Author Topic: COVID-19  (Read 177596 times)

a random player who doesn't even play for us any more and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline AyeDubbleYoo

  • General Member
Re: COVID-19
« Reply #4550 on: Tuesday 23 February 2021, 01:41:27 PM »
I don’t think I can keep social distancing for much longer like, definitely not once I and everyone I know has been vaccinated.

Offline kingkerouac

  • General Member
  • London, UK
Re: COVID-19
« Reply #4551 on: Tuesday 23 February 2021, 01:47:58 PM »
So we're essentially going back to the level of restrictions that didn't work to contain the Kent strain before this lockdown but we're still at 10k positive tests per day and now the Kent strain is the dominant strain everywhere and we'll have 25% of the population walking around with partial immunity thinking they're invincible. What could possibly go wrong?



33% of adults already vaccinated, the groups responsible for 90% of deaths have all been vaccinated, that will increase by the time the Schools go back and even further again by the time the next set of restrictions are lifted. The objective was always stopping the NHS from being overwhelmed which should be the case moving forwards.

Setting the objective as being the NHS not being overwhelmed has resulted in 120,000 deaths. It is a lagging indicator, if the NHS is anywhere near being overwhelmed we're already at the point where we have 2 months+ of 500+ deaths per day, 15,000+ deaths per month, and countless other people being left with long term heath conditions. The objective should have and should be to get a keep case levels down to a level that can be controlled by testing and tracing. Each time we have left our lockdowns far too late and come out of them too soon, and we've clearly haven't learnt any lessons from that either in the government, scientific community or population.
We have had three technical lockdowns and I agree we've locked down too late each time. Saying that we've had fairly tight restrictions since September in many areas of the country before this lockdown came into place and I don't see this as being too soon at present. By the time we can merely do things like meet in groups of six outside, the lockdown will have gone on nearly three months (longer for those in tier four), which is longer than we had last year. We have an excellent vaccine programme with studies producing more positive results, plus better understanding of how to treat covid, so this isn't the same. It's been an awful winter and people just need some hope and optimism - I'm not some covid-denier or someone who thinks lockdowns don't work ignoring all the evidence, but the harm they cause is pretty apparent and if they keep going on they are taking significant parts away from people's lives.

Ultimately everyone's situation is different and we all have different priorities. People who are vulnerable or have vulnerable family members have every right to be concerned for their well-being when restrictions are eased, while people fearing for their jobs shouldn't feel guilty when they are told they can open up their businesses also. Personally I think the government have approached this well (for once), but fully accept I could be wrong about that as I have been before.

But my point is not that we shouldn't open up, it's that we keep locking down too late and too softly and opening up too soon. Had we locked down faster and harder our lockdowns would not have needed to be as long and had we got down to a nominal level of infection before opening up again we could have controlled it better with test and trace and local lockdowns, as they have in other countries.

What isn't talked about much is that our approach has resulted in the worst of both worlds, we have among the highest death rates in the world and among the worst economic impact, most other countries with very high death rates have relatively low economic impacts. The government's response has been an unmitigated disaster and this will be no different.
Yeah I agree with you on the previous lockdowns and this one starting too late; just don't think this time is quite comparable because it's occurring during a swiftly progressing vaccination programme that studies are showing is both preventing severe symptoms and limiting transmission. Considering there are some people who strangely want society opened up much quicker, I think this is a decent compromise. Many parts of the UK would have effectively been in lockdown three months by the time the rule of six comes into force again (it wasn't much longer before the pubs reopened last year) and hopefully we'll keep the airport quarantine rule in place for a while, which should also make a big difference to last year.

Social distancing requirements such as wearing masks will have to continue significantly after this summer in my opinion, but all being well we should be getting things down to a manageable level.

