Media Player Los Gigantes!

Author Topic: Restrictions  (Read 10621 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline nophead

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 435
Re: Restrictions
« Reply #210 on: October 28, 2020 »
Advertisement
Inter-generational mixing is exactly how it gets to the older generations that fill up the hospital beds and provoke lock-downs.

Offline unhappy

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 723
Re: Restrictions
« Reply #211 on: October 28, 2020 »
Mr so called expert, get your head from where the sun does not shine, I believe you come from the north that model of the country who have behaving correctly, that is why they are all in the 3rd tier of lock down.

Offline nophead

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 435
Re: Restrictions
« Reply #212 on: October 28, 2020 »
Yes absolutely nobody we know or see complies with the government regulations. They all mix with their families and grandchildren. I don't think the government should be able to dictate that you can't mix with your friends and family, and in practice they can't because nobody takes any notice of those idiots.

And the vast majority here don't either.

All the government should do is advise people how to stay safe and put all their money and resources into increasing health service capacity to cope instead of spending billions paying people to stay at home and limiting all social and economic activity to match health service capacity.

Today I heard that the increase in suicides this year in Tenerife far exceeds the excess deaths due to Covid. Not sure if it is true but if it is it shows the cure is far worse than the disease.

« Last Edit: October 28, 2020 by nophead »

Offline paulaf

  • regular contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 60
Re: Restrictions
« Reply #213 on: October 28, 2020 »

Paulaf is this the same article you read that the WHO don't recommend wearing masks

No it was an article in a science report I read a few weeks ago and I always remember the 97% I quoted as now when I see someone wearing a cloth mask I always say to myself 3% as a little joke as that is all the protection they offer.

Offline unhappy

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 723
Re: Restrictions
« Reply #214 on: October 28, 2020 »
Finally I realise all the clowns are not in the circus, as for you 2, post as much as you want, my only hope is our paths will never cross.

THE END.

Offline Georgie

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1177
Re: Restrictions
« Reply #215 on: October 28, 2020 »
This is crazy everyone

Please can we discuss los gigantes please

Otherwise watch the news because it's another wind up

Offline pilgrim

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1037
  • Looking forward to better times
Re: Restrictions
« Reply #216 on: October 28, 2020 »
News is France and Germany are going into full lockdown! And the Torygraph headlined today that the second wave of the Covid will do more widespread damage than first wave!!!
Things are changing at speed, wonder if we will be okay for our flight next Thursday?

Offline nophead

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 435
Re: Restrictions
« Reply #217 on: October 28, 2020 »
Impossible to predict what will happen a week in advance with these crazy times. Yes a second wave in winter will probably be more serious. It was always predicted by the scientists.

Perhaps you will need a test, or perhaps two tests or perhaps travel will be banned, or perhaps none of those.

We had flights booked for 10th November but decided to bring them forward, as things were going downhill fast, and lucked out on the first day the foreign office advice was lifted and although we didn't know it at the time may have avoided having expensive tests.

If they introduce tests then flights become safer but a lot more expensive. If they don't my advice is to wear KN95 FFP3 masks and visors as it is more likely somebody on the plane has it than not.

Tony Arbolino, a Moto3 rider had to miss a race because somebody three rows in front of him on a plane had covid even though he tested negative himself. You have to give your seat number to the authorities so it could ruin a short holiday.

As for wearing masks outside: it seems to be over here.  Nearly everybody wears them around their necks. Apparently even the police don't wear them! 

Offline pilgrim

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1037
  • Looking forward to better times
Re: Restrictions
« Reply #218 on: October 28, 2020 »
Thanks Nophead, I guess if anyone is positive Covid it will be a steward or stewardess on the plane! quite an intense tube to work within day in day out! Yeh, good idea will have to get better protection. My wife is not good flying anyway, so will have to tread gently.

Offline nophead

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 435
Re: Restrictions
« Reply #219 on: October 28, 2020 »
My next door neighbour works in the building trade and his in his late 50s / early 60s. He stopped working because he thinks building sites are too risky for covid but his youngest daughter lives with them and is an air stewardess! His other daughters visit with grand children, which isn't even allowed. Go figure. 

