Telegraph columnist saying that we are basically going to continue with restrictive measures because the NHS is run by the state and we have got into a trap where it must be protected at all costs.
Presumably this is a guide to what some in the Tory right are thinking this week.
"The NHS has become Britain’s all-consuming project, the millstone around its neck and the cloying source of confected national pride. Its hold over the country is so powerful that even a so-called libertarian Conservative PM decided this week to risk sacrificing our ordinary freedoms rather than dare to reform it."
@Cyclefree a friend resigned from the compliance department of a major investment bank that prided itself on its “ethical “ credentials, because his bosses expected him to ignore breaches of their professed standards. As he put it, if you are truly ethical, you don’t need to loudly proclaim the fact.
But if you aren't 100% ethical, shouting loudly that you are may stop people picking up obvious breaches.
I'm seeing the same thing in the umbrella market at the moment, I look at the people boosting about compliance and thinking should I point out xyz...
In one column masks reduce the transmission of covid.
On the other column, they steam up your glasses, you get a bit hot, some feel a bit constrained and you look silly.
No brainier.
Absolutely. Post-vaccines the latter is more important.
If you're an anti-vaxxer relying upon others wearing masks, perhaps buy an FFP3 mask instead?
Covid seems to be spreading pretty fast despite vaccines.
Among the unvaccinated.
We don't know that - especially given the fact the current infection / hospital numbers don't exactly correlate with eariler infection / hospital numbers.
I suspect an awful lot of people currently catching Covid are doubly vaccinated but are getting milder symptoms.
12% of people in hospital are double jabbed and 88% are unvaccinated. We know that kids and younger people don't really go to hospital for this either. That 88% is largely going to be people who refused the vaccine aged 50+.
The vaccines currently yield a reduction of 97% in hospital numbers for double jabbed people. Someone over 50 has got around a 9% chance of being hospitalised by COVID, now they have a 0.24% chance of going to hospital. The same as they'd have for the flu or any number of infections.
Once again, if double jabbed people can catch it but experience few to no symptoms is it something worth destroying the country over? In about 4 weeks all adults who want to be should be double jabbed. We're reopening before that to get our exit wave out before autumn. The exit wave is primarily going to hit the unvaccinated by choice. Those hospitalisations are going to happen whether we reopen in July, August or October or even April next year.
Finally, anyone who wants to can go and buy an FFP3 mask. If you feel uncomfortable for a while in the new/old normal then go and buy a pack of them. They aren't expensive and give very good two way protection. That is your responsibility. In a post vaccine world individual responsibility must be returned. Collective responsibility only made sense before vaccines.
Ensuring people wear masks in enclosed spaces does not ‘destroy the country’.
In one column masks reduce the transmission of covid.
On the other column, they steam up your glasses, you get a bit hot, some feel a bit constrained and you look silly.
No brainier.
Trouble is that masks have a similar logic structure to other Tragedy of the Commons problems.
If I wear a mask, it inconveniences me a bit. I benefit a bit from not wearing it.
But most of the benefit of mask wearing accrues to other people. They don't catch the Covid that I may unknowingly spread, despite being double-jabbed. And whilst the chances of me doing that are low, my understanding is that they're not zero.
It's where libertarianism falls down as a philosophy.
But the other people have been offered a vaccine now.
If they turned it down, that's on them. 🤷♂️
Aged 12- 17 nope. Unable to be vaccinated nope.
And again - anyone know what the long term effects of Covid are? Are we 100% sure it doesn't have a Shingles like second attack phase 30 years hence...
This, in a nutshell, is the weakness of a discretionary public health policy during a pandemic. Even those who prepared to wear a mask may now just think, what's the point?https://twitter.com/paulwaugh/status/1414848242928525314
But significant numbers of people (and almost all children) aren’t wearing them at the moment. What’s the point in setting public policy on the basis of laws that aren’t (or can’t be) enforced? Frankly you’re better off implementing guidance backed up by education campaigns. (and by that I mean genuine education, not scare advertising)
Burnham wriggling on R4 - if mask wearing is so important why not mandate it on Manchester trams? Passes the buck to the government.
Why not indeed? They surely have the right to make it a condition of travel (with suitable exemptions). I don't see any incompatibility between the withdrawal of the legal regulatory framework by the government and the need for the suppliers of services to give proper consideration to the risks to their staff and the fellow users of their services.
We have had posters here proudly announce that they are going to tell anyone who asks them to mask up to "f**k off". Presumably to the front line transport/waiting/shp staff who are making such requests. It's probably just the beer talking, but no need for such rudeness.
I'm teetotal. And yes I will tell anyone who insists I wear a mask to fuck off.
I will be telling any patient or relative who abuses our reception or nursing staff to go away. They will need to apologise and comply if they want to be seen.
Would that be legal?
Hasn't it long been the case that non-critical care can be withheld from patients committing verbal or physical abuse?
Not sure whether it (withholding care) ever happens much in practice.
For abuse absolutely. But he said "they will need to apologise and comply [with mask wearing?] if they want to be seen".
Greensill Capital paid Cameron salary of more than $1m a year Former prime minister said to have made in excess of $40,000 a day from collapsed finance firm
Nice work if you can get it.
Wtf?
I know how much "advisors" in the City get paid, with banks and funds taking advantage of their Rolodex, their draw at conferences, and yes, their occasional insights.
It's not $1m/year.
Plus massive quantities of share options.
Cameron was a fool.
Wasn’t Blair $1m per year with JPM?
But he was unusual. Cameron should have realised they were buying his reputation
In one column masks reduce the transmission of covid.
On the other column, they steam up your glasses, you get a bit hot, some feel a bit constrained and you look silly.
No brainier.
Trouble is that masks have a similar logic structure to other Tragedy of the Commons problems.
If I wear a mask, it inconveniences me a bit. I benefit a bit from not wearing it.
But most of the benefit of mask wearing accrues to other people. They don't catch the Covid that I may unknowingly spread, despite being double-jabbed. And whilst the chances of me doing that are low, my understanding is that they're not zero.
It's where libertarianism falls down as a philosophy.
I will not go to cafes or restaurants.
Aren't they only required when moving about the restaurant, but not while sat at your table? I dislike masks too, but the restaurant requirement is no major hurdle.
@Cyclefree paints a disturbing picture. What Couzens did to Sarah Everard was evil. The Metropolitan Police seem to stagger from one crisis to the next, learning nothing.
And yet – and forgive me for not being familiar with the case – it is not clear that the two are causally connected. If Couzens had been discovered earlier and thrown out of the police, as he clearly should have been, or not recruited in the first place, how would this have saved Sarah Everard's life?
Couzens kidnapped, raped and murdered Sarah Everard but not in his role as a police officer. This was not like, for instance, tasering and kicking Dalian Atkinson to death or shooting Jean Charles de Menezes for running for the tube, or shooting Harry Stanley for carrying a chair leg, where the assailants' police standing was crucial.
Moving on, yes, the clues were there, as they often are. But we need to be careful that we do not rule out the rehabilitation of offenders. That man was convicted of flashing, or these days, that woman sent an offensive tweet. We have in the recent past had actors and reporters who in past lives had served time for murder: I'm not sure that could happen now.
But yes, on the big picture, there do seem to be systemic problems with the Met and other police forces. Lessons, one suspects, will not be learned.
Fact that it looks like his chums in the police covered up his escalating offences contributed a lot to it happening is pretty bad. Disaster after disaster but worst that seems to happen is they get promoted.
And Cressida Dick was very senior at the time that Jean Charles de Menezes met his death, and participated in the cover-up.
Burnham wriggling on R4 - if mask wearing is so important why not mandate it on Manchester trams? Passes the buck to the government.
Why not indeed? They surely have the right to make it a condition of travel (with suitable exemptions). I don't see any incompatibility between the withdrawal of the legal regulatory framework by the government and the need for the suppliers of services to give proper consideration to the risks to their staff and the fellow users of their services.
We have had posters here proudly announce that they are going to tell anyone who asks them to mask up to "f**k off". Presumably to the front line transport/waiting/shp staff who are making such requests. It's probably just the beer talking, but no need for such rudeness.
I'm teetotal. And yes I will tell anyone who insists I wear a mask to fuck off.
I will be telling any patient or relative who abuses our reception or nursing staff to go away. They will need to apologise and comply if they want to be seen.
Would that be legal?
Hasn't it long been the case that non-critical care can be withheld from patients committing verbal or physical abuse?
Not sure whether it (withholding care) ever happens much in practice.
For abuse absolutely. But he said "they will need to apologise and comply [with mask wearing?] if they want to be seen".
Is that legal?
Ah, yes - sorry. Missed that.
I assume any organisation can impose whatever measures it wishes on it's premises. For the NHS (and other public sector) it could presumably be overruled by staff higher in NHS, Javid etc. In practice a patient could presumably claim an exemption and likely not be challenged on it?
Burnham wriggling on R4 - if mask wearing is so important why not mandate it on Manchester trams? Passes the buck to the government.
Because I he mandates it the issue moves down to conductors and other front line workers to deal with.and without any threat of a fine / police backup it's pointless.
The issue is that you can't explain that in an interview as people will repeat the 5 seconds they want and remove the nuance.
This. We know there are a decent number of self-entitled people out there who will aggressively say "fuck you" to anyone suggesting they need to wear a mask once the legal requirement is dropped.
With respect, telling someone that they have no right to make you wear a mask is not 'aggressive' per se. It's the law. So back off slapping that adverb please.
Secondly, refusing to wear a mask is not 'self-entitled'. That's incredibly patronising and supercilious of you. Some people cannot wear masks for medical reasons. Others don't wish to any longer because it is damaging to their mental health. I'm one of those. So stop hectoring others.
I bet you don't stick to the 30 mph speed limit at all times in built up areas?
This is turning into a dystopian Black Mirror episode where utter hypocrites feel it's their (self-entitled?!) right to lecture others.
The difference between the 30 mph - benefit for society - example and mask wearing is that one is illegal and the other isn't, or won't be very soon.
Yes, there's no need for fully vaccinated people to wear masks, or to feel bad about not doing so.
Exactly
Whatever you may think. People like me will continue to do so in public places. It seems strange , but coming to terms with being close to a lot of people is a bit scary after spending over a year doing the exact opposite. It's going to take some time to feel comfortable again and I shall continue to be wary for the foreseeable future especially if R is >1
Very much my attitude and out of respect for others I will wear a mask wherever it is sensible
I'll continue also. If it makes other people less anxious then what's the harm?
In one column masks reduce the transmission of covid.
On the other column, they steam up your glasses, you get a bit hot, some feel a bit constrained and you look silly.
No brainier.
Absolutely. Post-vaccines the latter is more important.
If you're an anti-vaxxer relying upon others wearing masks, perhaps buy an FFP3 mask instead?
Covid seems to be spreading pretty fast despite vaccines.
Among the unvaccinated.
We don't know that - especially given the fact the current infection / hospital numbers don't exactly correlate with eariler infection / hospital numbers.
I suspect an awful lot of people currently catching Covid are doubly vaccinated but are getting milder symptoms.
12% of people in hospital are double jabbed and 88% are unvaccinated. We know that kids and younger people don't really go to hospital for this either. That 88% is largely going to be people who refused the vaccine aged 50+.
The vaccines currently yield a reduction of 97% in hospital numbers for double jabbed people. Someone over 50 has got around a 9% chance of being hospitalised by COVID, now they have a 0.24% chance of going to hospital. The same as they'd have for the flu or any number of infections.
Once again, if double jabbed people can catch it but experience few to no symptoms is it something worth destroying the country over? In about 4 weeks all adults who want to be should be double jabbed. We're reopening before that to get our exit wave out before autumn. The exit wave is primarily going to hit the unvaccinated by choice. Those hospitalisations are going to happen whether we reopen in July, August or October or even April next year.
Finally, anyone who wants to can go and buy an FFP3 mask. If you feel uncomfortable for a while in the new/old normal then go and buy a pack of them. They aren't expensive and give very good two way protection. That is your responsibility. In a post vaccine world individual responsibility must be returned. Collective responsibility only made sense before vaccines.
My comment was based on the fact you said Covid was only spreading fast among the unvaccinated - which you've now shown isn't true.
What you've shown is Covid resulting in hospital admissions is no longer that common among the vaccinated - although it would be nice to have more up to figures to confirm your 12% fully vaccinated figure (because we really need to know if that figure is getting better or worse over time).
But my point has always been the same. If it doesn't put you in hospital or kill you then get on with life. We're already at that stage. The current death rate of about 20 per day relates back to an infection rate of about 15k per day. It's tiny and, once again, we aren't being told how many of those are from unvaccinated people. I'd take a guess at it being almost all of them.
In a scenario where 90% of people are double jabbed the onus falls on the 10% of refusers. Going by the age profile around 3% of the 5m who have said no will end up in hospital. We're going to get 150k hospitalisations from them whatever happens. Whether we wear masks, don't wear masks, don't have clubs open etc... The die is cast for those 150k by virtue of their own stupidity in saying no to the vaccine.
As it has always been - the point of the vaccines was to stop people turning up to hospital with COVID. That has been achieved. It's time to dump all of the restrictions.
In one column masks reduce the transmission of covid.
On the other column, they steam up your glasses, you get a bit hot, some feel a bit constrained and you look silly.
No brainier.
Trouble is that masks have a similar logic structure to other Tragedy of the Commons problems.
If I wear a mask, it inconveniences me a bit. I benefit a bit from not wearing it.
But most of the benefit of mask wearing accrues to other people. They don't catch the Covid that I may unknowingly spread, despite being double-jabbed. And whilst the chances of me doing that are low, my understanding is that they're not zero.
It's where libertarianism falls down as a philosophy.
I will not go to cafes or restaurants.