Agreed, but the brave, loyal English people I've seen around this morning actually now believe it's all over.
#whycanttheyunderstand

Offline Jackie Broon

  • General Member
Re: COVID-19
« Reply #4552 on: Tuesday 23 February 2021, 01:48:16 PM »
So we're essentially going back to the level of restrictions that didn't work to contain the Kent strain before this lockdown but we're still at 10k positive tests per day and now the Kent strain is the dominant strain everywhere and we'll have 25% of the population walking around with partial immunity thinking they're invincible. What could possibly go wrong?



33% of adults already vaccinated, the groups responsible for 90% of deaths have all been vaccinated, that will increase by the time the Schools go back and even further again by the time the next set of restrictions are lifted. The objective was always stopping the NHS from being overwhelmed which should be the case moving forwards.

Setting the objective as being the NHS not being overwhelmed has resulted in 120,000 deaths. It is a lagging indicator, if the NHS is anywhere near being overwhelmed we're already at the point where we have 2 months+ of 500+ deaths per day, 15,000+ deaths per month, and countless other people being left with long term heath conditions. The objective should have and should be to get a keep case levels down to a level that can be controlled by testing and tracing. Each time we have left our lockdowns far too late and come out of them too soon, and we've clearly haven't learnt any lessons from that either in the government, scientific community or population.
We have had three technical lockdowns and I agree we've locked down too late each time. Saying that we've had fairly tight restrictions since September in many areas of the country before this lockdown came into place and I don't see this as being too soon at present. By the time we can merely do things like meet in groups of six outside, the lockdown will have gone on nearly three months (longer for those in tier four), which is longer than we had last year. We have an excellent vaccine programme with studies producing more positive results, plus better understanding of how to treat covid, so this isn't the same. It's been an awful winter and people just need some hope and optimism - I'm not some covid-denier or someone who thinks lockdowns don't work ignoring all the evidence, but the harm they cause is pretty apparent and if they keep going on they are taking significant parts away from people's lives.

Ultimately everyone's situation is different and we all have different priorities. People who are vulnerable or have vulnerable family members have every right to be concerned for their well-being when restrictions are eased, while people fearing for their jobs shouldn't feel guilty when they are told they can open up their businesses also. Personally I think the government have approached this well (for once), but fully accept I could be wrong about that as I have been before.

But my point is not that we shouldn't open up, it's that we keep locking down too late and too softly and opening up too soon. Had we locked down faster and harder our lockdowns would not have needed to be as long and had we got down to a nominal level of infection before opening up again we could have controlled it better with test and trace and local lockdowns, as they have in other countries.

What isn't talked about much is that our approach has resulted in the worst of both worlds, we have among the highest death rates in the world and among the worst economic impact, most other countries with very high death rates have relatively low economic impacts. The government's response has been an unmitigated disaster and this will be no different.
Yeah I agree with you on the previous lockdowns and this one starting too late; just don't think this time is quite comparable because it's occurring during a swiftly progressing vaccination programme that studies are showing is both preventing severe symptoms and limiting transmission. Considering there are some people who strangely want society opened up much quicker, I think this is a decent compromise. Many parts of the UK would have effectively been in lockdown three months by the time the rule of six comes into force again (it wasn't much longer before the pubs reopened last year) and hopefully we'll keep the airport quarantine rule in place for a while, which should also make a big difference to last year.

Social distancing requirements such as wearing masks will have to continue significantly after this summer in my opinion, but all being well we should be getting things down to a manageable level.

My main concern is the rush to open schools with pretty much no staff or pupils having been vaccinated and the dogged insistence on full reopening rather than a staggered approach and/or allowing blended learning. Anecdotally blended learning has been pretty effective in limiting transmission in 6th form collages, which is the only place it has been allowed by the government.

The government keep insisting that schools are safe but have suppressed the figures on infections of school staff and when unions have threatened to make them need to prove it in court they've backed down and closed schools.

Online Shearergol

  • General Member
Re: COVID-19
« Reply #4553 on: Tuesday 23 February 2021, 01:48:25 PM »
I don’t think I can keep social distancing for much longer like, definitely not once I and everyone I know has been vaccinated.

I'd happily distance myself from the majority of people in shops tbf.

