• Welcome to the ShrimperZone forums.
    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which only gives you limited access.

    Existing Users:.
    Please log-in using your existing username and password. If you have any problems, please see below.

    New Users:
    Join our free community now and gain access to post topics, communicate privately with other members, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and free. Click here to join.

    Fans from other clubs
    We welcome and appreciate supporters from other clubs who wish to engage in sensible discussion. Please feel free to join as above but understand that this is a moderated site and those who cannot play nicely will be quickly removed.

    Assistance Required
    For help with the registration process or accessing your account, please send a note using the Contact us link in the footer, please include your account name. We can then provide you with a new password and verification to get you on the site.

Coronavirus (Non-Politics)

GNH

Fish House Ultras
Joined
Oct 26, 2003
Messages
2,582
Location
Rayleigh
Don't you think that "young/healthy " people probably also have older/unhealthy relatives?
Yes I'd imagine they do, and the vast majority of those will be isolating away from these people so they are protected until there infection has passed.
 

Tangled up in Blue

Certified Senior Citizen
Joined
May 24, 2004
Messages
29,392
Location
Sant Cugat del Vallès
Yes I'd imagine they do, and the vast majority of those will be isolating away from these people so they are protected until there infection has passed.
Your lack of concern for elderly relatives is nothing short of callous or as the head of the WHO has said "immoral".

 

OldBlueLady

Junior Blues Co-ordinator
Joined
Dec 27, 2007
Messages
46,942
Location
Benfleet
Your lack of concern for elderly relatives is nothing short of callous or as the head of the WHO has said "immoral".
I don't agree, you can still visit your elderly relatives as you were during lockdown - as we did with my parents (82 and 83) yesterday and had a cup of tea outside with them. You can put a mask on to visit and take all necessary precautions. If you have symptoms or test positive then of course you would isolate, or you should!
 

rigsby

Life President
Joined
Oct 12, 2014
Messages
12,704

rigsby

Life President
Joined
Oct 12, 2014
Messages
12,704
I don't agree, you can still visit your elderly relatives as you were during lockdown - as we did with my parents (82 and 83) yesterday and had a cup of tea outside with them. You can put a mask on to visit and take all necessary precautions. If you have symptoms or test positive then of course you would isolate, or you should!
Cant you go in their house as part of their support group?
 

OldBlueLady

Junior Blues Co-ordinator
Joined
Dec 27, 2007
Messages
46,942
Location
Benfleet
Cant you go in their house as part of their support group?
The problem is that Kev is in contact with people on the ambulances with so many people with a huge variety of problems, including suspected Covid cases. It's what keeps them happy at the end of the day.
 

rigsby

Life President
Joined
Oct 12, 2014
Messages
12,704
The problem is that Kev is in contact with people on the ambulances with so many people with a huge variety of problems, including suspected Covid cases. It's what keeps them happy at the end of the day.
Ok understand. I was just checking what the tier 2 rules are as I will be heading into the forbidden zone this afternoon.
 

Tangled up in Blue

Certified Senior Citizen
Joined
May 24, 2004
Messages
29,392
Location
Sant Cugat del Vallès
You just cant help yourself can you. Either debate the with people or don't post.
Your trouble is you just don't seem to understand when someone is making a serious point which doesn't co-incide with your own particular views on an issue.The idea that people who've worked all their lives are somehow less important than those of current working age is not the hallmark of a civilised society.

As someone of a certain age. I have no intention of" shielding" myself from society (I'll be using public transport this afternoon to go to the cinema for example.I will however, continue to take what I believe, are sensible precautions.ie wearing a face mask,regular hand washing and observing social distancing rules whenever possible. We also had our grandson for the weekend and his parents picked him up yesterday.Fortunately that's still allowed.It's called taking a calculated risk I think.
 
Last edited:

Tangled up in Blue

Certified Senior Citizen
Joined
May 24, 2004
Messages
29,392
Location
Sant Cugat del Vallès
I don't agree, you can still visit your elderly relatives as you were during lockdown - as we did with my parents (82 and 83) yesterday and had a cup of tea outside with them. You can put a mask on to visit and take all necessary precautions. If you have symptoms or test positive then of course you would isolate, or you should!
See Post above.Incidentally we'll be having a friend round for a meal on Wednesday (not in the Silence of the Lambs sense :Winking: ) She and I studied together back in the 90's and we haven't really had a chance to repay her hospitality from when she invited us ariound to see her new flat ,just before the lockdown back in Feb. No idea where that fits into the scheme of things in tier 2 or even here but Sharon who's also retired seemed very happy with the invite.
 
Last edited:

jackj13

Youth Team
Joined
Dec 21, 2012
Messages
422
I know the restrictions brought in are quite questionable but some people really are taking it out on others when they shouldn't. My partners pub has just received a 1 star review from people who went in on Saturday and were certain the new rules didn't come in till midnight that evening so had the hump they couldn't mix households and had to leave. They're struggling enough at the moment and stuff like this really doesn't help.
 

Pubey

Frequent flyer in all buzzing chatrooms
Joined
Jan 3, 2018
Messages
31,422
If Gyms were spreading the 'virus' then people who go to the gym would be ill. If you haven't had one customer go down with it why the need to close.

Local gym or tube train?....Where are you more likely to catch something.
I know people from my gym who've had COVID-19. Typically mild. I know a couple of individuals with no pre-existing conditions who are young and fit and healthy who've had COVID-19 and 3-4 weeks later are still feeling pretty unwell and wiped out. It's not a joke.