Aren't they only required when moving about the restaurant, but not while sat at your table? I dislike masks too, but the restaurant requirement is no major hurdle.
My issues are not merely physical, but also logical and psychological. The staff will be wearing masks still. If it's not safe for them to be without masks, nor safe for me to go to the toilet without one, then it isn't safe for me not to be wearing a mask sat down, and I'm in a fight/flight situation where I want to escape, not relax with my tea and scone.
@Cyclefree a friend resigned from the compliance department of a major investment bank that prided itself on its “ethical “ credentials, because his bosses expected him to ignore breaches of their professed standards. As he put it, if you are truly ethical, you don’t need to loudly proclaim the fact.
But if you aren't 100% ethical, shouting loudly that you are may stop people picking up obvious breaches.
I'm seeing the same thing in the umbrella market at the moment, I look at the people boosting about compliance and thinking should I point out xyz...
@Cyclefree paints a disturbing picture. What Couzens did to Sarah Everard was evil. The Metropolitan Police seem to stagger from one crisis to the next, learning nothing.
And yet – and forgive me for not being familiar with the case – it is not clear that the two are causally connected. If Couzens had been discovered earlier and thrown out of the police, as he clearly should have been, or not recruited in the first place, how would this have saved Sarah Everard's life?
Couzens kidnapped, raped and murdered Sarah Everard but not in his role as a police officer. This was not like, for instance, tasering and kicking Dalian Atkinson to death or shooting Jean Charles de Menezes for running for the tube, or shooting Harry Stanley for carrying a chair leg, where the assailants' police standing was crucial.
Moving on, yes, the clues were there, as they often are. But we need to be careful that we do not rule out the rehabilitation of offenders. That man was convicted of flashing, or these days, that woman sent an offensive tweet. We have in the recent past had actors and reporters who in past lives had served time for murder: I'm not sure that could happen now.
But yes, on the big picture, there do seem to be systemic problems with the Met and other police forces. Lessons, one suspects, will not be learned.
Fact that it looks like his chums in the police covered up his escalating offences contributed a lot to it happening is pretty bad. Disaster after disaster but worst that seems to happen is they get promoted.
And Cressida Dick was very senior at the time that Jean Charles de Menezes met his death, and participated in the cover-up.
She was the operational commander on the day (the one who decides if and when the trigger is pulled) so she can clearly claim "nothing to do with me squire".
Really don’t understand what some people have against masks. It’s a painless way of reducing the probability of passing on something nasty to a fellow citizen. Seems eminently sensible during an ongoing pandemic.
Wearing a mask is not a cost free exercise: - they do actually cost something, unless you just wear the same bit of cloth all the time (which is probably worse than no mask at all). - Those of us with glasses have to put up with the glasses misting up so we can’t see where we are going - From my own experience teaching I frequently have to ask pupils to take their masks off so I can hear them, so they reduce communication significantly - It also makes it much harder to tell who is who - As detailed above some find it gives them problems with breathing and others have significant mental health issues with them.
All of these points may be outweighed by the good they do in reducing transmission, but don’t think that requiring mask wearing is a zero cost exercise.
What the we do to deserve a Home Secretary as vile and thick as Priti Patel?
Offer them a Jeremy Corbyn government as the alternative.
So a administration led by a disingenuous racist fat fornicator is better?
Disingenuous - show me the politician who isn't. Boris is at worst midway on the scale there. Racist - no. Fat - yes. I don't think that's necessarily a bar to high office yet. Fornicator - yes. Do I care? Does anyone bar those immediately involved? Not really.
Honestly, you could have chosen so many other adjectives.
And still none of them would have been as bad as those describing Corbyn.
In one column masks reduce the transmission of covid.
On the other column, they steam up your glasses, you get a bit hot, some feel a bit constrained and you look silly.
No brainier.
Trouble is that masks have a similar logic structure to other Tragedy of the Commons problems.
If I wear a mask, it inconveniences me a bit. I benefit a bit from not wearing it.
But most of the benefit of mask wearing accrues to other people. They don't catch the Covid that I may unknowingly spread, despite being double-jabbed. And whilst the chances of me doing that are low, my understanding is that they're not zero.
It's where libertarianism falls down as a philosophy.
But the other people have been offered a vaccine now.
If they turned it down, that's on them. 🤷♂️
Aged 12- 17 nope. Unable to be vaccinated nope.
And again - anyone know what the long term effects of Covid are? Are we 100% sure it doesn't have a Shingles like second attack phase 30 years hence...
There's not much published or pre-print on other effects yet, but I am aware of a case control study on long Covid symptoms which, I am told, seems to be showing similar prevalence of long covid symptoms in children among cases (those who have had Covid) and controls (those who have not been exposed) which might suggest many of the symptoms are more to do with lockdown/disruption/other psychological effects (and no less real for that).
There's little evidence so far of some of the physical long Covid effects in children as seen in some adults (some adults have observable cardiovascular or lung damage). There are cases of inflamation in children, but they appear to self-resolve.
Big moves in France. They won't pay health workers who refuse the jab “From September 15, if you’re a carer and you’re not vaccinated, you will no longer be able to work and you won’t be paid any more,” Olivier Véran says. He noted that carers were already vaccinated for Hep-B. https://twitter.com/steve_hawkes/status/1414852130205208584
The French health and care systems will therefore collapse in two months.
After all that was what we were told would happen in the UK if the much smaller number of anti-vaxxers were given the same choice.
Best that the two groups stay apart to protect the former.
So which group has been told to modify their behaviour?
Yep, the selfish get to carry on with impunity.
What are you proposing? Compulsory anti-vaccination?
The reality is that we have very high vax rates in this country - a tremendous asset which we should now leverage to unlock, unlock, unlock.
I am ok with mandatory masks on public transport if it makes people feel safer, but pretty much everything else should go.
Follow France's lead: If you are not jabbed, you are excluded from public activities - transport, eating, drinking, entertainment. The the vulnerable can attend these venues knowing that there are no anti-vaxxers in attendance.
Burnham wriggling on R4 - if mask wearing is so important why not mandate it on Manchester trams? Passes the buck to the government.
Why not indeed? They surely have the right to make it a condition of travel (with suitable exemptions). I don't see any incompatibility between the withdrawal of the legal regulatory framework by the government and the need for the suppliers of services to give proper consideration to the risks to their staff and the fellow users of their services.
We have had posters here proudly announce that they are going to tell anyone who asks them to mask up to "f**k off". Presumably to the front line transport/waiting/shp staff who are making such requests. It's probably just the beer talking, but no need for such rudeness.
I'm teetotal. And yes I will tell anyone who insists I wear a mask to fuck off.
I will be telling any patient or relative who abuses our reception or nursing staff to go away. They will need to apologise and comply if they want to be seen.
Would that be legal?
Hasn't it long been the case that non-critical care can be withheld from patients committing verbal or physical abuse?
Not sure whether it (withholding care) ever happens much in practice.
For abuse absolutely. But he said "they will need to apologise and comply [with mask wearing?] if they want to be seen".
Is that legal?
Ah, yes - sorry. Missed that.
I assume any organisation can impose whatever measures it wishes on it's premises. For the NHS (and other public sector) it could presumably be overruled by staff higher in NHS, Javid etc. In practice a patient could presumably claim an exemption and likely not be challenged on it?
Yes I'm not sure that the NHS could discriminate against someone who is not breaking the law. @Foxy might easily be talking bollocks here but perhaps he can enlighten us.
Best that the two groups stay apart to protect the former.
So which group has been told to modify their behaviour?
Yep, the selfish get to carry on with impunity.
What are you proposing? Compulsory anti-vaccination?
The reality is that we have very high vax rates in this country - a tremendous asset which we should now leverage to unlock, unlock, unlock.
I am ok with mandatory masks on public transport if it makes people feel safer, but pretty much everything else should go.
Follow France's lead: If you are not jabbed, you are excluded from public activities - transport, eating, drinking, entertainment. The the vulnerable can attend these venues knowing that there are no anti-vaxxers in attendance.
Truly it would solve the anti-vaxer problem swiftly if they were excluded from eating and drinking.
Burnham wriggling on R4 - if mask wearing is so important why not mandate it on Manchester trams? Passes the buck to the government.
Because I he mandates it the issue moves down to conductors and other front line workers to deal with.and without any threat of a fine / police backup it's pointless.
The issue is that you can't explain that in an interview as people will repeat the 5 seconds they want and remove the nuance.
This. We know there are a decent number of self-entitled people out there who will aggressively say "fuck you" to anyone suggesting they need to wear a mask once the legal requirement is dropped.
With respect, telling someone that they have no right to make you wear a mask is not 'aggressive' per se. It's the law. So back off slapping that adverb please.
Secondly, refusing to wear a mask is not 'self-entitled'. That's incredibly patronising and supercilious of you. Some people cannot wear masks for medical reasons. Others don't wish to any longer because it is damaging to their mental health. I'm one of those. So stop hectoring others.
I bet you don't stick to the 30 mph speed limit at all times in built up areas?
This is turning into a dystopian Black Mirror episode where utter hypocrites feel it's their (self-entitled?!) right to lecture others.
The difference between the 30 mph - benefit for society - example and mask wearing is that one is illegal and the other isn't, or won't be very soon.
Yes, there's no need for fully vaccinated people to wear masks, or to feel bad about not doing so.
Exactly
Whatever you may think. People like me will continue to do so in public places. It seems strange , but coming to terms with being close to a lot of people is a bit scary after spending over a year doing the exact opposite. It's going to take some time to feel comfortable again and I shall continue to be wary for the foreseeable future especially if R is >1
Very much my attitude and out of respect for others I will wear a mask wherever it is sensible
I'll continue also. If it makes other people less anxious then what's the harm?
Best that the two groups stay apart to protect the former.
So which group has been told to modify their behaviour?
Yep, the selfish get to carry on with impunity.
What are you proposing? Compulsory anti-vaccination?
The reality is that we have very high vax rates in this country - a tremendous asset which we should now leverage to unlock, unlock, unlock.
I am ok with mandatory masks on public transport if it makes people feel safer, but pretty much everything else should go.
Follow France's lead: If you are not jabbed, you are excluded from public activities - transport, eating, drinking, entertainment. The the vulnerable can attend these venues knowing that there are no anti-vaxxers in attendance.
No thanks. Don’t want to live in some kind of paperwork state.
Best that the two groups stay apart to protect the former.
So which group has been told to modify their behaviour?
Yep, the selfish get to carry on with impunity.
What are you proposing? Compulsory anti-vaccination?
The reality is that we have very high vax rates in this country - a tremendous asset which we should now leverage to unlock, unlock, unlock.
I am ok with mandatory masks on public transport if it makes people feel safer, but pretty much everything else should go.
Follow France's lead: If you are not jabbed, you are excluded from public activities - transport, eating, drinking, entertainment. The the vulnerable can attend these venues knowing that there are no anti-vaxxers in attendance.
No thanks. Don’t want to live in some kind of paperwork state.
It's not paperwork, it's on your phone
Here's the thing, you and topping and some others might not like it, heck it's definitely the state imposing and yes "We'd all rather live in a society without "Papiere, Bitte" but realistically it's a big tool to get rid of the virus amongst the younguns.
Really don’t understand what some people have against masks. It’s a painless way of reducing the probability of passing on something nasty to a fellow citizen. Seems eminently sensible during an ongoing pandemic.
Wearing a mask is not a cost free exercise: - they do actually cost something, unless you just wear the same bit of cloth all the time (which is probably worse than no mask at all). - Those of us with glasses have to put up with the glasses misting up so we can’t see where we are going - From my own experience teaching I frequently have to ask pupils to take their masks off so I can hear them, so they reduce communication significantly - It also makes it much harder to tell who is who - As detailed above some find it gives them problems with breathing and others have significant mental health issues with them.
All of these points may be outweighed by the good they do in reducing transmission, but don’t think that requiring mask wearing is a zero cost exercise.
If your glasses are misting up, the fit of the mask is wrong.
I wear glasses, so not victim blaming here.....
Part of the problem is that fitting masks requires a bit of practise, and trying different options to get it right.
Is it just me or does data seem harder to decipher. Or perhaps I have just given up trying to figure out.
I still think we should have unlocked as originally promised last month. We can’t encumber society forever.
The data is a bit messy, as we are now seeing numbers that are skewed heavily towards the young and the unvaccinated, rather than more broadly across the whole population. So even doing a comparison with the previous waves isn't much use unless you look at segments of the population.
That said the data is unequivocal in one regard, the vaccines provide a very high degree of protection against serious illness and death. The vaccines we have are almost miraculously good in terms of limiting harm.
By far the best documentary I have seen in several years was the BBC produced OJ Simpson, Made in America. It really brought out and explained the reasoning of the black members of the Jury with a clarity that no one else had. The black community of LA didn't just distrust the police, they hated them. They were a hostile, dangerous occupying force and they would give them nothing. No matter what. The George Floyd murder and the BLM led anger it generated fell on very fertile soil.
This is where the alienation of society from the police leads to. It is not where we want to go. Unlike @Leon I find @Cyclefree's piece timely. We are on a dangerous path and we are sleepwalking along it. I don't have much confidence that Priti Patel is the sort of Home Secretary who is going to wake us up.
I look at the police and it feels very familiar, like finance a few years ago - a group which thinks itself untouchable, with poor leadership, with serious systemic problems, rocketing from problem to problem with no clear idea how to stop them happening. There will be plenty of good people in it trying to do their best but without effective guidance, help and leadership, it's a bit hit and miss.
Three things were necessary before finance realised it needed to sort itself out:-
1. A near death experience. 2. Persistent pressure from outside bodies - regulators, governments, the press & shareholders - to sort themselves out. 3. Senior management who realised that they had to do focus on this and harness the goodwill of the many staff fed up with what they saw happening.