Offline St. Maximin

  • General Member
Re: COVID-19
« Reply #4554 on: Tuesday 23 February 2021, 01:54:26 PM »
So we're essentially going back to the level of restrictions that didn't work to contain the Kent strain before this lockdown but we're still at 10k positive tests per day and now the Kent strain is the dominant strain everywhere and we'll have 25% of the population walking around with partial immunity thinking they're invincible. What could possibly go wrong?



33% of adults already vaccinated, the groups responsible for 90% of deaths have all been vaccinated, that will increase by the time the Schools go back and even further again by the time the next set of restrictions are lifted. The objective was always stopping the NHS from being overwhelmed which should be the case moving forwards.

Setting the objective as being the NHS not being overwhelmed has resulted in 120,000 deaths. It is a lagging indicator, if the NHS is anywhere near being overwhelmed we're already at the point where we have 2 months+ of 500+ deaths per day, 15,000+ deaths per month, and countless other people being left with long term heath conditions. The objective should have and should be to get a keep case levels down to a level that can be controlled by testing and tracing. Each time we have left our lockdowns far too late and come out of them too soon, and we've clearly haven't learnt any lessons from that either in the government, scientific community or population.
We have had three technical lockdowns and I agree we've locked down too late each time. Saying that we've had fairly tight restrictions since September in many areas of the country before this lockdown came into place and I don't see this as being too soon at present. By the time we can merely do things like meet in groups of six outside, the lockdown will have gone on nearly three months (longer for those in tier four), which is longer than we had last year. We have an excellent vaccine programme with studies producing more positive results, plus better understanding of how to treat covid, so this isn't the same. It's been an awful winter and people just need some hope and optimism - I'm not some covid-denier or someone who thinks lockdowns don't work ignoring all the evidence, but the harm they cause is pretty apparent and if they keep going on they are taking significant parts away from people's lives.

Ultimately everyone's situation is different and we all have different priorities. People who are vulnerable or have vulnerable family members have every right to be concerned for their well-being when restrictions are eased, while people fearing for their jobs shouldn't feel guilty when they are told they can open up their businesses also. Personally I think the government have approached this well (for once), but fully accept I could be wrong about that as I have been before.

But my point is not that we shouldn't open up, it's that we keep locking down too late and too softly and opening up too soon. Had we locked down faster and harder our lockdowns would not have needed to be as long and had we got down to a nominal level of infection before opening up again we could have controlled it better with test and trace and local lockdowns, as they have in other countries.

What isn't talked about much is that our approach has resulted in the worst of both worlds, we have among the highest death rates in the world and among the worst economic impact, most other countries with very high death rates have relatively low economic impacts. The government's response has been an unmitigated disaster and this will be no different.
Yeah I agree with you on the previous lockdowns and this one starting too late; just don't think this time is quite comparable because it's occurring during a swiftly progressing vaccination programme that studies are showing is both preventing severe symptoms and limiting transmission. Considering there are some people who strangely want society opened up much quicker, I think this is a decent compromise. Many parts of the UK would have effectively been in lockdown three months by the time the rule of six comes into force again (it wasn't much longer before the pubs reopened last year) and hopefully we'll keep the airport quarantine rule in place for a while, which should also make a big difference to last year.

Social distancing requirements such as wearing masks will have to continue significantly after this summer in my opinion, but all being well we should be getting things down to a manageable level.

Agreed, but the brave, loyal English people I've seen around this morning actually now believe it's all over.
#whycanttheyunderstand
That was my main concern actually - as soon as we get good news about restrictions easing many people in the future, many people decide the laws change that day and we can all just relax.

Offline AyeDubbleYoo

  • General Member
Re: COVID-19
« Reply #4555 on: Tuesday 23 February 2021, 01:55:50 PM »
I don’t think I can keep social distancing for much longer like, definitely not once I and everyone I know has been vaccinated.

I'd happily distance myself from the majority of people in shops tbf.

Sure, but not my friends and family.