Offline paulaf

  • regular contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 60
Re: Restrictions
« Reply #220 on: October 29, 2020 »
Thanks Nophead, I guess if anyone is positive Covid it will be a steward or stewardess on the plane! quite an intense tube to work within day in day out! Yeh, good idea will have to get better protection. My wife is not good flying anyway, so will have to tread gently.
Read this article to your wife might make her feel better, 1 in 27 million passengers catch Covid on a flight. We've flown 4 times during Covid and felt perfectly safe.

https://www.travelmole.com/news_feature.php?news_id=2044611

Offline Davymar

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 296
Re: Restrictions
« Reply #221 on: October 29, 2020 »
Quote
Read this article to your wife might make her feel better, 1 in 27 million passengers catch Covid on a flight. We've flown 4 times during Covid and felt perfectly safe.

I would read who produced the article first! not like they are biased is it? ;D

Offline paulaf

  • regular contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 60
Re: Restrictions
« Reply #222 on: October 29, 2020 »
IATA produced it.

Offline pilgrim

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1037
  • Looking forward to better times
Re: Restrictions
« Reply #223 on: October 29, 2020 »
Things seem to be changing fast again! more lock down areas announced tonight. What happens if my area goes to Tier 3. Gatwick airport is not far but I would be leaving my area! Am I allowed, is a holiday essential
travel?

Offline paulaf

  • regular contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 60
Re: Restrictions
« Reply #224 on: October 29, 2020 »
Things seem to be changing fast again! more lock down areas announced tonight. What happens if my area goes to Tier 3. Gatwick airport is not far but I would be leaving my area! Am I allowed, is a holiday essential
travel?
Are you in Tier 1 now, you would first go to Tier 2 next but read this article.

https://www.independent.co.uk/travel/news-and-advice/can-tier-3-travel-abroad-restrictions-rules-lockdown-covid-uk-b1401788.html

Offline pilgrim

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1037
  • Looking forward to better times
Re: Restrictions
« Reply #225 on: October 29, 2020 »
Thank you for that paulaf, Yes Reigate and Banstead in surrey in Tier 1, so according to that article if we went to Tier 3, we should also be good to travel!

Offline paulaf

  • regular contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 60
Re: Restrictions
« Reply #226 on: October 29, 2020 »
Thank you for that paulaf, Yes Reigate and Banstead in surrey in Tier 1, so according to that article if we went to Tier 3, we should also be good to travel!
[/quote

I'm not that far from you also in Tier 1, nearest area to us in Tier 2 is Elmbridge Surrey.

Offline nophead

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 435
Re: Restrictions
« Reply #227 on: October 29, 2020 »
Yes we flew out seven hours after we became tier 3 because there was no law against it.

When the government announce restrictions they don't make it clear what is illegal and what is just advice. When they made the rule of six law we thought we were already limited to six but the law was actually 30. We learnt from that to always check and we ignore advice from idiots.

Offline pilgrim

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1037
  • Looking forward to better times
Re: Restrictions
« Reply #228 on: October 29, 2020 »
Boris and rest of this government are poor communicators. Need a lesson from Trump or Reagan!

Offline nophead

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 435
Re: Restrictions
« Reply #229 on: October 30, 2020 »
Don't care about the how they dress it up, it the policy that is bonkers. Can somebody tell me how it makes sense to ruin the economy for a generation and disrupt all normal life for 18 months just to extend the lives of 1% of the population that on average are already past the normal age people die at?

Offline paulaf

  • regular contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 60
Re: Restrictions
« Reply #230 on: October 30, 2020 »
Don't care about the how they dress it up, it the policy that is bonkers. Can somebody tell me how it makes sense to ruin the economy for a generation and disrupt all normal life for 18 months just to extend the lives of 1% of the population that on average are already past the normal age people die at?
Completely agree with you just shield the elderly and the vulnerable for another few weeks until the vaccines are ready, which seems to be looking hopeful for the Oxford and Pfizer ones now. Have you signed the Great Barrington Declaration?

https://gbdeclaration.org/
« Last Edit: October 30, 2020 by paulaf »

Online angiebabes

  • Old Hand
  • ***
  • Posts: 173
Re: Restrictions
« Reply #231 on: October 30, 2020 »
How sad to realise my life matters so little to Nophead and Paulaf.

The cynic in me feels that once you two are my age, your outlook on your own lives mattering will do a U turn.

I am fortunate that my friends and family value my contribution to their lives.

Offline paulaf

  • regular contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 60
Re: Restrictions
« Reply #232 on: October 30, 2020 »
I'm not saying it doesn't matter, I am saying you should take care and shield but that we shouldn't stop the rest of the population earning a living and getting on with their lives for a small minority of vulnerable people. There are approx 5.4 million people in the UK over 75 yet we are destroying businesses and peoples livelihoods when there is an alternative. I guess this issue is just like Brexit and equally divisive.

