming to the house to bring food, provide medical aid etc.

So 19% of the population have to go into solitary confinement for the sake of the economy.  That's a hard sell.

Not sure why masks are a problem at all. I can see the point about the economy etc but wearing a mask is hardly a big ask especially if you're advocating a million people self isolate. You million folk self isolate so i can stop wearing  a mask, sounds a bit ludicrous to be honest.

 

Food packaging should be sanitised and left at the front door. If you are providing medical aid then you should be tested daily before you start work. 

As I said above the reality wouldn't be 20 percent, it would be only a few percent imo. Alot of healthy 65+ ppl would happily take the risk much like they do with other risks that are prevalent in society. 

Masks are not really the big problem imo, it's the social distancing which is causing industries to suffer. I don't have too much a problem with masks but social distancing is going to harm the economy big time. 

[phart]

7 minutes ago, mccaughey85 said:

Food packaging should be sanitised and left at the front door. If you are providing medical aid then you should be tested daily before you start work. 

As I said above the reality wouldn't be 20 percent, it would be only a few percent imo. Alot of healthy 65+ ppl would happily take the risk much like they do with other risks that are prevalent in society. 

Masks are not really the big problem imo, it's the social distancing which is causing industries to suffer. I don't have too much a problem with masks but social distancing is going to harm the economy big time. 

I just said masks cause you included it in your post. If you're going to ask hundreds of thousands of people to go into solitary confinement for months then it did seem churlish to moan about masks.

How are you going to develop and process these tests each day? There's 132,000 people who care for 50 hours a week or more (source). 759,000 carers in Scotland in some capacity.

So at least 132,000 tests a day. The most tests Scotland have managed to do so far is 28,800. Leaked reports show that there is actually a backlog

"There was a backlog of 185,000 tests on Friday, according to Department of Health and Social Care documents leaked to The Sunday Times, with some tests being sent to Italy and Germany for processing."

https://www.ft.com/content/45a559bd-ec00-426b-9f05-ac962ba49375

Edited September 14, 2020 by phart

[phart]

11 minutes ago, ParisInAKilt said:

Does raise the question of personal liberty v public safety, the videos of people being brutally arrested for apparently not complying with the authorities is troubling. 

Ive a soft spot for those complaining. 

Whatever the origin of covid etc the powers that shouldn’t be will have learned a lot about how most of us behave and follow orders without questioning anything 

Who was brutally arrested over here? I can well believe it in US or other shit-show countries.