Online TheHoob

  • General Member
Re: COVID-19
« Reply #4556 on: Tuesday 23 February 2021, 01:55:51 PM »
The thing I find odd about the schools debate is how politically toxic it seems to have become to express doubt about kids going back in a few weeks time. On BBC Politics yesterday the interviewer was asking people if they agreed that it was safe to go back, in a tone that suggested if they said no they may as well admit they love shagging bairns.

Online TBG

  • King of GIF. WHAT?
  • General Member
Re: COVID-19
« Reply #4557 on: Tuesday 23 February 2021, 01:55:51 PM »
If they're going to reopen schools in a fortnight, I really don't know why they've not set aside one or two days and just vaccinated as many school staff as possible. At the rate they've been going they could have done first doses for the lot in a couple of days.

Could make that argument about all key workers.

Always seemed a slightly strange concept to me that the priority was to vaccinate the people who were shielding before the people who couldn't, but I do understand that in the first instance this was all about reducing deaths and protecting hospitals. Surely now though they can change the vaccination rollout plan and ensure any front line staff are prioritised?

We only clap key workers.

22nd June onwards and people will go back to telling their children to stick in at school or else they'll end up working at McDonalds.

Offline St. Maximin

  • General Member
Re: COVID-19
« Reply #4558 on: Tuesday 23 February 2021, 01:57:12 PM »
So we're essentially going back to the level of restrictions that didn't work to contain the Kent strain before this lockdown but we're still at 10k positive tests per day and now the Kent strain is the dominant strain everywhere and we'll have 25% of the population walking around with partial immunity thinking they're invincible. What could possibly go wrong?



33% of adults already vaccinated, the groups responsible for 90% of deaths have all been vaccinated, that will increase by the time the Schools go back and even further again by the time the next set of restrictions are lifted. The objective was always stopping the NHS from being overwhelmed which should be the case moving forwards.

Setting the objective as being the NHS not being overwhelmed has resulted in 120,000 deaths. It is a lagging indicator, if the NHS is anywhere near being overwhelmed we're already at the point where we have 2 months+ of 500+ deaths per day, 15,000+ deaths per month, and countless other people being left with long term heath conditions. The objective should have and should be to get a keep case levels down to a level that can be controlled by testing and tracing. Each time we have left our lockdowns far too late and come out of them too soon, and we've clearly haven't learnt any lessons from that either in the government, scientific community or population.
We have had three technical lockdowns and I agree we've locked down too late each time. Saying that we've had fairly tight restrictions since September in many areas of the country before this lockdown came into place and I don't see this as being too soon at present. By the time we can merely do things like meet in groups of six outside, the lockdown will have gone on nearly three months (longer for those in tier four), which is longer than we had last year. We have an excellent vaccine programme with studies producing more positive results, plus better understanding of how to treat covid, so this isn't the same. It's been an awful winter and people just need some hope and optimism - I'm not some covid-denier or someone who thinks lockdowns don't work ignoring all the evidence, but the harm they cause is pretty apparent and if they keep going on they are taking significant parts away from people's lives.

Ultimately everyone's situation is different and we all have different priorities. People who are vulnerable or have vulnerable family members have every right to be concerned for their well-being when restrictions are eased, while people fearing for their jobs shouldn't feel guilty when they are told they can open up their businesses also. Personally I think the government have approached this well (for once), but fully accept I could be wrong about that as I have been before.

But my point is not that we shouldn't open up, it's that we keep locking down too late and too softly and opening up too soon. Had we locked down faster and harder our lockdowns would not have needed to be as long and had we got down to a nominal level of infection before opening up again we could have controlled it better with test and trace and local lockdowns, as they have in other countries.

