Manc33 wrote:Let's just ignore it and have the usual Christmas. I certainly will be.
But given that you ignore all scientific evidence that doesn’t surprise me.
In this case your wilful ignorance will kill.
Manc33 wrote:Let's just ignore it and have the usual Christmas. I certainly will be.
mjr wrote:mercalia wrote:About time that shops were required to stop people not wearing face masks from entering their premises?
There are too many exemptions for that to be practical, plus asking someone if they are exempt is basically asking them to reveal their medical history, which is a bit iffy.
Now, if you were to propose tasering space invaders, I'd be quite happy with that because I can't think of a medical reason why someone needs to push past me and the guy two in front walking with a stick in a slow-moving shop exit queue just to get back slightly quicker to their van parked in the "pick-up/drop-off zone" (and then set the alarm off when they tried to start it - almost justice!).
Oldjohnw wrote:Northumberland has a rate of infection of about 20 on 100,000, less than the UK average but it has been locked down because it is next to the Tyneside conurbation which has a rate of round 120 in 100,000.
No, I don't get it.
Oldjohnw wrote:Northumberland has a rate of infection of about 20 on 100,000, less than the UK average but it has been locked down because it is next to the Tyneside conurbation which has a rate of round 120 in 100,000.
No, I don't get it.
pwa wrote:Oldjohnw wrote:Northumberland has a rate of infection of about 20 on 100,000, less than the UK average but it has been locked down because it is next to the Tyneside conurbation which has a rate of round 120 in 100,000.
No, I don't get it.
Surely if one area has a spike, neighbouring areas will also be in danger because people, and infection, cross boundaries. It only takes a few people from Northumberland to venture into Newcastle for the night and the spike will spread to other nearby areas. Better to get the measures in place before the spike becomes apparent rather than responding too late.
Ben@Forest wrote:Oldjohnw wrote:Northumberland has a rate of infection of about 20 on 100,000, less than the UK average but it has been locked down because it is next to the Tyneside conurbation which has a rate of round 120 in 100,000.
No, I don't get it.
It can be seen as a failure of having large unitary authorities, if Northumberland had the old structure of Berwick, Blyth, Alnwick, Morpeth District Councils it'd be easier to isolate those districts. Now discrete areas are harder to define. It's the same in Durham - used to have seven districts - now one amalgamated authority.
Oldjohnw wrote:Ben@Forest wrote:Oldjohnw wrote:Northumberland has a rate of infection of about 20 on 100,000, less than the UK average but it has been locked down because it is next to the Tyneside conurbation which has a rate of round 120 in 100,000.
No, I don't get it.
It can be seen as a failure of having large unitary authorities, if Northumberland had the old structure of Berwick, Blyth, Alnwick, Morpeth District Councils it'd be easier to isolate those districts. Now discrete areas are harder to define. It's the same in Durham - used to have seven districts - now one amalgamated authority.
Agreed. An authority no-one wanted. People from Berwick do not pop into Newcastle for the night either.
smcknighty wrote:I know someone aged 35 who hasn’t been well enough to work for 6 months, my wife took sheltering very seriously, still caught it and now has breathing problems like severe asthma that aren’t going away. It’s not all about dying. It’s a very unjust disease in that people can take all the risks but not take the impact. This reinforces their selfish attitudes and helps them believe they are right to not take things seriously. Maybe they will change their minds when someone they know gets impacted.
[XAP]Bob wrote:Manc33 wrote:Let's just ignore it and have the usual Christmas. I certainly will be.
But given that you ignore all scientific evidence that doesn’t surprise me.
In this case your wilful ignorance will kill.
Manc33 wrote:[XAP]Bob wrote:Manc33 wrote:Let's just ignore it and have the usual Christmas. I certainly will be.
But given that you ignore all scientific evidence that doesn’t surprise me.
In this case your wilful ignorance will kill.
The evidence for this virus is not based in science though. Science involves a dependent and an independent variable, but how can that apply when the testing is skewed from the outset - that is, they are testing for something that's always present in all our bodies all our lives, then claiming to have diagnosed people with something when they find it. That's not science.
Manc33 wrote:... that is, they are testing for something that's always present in all our bodies all our lives, then claiming to have diagnosed people with something when they find it.
pwa wrote:Manc33 wrote:[XAP]Bob wrote:
But given that you ignore all scientific evidence that doesn’t surprise me.
In this case your wilful ignorance will kill.
The evidence for this virus is not based in science though. Science involves a dependent and an independent variable, but how can that apply when the testing is skewed from the outset - that is, they are testing for something that's always present in all our bodies all our lives, then claiming to have diagnosed people with something when they find it. That's not science.
Well something filled the hospital my son was working in during April. Are you saying it was something else?
If enough people ignore Covid we will have a proper Lockdown to endure over Christmas.