We don't have studies or evidence about the relative risks of different settings. This would be basically impossible to do. What we do know are the factors that lead to an increased risk of transmission:
- proximity/distancing
- ventilation
- risk of touching face/touching shared surfaces
- exercise/strenuous activity/shouting/heavy breathing

gyms are risky due to a number of those factors. Are they more or less risky than a pub or a school? Just because we don't have evidence doesn't mean we can assume they're risk free. From a public health perspective I'd suggest that gyms are probably 'mid-level risk' in terms of risk of transmission, but lower risk in terms of outcomes because of the people that tend to go being younger and healthier in general. Weighing up whether they stay open or shut down is a political decision as much based on economic factors as it is on public health. Shutting down the tube is not going to happen as it's the primary and only source of transport for millions of Londoners who need to travel to work. However, from a public health perspective it's probably high risk based on the bullet-points I shared above.
 

Chalky

Coach
Joined
Mar 27, 2014
Messages
930
I know people from my gym who've had COVID-19. Typically mild. I know a couple of individuals with no pre-existing conditions who are young and fit and healthy who've had COVID-19 and 3-4 weeks later are still feeling pretty unwell and wiped out. It's not a joke.

We don't have studies or evidence about the relative risks of different settings. This would be basically impossible to do. What we do know are the factors that lead to an increased risk of transmission:
- proximity/distancing
- ventilation
- risk of touching face/touching shared surfaces
- exercise/strenuous activity/shouting/heavy breathing

gyms are risky due to a number of those factors. Are they more or less risky than a pub or a school? Just because we don't have evidence doesn't mean we can assume they're risk free. From a public health perspective I'd suggest that gyms are probably 'mid-level risk' in terms of risk of transmission, but lower risk in terms of outcomes because of the people that tend to go being younger and healthier in general. Weighing up whether they stay open or shut down is a political decision as much based on economic factors as it is on public health. Shutting down the tube is not going to happen as it's the primary and only source of transport for millions of Londoners who need to travel to work. However, from a public health perspective it's probably high risk based on the bullet-points I shared above.
We do have evidence though. NHS Test and trace figures show that 75.3 percent of transmissions happened in homes, with only 5.5 percent in pubs, restaurents, gyms and churches.

I urge anyone in this thread to follow a few of these people on twitter:

@sepsisUK (Dr Ron Daniels BEM, who is an intensive care doctor within the NHS who has repeatedly called out the scientifically baseless Lockdowns and has inside data)

@MichaelYeadon (Retired Dr who is the former CSO and VP, allergy and Respiratory research head with Pfizer Global. Who is constantly challenging the Govs distortion of facts)

@Jon_statistics (full time data analyst who compiles Covid data, you would be amazed at what the data really says. We have been fearmongered with 'rising hospitalizations' but in fact this same time last year, when Covid didnt even exsist, hospitals were actually more full than they are now)
 

Pubey

Frequent flyer in all buzzing chatrooms
Joined
Jan 3, 2018
Messages
31,422
Last edited:

Pubey

Frequent flyer in all buzzing chatrooms
Joined
Jan 3, 2018
Messages
31,422
We do have evidence though. NHS Test and trace figures show that 75.3 percent of transmissions happened in homes, with only 5.5 percent in pubs, restaurents, gyms and churches.

I urge anyone in this thread to follow a few of these people on twitter:

@sepsisUK (Dr Ron Daniels BEM, who is an intensive care doctor within the NHS who has repeatedly called out the scientifically baseless Lockdowns and has inside data)

@MichaelYeadon (Retired Dr who is the former CSO and VP, allergy and Respiratory research head with Pfizer Global. Who is constantly challenging the Govs distortion of facts)

@Jon_statistics (full time data analyst who compiles Covid data, you would be amazed at what the data really says. We have been fearmongered with 'rising hospitalizations' but in fact this same time last year, when Covid didnt even exsist, hospitals were actually more full than they are now)
that isn't evidence about the risk of transmission. Of course the majority of transmission are happening at homes, because that's where the majority of people spend the majority of their time each week. Plus homes are where my risk factors linked above really come into play.

Only a small proportion of the population regularly use a gym, and it might be for a couple of hours a week on average. No wonder they account for a small proportion of the overall 'contacts' found by track and trace.

And let's not get into the methodological issues about how Track and Trace determine where transmission may have occurred. It's self-reported close contacts and based on weighing up probabilities, only tracking of serology can provide more definitive links.
 

GBJ

The Font of all Knowledge
Joined
Nov 2, 2008
Messages
11,421
Location
Grays
Yes I'd imagine they do, and the vast majority of those will be isolating away from these people so they are protected until there infection has passed.
Again, the list of people who fall into the vulnerable category, includes a massive percentage of taxpayers. If they were forced to shield, do you think this would benefit the economy?

That is the reason why this idea of “protecting the vulnerable, and let the rest of us get on with our lives”, is a non-starter.
 

GNH

Fish House Ultras
Joined
Oct 26, 2003
Messages
2,582
Location
Rayleigh
Your lack of concern for elderly relatives is nothing short of callous or as the head of the WHO has said "immoral".

Thank you for taking to time to highlight my grammatical error bold, not sure what that achieves?

Also for the detailed response and debate as to what my views on this matter are rather than jumping to biased conclusions...……..Oh wait....

Don't even think about lecturing me on my moral compass, if you think that providing support and help to those most at risk, while allowing other demographics of society to return to some sort of normality is wrong then say so in a reasoned way.

Pathetic
 
Top