Offline Edward Bear

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1189
Re: Restrictions
« Reply #233 on: October 30, 2020 »
Well said Angie, some folk have an extremely selfish attitude. They all know who they are.

Offline paulaf

  • regular contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 60
Re: Restrictions
« Reply #234 on: October 30, 2020 »
Well said Angie, some folk have an extremely selfish attitude. They all know who they are.
I guess you don't know anyone who has lost their job or business then?

Online angiebabes

  • Old Hand
  • ***
  • Posts: 173
Re: Restrictions
« Reply #235 on: October 30, 2020 »
Well said Angie, some folk have an extremely selfish attitude. They all know who they are.
I guess you don't know anyone who has lost their job or business then?


We all know people who are and have suffered from these unprecedented times but you agreed with Nophead’s comments about his theory of natural selection which to some of us seniors, is harsh, unkind and thoughtless.

Us seniors have lived through some incredible times before you were probably born. One could just as easily argue that if SOME ( and I emphasise SOME ) younger people had done as they were asked and distanced, made a fortnights sacrifice and stayed at home, considered others and worn a mask, then we wouldn’t be in the situation we now find ourselves in.  It isn’t clever to try and get round regulations and herald yourself as having outwitted those advising this pandemic. I dread to think what would have happened in WW11 with the modern day attitude so amply demonstrated amongst some these days. As to Nophead and his opinions, he is absolutely entitled to them, but I do wish he wouldn’t quite so arrogantly opine that’s he is right and those of us who disagree with him are idiots - because, believe it or not, we’ve managed to get this far through life and are still standing!! Trying to teach your grandmother to suck eggs, as the saying goes.............

Offline AWOL

  • Old Hand
  • ***
  • Posts: 194
Re: Restrictions
« Reply #236 on: October 30, 2020 »
Well said Angie, some folk have an extremely selfish attitude. They all know who they are.
I guess you don't know anyone who has lost their job or business then?

I presume you do not run a company that employ staff  that make mobilty scooters or walking frames etc for the elderly. You strike me as a very selfish money grabbing individual if I may say. I am sure they would not agree with your take on things.

Words almost fail me.

Offline paulaf

  • regular contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 60
Re: Restrictions
« Reply #237 on: October 30, 2020 »
Well said Angie, some folk have an extremely selfish attitude. They all know who they are.
I guess you don't know anyone who has lost their job or business then?

I presume you do not run a company that employ staff  that make mobilty scooters or walking frames etc for the elderly. You strike me as a very selfish money grabbing individual if I may say. I am sure they would not agree with your take on things.

Words almost fail me.
Not sure who your comment about money grabbing is aimed at, no I do not run any money grabbing businesses! We are both in our mid 50's so not a youngster as I think was presumed, just trying to see past all the scaremongering and thinking about the rest of the population too.

Offline nophead

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 435
Re: Restrictions
« Reply #238 on: October 30, 2020 »
The old think the young are selfish and the young think the old are selfish.

Governments should be rational and act in the best interests of the people they govern, or perhaps the best interests of the people that elected them! So how does it makes sense to ruin everything for the small minority of people that would die from covid a few years early? The average age of people dying with it is actually higher than the average age I would hope to live to. I.e. ~82.4. Google said I would live to 82 and the average age people die at is about a year less.

The UK government's stated priority is to save lives and protect the health service. Saving lives makes no sense because everybody dies. So what they actually mean is extend lives. And who's lives are they extending and for how long? It turns out it is the most elderly and frail 1% and probably for only a few years. But with the reduction in cancer care and increased suicides, etc, they don't actually save any lives. Excess deaths run about twice as high as covid death.

And given the health service is normally under severe pressure in the winter wouldn't you think they would have spent the summer increasing capacity? We have the smallest number of beds per capita in Europe. They should have trained up out of work air stewards to give basic nursing care and specific covid treatment in the Nightingale hospitals instead of trying to limit our social lives and economy to match the very limited capacity of the NHS.

Isn't it reasonable to advise the people it would affect to shield themselves and let the rest get on with life? Why should the whole population be affected?

I saw a graph today that showed the death rate in 2020 was high but you only have go back a few years to see it higher. Everything should be shown in context. More than half a million people die every year in the UK. People seem to have lost sight of that.
« Last Edit: October 30, 2020 by nophead »

Offline paulaf

  • regular contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 60
Re: Restrictions
« Reply #239 on: October 30, 2020 »
Flu deaths in September in the UK were 1132, Covid deaths were 690, we don't lockdown for flu!