The police don't face any of this and we really don't, as @DavidL has said, want 1 to happen.
The pity of it is that we are letting down not just the victims of crime but also the many policemen who are trying to to do a difficult, dangerous and necessary job.
2 will never happen either. Pressure happens but its never persistent, as that's attacking the police etc so after the incident which led to pressure is over its seen as unfair.
Best that the two groups stay apart to protect the former.
So which group has been told to modify their behaviour?
Yep, the selfish get to carry on with impunity.
What are you proposing? Compulsory anti-vaccination?
The reality is that we have very high vax rates in this country - a tremendous asset which we should now leverage to unlock, unlock, unlock.
I am ok with mandatory masks on public transport if it makes people feel safer, but pretty much everything else should go.
Follow France's lead: If you are not jabbed, you are excluded from public activities - transport, eating, drinking, entertainment. The the vulnerable can attend these venues knowing that there are no anti-vaxxers in attendance.
No thanks. Don’t want to live in some kind of paperwork state.
It's not paperwork, it's on your phone
Even worse.
The thread header is about how shite the police are; don’t want to feel at all responsible to them for whether I can buy a fucking sandwich.
Scottish Lib Dems. If not Cole-Hamilton, then who?
Ms Swinton? If someone is willing to stand aside for her. But that would involve a by election as IIRC the LDs have no List MSPs (which would mean an automatic shoo-in). And Mr Rennie seems too young to retire from Holyrood.
Big moves in France. They won't pay health workers who refuse the jab “From September 15, if you’re a carer and you’re not vaccinated, you will no longer be able to work and you won’t be paid any more,” Olivier Véran says. He noted that carers were already vaccinated for Hep-B. https://twitter.com/steve_hawkes/status/1414852130205208584
If Delta is as scary as some here would contend, they should stop buggering about and legally mandate vaccination for adults. We can then be done and dusted with this in weeks.
Mandatory vaccination for the general population?
Opening that can of worms would making the football racism thing look like a tea party.
Best that the two groups stay apart to protect the former.
So which group has been told to modify their behaviour?
Yep, the selfish get to carry on with impunity.
What are you proposing? Compulsory anti-vaccination?
The reality is that we have very high vax rates in this country - a tremendous asset which we should now leverage to unlock, unlock, unlock.
I am ok with mandatory masks on public transport if it makes people feel safer, but pretty much everything else should go.
Follow France's lead: If you are not jabbed, you are excluded from public activities - transport, eating, drinking, entertainment. The the vulnerable can attend these venues knowing that there are no anti-vaxxers in attendance.
No thanks. Don’t want to live in some kind of paperwork state.
It's not paperwork, it's on your phone
Here's the thing, you and topping and some others might not like it, heck it's definitely the state imposing and yes "We'd all rather live in a society without "Papiere, Bitte" but realistically it's a big tool to get rid of the virus amongst the younguns.
Why do we need such drastic measures to get rid of a not very harmful virus amongst the younguns (young guns?)?
Scottish Lib Dems. If not Cole-Hamilton, then who?
Ms Swinton? If someone is willing to stand aside for her. But that would involve a by election as IIRC the LDs have no List MSPs (which would mean an automatic shoo-in). And Mr Rennie seems too young to retire from Holyrood.
So I rather think perhaps Mr McArthur.
Didn’t Swinton piss on her chips with the worst election campaign strategy of modern times?
Or has she been forgiven? I’m all for second chances.
Scottish Lib Dems. If not Cole-Hamilton, then who?
Ms Swinton? If someone is willing to stand aside for her. But that would involve a by election as IIRC the LDs have no List MSPs (which would mean an automatic shoo-in). And Mr Rennie seems too young to retire from Holyrood.
So I rather think perhaps Mr McArthur.
Didn’t Swinton piss on her chips with the worst election campaign strategy of modern times?
Or has she been forgiven? I’m all for second chances.
Well, Mr Carmichael also rather micturated on his bere bannock with that unfortunate judgement in the court case.
Edit: Also a MP. Which may be logical for a Unionist party to have its leader in London. But is it a good look?
Best that the two groups stay apart to protect the former.
So which group has been told to modify their behaviour?
Yep, the selfish get to carry on with impunity.
What are you proposing? Compulsory anti-vaccination?
The reality is that we have very high vax rates in this country - a tremendous asset which we should now leverage to unlock, unlock, unlock.
I am ok with mandatory masks on public transport if it makes people feel safer, but pretty much everything else should go.
Follow France's lead: If you are not jabbed, you are excluded from public activities - transport, eating, drinking, entertainment. The the vulnerable can attend these venues knowing that there are no anti-vaxxers in attendance.
No thanks. Don’t want to live in some kind of paperwork state.
Silly objection. You already show a ticket to get in to a show or on to a train. A paperwork state is one where you can be arbitrarily asked in the street to prove who you are.
In 10 years time the state will know who and where you are at all times anyway via cctv and facial recognition. Paperwork is very last millennium.
Best that the two groups stay apart to protect the former.
So which group has been told to modify their behaviour?
Yep, the selfish get to carry on with impunity.
What are you proposing? Compulsory anti-vaccination?
The reality is that we have very high vax rates in this country - a tremendous asset which we should now leverage to unlock, unlock, unlock.
I am ok with mandatory masks on public transport if it makes people feel safer, but pretty much everything else should go.
Follow France's lead: If you are not jabbed, you are excluded from public activities - transport, eating, drinking, entertainment. The the vulnerable can attend these venues knowing that there are no anti-vaxxers in attendance.
Assuming you are double-vaccinated + 14 days why on earth would you be bothered whether there are antivaxxers present or not? We must stop this divisiveness.
Scottish Lib Dems. If not Cole-Hamilton, then who?
Ms Swinton? If someone is willing to stand aside for her. But that would involve a by election as IIRC the LDs have no List MSPs (which would mean an automatic shoo-in). And Mr Rennie seems too young to retire from Holyrood.
So I rather think perhaps Mr McArthur.
Didn’t Swinton piss on her chips with the worst election campaign strategy of modern times?
Or has she been forgiven? I’m all for second chances.
Well, Mr Carmichael also rather micturated on his bere bannock with that unfortunate judgement in the court case.
I don’t know much about Scottish politics, and about the Scottish Lib Dems practically nothing.
If you were advising them, what would you suggest? (I assume you are an opponent, but not a tribalist).
Best that the two groups stay apart to protect the former.
So which group has been told to modify their behaviour?
Yep, the selfish get to carry on with impunity.
What are you proposing? Compulsory anti-vaccination?
The reality is that we have very high vax rates in this country - a tremendous asset which we should now leverage to unlock, unlock, unlock.
I am ok with mandatory masks on public transport if it makes people feel safer, but pretty much everything else should go.
Follow France's lead: If you are not jabbed, you are excluded from public activities - transport, eating, drinking, entertainment. The the vulnerable can attend these venues knowing that there are no anti-vaxxers in attendance.
Assuming you are double-vaccinated + 14 days why on earth would you be bothered whether there are antivaxxers present or not? We must stop this divisiveness.
Anti-vaxers are blocking those freedoms for the 3.8m severely critically vulnerable, those who have no choice unlike the anti-vaxers.
Who's freedom matters more those who have done all they can to do the right thing and through no fault of their own are still vulnerable, despite being vaccinated, or those who don't give a shit about the rest of society ?
Big moves in France. They won't pay health workers who refuse the jab “From September 15, if you’re a carer and you’re not vaccinated, you will no longer be able to work and you won’t be paid any more,” Olivier Véran says. He noted that carers were already vaccinated for Hep-B. https://twitter.com/steve_hawkes/status/1414852130205208584
The French health and care systems will therefore collapse in two months.
After all that was what we were told would happen in the UK if the much smaller number of anti-vaxxers were given the same choice.
I can't fathom why anyone would want an anti-vaxxer working in health care in the first place, I'd be looking for any reason to fire them, pandemic or not.
Burnham wriggling on R4 - if mask wearing is so important why not mandate it on Manchester trams? Passes the buck to the government.
Because I he mandates it the issue moves down to conductors and other front line workers to deal with.and without any threat of a fine / police backup it's pointless.
The issue is that you can't explain that in an interview as people will repeat the 5 seconds they want and remove the nuance.
That's just not true.
If he wanted to, he could mandate it - and some people would wear it because its mandated even without the threat of draconian police state actions....
No, he can't for buses, which account for the majority of public transport in his area.
Best that the two groups stay apart to protect the former.
So which group has been told to modify their behaviour?
Yep, the selfish get to carry on with impunity.
What are you proposing? Compulsory anti-vaccination?
The reality is that we have very high vax rates in this country - a tremendous asset which we should now leverage to unlock, unlock, unlock.
I am ok with mandatory masks on public transport if it makes people feel safer, but pretty much everything else should go.
Follow France's lead: If you are not jabbed, you are excluded from public activities - transport, eating, drinking, entertainment. The the vulnerable can attend these venues knowing that there are no anti-vaxxers in attendance.
No thanks. Don’t want to live in some kind of paperwork state.
Silly objection. You already show a ticket to get in to a show or on to a train. A paperwork state is one where you can be arbitrarily asked in the street to prove who you are.
In 10 years time the state will know who and where you are at all times anyway via cctv and facial recognition. Paperwork is very last millennium.
Let’s imagine I was immune compromised due to my HIV status, and for other reasons I am not vaxxed.
(This is not true, it’s for the sake of argument).
What status precisely am I supposed to show Bob Jobsworth the Train Inspector?
Best that the two groups stay apart to protect the former.
So which group has been told to modify their behaviour?
Yep, the selfish get to carry on with impunity.
What are you proposing? Compulsory anti-vaccination?
The reality is that we have very high vax rates in this country - a tremendous asset which we should now leverage to unlock, unlock, unlock.
I am ok with mandatory masks on public transport if it makes people feel safer, but pretty much everything else should go.
Follow France's lead: If you are not jabbed, you are excluded from public activities - transport, eating, drinking, entertainment. The the vulnerable can attend these venues knowing that there are no anti-vaxxers in attendance.
Assuming you are double-vaccinated + 14 days why on earth would you be bothered whether there are antivaxxers present or not? We must stop this divisiveness.
I've spoken to one person amongst my friend group who wasn't vaccinated (And has had the chance). His opposition would last all of a minute if he needed to get vaccinated to head into a pub.
Bad people exist. Many more people are getting away with stuff, and don't get caught, @Foxy alludes to this. They can even exist in HR departments. I am not convinced there is a clear line between good and bad, or that the answer to this problem is to allow people to exercise their judgement a bit more in rooting out evil. I am more of the view expressed by a famous writer once that the line between good and evil is a shifting one that exists within all human hearts, and we should conduct our affairs accordingly.
I agree with the last sentence. A good leader will realise this and manage accordingly. But I strongly feel that we all need to learn to exercise judgment more. Too many people - certainly in finance - rely on procedures without applying any sort of judgment at all and it can lead to some astonishingly bad decisions.
Judgment without procedure is as bad as procedure without judgment. As your header suggests, both are required.
This, in a nutshell, is the weakness of a discretionary public health policy during a pandemic. Even those who prepared to wear a mask may now just think, what's the point?https://twitter.com/paulwaugh/status/1414848242928525314
But significant numbers of people (and almost all children) aren’t wearing them at the moment. What’s the point in setting public policy on the basis of laws that aren’t (or can’t be) enforced? Frankly you’re better off implementing guidance backed up by education campaigns. (and by that I mean genuine education, not scare advertising)
I agree. Things that cant really be enforced shouldn't really be made into law. It was only worth it during far worse parts of the pandemic to give at least some additional weight, but now things are very different in the pandemic even as cases are presently high. The risks are much lower and so a law that is not really enforceable is no longer proportionate or necessary as a signalling measure.
Most people followed guidance earlier in the pandemic even when that guidance was not law. Most people follow the rules of a business/service provider even when it's not law.
Yes, some people will resist and there will be angry incidents when a business asks people sans law to wear a mask. But are those few incidents representative? Most will comply if asked, even if it's not law, especially if they cannot access the service they want unless they do.
I think we're in danger of letting perfection be the enemy here. That some people will spit in the face of discretionary rules does not mean discretionary rules are meaningless.
Best that the two groups stay apart to protect the former.
So which group has been told to modify their behaviour?
Yep, the selfish get to carry on with impunity.
What are you proposing? Compulsory anti-vaccination?
The reality is that we have very high vax rates in this country - a tremendous asset which we should now leverage to unlock, unlock, unlock.
I am ok with mandatory masks on public transport if it makes people feel safer, but pretty much everything else should go.
Follow France's lead: If you are not jabbed, you are excluded from public activities - transport, eating, drinking, entertainment. The the vulnerable can attend these venues knowing that there are no anti-vaxxers in attendance.
No thanks. Don’t want to live in some kind of paperwork state.
Silly objection. You already show a ticket to get in to a show or on to a train. A paperwork state is one where you can be arbitrarily asked in the street to prove who you are.
In 10 years time the state will know who and where you are at all times anyway via cctv and facial recognition. Paperwork is very last millennium.
As for the CCTV etc, it’s a baleful and sad indictment on this country that nobody seems to care apart from David Davis MP.
@Cyclefree a friend resigned from the compliance department of a major investment bank that prided itself on its “ethical “ credentials, because his bosses expected him to ignore breaches of their professed standards. As he put it, if you are truly ethical, you don’t need to loudly proclaim the fact.
But if you aren't 100% ethical, shouting loudly that you are may stop people picking up obvious breaches.
I'm seeing the same thing in the umbrella market at the moment, I look at the people boosting about compliance and thinking should I point out xyz...
My own view is that it should be a red flag.
"The louder he talked about his honour, the faster we counted the spoons."