What isn't talked about much is that our approach has resulted in the worst of both worlds, we have among the highest death rates in the world and among the worst economic impact, most other countries with very high death rates have relatively low economic impacts. The government's response has been an unmitigated disaster and this will be no different.
Yeah I agree with you on the previous lockdowns and this one starting too late; just don't think this time is quite comparable because it's occurring during a swiftly progressing vaccination programme that studies are showing is both preventing severe symptoms and limiting transmission. Considering there are some people who strangely want society opened up much quicker, I think this is a decent compromise. Many parts of the UK would have effectively been in lockdown three months by the time the rule of six comes into force again (it wasn't much longer before the pubs reopened last year) and hopefully we'll keep the airport quarantine rule in place for a while, which should also make a big difference to last year.

Social distancing requirements such as wearing masks will have to continue significantly after this summer in my opinion, but all being well we should be getting things down to a manageable level.

My main concern is the rush to open schools with pretty much no staff or pupils having been vaccinated and the dogged insistence on full reopening rather than a staggered approach and/or allowing blended learning. Anecdotally blended learning has been pretty effective in limiting transmission in 6th form collages, which is the only place it has been allowed by the government.

The government keep insisting that schools are safe but have suppressed the figures on infections of school staff and when unions have threatened to make them need to prove it in court they've backed down and closed schools.
Agree the school reopening has been poorly handled, which doesn't surprise at all given they sent them back for a day in January before shutting until March.

Offline Darth Crooks

  • General Member
  • ‘Rolled wuh sleeve dust up wuh kicked backsides’
Re: COVID-19
« Reply #4559 on: Tuesday 23 February 2021, 01:58:15 PM »
Hard open of schools will result in a massive spike. Getting kids to mask up etc is a perennial nightmare and seems the only difference alongside the vaccine. It should be at the heart of response seeing as it impacts everybody the most. Childcare etc. Yet everyone talks about the pub. I get the Hope arguments but that many pig headed calls have been made on that basis I’d welcome some rationality.


www.brianstormers.net Modern History & Film podcast network

Offline Slim

  • General Member
Re: COVID-19
« Reply #4560 on: Tuesday 23 February 2021, 02:55:46 PM »
So we're essentially going back to the level of restrictions that didn't work to contain the Kent strain before this lockdown but we're still at 10k positive tests per day and now the Kent strain is the dominant strain everywhere and we'll have 25% of the population walking around with partial immunity thinking they're invincible. What could possibly go wrong?



33% of adults already vaccinated, the groups responsible for 90% of deaths have all been vaccinated, that will increase by the time the Schools go back and even further again by the time the next set of restrictions are lifted. The objective was always stopping the NHS from being overwhelmed which should be the case moving forwards.

Setting the objective as being the NHS not being overwhelmed has resulted in 120,000 deaths. It is a lagging indicator, if the NHS is anywhere near being overwhelmed we're already at the point where we have 2 months+ of 500+ deaths per day, 15,000+ deaths per month, and countless other people being left with long term heath conditions. The objective should have and should be to get a keep case levels down to a level that can be controlled by testing and tracing. Each time we have left our lockdowns far too late and come out of them too soon, and we've clearly haven't learnt any lessons from that either in the government, scientific community or population.
We have had three technical lockdowns and I agree we've locked down too late each time. Saying that we've had fairly tight restrictions since September in many areas of the country before this lockdown came into place and I don't see this as being too soon at present. By the time we can merely do things like meet in groups of six outside, the lockdown will have gone on nearly three months (longer for those in tier four), which is longer than we had last year. We have an excellent vaccine programme with studies producing more positive results, plus better understanding of how to treat covid, so this isn't the same. It's been an awful winter and people just need some hope and optimism - I'm not some covid-denier or someone who thinks lockdowns don't work ignoring all the evidence, but the harm they cause is pretty apparent and if they keep going on they are taking significant parts away from people's lives.

Ultimately everyone's situation is different and we all have different priorities. People who are vulnerable or have vulnerable family members have every right to be concerned for their well-being when restrictions are eased, while people fearing for their jobs shouldn't feel guilty when they are told they can open up their businesses also. Personally I think the government have approached this well (for once), but fully accept I could be wrong about that as I have been before.