Best that the two groups stay apart to protect the former.
So which group has been told to modify their behaviour?
Yep, the selfish get to carry on with impunity.
What are you proposing? Compulsory anti-vaccination?
The reality is that we have very high vax rates in this country - a tremendous asset which we should now leverage to unlock, unlock, unlock.
I am ok with mandatory masks on public transport if it makes people feel safer, but pretty much everything else should go.
Follow France's lead: If you are not jabbed, you are excluded from public activities - transport, eating, drinking, entertainment. The the vulnerable can attend these venues knowing that there are no anti-vaxxers in attendance.
No thanks. Don’t want to live in some kind of paperwork state.
Silly objection. You already show a ticket to get in to a show or on to a train. A paperwork state is one where you can be arbitrarily asked in the street to prove who you are.
In 10 years time the state will know who and where you are at all times anyway via cctv and facial recognition. Paperwork is very last millennium.
Let’s imagine I was immune compromised due to my HIV status, and for other reasons I am not vaxxed.
(This is not true, it’s for the sake of argument).
What status precisely am I supposed to show Bob Jobsworth the Train Inspector?
I believe the domestic (Can't be international as different countries might like to know if you're actually vaccinated or not) vaccine QR code is pari passu for those who can't be vaccinated and the vaccinated.
I've only seen a few people wearing mask exemption lanyards. One was yesterday - a shopworker in Huntingdon. Zero problems with that.
However: at half term I took the little 'un to an attraction in Essex. There was a queue to get in, and behind us was a family of five. The adults and two eldest children (late teenagers, from their looks) all wore mask exemption lanyards. The youngest child (who would not have to wear a mask) did not.
Rather unkindly, I did wonder what medical condition(s) meant they had to have mask exemptions.
They did not keep their distance, and crowded in towards the rest of the queue. They occasionally swore as they talked. The two adults and one of the teenagers then lit cigarettes whilst in the queue ...
Is it just me or does data seem harder to decipher. Or perhaps I have just given up trying to figure out.
I still think we should have unlocked as originally promised last month. We can’t encumber society forever.
The data is a bit messy, as we are now seeing numbers that are skewed heavily towards the young and the unvaccinated, rather than more broadly across the whole population. So even doing a comparison with the previous waves isn't much use unless you look at segments of the population.
That said the data is unequivocal in one regard, the vaccines provide a very high degree of protection against serious illness and death. The vaccines we have are almost miraculously good in terms of limiting harm.
Thanks.
Then why can’t we simply see a graph that shows infection and hospitalisation per age cohort, per vax status.
I feel like the entire media is effectively innumerate.
I've only seen a few people wearing mask exemption lanyards. One was yesterday - a shopworker in Huntingdon. Zero problems with that.
However: at half term I took the little 'un to an attraction in Essex. There was a queue to get in, and behind us was a family of five. The adults and two eldest children (late teenagers, from their looks) all wore mask exemption lanyards. The youngest child (who would not have to wear a mask) did not.
Rather unkindly, I did wonder what medical condition(s) meant they had to have mask exemptions.
They did not keep their distance, and crowded in towards the rest of the queue. They occasionally swore as they talked. The two adults and one of the teenagers then lit cigarettes whilst in the queue ...
Yeah this is the sort of mindset that people will need to jettison. People are going to behave anti-socially whatever happens and you need to learn to live with it.
It's not going to be easy because we have had 18 months of grooming from the govt. Shaking that off will take some doing. But we are going to have to make an effort to do so.
Best that the two groups stay apart to protect the former.
So which group has been told to modify their behaviour?
Yep, the selfish get to carry on with impunity.
What are you proposing? Compulsory anti-vaccination?
The reality is that we have very high vax rates in this country - a tremendous asset which we should now leverage to unlock, unlock, unlock.
I am ok with mandatory masks on public transport if it makes people feel safer, but pretty much everything else should go.
Follow France's lead: If you are not jabbed, you are excluded from public activities - transport, eating, drinking, entertainment. The the vulnerable can attend these venues knowing that there are no anti-vaxxers in attendance.
Assuming you are double-vaccinated + 14 days why on earth would you be bothered whether there are antivaxxers present or not? We must stop this divisiveness.
Anti-vaxers are blocking those freedoms for the 3.8m severely critically vulnerable, those who have no choice unlike the anti-vaxers.
Who's freedom matters more those who have done all they can to do the right thing and through no fault of their own are still vulnerable, despite being vaccinated, or those who don't give a shit about the rest of society ?
In Philip_Thompson's world the only person and thing that matters is Philip_Thompson's slight dislike and inconvenience of wearing a mask.
Burnham wriggling on R4 - if mask wearing is so important why not mandate it on Manchester trams? Passes the buck to the government.
Because I he mandates it the issue moves down to conductors and other front line workers to deal with.and without any threat of a fine / police backup it's pointless.
The issue is that you can't explain that in an interview as people will repeat the 5 seconds they want and remove the nuance.
This. We know there are a decent number of self-entitled people out there who will aggressively say "fuck you" to anyone suggesting they need to wear a mask once the legal requirement is dropped.
With respect, telling someone that they have no right to make you wear a mask is not 'aggressive' per se. It's the law. So back off slapping that adverb please.
Secondly, refusing to wear a mask is not 'self-entitled'. That's incredibly patronising and supercilious of you. Some people cannot wear masks for medical reasons. Others don't wish to any longer because it is damaging to their mental health. I'm one of those. So stop hectoring others.
I bet you don't stick to the 30 mph speed limit at all times in built up areas?
This is turning into a dystopian Black Mirror episode where utter hypocrites feel it's their (self-entitled?!) right to lecture others.
The difference between the 30 mph - benefit for society - example and mask wearing is that one is illegal and the other isn't, or won't be very soon.
Advising that people can "fuck off" if they want you to wear a mask is aggressive. And yes, I do stick to the speed limits, especially in 30mph areas. They exist for a reason.
Best that the two groups stay apart to protect the former.
So which group has been told to modify their behaviour?
Yep, the selfish get to carry on with impunity.
What are you proposing? Compulsory anti-vaccination?
The reality is that we have very high vax rates in this country - a tremendous asset which we should now leverage to unlock, unlock, unlock.
I am ok with mandatory masks on public transport if it makes people feel safer, but pretty much everything else should go.
Follow France's lead: If you are not jabbed, you are excluded from public activities - transport, eating, drinking, entertainment. The the vulnerable can attend these venues knowing that there are no anti-vaxxers in attendance.
No thanks. Don’t want to live in some kind of paperwork state.
Silly objection. You already show a ticket to get in to a show or on to a train. A paperwork state is one where you can be arbitrarily asked in the street to prove who you are.
In 10 years time the state will know who and where you are at all times anyway via cctv and facial recognition. Paperwork is very last millennium.
Let’s imagine I was immune compromised due to my HIV status, and for other reasons I am not vaxxed.
(This is not true, it’s for the sake of argument).
What status precisely am I supposed to show Bob Jobsworth the Train Inspector?
Best that the two groups stay apart to protect the former.
So which group has been told to modify their behaviour?
Yep, the selfish get to carry on with impunity.
What are you proposing? Compulsory anti-vaccination?
The reality is that we have very high vax rates in this country - a tremendous asset which we should now leverage to unlock, unlock, unlock.
I am ok with mandatory masks on public transport if it makes people feel safer, but pretty much everything else should go.
Follow France's lead: If you are not jabbed, you are excluded from public activities - transport, eating, drinking, entertainment. The the vulnerable can attend these venues knowing that there are no anti-vaxxers in attendance.
Assuming you are double-vaccinated + 14 days why on earth would you be bothered whether there are antivaxxers present or not? We must stop this divisiveness.
We must accentuate it. Annoying anti-vaxxers is both a duty and a pleasure in its own right. You can still get covid after 2 vaccines, and if you say it's unlikely to kill you, I reply that I object to having even the mildest cold inflicted on me by someone choosing to be a cnt.
At the risk of annoying many people, I'll go out on a limb by suggesting that the relaxation of the remaining COVID19 measures on the UK on July 19th might only have a marginal effect on the dynamic of the epidemic.
Scottish Lib Dems. If not Cole-Hamilton, then who?
Ms Swinton? If someone is willing to stand aside for her. But that would involve a by election as IIRC the LDs have no List MSPs (which would mean an automatic shoo-in). And Mr Rennie seems too young to retire from Holyrood.
So I rather think perhaps Mr McArthur.
Didn’t Swinton piss on her chips with the worst election campaign strategy of modern times?
Or has she been forgiven? I’m all for second chances.
Well, Mr Carmichael also rather micturated on his bere bannock with that unfortunate judgement in the court case.
I don’t know much about Scottish politics, and about the Scottish Lib Dems practically nothing.
If you were advising them, what would you suggest? (I assume you are an opponent, but not a tribalist).
If I wanted the equivalent of Ian Murray MP (last man (etc) left standing) I'd pick Mr Cole Hamilton. Whacking majority (same sort of tactical voting from Tories I suspect as benefits Ian Murray). And he's as well known as any of the others, perhaps more.
Slightly surprising they identify Ms Chamberlain as a front runner as she is a MP.
But a parliamentary party that would fit into a 2CV doesn't need much supervision evbe if it is on the other end of the line from London. They are now well behind Labour and the Scottish Greens, which isn't saying much.
I'll bne interested to see whether the new leader is seen quite so often being photographed with animals, preferably copulating ones - I have a slight suspicion that Mr Rennie was trying to take a leaf out of Ms Davidson's book but someone somewhere has a sense of humour (or photographer has a sptay can of hormone quietly tucked away in his camera bag).
Is it just me or does data seem harder to decipher. Or perhaps I have just given up trying to figure out.
I still think we should have unlocked as originally promised last month. We can’t encumber society forever.
The data is a bit messy, as we are now seeing numbers that are skewed heavily towards the young and the unvaccinated, rather than more broadly across the whole population. So even doing a comparison with the previous waves isn't much use unless you look at segments of the population.
That said the data is unequivocal in one regard, the vaccines provide a very high degree of protection against serious illness and death. The vaccines we have are almost miraculously good in terms of limiting harm.
Thanks.
Then why can’t we simply see a graph that shows infection and hospitalisation per age cohort, per vax status.
I feel like the entire media is effectively innumerate.
because the dataset doesn't exist in usable form (probably because of privacy rules)...
Best that the two groups stay apart to protect the former.
So which group has been told to modify their behaviour?
Yep, the selfish get to carry on with impunity.
What are you proposing? Compulsory anti-vaccination?
The reality is that we have very high vax rates in this country - a tremendous asset which we should now leverage to unlock, unlock, unlock.
I am ok with mandatory masks on public transport if it makes people feel safer, but pretty much everything else should go.
Follow France's lead: If you are not jabbed, you are excluded from public activities - transport, eating, drinking, entertainment. The the vulnerable can attend these venues knowing that there are no anti-vaxxers in attendance.
Assuming you are double-vaccinated + 14 days why on earth would you be bothered whether there are antivaxxers present or not? We must stop this divisiveness.
Anti-vaxers are blocking those freedoms for the 3.8m severely critically vulnerable, those who have no choice unlike the anti-vaxers.
Who's freedom matters more those who have done all they can to do the right thing and through no fault of their own are still vulnerable, despite being vaccinated, or those who don't give a shit about the rest of society ?
In Philip_Thompson's world the only person and thing that matters is Philip_Thompson's slight dislike and inconvenience of wearing a mask.
I think there have been plenty of posters, not least @Cocky_cockney, who have described for you some of the issues with wearing masks. I don't think he ( @Cocky_cockney ) mentioned @Philip_Thompson once.
Burnham wriggling on R4 - if mask wearing is so important why not mandate it on Manchester trams? Passes the buck to the government.
Why not indeed? They surely have the right to make it a condition of travel (with suitable exemptions). I don't see any incompatibility between the withdrawal of the legal regulatory framework by the government and the need for the suppliers of services to give proper consideration to the risks to their staff and the fellow users of their services.
We have had posters here proudly announce that they are going to tell anyone who asks them to mask up to "f**k off". Presumably to the front line transport/waiting/shp staff who are making such requests. It's probably just the beer talking, but no need for such rudeness.
I'm teetotal. And yes I will tell anyone who insists I wear a mask to fuck off.
I will be telling any patient or relative who abuses our reception or nursing staff to go away. They will need to apologise and comply if they want to be seen.
Would that be legal?
Hasn't it long been the case that non-critical care can be withheld from patients committing verbal or physical abuse?
Not sure whether it (withholding care) ever happens much in practice.
For abuse absolutely. But he said "they will need to apologise and comply [with mask wearing?] if they want to be seen".
Is that legal?
Ah, yes - sorry. Missed that.
I assume any organisation can impose whatever measures it wishes on it's premises. For the NHS (and other public sector) it could presumably be overruled by staff higher in NHS, Javid etc. In practice a patient could presumably claim an exemption and likely not be challenged on it?
Yes I'm not sure that the NHS could discriminate against someone who is not breaking the law. @Foxy might easily be talking bollocks here but perhaps he can enlighten us.
Telling an NHS receptionist to F off could very well be, albeit in a minor and very limited way, breaking the law. It would be unlikely to be in the public interest to prosecute but a receptionist would have a complaint. From the CPS website -
“ These offences contrary to the Public Order Act 1986 relate to threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour, or display of visible representations, which:
- Are likely to cause fear of, or to provoke, immediate violence: section 4; - Intentionally cause harassment, alarm or distress: section 4A; or - Are likely to cause harassment, alarm or distress (threatening or abusive words or behaviour only): section 5.
2. It is a defence to section 4A and section 5 for the accused to demonstrate that their conduct was reasonable, which must be interpreted in accordance with the freedom of expression and other freedoms. If these freedoms are engaged, a justification for interference (by prosecution) with them must be convincingly established. A prosecution may only proceed if necessary and proportionate.”