But my point is not that we shouldn't open up, it's that we keep locking down too late and too softly and opening up too soon. Had we locked down faster and harder our lockdowns would not have needed to be as long and had we got down to a nominal level of infection before opening up again we could have controlled it better with test and trace and local lockdowns, as they have in other countries.

What isn't talked about much is that our approach has resulted in the worst of both worlds, we have among the highest death rates in the world and among the worst economic impact, most other countries with very high death rates have relatively low economic impacts. The government's response has been an unmitigated disaster and this will be no different.
Yeah I agree with you on the previous lockdowns and this one starting too late; just don't think this time is quite comparable because it's occurring during a swiftly progressing vaccination programme that studies are showing is both preventing severe symptoms and limiting transmission. Considering there are some people who strangely want society opened up much quicker, I think this is a decent compromise. Many parts of the UK would have effectively been in lockdown three months by the time the rule of six comes into force again (it wasn't much longer before the pubs reopened last year) and hopefully we'll keep the airport quarantine rule in place for a while, which should also make a big difference to last year.

Social distancing requirements such as wearing masks will have to continue significantly after this summer in my opinion, but all being well we should be getting things down to a manageable level.

Agreed, but the brave, loyal English people I've seen around this morning actually now believe it's all over.
#whycanttheyunderstand
That was my main concern actually - as soon as we get good news about restrictions easing many people in the future, many people decide the laws change that day and we can all just relax.

Already had a guy I know text me to play poker on Sat. 

Offline sadnesstan

  • General Member
Re: COVID-19
« Reply #4561 on: Tuesday 23 February 2021, 02:58:20 PM »
So we're essentially going back to the level of restrictions that didn't work to contain the Kent strain before this lockdown but we're still at 10k positive tests per day and now the Kent strain is the dominant strain everywhere and we'll have 25% of the population walking around with partial immunity thinking they're invincible. What could possibly go wrong?



33% of adults already vaccinated, the groups responsible for 90% of deaths have all been vaccinated, that will increase by the time the Schools go back and even further again by the time the next set of restrictions are lifted. The objective was always stopping the NHS from being overwhelmed which should be the case moving forwards.

Setting the objective as being the NHS not being overwhelmed has resulted in 120,000 deaths. It is a lagging indicator, if the NHS is anywhere near being overwhelmed we're already at the point where we have 2 months+ of 500+ deaths per day, 15,000+ deaths per month, and countless other people being left with long term heath conditions. The objective should have and should be to get a keep case levels down to a level that can be controlled by testing and tracing. Each time we have left our lockdowns far too late and come out of them too soon, and we've clearly haven't learnt any lessons from that either in the government, scientific community or population.
We have had three technical lockdowns and I agree we've locked down too late each time. Saying that we've had fairly tight restrictions since September in many areas of the country before this lockdown came into place and I don't see this as being too soon at present. By the time we can merely do things like meet in groups of six outside, the lockdown will have gone on nearly three months (longer for those in tier four), which is longer than we had last year. We have an excellent vaccine programme with studies producing more positive results, plus better understanding of how to treat covid, so this isn't the same. It's been an awful winter and people just need some hope and optimism - I'm not some covid-denier or someone who thinks lockdowns don't work ignoring all the evidence, but the harm they cause is pretty apparent and if they keep going on they are taking significant parts away from people's lives.

Ultimately everyone's situation is different and we all have different priorities. People who are vulnerable or have vulnerable family members have every right to be concerned for their well-being when restrictions are eased, while people fearing for their jobs shouldn't feel guilty when they are told they can open up their businesses also. Personally I think the government have approached this well (for once), but fully accept I could be wrong about that as I have been before.

But my point is not that we shouldn't open up, it's that we keep locking down too late and too softly and opening up too soon. Had we locked down faster and harder our lockdowns would not have needed to be as long and had we got down to a nominal level of infection before opening up again we could have controlled it better with test and trace and local lockdowns, as they have in other countries.

What isn't talked about much is that our approach has resulted in the worst of both worlds, we have among the highest death rates in the world and among the worst economic impact, most other countries with very high death rates have relatively low economic impacts. The government's response has been an unmitigated disaster and this will be no different.