Really don’t understand what some people have against masks. It’s a painless way of reducing the probability of passing on something nasty to a fellow citizen. Seems eminently sensible during an ongoing pandemic.
Wearing a mask is not a cost free exercise: - they do actually cost something, unless you just wear the same bit of cloth all the time (which is probably worse than no mask at all). - Those of us with glasses have to put up with the glasses misting up so we can’t see where we are going - From my own experience teaching I frequently have to ask pupils to take their masks off so I can hear them, so they reduce communication significantly - It also makes it much harder to tell who is who - As detailed above some find it gives them problems with breathing and others have significant mental health issues with them.
All of these points may be outweighed by the good they do in reducing transmission, but don’t think that requiring mask wearing is a zero cost exercise.
If your glasses are misting up, the fit of the mask is wrong.
I wear glasses, so not victim blaming here.....
Part of the problem is that fitting masks requires a bit of practise, and trying different options to get it right.
Some masks are better than others: I tend to use disposable ones as they have the little bit of metal in them that bends over one’s nose.
Having to buy and use disposable masks rather adds to my argument that they are not cost-free I feel.
Best that the two groups stay apart to protect the former.
So which group has been told to modify their behaviour?
Yep, the selfish get to carry on with impunity.
What are you proposing? Compulsory anti-vaccination?
The reality is that we have very high vax rates in this country - a tremendous asset which we should now leverage to unlock, unlock, unlock.
I am ok with mandatory masks on public transport if it makes people feel safer, but pretty much everything else should go.
Follow France's lead: If you are not jabbed, you are excluded from public activities - transport, eating, drinking, entertainment. The the vulnerable can attend these venues knowing that there are no anti-vaxxers in attendance.
No thanks. Don’t want to live in some kind of paperwork state.
Silly objection. You already show a ticket to get in to a show or on to a train. A paperwork state is one where you can be arbitrarily asked in the street to prove who you are.
In 10 years time the state will know who and where you are at all times anyway via cctv and facial recognition. Paperwork is very last millennium.
As for the CCTV etc, it’s a baleful and sad indictment on this country that nobody seems to care apart from David Davis MP.
Best that the two groups stay apart to protect the former.
So which group has been told to modify their behaviour?
Yep, the selfish get to carry on with impunity.
What are you proposing? Compulsory anti-vaccination?
The reality is that we have very high vax rates in this country - a tremendous asset which we should now leverage to unlock, unlock, unlock.
I am ok with mandatory masks on public transport if it makes people feel safer, but pretty much everything else should go.
Follow France's lead: If you are not jabbed, you are excluded from public activities - transport, eating, drinking, entertainment. The the vulnerable can attend these venues knowing that there are no anti-vaxxers in attendance.
No thanks. Don’t want to live in some kind of paperwork state.
We mast accept that we are losing to the authoritarians and dystopians, who number far more than I would ever have guessed pre-pandemic.
I'm feeling very down this morning after yesterday's announcements, Johnson is speaking from both sides of his mouth. Reminds me of the original Amber list rules, "it is legal to travel but you shouldn't travel".
From one side of his mouth he is saying that legal restrictions are over but from the other he is introducing quasi-legal restrictions by opining about what people should and shouldn't do. This is going to give the health fascists sufficient license to hector those who haven't got Covid but dare to exercise their right not to participate in the realm of Covid theatre.
Has the Road Map truly been adhered to when Freedom Day has been so neutered?
I'm keen to know @kinabalu 's view on this. He was about to jump the fence.
Best that the two groups stay apart to protect the former.
So which group has been told to modify their behaviour?
Yep, the selfish get to carry on with impunity.
What are you proposing? Compulsory anti-vaccination?
The reality is that we have very high vax rates in this country - a tremendous asset which we should now leverage to unlock, unlock, unlock.
I am ok with mandatory masks on public transport if it makes people feel safer, but pretty much everything else should go.
Follow France's lead: If you are not jabbed, you are excluded from public activities - transport, eating, drinking, entertainment. The the vulnerable can attend these venues knowing that there are no anti-vaxxers in attendance.
No thanks. Don’t want to live in some kind of paperwork state.
Silly objection. You already show a ticket to get in to a show or on to a train. A paperwork state is one where you can be arbitrarily asked in the street to prove who you are.
In 10 years time the state will know who and where you are at all times anyway via cctv and facial recognition. Paperwork is very last millennium.
Let’s imagine I was immune compromised due to my HIV status, and for other reasons I am not vaxxed.
(This is not true, it’s for the sake of argument).
What status precisely am I supposed to show Bob Jobsworth the Train Inspector?
I believe the domestic (Can't be international as different countries might like to know if you're actually vaccinated or not) vaccine QR code is pari passu for those who can't be vaccinated and the vaccinated.
I’m afraid I still find it an unnecessary infringement on my rights to go about my business as a citizen.
The health emergency would have to be much worse to justify even this “minor” imposition.
Best that the two groups stay apart to protect the former.
So which group has been told to modify their behaviour?
Yep, the selfish get to carry on with impunity.
What are you proposing? Compulsory anti-vaccination?
The reality is that we have very high vax rates in this country - a tremendous asset which we should now leverage to unlock, unlock, unlock.
I am ok with mandatory masks on public transport if it makes people feel safer, but pretty much everything else should go.
Follow France's lead: If you are not jabbed, you are excluded from public activities - transport, eating, drinking, entertainment. The the vulnerable can attend these venues knowing that there are no anti-vaxxers in attendance.
Assuming you are double-vaccinated + 14 days why on earth would you be bothered whether there are antivaxxers present or not? We must stop this divisiveness.
We must accentuate it. Annoying anti-vaxxers is both a duty and a pleasure in its own right. You can still get covid after 2 vaccines, and if you say it's unlikely to kill you, I reply that I object to having even the mildest cold inflicted on me by someone choosing to be a cnt.
Interesting to hear. I presume you have a good lawyer who has, over the past 30 years, managed to get you off your ABH charges when you have slapped those people sneezing or coughing within 10 yards of you hitherto.
Is it just me or does data seem harder to decipher. Or perhaps I have just given up trying to figure out.
I still think we should have unlocked as originally promised last month. We can’t encumber society forever.
The data is a bit messy, as we are now seeing numbers that are skewed heavily towards the young and the unvaccinated, rather than more broadly across the whole population. So even doing a comparison with the previous waves isn't much use unless you look at segments of the population.
That said the data is unequivocal in one regard, the vaccines provide a very high degree of protection against serious illness and death. The vaccines we have are almost miraculously good in terms of limiting harm.
Thanks.
Then why can’t we simply see a graph that shows infection and hospitalisation per age cohort, per vax status.
I feel like the entire media is effectively innumerate.
Age breakdowns for cases are posted here everyday. I don't know if a data set is produced that would allow a vaccine status chart to be produced.
*edit* One issue about showing vaccine status is that the govenment might be wary about stories of "most people ill with covid have had the vaccine", that's almost inevitable once the uptake is high, but it doesn't mean that the vaccine has failed, it's just not perfect.
I've only seen a few people wearing mask exemption lanyards. One was yesterday - a shopworker in Huntingdon. Zero problems with that.
However: at half term I took the little 'un to an attraction in Essex. There was a queue to get in, and behind us was a family of five. The adults and two eldest children (late teenagers, from their looks) all wore mask exemption lanyards. The youngest child (who would not have to wear a mask) did not.
Rather unkindly, I did wonder what medical condition(s) meant they had to have mask exemptions.
They did not keep their distance, and crowded in towards the rest of the queue. They occasionally swore as they talked. The two adults and one of the teenagers then lit cigarettes whilst in the queue ...
Yeah this is the sort of mindset that people will need to jettison. People are going to behave anti-socially whatever happens and you need to learn to live with it.
It's not going to be easy because we have had 18 months of grooming from the govt. Shaking that off will take some doing. But we are going to have to make an effort to do so.
I agree: people swearing and smoking whilst in the queue for a family attraction is a mindset they should jettison. Not sure what the government has to do with it, though...
Burnham wriggling on R4 - if mask wearing is so important why not mandate it on Manchester trams? Passes the buck to the government.
Because I he mandates it the issue moves down to conductors and other front line workers to deal with.and without any threat of a fine / police backup it's pointless.
The issue is that you can't explain that in an interview as people will repeat the 5 seconds they want and remove the nuance.
This. We know there are a decent number of self-entitled people out there who will aggressively say "fuck you" to anyone suggesting they need to wear a mask once the legal requirement is dropped.
With respect, telling someone that they have no right to make you wear a mask is not 'aggressive' per se. It's the law. So back off slapping that adverb please.
Secondly, refusing to wear a mask is not 'self-entitled'. That's incredibly patronising and supercilious of you. Some people cannot wear masks for medical reasons. Others don't wish to any longer because it is damaging to their mental health. I'm one of those. So stop hectoring others.
I bet you don't stick to the 30 mph speed limit at all times in built up areas?
This is turning into a dystopian Black Mirror episode where utter hypocrites feel it's their (self-entitled?!) right to lecture others.
The difference between the 30 mph - benefit for society - example and mask wearing is that one is illegal and the other isn't, or won't be very soon.
Yes, there's no need for fully vaccinated people to wear masks, or to feel bad about not doing so.
Exactly
Whatever you may think. People like me will continue to do so in public places. It seems strange , but coming to terms with being close to a lot of people is a bit scary after spending over a year doing the exact opposite. It's going to take some time to feel comfortable again and I shall continue to be wary for the foreseeable future especially if R is >1
Very much my attitude and out of respect for others I will wear a mask wherever it is sensible
I'll continue also. If it makes other people less anxious then what's the harm?
If only you took the same consideration with regards to getting vaccinated.
I thought it was going to be about "freedom day"....
Same data but on a log axis - now you can see that hospital admissions are now growing at almost the same rate as cases. Roughly doubling every 11 days. V unsettling. Especially given cases have further to rise. So what next? https://twitter.com/EdConwaySky/status/1414658909239918595/photo/1
Ummm
I'm not sure that's unsettling at all. Admissions seem to lag cases by a very short period, and cases are flattening off right now.
Unless you think that admissions will continue to rise, uncoupled from flattening (or declining) case numbers. Which would be an odd attitude.
The government are forecasting an explosion in cases. 100k new cases a day says Javid. Which means worrying numbers in hospital does it not.
Good for them.
Case growth is slowing, ZOE reports an absolute decline in the number of unvaccinated people with Covid, more and more people are double-vaccinated, and schools are about to go on holiday. (If nothing else, the last will dramatically lower the number of people *testing* positive for CV19.)
It may be that cases reach 100,000 per day, but my money is against it.
Numbers have been stuck on 30-35K for the last 6 days. It would be good if this proves to be the peak.
And in the 6 days before that they were stuck in the range 24-28K And in the 23rd to the 27th they were stuck in the range 14-18K And from the 9th to the 15th they were stuck in the range 7500-8000 And at the end of may they were stuck in the range of 3100-4100 and had definitely peaked.
I don't think we are at the peak, but the rate of growth is slowing. Also in Scotland, cases are declining. i expect that to happen in England too when the the schools close and s the footy is now over. Going to the pub to watch the Olympics is not quite as popular...
Best that the two groups stay apart to protect the former.
So which group has been told to modify their behaviour?
Yep, the selfish get to carry on with impunity.
What are you proposing? Compulsory anti-vaccination?
The reality is that we have very high vax rates in this country - a tremendous asset which we should now leverage to unlock, unlock, unlock.
I am ok with mandatory masks on public transport if it makes people feel safer, but pretty much everything else should go.
Follow France's lead: If you are not jabbed, you are excluded from public activities - transport, eating, drinking, entertainment. The the vulnerable can attend these venues knowing that there are no anti-vaxxers in attendance.
No thanks. Don’t want to live in some kind of paperwork state.
Silly objection. You already show a ticket to get in to a show or on to a train. A paperwork state is one where you can be arbitrarily asked in the street to prove who you are.
In 10 years time the state will know who and where you are at all times anyway via cctv and facial recognition. Paperwork is very last millennium.
Let’s imagine I was immune compromised due to my HIV status, and for other reasons I am not vaxxed.
(This is not true, it’s for the sake of argument).
What status precisely am I supposed to show Bob Jobsworth the Train Inspector?
I believe the domestic (Can't be international as different countries might like to know if you're actually vaccinated or not) vaccine QR code is pari passu for those who can't be vaccinated and the vaccinated.
I’m afraid I still find it an unnecessary infringement on my rights to go about my business as a citizen.
The health emergency would have to be much worse to justify even this “minor” imposition.
3.8m people have been told not to mix with un-vaxxed.
What is your advise to them in terms of them re-gaining freedoms again ?
Burnham wriggling on R4 - if mask wearing is so important why not mandate it on Manchester trams? Passes the buck to the government.
Why not indeed? They surely have the right to make it a condition of travel (with suitable exemptions). I don't see any incompatibility between the withdrawal of the legal regulatory framework by the government and the need for the suppliers of services to give proper consideration to the risks to their staff and the fellow users of their services.
We have had posters here proudly announce that they are going to tell anyone who asks them to mask up to "f**k off". Presumably to the front line transport/waiting/shp staff who are making such requests. It's probably just the beer talking, but no need for such rudeness.
I'm teetotal. And yes I will tell anyone who insists I wear a mask to fuck off.
I will be telling any patient or relative who abuses our reception or nursing staff to go away. They will need to apologise and comply if they want to be seen.
Would that be legal?
Hasn't it long been the case that non-critical care can be withheld from patients committing verbal or physical abuse?
Not sure whether it (withholding care) ever happens much in practice.
For abuse absolutely. But he said "they will need to apologise and comply [with mask wearing?] if they want to be seen".
Is that legal?
Ah, yes - sorry. Missed that.
I assume any organisation can impose whatever measures it wishes on it's premises. For the NHS (and other public sector) it could presumably be overruled by staff higher in NHS, Javid etc. In practice a patient could presumably claim an exemption and likely not be challenged on it?
Yes I'm not sure that the NHS could discriminate against someone who is not breaking the law. @Foxy might easily be talking bollocks here but perhaps he can enlighten us.
Telling an NHS receptionist to F off could very well be, albeit in a minor and very limited way, breaking the law. It would be unlikely to be in the public interest to prosecute but a receptionist would have a complaint. From the CPS website -
“ These offences contrary to the Public Order Act 1986 relate to threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour, or display of visible representations, which:
- Are likely to cause fear of, or to provoke, immediate violence: section 4; - Intentionally cause harassment, alarm or distress: section 4A; or - Are likely to cause harassment, alarm or distress (threatening or abusive words or behaviour only): section 5.
2. It is a defence to section 4A and section 5 for the accused to demonstrate that their conduct was reasonable, which must be interpreted in accordance with the freedom of expression and other freedoms. If these freedoms are engaged, a justification for interference (by prosecution) with them must be convincingly established. A prosecution may only proceed if necessary and proportionate.”
What if they don't tell the receptionist to "F off" but politely say "no thank you, it is no longer a legal requirement"?
Best that the two groups stay apart to protect the former.
So which group has been told to modify their behaviour?
Yep, the selfish get to carry on with impunity.
What are you proposing? Compulsory anti-vaccination?
The reality is that we have very high vax rates in this country - a tremendous asset which we should now leverage to unlock, unlock, unlock.
I am ok with mandatory masks on public transport if it makes people feel safer, but pretty much everything else should go.
Follow France's lead: If you are not jabbed, you are excluded from public activities - transport, eating, drinking, entertainment. The the vulnerable can attend these venues knowing that there are no anti-vaxxers in attendance.
Assuming you are double-vaccinated + 14 days why on earth would you be bothered whether there are antivaxxers present or not? We must stop this divisiveness.
Anti-vaxers are blocking those freedoms for the 3.8m severely critically vulnerable, those who have no choice unlike the anti-vaxers.
Who's freedom matters more those who have done all they can to do the right thing and through no fault of their own are still vulnerable, despite being vaccinated, or those who don't give a shit about the rest of society ?
In Philip_Thompson's world the only person and thing that matters is Philip_Thompson's slight dislike and inconvenience of wearing a mask.
No. I'm quite capable of speaking for myself.
In my world individual responsibility means getting vaccinated.
If you want more than a vaccine, get an FFP3 mask.
@Cyclefree a friend resigned from the compliance department of a major investment bank that prided itself on its “ethical “ credentials, because his bosses expected him to ignore breaches of their professed standards. As he put it, if you are truly ethical, you don’t need to loudly proclaim the fact.
A decade ago I worked at a business unit of an Irish multi-national. In the boardroom they had the company ethics literally on the wall. Had fun in a management meeting about where the business was struggling in pointing behind me and saying "its starts by us not upholding any of our own values".
Best that the two groups stay apart to protect the former.
So which group has been told to modify their behaviour?
Yep, the selfish get to carry on with impunity.
What are you proposing? Compulsory anti-vaccination?
The reality is that we have very high vax rates in this country - a tremendous asset which we should now leverage to unlock, unlock, unlock.
I am ok with mandatory masks on public transport if it makes people feel safer, but pretty much everything else should go.
Follow France's lead: If you are not jabbed, you are excluded from public activities - transport, eating, drinking, entertainment. The the vulnerable can attend these venues knowing that there are no anti-vaxxers in attendance.
No thanks. Don’t want to live in some kind of paperwork state.
Silly objection. You already show a ticket to get in to a show or on to a train. A paperwork state is one where you can be arbitrarily asked in the street to prove who you are.
In 10 years time the state will know who and where you are at all times anyway via cctv and facial recognition. Paperwork is very last millennium.
Let’s imagine I was immune compromised due to my HIV status, and for other reasons I am not vaxxed.
(This is not true, it’s for the sake of argument).
What status precisely am I supposed to show Bob Jobsworth the Train Inspector?
I believe the domestic (Can't be international as different countries might like to know if you're actually vaccinated or not) vaccine QR code is pari passu for those who can't be vaccinated and the vaccinated.
I’m afraid I still find it an unnecessary infringement on my rights to go about my business as a citizen.
The health emergency would have to be much worse to justify even this “minor” imposition.
I'd help the conductor get @Dura_Ace off the train tbh.
I thought it was going to be about "freedom day"....
Same data but on a log axis - now you can see that hospital admissions are now growing at almost the same rate as cases. Roughly doubling every 11 days. V unsettling. Especially given cases have further to rise. So what next? https://twitter.com/EdConwaySky/status/1414658909239918595/photo/1
Ummm
I'm not sure that's unsettling at all. Admissions seem to lag cases by a very short period, and cases are flattening off right now.
Unless you think that admissions will continue to rise, uncoupled from flattening (or declining) case numbers. Which would be an odd attitude.
The government are forecasting an explosion in cases. 100k new cases a day says Javid. Which means worrying numbers in hospital does it not.
Good for them.
Case growth is slowing, ZOE reports an absolute decline in the number of unvaccinated people with Covid, more and more people are double-vaccinated, and schools are about to go on holiday. (If nothing else, the last will dramatically lower the number of people *testing* positive for CV19.)
It may be that cases reach 100,000 per day, but my money is against it.
Numbers have been stuck on 30-35K for the last 6 days. It would be good if this proves to be the peak.
And in the 6 days before that they were stuck in the range 24-28K And in the 23rd to the 27th they were stuck in the range 14-18K And from the 9th to the 15th they were stuck in the range 7500-8000 And at the end of may they were stuck in the range of 3100-4100 and had definitely peaked.
I don't think we are at the peak, but the rate of growth is slowing. Also in Scotland, cases are declining. i expect that to happen in England too when the the schools close and s the footy is now over. Going to the pub to watch the Olympics is not quite as popular...
Also, given the GMT +8 time zone, practically impossible.
Best that the two groups stay apart to protect the former.
So which group has been told to modify their behaviour?
Yep, the selfish get to carry on with impunity.
What are you proposing? Compulsory anti-vaccination?
The reality is that we have very high vax rates in this country - a tremendous asset which we should now leverage to unlock, unlock, unlock.
I am ok with mandatory masks on public transport if it makes people feel safer, but pretty much everything else should go.
Follow France's lead: If you are not jabbed, you are excluded from public activities - transport, eating, drinking, entertainment. The the vulnerable can attend these venues knowing that there are no anti-vaxxers in attendance.
Assuming you are double-vaccinated + 14 days why on earth would you be bothered whether there are antivaxxers present or not? We must stop this divisiveness.
Anti-vaxers are blocking those freedoms for the 3.8m severely critically vulnerable, those who have no choice unlike the anti-vaxers.
Who's freedom matters more those who have done all they can to do the right thing and through no fault of their own are still vulnerable, despite being vaccinated, or those who don't give a shit about the rest of society ?
In Philip_Thompson's world the only person and thing that matters is Philip_Thompson's slight dislike and inconvenience of wearing a mask.
No. I'm quite capable of speaking for myself.
In my world individual responsibility means getting vaccinated.
If you want more than a vaccine, get an FFP3 mask.
I'm double vaccinated. I've done my bit.
So you agree with what I said - as you've said nothing that goes against my point....
Best that the two groups stay apart to protect the former.
So which group has been told to modify their behaviour?
Yep, the selfish get to carry on with impunity.
What are you proposing? Compulsory anti-vaccination?
The reality is that we have very high vax rates in this country - a tremendous asset which we should now leverage to unlock, unlock, unlock.
I am ok with mandatory masks on public transport if it makes people feel safer, but pretty much everything else should go.
Follow France's lead: If you are not jabbed, you are excluded from public activities - transport, eating, drinking, entertainment. The the vulnerable can attend these venues knowing that there are no anti-vaxxers in attendance.
No thanks. Don’t want to live in some kind of paperwork state.
Silly objection. You already show a ticket to get in to a show or on to a train. A paperwork state is one where you can be arbitrarily asked in the street to prove who you are.
In 10 years time the state will know who and where you are at all times anyway via cctv and facial recognition. Paperwork is very last millennium.
Let’s imagine I was immune compromised due to my HIV status, and for other reasons I am not vaxxed.
(This is not true, it’s for the sake of argument).
What status precisely am I supposed to show Bob Jobsworth the Train Inspector?
I believe the domestic (Can't be international as different countries might like to know if you're actually vaccinated or not) vaccine QR code is pari passu for those who can't be vaccinated and the vaccinated.
I’m afraid I still find it an unnecessary infringement on my rights to go about my business as a citizen.
The health emergency would have to be much worse to justify even this “minor” imposition.
3.8m people have been told not to mix with un-vaxxed.
What is your advise to them in terms of them re-gaining freedoms again ?
Vaccinated people can still pass on Covid. Who has told 3.8m people not to mix - specifically - with the unvaxed?
It's weird the weekly new case percentage rate growth was dropping rapidly until *checks notes* the 7-day period ending on 15th of June. Anything start happening around then (this time it is a rhetorical question)
There was also probably an effect from the school half term back in June.
In one column masks reduce the transmission of covid.
On the other column, they steam up your glasses, you get a bit hot, some feel a bit constrained and you look silly.
No brainier.
Absolutely. Post-vaccines the latter is more important.
If you're an anti-vaxxer relying upon others wearing masks, perhaps buy an FFP3 mask instead?
Covid seems to be spreading pretty fast despite vaccines.
Among the unvaccinated.
We don't know that - especially given the fact the current infection / hospital numbers don't exactly correlate with eariler infection / hospital numbers.
I suspect an awful lot of people currently catching Covid are doubly vaccinated but are getting milder symptoms.
12% of people in hospital are double jabbed and 88% are unvaccinated. We know that kids and younger people don't really go to hospital for this either. That 88% is largely going to be people who refused the vaccine aged 50+.
The vaccines currently yield a reduction of 97% in hospital numbers for double jabbed people. Someone over 50 has got around a 9% chance of being hospitalised by COVID, now they have a 0.24% chance of going to hospital. The same as they'd have for the flu or any number of infections.
Once again, if double jabbed people can catch it but experience few to no symptoms is it something worth destroying the country over? In about 4 weeks all adults who want to be should be double jabbed. We're reopening before that to get our exit wave out before autumn. The exit wave is primarily going to hit the unvaccinated by choice. Those hospitalisations are going to happen whether we reopen in July, August or October or even April next year.
Finally, anyone who wants to can go and buy an FFP3 mask. If you feel uncomfortable for a while in the new/old normal then go and buy a pack of them. They aren't expensive and give very good two way protection. That is your responsibility. In a post vaccine world individual responsibility must be returned. Collective responsibility only made sense before vaccines.
Those numbers don't look right. Are you sure you aren't confusing the VE against hospitalization with the reduced conditional probability of hospitalization, given symptomatic infection?
Burnham wriggling on R4 - if mask wearing is so important why not mandate it on Manchester trams? Passes the buck to the government.
Why not indeed? They surely have the right to make it a condition of travel (with suitable exemptions). I don't see any incompatibility between the withdrawal of the legal regulatory framework by the government and the need for the suppliers of services to give proper consideration to the risks to their staff and the fellow users of their services.
We have had posters here proudly announce that they are going to tell anyone who asks them to mask up to "f**k off". Presumably to the front line transport/waiting/shp staff who are making such requests. It's probably just the beer talking, but no need for such rudeness.
I'm teetotal. And yes I will tell anyone who insists I wear a mask to fuck off.
I will be telling any patient or relative who abuses our reception or nursing staff to go away. They will need to apologise and comply if they want to be seen.
Would that be legal?
Hasn't it long been the case that non-critical care can be withheld from patients committing verbal or physical abuse?
Not sure whether it (withholding care) ever happens much in practice.
For abuse absolutely. But he said "they will need to apologise and comply [with mask wearing?] if they want to be seen".
Is that legal?
Ah, yes - sorry. Missed that.
I assume any organisation can impose whatever measures it wishes on it's premises. For the NHS (and other public sector) it could presumably be overruled by staff higher in NHS, Javid etc. In practice a patient could presumably claim an exemption and likely not be challenged on it?
Yes I'm not sure that the NHS could discriminate against someone who is not breaking the law. @Foxy might easily be talking bollocks here but perhaps he can enlighten us.
Telling an NHS receptionist to F off could very well be, albeit in a minor and very limited way, breaking the law. It would be unlikely to be in the public interest to prosecute but a receptionist would have a complaint. From the CPS website -
“ These offences contrary to the Public Order Act 1986 relate to threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour, or display of visible representations, which:
- Are likely to cause fear of, or to provoke, immediate violence: section 4; - Intentionally cause harassment, alarm or distress: section 4A; or - Are likely to cause harassment, alarm or distress (threatening or abusive words or behaviour only): section 5.
2. It is a defence to section 4A and section 5 for the accused to demonstrate that their conduct was reasonable, which must be interpreted in accordance with the freedom of expression and other freedoms. If these freedoms are engaged, a justification for interference (by prosecution) with them must be convincingly established. A prosecution may only proceed if necessary and proportionate.”
So abuse aside which I believe falls into a separate category, if someone rocks up to an NHS facility without a mask, is it legal for the NHS to say go away?
Does your second point, including "the freedom of expression and other freedoms" speak to that?
Best that the two groups stay apart to protect the former.
So which group has been told to modify their behaviour?
Yep, the selfish get to carry on with impunity.