Aye but we've solved the overage population problem.

Offline Klaus

  • General Member
Re: COVID-19
« Reply #4562 on: Tuesday 23 February 2021, 03:31:31 PM »

Offline neesy111

  • General Member

Offline Adam^

  • General Member
  • Third best games poster 2020
Re: COVID-19
« Reply #4564 on: Tuesday 23 February 2021, 04:28:01 PM »

Offline 54

  • NUFC54
  • General Member
  • Remember...
Re: COVID-19
« Reply #4565 on: Tuesday 23 February 2021, 04:43:43 PM »
Love a bit of Tom Scott :lol:

Offline Wullie

  • Administrator
Re: COVID-19
« Reply #4566 on: Tuesday 23 February 2021, 04:54:05 PM »
New case numbers nicely down today.
Jeff's Garage - Cheaper than some other garages.

Offline 54

  • NUFC54
  • General Member
  • Remember...
Re: COVID-19
« Reply #4567 on: Tuesday 23 February 2021, 05:00:49 PM »
New case numbers nicely down today.
And there was an extra 80000 tests complete compared to yesterday too...

Offline Matt

  • General Member
Re: COVID-19
« Reply #4568 on: Tuesday 23 February 2021, 05:05:06 PM »
I know the lower vaccination numbers were well-flagged due to supply issues, but it does make things a bit twitchy.

Offline SEMTEX

  • General Member
Re: COVID-19
« Reply #4569 on: Tuesday 23 February 2021, 05:55:45 PM »
I don't think it's as much to do with alcohol as it is pubs being very culturally ingrained in Britain as a point of social interaction.

I'm a tad late on this discussion point, but the love for the pubs is just a way of saying you enjoy spending time with friends in a social setting. Without directly admitting you actually like some people. That'd be gauche.

Offline sadnesstan

  • General Member
Re: COVID-19
« Reply #4570 on: Tuesday 23 February 2021, 08:14:12 PM »
I don't think it's as much to do with alcohol as it is pubs being very culturally ingrained in Britain as a point of social interaction.

I'm a tad late on this discussion point, but the love for the pubs is just a way of saying you enjoy spending time with friends in a social setting. Without directly admitting you actually like some people. That'd be gauche.

Twas the other way around in my day. You'd put Socialising as a hobby, on your CV to disguise the fact you just liked getting shitfaced.

Offline thomas

  • NO's Best Foreigner - Participant
  • General Member
  • jerk who hates food pics
Re: COVID-19
« Reply #4571 on: Tuesday 23 February 2021, 09:16:05 PM »
cali variant sounding cool can't f***ing wait. (thread)

Nah f*** this, worst poster nominations are back.
One year I deliberately made no posts in the general chat thread so I couldn’t be nominated for it, I still f***ing won.

Offline Lush Vlad

  • General Member
  • Vlad The Impaler (Nath)
Re: COVID-19
« Reply #4572 on: Tuesday 23 February 2021, 09:20:03 PM »
Not gonna pretend that I understand half that s****. But isn’t that bloke regularly called out by scientists and other experts. For regularly talking utter s**** and misrepresenting data, fear mongering etc.?

Offline Disco

  • General Member
  • Newcastle
Re: COVID-19
« Reply #4573 on: Tuesday 23 February 2021, 09:20:59 PM »
I remember Dr Troll saying Dr Ding was a, and I’ll use the scientific term, “daft c***”.

Offline relámpago blanco

  • Likes gambling
  • General Member
  • aka Gorilla
Re: COVID-19
« Reply #4574 on: Tuesday 23 February 2021, 09:21:57 PM »
cali variant sounding cool can't f***ing wait. (thread)

It will be interesting to see how this goes in the US as its been known for a long time it's been coming.  We've had it last 2-3 months and it f***ed us but we are getting it down now.  It does appear there are 2 new variants in California though B1429 and B1427.  US is massively behind us in sequencing the the virus however so who knows.