What are you proposing? Compulsory anti-vaccination?
The reality is that we have very high vax rates in this country - a tremendous asset which we should now leverage to unlock, unlock, unlock.
I am ok with mandatory masks on public transport if it makes people feel safer, but pretty much everything else should go.
Follow France's lead: If you are not jabbed, you are excluded from public activities - transport, eating, drinking, entertainment. The the vulnerable can attend these venues knowing that there are no anti-vaxxers in attendance.
Assuming you are double-vaccinated + 14 days why on earth would you be bothered whether there are antivaxxers present or not? We must stop this divisiveness.
Anti-vaxers are blocking those freedoms for the 3.8m severely critically vulnerable, those who have no choice unlike the anti-vaxers.
Who's freedom matters more those who have done all they can to do the right thing and through no fault of their own are still vulnerable, despite being vaccinated, or those who don't give a shit about the rest of society ?
In Philip_Thompson's world the only person and thing that matters is Philip_Thompson's slight dislike and inconvenience of wearing a mask.
I wear a mask whenever I walk up the road from Gants Hill to Barkingside, OR whenever I go to the local Valentine's Park - protection from joggers and cyclists whizzing past me!
I've only seen a few people wearing mask exemption lanyards. One was yesterday - a shopworker in Huntingdon. Zero problems with that.
However: at half term I took the little 'un to an attraction in Essex. There was a queue to get in, and behind us was a family of five. The adults and two eldest children (late teenagers, from their looks) all wore mask exemption lanyards. The youngest child (who would not have to wear a mask) did not.
Rather unkindly, I did wonder what medical condition(s) meant they had to have mask exemptions.
They did not keep their distance, and crowded in towards the rest of the queue. They occasionally swore as they talked. The two adults and one of the teenagers then lit cigarettes whilst in the queue ...
Yeah this is the sort of mindset that people will need to jettison. People are going to behave anti-socially whatever happens and you need to learn to live with it.
It's not going to be easy because we have had 18 months of grooming from the govt. Shaking that off will take some doing. But we are going to have to make an effort to do so.
I agree: people swearing and smoking whilst in the queue for a family attraction is a mindset they should jettison. Not sure what the government has to do with it, though...
What’s wrong with swearing and smoking? Both activities, are - as far as I know - legal.
Best that the two groups stay apart to protect the former.
So which group has been told to modify their behaviour?
Yep, the selfish get to carry on with impunity.
What are you proposing? Compulsory anti-vaccination?
The reality is that we have very high vax rates in this country - a tremendous asset which we should now leverage to unlock, unlock, unlock.
I am ok with mandatory masks on public transport if it makes people feel safer, but pretty much everything else should go.
Follow France's lead: If you are not jabbed, you are excluded from public activities - transport, eating, drinking, entertainment. The the vulnerable can attend these venues knowing that there are no anti-vaxxers in attendance.
No thanks. Don’t want to live in some kind of paperwork state.
Silly objection. You already show a ticket to get in to a show or on to a train. A paperwork state is one where you can be arbitrarily asked in the street to prove who you are.
In 10 years time the state will know who and where you are at all times anyway via cctv and facial recognition. Paperwork is very last millennium.
Let’s imagine I was immune compromised due to my HIV status, and for other reasons I am not vaxxed.
(This is not true, it’s for the sake of argument).
What status precisely am I supposed to show Bob Jobsworth the Train Inspector?
I believe the domestic (Can't be international as different countries might like to know if you're actually vaccinated or not) vaccine QR code is pari passu for those who can't be vaccinated and the vaccinated.
I’m afraid I still find it an unnecessary infringement on my rights to go about my business as a citizen.
The health emergency would have to be much worse to justify even this “minor” imposition.
3.8m people have been told not to mix with un-vaxxed.
What is your advise to them in terms of them re-gaining freedoms again ?
Mr. L, aye. The police will kneel for BLM. And ignore a mob of thugs who intimidated a teacher into hiding. And their leader is keener on anti-white discrimination than rooting out the bad eggs in her own force.
I should be the sort of person who's right behind the police. But what happened in Rotherham and many other places, and the examples mentioned above, don't exactly encourage that.
What is this anti white discrimination of which you speak?
Positive discrimination for ethnic applicants. Not everyone thinks this is the way to address balance issues.
Best that the two groups stay apart to protect the former.
So which group has been told to modify their behaviour?
Yep, the selfish get to carry on with impunity.
What are you proposing? Compulsory anti-vaccination?
The reality is that we have very high vax rates in this country - a tremendous asset which we should now leverage to unlock, unlock, unlock.
I am ok with mandatory masks on public transport if it makes people feel safer, but pretty much everything else should go.
Follow France's lead: If you are not jabbed, you are excluded from public activities - transport, eating, drinking, entertainment. The the vulnerable can attend these venues knowing that there are no anti-vaxxers in attendance.
No thanks. Don’t want to live in some kind of paperwork state.
Silly objection. You already show a ticket to get in to a show or on to a train. A paperwork state is one where you can be arbitrarily asked in the street to prove who you are.
In 10 years time the state will know who and where you are at all times anyway via cctv and facial recognition. Paperwork is very last millennium.
Let’s imagine I was immune compromised due to my HIV status, and for other reasons I am not vaxxed.
(This is not true, it’s for the sake of argument).
What status precisely am I supposed to show Bob Jobsworth the Train Inspector?
I believe the domestic (Can't be international as different countries might like to know if you're actually vaccinated or not) vaccine QR code is pari passu for those who can't be vaccinated and the vaccinated.
I’m afraid I still find it an unnecessary infringement on my rights to go about my business as a citizen.
The health emergency would have to be much worse to justify even this “minor” imposition.
I'd help the conductor get @Dura_Ace off the train tbh.
Best that the two groups stay apart to protect the former.
So which group has been told to modify their behaviour?
Yep, the selfish get to carry on with impunity.
What are you proposing? Compulsory anti-vaccination?
The reality is that we have very high vax rates in this country - a tremendous asset which we should now leverage to unlock, unlock, unlock.
I am ok with mandatory masks on public transport if it makes people feel safer, but pretty much everything else should go.
Follow France's lead: If you are not jabbed, you are excluded from public activities - transport, eating, drinking, entertainment. The the vulnerable can attend these venues knowing that there are no anti-vaxxers in attendance.
No thanks. Don’t want to live in some kind of paperwork state.
Silly objection. You already show a ticket to get in to a show or on to a train. A paperwork state is one where you can be arbitrarily asked in the street to prove who you are.
In 10 years time the state will know who and where you are at all times anyway via cctv and facial recognition. Paperwork is very last millennium.
Let’s imagine I was immune compromised due to my HIV status, and for other reasons I am not vaxxed.
(This is not true, it’s for the sake of argument).
What status precisely am I supposed to show Bob Jobsworth the Train Inspector?
I believe the domestic (Can't be international as different countries might like to know if you're actually vaccinated or not) vaccine QR code is pari passu for those who can't be vaccinated and the vaccinated.
I’m afraid I still find it an unnecessary infringement on my rights to go about my business as a citizen.
The health emergency would have to be much worse to justify even this “minor” imposition.
3.8m people have been told not to mix with un-vaxxed.
What is your advise to them in terms of them re-gaining freedoms again ?
Mr. L, aye. The police will kneel for BLM. And ignore a mob of thugs who intimidated a teacher into hiding. And their leader is keener on anti-white discrimination than rooting out the bad eggs in her own force.
I should be the sort of person who's right behind the police. But what happened in Rotherham and many other places, and the examples mentioned above, don't exactly encourage that.
In my mind, the middle-class distrust of the police started with speed cameras.
There is something in that. I am currently due a 3 hour "education" course at substantial financial cost for the heinous crime of driving at 35mph on a major trunk road that now has a 30mph limit.
In a city I have known all my life it is now deemed criminal to drive at more than 20mph in large parts of it. Traffic is no different to how it has been for the last decades but I could now lose my license for being caught driving at 25mph a few times. It's a money making exercise, pure and simple and will be enforced to keep the coffers filled - get burgled on the other hand and you may as well safe your breath calling the police.
Burnham wriggling on R4 - if mask wearing is so important why not mandate it on Manchester trams? Passes the buck to the government.
Why not indeed? They surely have the right to make it a condition of travel (with suitable exemptions). I don't see any incompatibility between the withdrawal of the legal regulatory framework by the government and the need for the suppliers of services to give proper consideration to the risks to their staff and the fellow users of their services.
We have had posters here proudly announce that they are going to tell anyone who asks them to mask up to "f**k off". Presumably to the front line transport/waiting/shp staff who are making such requests. It's probably just the beer talking, but no need for such rudeness.
I'm teetotal. And yes I will tell anyone who insists I wear a mask to fuck off.
I will be telling any patient or relative who abuses our reception or nursing staff to go away. They will need to apologise and comply if they want to be seen.
Would that be legal?
Hasn't it long been the case that non-critical care can be withheld from patients committing verbal or physical abuse?
Not sure whether it (withholding care) ever happens much in practice.
For abuse absolutely. But he said "they will need to apologise and comply [with mask wearing?] if they want to be seen".
Is that legal?
Ah, yes - sorry. Missed that.
I assume any organisation can impose whatever measures it wishes on it's premises. For the NHS (and other public sector) it could presumably be overruled by staff higher in NHS, Javid etc. In practice a patient could presumably claim an exemption and likely not be challenged on it?
Yes I'm not sure that the NHS could discriminate against someone who is not breaking the law. @Foxy might easily be talking bollocks here but perhaps he can enlighten us.
Telling an NHS receptionist to F off could very well be, albeit in a minor and very limited way, breaking the law. It would be unlikely to be in the public interest to prosecute but a receptionist would have a complaint. From the CPS website -
“ These offences contrary to the Public Order Act 1986 relate to threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour, or display of visible representations, which:
- Are likely to cause fear of, or to provoke, immediate violence: section 4; - Intentionally cause harassment, alarm or distress: section 4A; or - Are likely to cause harassment, alarm or distress (threatening or abusive words or behaviour only): section 5.
2. It is a defence to section 4A and section 5 for the accused to demonstrate that their conduct was reasonable, which must be interpreted in accordance with the freedom of expression and other freedoms. If these freedoms are engaged, a justification for interference (by prosecution) with them must be convincingly established. A prosecution may only proceed if necessary and proportionate.”
So abuse aside which I believe falls into a separate category, if someone rocks up to an NHS facility without a mask, is it legal for the NHS to say go away?
Does your second point, including "the freedom of expression and other freedoms" speak to that?
It is unlikely that not wearing a mask would fall under freedom of expression even in the states. As for mask wearing, sure, you can kick someone out of a hospital for smoking and short term the risk to public health of being exposed to second hand smoke from one cigarette is far less.
Burnham wriggling on R4 - if mask wearing is so important why not mandate it on Manchester trams? Passes the buck to the government.
Why not indeed? They surely have the right to make it a condition of travel (with suitable exemptions). I don't see any incompatibility between the withdrawal of the legal regulatory framework by the government and the need for the suppliers of services to give proper consideration to the risks to their staff and the fellow users of their services.
We have had posters here proudly announce that they are going to tell anyone who asks them to mask up to "f**k off". Presumably to the front line transport/waiting/shp staff who are making such requests. It's probably just the beer talking, but no need for such rudeness.
I'm teetotal. And yes I will tell anyone who insists I wear a mask to fuck off.
I will be telling any patient or relative who abuses our reception or nursing staff to go away. They will need to apologise and comply if they want to be seen.
Would that be legal?
Hasn't it long been the case that non-critical care can be withheld from patients committing verbal or physical abuse?
Not sure whether it (withholding care) ever happens much in practice.
For abuse absolutely. But he said "they will need to apologise and comply [with mask wearing?] if they want to be seen".
Is that legal?
Ah, yes - sorry. Missed that.
I assume any organisation can impose whatever measures it wishes on it's premises. For the NHS (and other public sector) it could presumably be overruled by staff higher in NHS, Javid etc. In practice a patient could presumably claim an exemption and likely not be challenged on it?
Yes I'm not sure that the NHS could discriminate against someone who is not breaking the law. @Foxy might easily be talking bollocks here but perhaps he can enlighten us.
Telling an NHS receptionist to F off could very well be, albeit in a minor and very limited way, breaking the law. It would be unlikely to be in the public interest to prosecute but a receptionist would have a complaint. From the CPS website -
“ These offences contrary to the Public Order Act 1986 relate to threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour, or display of visible representations, which:
- Are likely to cause fear of, or to provoke, immediate violence: section 4; - Intentionally cause harassment, alarm or distress: section 4A; or - Are likely to cause harassment, alarm or distress (threatening or abusive words or behaviour only): section 5.
2. It is a defence to section 4A and section 5 for the accused to demonstrate that their conduct was reasonable, which must be interpreted in accordance with the freedom of expression and other freedoms. If these freedoms are engaged, a justification for interference (by prosecution) with them must be convincingly established. A prosecution may only proceed if necessary and proportionate.”
So abuse aside which I believe falls into a separate category, if someone rocks up to an NHS facility without a mask, is it legal for the NHS to say go away?
Does your second point, including "the freedom of expression and other freedoms" speak to that?
Isn't a GP practice an independent business anyway? So they could tell Mr Cockney to **** off and find another practice, no?
More of an issue for a NHS hospital though. Like someone coming in off his head on booze but needing treatment.
Best that the two groups stay apart to protect the former.
So which group has been told to modify their behaviour?
Yep, the selfish get to carry on with impunity.
What are you proposing? Compulsory anti-vaccination?
The reality is that we have very high vax rates in this country - a tremendous asset which we should now leverage to unlock, unlock, unlock.
I am ok with mandatory masks on public transport if it makes people feel safer, but pretty much everything else should go.
Follow France's lead: If you are not jabbed, you are excluded from public activities - transport, eating, drinking, entertainment. The the vulnerable can attend these venues knowing that there are no anti-vaxxers in attendance.
Assuming you are double-vaccinated + 14 days why on earth would you be bothered whether there are antivaxxers present or not? We must stop this divisiveness.
Anti-vaxers are blocking those freedoms for the 3.8m severely critically vulnerable, those who have no choice unlike the anti-vaxers.
Who's freedom matters more those who have done all they can to do the right thing and through no fault of their own are still vulnerable, despite being vaccinated, or those who don't give a shit about the rest of society ?
It does not follow that people who have done as they have been advised and got vaccinated and who take responsibility for their own health don't give a shit about society! Why don't you think that the bad manners are on the other side; those who want to constrain the lives of other people rather than taking responsibility for their own health? Aren't they the selfish ones?
@Cyclefree a friend resigned from the compliance department of a major investment bank that prided itself on its “ethical “ credentials, because his bosses expected him to ignore breaches of their professed standards. As he put it, if you are truly ethical, you don’t need to loudly proclaim the fact.
A decade ago I worked at a business unit of an Irish multi-national. In the boardroom they had the company ethics literally on the wall. Had fun in a management meeting about where the business was struggling in pointing behind me and saying "its starts by us not upholding any of our own values".
The Irish financial regulator once wrote a paper on ethics. Unfortunately, they knew so little about it that they spelt it wrong throughout the document and called it "ethitical conduct".
(Though if you wanted to be fair, "ethitical" is used in Hindi English. But somehow I don't think that what was inspiring the Irish.)
Burnham wriggling on R4 - if mask wearing is so important why not mandate it on Manchester trams? Passes the buck to the government.
Why not indeed? They surely have the right to make it a condition of travel (with suitable exemptions). I don't see any incompatibility between the withdrawal of the legal regulatory framework by the government and the need for the suppliers of services to give proper consideration to the risks to their staff and the fellow users of their services.
We have had posters here proudly announce that they are going to tell anyone who asks them to mask up to "f**k off". Presumably to the front line transport/waiting/shp staff who are making such requests. It's probably just the beer talking, but no need for such rudeness.
I'm teetotal. And yes I will tell anyone who insists I wear a mask to fuck off.
I will be telling any patient or relative who abuses our reception or nursing staff to go away. They will need to apologise and comply if they want to be seen.
Would that be legal?
Hasn't it long been the case that non-critical care can be withheld from patients committing verbal or physical abuse?
Not sure whether it (withholding care) ever happens much in practice.
For abuse absolutely. But he said "they will need to apologise and comply [with mask wearing?] if they want to be seen".
Is that legal?
Ah, yes - sorry. Missed that.
I assume any organisation can impose whatever measures it wishes on it's premises. For the NHS (and other public sector) it could presumably be overruled by staff higher in NHS, Javid etc. In practice a patient could presumably claim an exemption and likely not be challenged on it?
Yes I'm not sure that the NHS could discriminate against someone who is not breaking the law. @Foxy might easily be talking bollocks here but perhaps he can enlighten us.
Telling an NHS receptionist to F off could very well be, albeit in a minor and very limited way, breaking the law. It would be unlikely to be in the public interest to prosecute but a receptionist would have a complaint. From the CPS website -
“ These offences contrary to the Public Order Act 1986 relate to threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour, or display of visible representations, which:
- Are likely to cause fear of, or to provoke, immediate violence: section 4; - Intentionally cause harassment, alarm or distress: section 4A; or - Are likely to cause harassment, alarm or distress (threatening or abusive words or behaviour only): section 5.
2. It is a defence to section 4A and section 5 for the accused to demonstrate that their conduct was reasonable, which must be interpreted in accordance with the freedom of expression and other freedoms. If these freedoms are engaged, a justification for interference (by prosecution) with them must be convincingly established. A prosecution may only proceed if necessary and proportionate.”
So abuse aside which I believe falls into a separate category, if someone rocks up to an NHS facility without a mask, is it legal for the NHS to say go away?
Does your second point, including "the freedom of expression and other freedoms" speak to that?
Yep its legal to ask someone to leave the premises. Why wouldn't it be?
I went to the Doctors last Friday and their were happier with me reading their screens from the side rather than letting me in to the practice so I could talk to them without seeing what was on display...
Comments
Sadly the answer to your q is yes, BTW.
I'm seeing the same thing in the umbrella market at the moment, I look at the people boosting about compliance and thinking should I point out xyz...
batshitwall on this. He's also against mask wearing* and part of the whole "Great Barrington" malarkey...https://bylinetimes.com/2021/07/08/governments-mass-infection-plan-pushed-by-great-barrington-declaration-lobbying-effort-to-end-covid-protections/
Now those views, they're all legitimitely held - but how remarkable it is that he's concerned about the unknown unknowns of vaccination on adolescents but not about the use of masks in say a crowded public transport setting....
* And vaccine passports (Of course
Is that legal?
But he was unusual. Cameron should have realised they were buying his reputation
I assume any organisation can impose whatever measures it wishes on it's premises. For the NHS (and other public sector) it could presumably be overruled by staff higher in NHS, Javid etc. In practice a patient could presumably claim an exemption and likely not be challenged on it?
In a scenario where 90% of people are double jabbed the onus falls on the 10% of refusers. Going by the age profile around 3% of the 5m who have said no will end up in hospital. We're going to get 150k hospitalisations from them whatever happens. Whether we wear masks, don't wear masks, don't have clubs open etc... The die is cast for those 150k by virtue of their own stupidity in saying no to the vaccine.
As it has always been - the point of the vaccines was to stop people turning up to hospital with COVID. That has been achieved. It's time to dump all of the restrictions.
- they do actually cost something, unless you just wear the same bit of cloth all the time (which is probably worse than no mask at all).
- Those of us with glasses have to put up with the glasses misting up so we can’t see where we are going
- From my own experience teaching I frequently have to ask pupils to take their masks off so I can hear them, so they reduce communication significantly
- It also makes it much harder to tell who is who
- As detailed above some find it gives them problems with breathing and others have significant mental health issues with them.
All of these points may be outweighed by the good they do in reducing transmission, but don’t think that requiring mask wearing is a zero cost exercise.
Racist - no.
Fat - yes. I don't think that's necessarily a bar to high office yet.
Fornicator - yes. Do I care? Does anyone bar those immediately involved? Not really.
Honestly, you could have chosen so many other adjectives.
And still none of them would have been as bad as those describing Corbyn.
https://www.researchsquare.com/article/rs-689684/v1
(more info and disclaimer: https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/3479119#Comment_3479119 )
There's not much published or pre-print on other effects yet, but I am aware of a case control study on long Covid symptoms which, I am told, seems to be showing similar prevalence of long covid symptoms in children among cases (those who have had Covid) and controls (those who have not been exposed) which might suggest many of the symptoms are more to do with lockdown/disruption/other psychological effects (and no less real for that).
There's little evidence so far of some of the physical long Covid effects in children as seen in some adults (some adults have observable cardiovascular or lung damage). There are cases of inflamation in children, but they appear to self-resolve.
Still need for more data though.
After all that was what we were told would happen in the UK if the much smaller number of anti-vaxxers were given the same choice.
What's the timing info, under 24 hours etc? Something like time between booking date and vaccination date?
Don’t want to live in some kind of paperwork state.
Here's the thing, you and topping and some others might not like it, heck it's definitely the state imposing and yes "We'd all rather live in a society without "Papiere, Bitte" but realistically it's a big tool to get rid of the virus amongst the younguns.
I wear glasses, so not victim blaming here.....
Part of the problem is that fitting masks requires a bit of practise, and trying different options to get it right.
That said the data is unequivocal in one regard, the vaccines provide a very high degree of protection against serious illness and death. The vaccines we have are almost miraculously good in terms of limiting harm.
The thread header is about how shite the police are; don’t want to feel at all responsible to them for whether I can buy a fucking sandwich.
So I rather think perhaps Mr McArthur.
Opening that can of worms would making the football racism thing look like a tea party.
Or has she been forgiven? I’m all for second chances.
Edit: Also a MP. Which may be logical for a Unionist party to have its leader in London. But is it a good look?
In 10 years time the state will know who and where you are at all times anyway via cctv and facial recognition. Paperwork is very last millennium.
If you were advising them, what would you suggest? (I assume you are an opponent, but not a tribalist).
Who's freedom matters more those who have done all they can to do the right thing and through no fault of their own are still vulnerable, despite being vaccinated, or those who don't give a shit about the rest of society ?
(This is not true, it’s for the sake of argument).
What status precisely am I supposed to show Bob Jobsworth the Train Inspector?
As your header suggests, both are required.
Most people followed guidance earlier in the pandemic even when that guidance was not law. Most people follow the rules of a business/service provider even when it's not law.
Yes, some people will resist and there will be angry incidents when a business asks people sans law to wear a mask. But are those few incidents representative? Most will comply if asked, even if it's not law, especially if they cannot access the service they want unless they do.
I think we're in danger of letting perfection be the enemy here. That some people will spit in the face of discretionary rules does not mean discretionary rules are meaningless.
I've only seen a few people wearing mask exemption lanyards. One was yesterday - a shopworker in Huntingdon. Zero problems with that.
However: at half term I took the little 'un to an attraction in Essex. There was a queue to get in, and behind us was a family of five. The adults and two eldest children (late teenagers, from their looks) all wore mask exemption lanyards. The youngest child (who would not have to wear a mask) did not.
Rather unkindly, I did wonder what medical condition(s) meant they had to have mask exemptions.
They did not keep their distance, and crowded in towards the rest of the queue. They occasionally swore as they talked. The two adults and one of the teenagers then lit cigarettes whilst in the queue ...
Then why can’t we simply see a graph that shows infection and hospitalisation per age cohort, per vax status.
I feel like the entire media is effectively innumerate.
It's not going to be easy because we have had 18 months of grooming from the govt. Shaking that off will take some doing. But we are going to have to make an effort to do so.
Which of course underlines exactly where you are.
https://twitter.com/ballouxfrancois/status/1414629962578071552
This is quite a nice potted account
https://www.thecourier.co.uk/fp/news/politics/scottish-politics/2373214/runners-and-riders-who-could-replace-willie-rennie-as-scottish-lib-dem-leader/
Slightly surprising they identify Ms Chamberlain as a front runner as she is a MP.
But a parliamentary party that would fit into a 2CV doesn't need much supervision evbe if it is on the other end of the line from London. They are now well behind Labour and the Scottish Greens, which isn't saying much.
I'll bne interested to see whether the new leader is seen quite so often being photographed with animals, preferably copulating ones - I have a slight suspicion that Mr Rennie was trying to take a leaf out of Ms Davidson's book but someone somewhere has a sense of humour (or photographer has a sptay can of hormone quietly tucked away in his camera bag).
https://twitter.com/BBCPhilipSim/status/718400480548941825?ref_src=twsrc^tfw|twcamp^tweetembed|twterm^718411328759717888|twgr^|twcon^s3_&ref_url=https://www.sundaypost.com/fp/pictures-scottish-liberal-democrats-leader-willie-rennie-v-animals/
“ These offences contrary to the Public Order Act 1986 relate to threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour, or display of visible representations, which:
- Are likely to cause fear of, or to provoke, immediate violence: section 4;
- Intentionally cause harassment, alarm or distress: section 4A; or
- Are likely to cause harassment, alarm or distress (threatening or abusive words or behaviour only): section 5.
2. It is a defence to section 4A and section 5 for the accused to demonstrate that their conduct was reasonable, which must be interpreted in accordance with the freedom of expression and other freedoms. If these freedoms are engaged, a justification for interference (by prosecution) with them must be convincingly established. A prosecution may only proceed if necessary and proportionate.”
Having to buy and use disposable masks rather adds to my argument that they are not cost-free I feel.
I'm feeling very down this morning after yesterday's announcements, Johnson is speaking from both sides of his mouth. Reminds me of the original Amber list rules, "it is legal to travel but you shouldn't travel".
From one side of his mouth he is saying that legal restrictions are over but from the other he is introducing quasi-legal restrictions by opining about what people should and shouldn't do. This is going to give the health fascists sufficient license to hector those who haven't got Covid but dare to exercise their right not to participate in the realm of Covid theatre.
Has the Road Map truly been adhered to when Freedom Day has been so neutered?
I'm keen to know @kinabalu 's view on this. He was about to jump the fence.
The health emergency would have to be much worse to justify even this “minor” imposition.
*edit* One issue about showing vaccine status is that the govenment might be wary about stories of "most people ill with covid have had the vaccine", that's almost inevitable once the uptake is high, but it doesn't mean that the vaccine has failed, it's just not perfect.
What is your advise to them in terms of them re-gaining freedoms again ?
In my world individual responsibility means getting vaccinated.
If you want more than a vaccine, get an FFP3 mask.
I'm double vaccinated. I've done my bit.
--AS
Does your second point, including "the freedom of expression and other freedoms" speak to that?
Both activities, are - as far as I know - legal.
In a city I have known all my life it is now deemed criminal to drive at more than 20mph in large parts of it. Traffic is no different to how it has been for the last decades but I could now lose my license for being caught driving at 25mph a few times. It's a money making exercise, pure and simple and will be enforced to keep the coffers filled - get burgled on the other hand and you may as well safe your breath calling the police.
More of an issue for a NHS hospital though. Like someone coming in off his head on booze but needing treatment.
(Though if you wanted to be fair, "ethitical" is used in Hindi English. But somehow I don't think that what was inspiring the Irish.)
I went to the Doctors last Friday and their were happier with me reading their screens from the side rather than letting me in to the practice so I could talk to them without seeing what was on display...