Jump to content
talkfootball365
  • Welcome to talkfootball365!

    The better place to talk football.

Recommended Posts

Posted
1 minute ago, Harry said:

Honestly I find it hard to believe that people here caught it in December or January.

No offence intended but if true then the corollary is that a virus that spreads like wildfire and causes 10% of those who catch it to be hospitalised and 1% to die went totally undetected without anyone noticing it was there in major economies for multiple months.

My wife did 

Sign up to remove this ad.
Posted
7 hours ago, Cicero said:

My wife did 

Could she have been an assymptomatic carrier in April that never knew it?

I don't recall the facts of your case but looking at weekly death count from Jan to June there is no sign of a COVID wave before March, and a very big wave when Covid passes through... 

The weekly death count in New York went through the roof in April as Covid passed through. Four times as many deaths as usual. Without massive control measures it would have escalated further. 

20200716_122916.jpg

20200716_131443.jpg

  • Subscriber
Posted
8 minutes ago, Stan said:

The fiasco in England continues 

 

Another dead cat, let's be honest. How many people will there be who were close enough to the end of their lives to have died naturally in the last 6 months anyway, that also contracted Covid 19, recovered and then passed away in that period of time. It's hardly going to bring the death toll down by thousands is it? But at least this government has their priorities right when it comes to things that are urgent.

  • Administrator
Posted
4 minutes ago, RandoEFC said:

Another dead cat, let's be honest. How many people will there be who were close enough to the end of their lives to have died naturally in the last 6 months anyway, that also contracted Covid 19, recovered and then passed away in that period of time. It's hardly going to bring the death toll down by thousands is it? But at least this government has their priorities right when it comes to things that are urgent.

I think there'll be a considerate amount of people who weren't near the end of their live or died within 6 months to be honest. 

  • Subscriber
Posted
23 minutes ago, Stan said:

I think there'll be a considerate amount of people who weren't near the end of their live or died within 6 months to be honest. 

I don't understand what you're saying... My point was that if people were close enough to dying of "natural causes" that they have passed away in the last 6 months, they're not exactly likely to have caught and then recovered from coronavirus are they? It's not going to be that many people.

Urgent: Reducing the coronavirus death toll by a few dozen to make the government look slightly better with the help of misleading headlines in The Daily Telegraph and The Daily Mail.

Not Urgent: Giving the public up-to-date guidance on face masks to help prevent further spread of the virus despite most developed countries (even the US ffs) doing so months ago.

Posted

Got to have a test later. Rang work and told them I had a sore throat and a bit of a cold and  I can't come back until I have had the test. I don't actually show the symptoms of covid 19 it is precautionary. 

  • Administrator
Posted
1 hour ago, Gunnersauraus said:

Got to have a test later. Rang work and told them I had a sore throat and a bit of a cold and  I can't come back until I have had the test. I don't actually show the symptoms of covid 19 it is precautionary. 

Good luck. 

Posted
17 minutes ago, Stan said:

Good luck. 

Thanks mate. If I've got it I'm gonna be a right twat on here while in isolation just to warn you xD

Posted

Well that was horrible. They stick a swab up your mouth and then your nose. The nose test is pretty hard. Made me quench my fist a bit. 

Posted
40 minutes ago, Gunnersauraus said:

Well that was horrible. They stick a swab up your mouth and then your nose. The nose test is pretty hard. Made me quench my fist a bit. 

I've heard it's awful, like they're poking your brain through your nose.

Posted
Just now, Dr. Gonzo said:

I've heard it's awful, like they're poking your brain through your nose.

It's not painful but I makes you want to blow your nose and you can't 

Posted
On 14/07/2020 at 08:38, Harry said:

I can sympathise to a slight degree with the liberty argument. I would like to have a choice on wearing a mask rather than have it legally imposed on me.

I that's not because I desire to be irresponsible. I already gladly wear one anywhere that it would add value, but if I'm taking my son for a walk in our low density suburban neighbourhood where we come no close than 5 metres to anyone, I would prefer not to wear, as he's an anxious 4 year old and I don't want to heighten his fears of this whole thing.

Sadly, I think there are too many people in the world that are just fucking idiots to not have it legally imposed on everyone. You might be reasonable about when you wear a mask and when you don't. Sadly, many people won't be reasonable about it at all.

Posted (edited)

It's worse here with the mask. While no one is complaining about them, very few are actually wearing it properly. 

Meanwhile, we are getting more and more cases as we open up. And despite the government's best efforts, the people have stopped caring. I have lost count of the times I have had to tell someone to maintain distance, only to be laughed at or scoffed at. 

At least our death rate is low at 2.6%. While we have hit a million, more than half a million of those have recovered.

Heard @Mel81x city has gone back to lockdown, along with his home state. Hope you are doing well there. 

Edited by IgnisExcubitor
Posted
2 hours ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

Do you have a fever?

No just got a nasty cold I think. Slept for like 14 hours and feel a lot better now 

Posted

I just had a conversation with a covid 19 conspiracy theorist on Facebook.  I literally made up a conspiracy and he believed me xD

Posted
26 minutes ago, MUFC said:

 

17 minutes ago, Stan said:

Stupidity reigns supreme. 

 

What is so shocking about this?

It was a funeral, they had sanitizers, separated people as guidelined by the NHS.

Certainly the attendance of 250 is well over the suggested 30, but it was a funeral and they did the other steps asked of them. 

Say it's stupid if you want, but this funeral was for your wife, parent, or best friend, I dare you to be mad if more than 30 people show up to pay their respects, while abiding by the rest of the suggestions and regulations put in place.  

  • Administrator
Posted
39 minutes ago, Eco said:

 

What is so shocking about this?

It was a funeral, they had sanitizers, separated people as guidelined by the NHS.

Certainly the attendance of 250 is well over the suggested 30, but it was a funeral and they did the other steps asked of them. 

Say it's stupid if you want, but this funeral was for your wife, parent, or best friend, I dare you to be mad if more than 30 people show up to pay their respects, while abiding by the rest of the suggestions and regulations put in place.  

I wasn't shocked by it. I just don't understand how it appears to be fine to have 250 people just because you have things in place. There's a reason it's 30 people with those criteria to meet. The guidance isn't '30 people with social distancing, hand sanitiser, track and trace, but it can be more as well if you fancy it'. It shouldn't be used as a disclaimer after the event.

My other problem with it is if you've gone to the funeral and seen a large crowd, to enter in to that crowd knowing the risks is where the stupidity, for me is. Especially given the fact it would be a relatively tight space indoors where the virus is more likely to spread. 

I totally agree with the bottom line you mention. I can't imagine the pain I'd feel not being able to go to a funeral of a relative/friend. 

There have been far worse events/gatherings which I'm more shocked about i.e. an illegal rave over the weekend in Bath where over 3000 (!!!) people turned up. 

Posted
Just now, Stan said:

I wasn't shocked by it. I just don't understand how it appears to be fine to have 250 people just because you have things in place. There's a reason it's 30 people with those criteria to meet. The guidance isn't '30 people with social distancing, hand sanitiser, track and trace, but it can be more as well if you fancy it'. It shouldn't be used as a disclaimer after the event.

My other problem with it is if you've gone to the funeral and seen a large crowd, to enter in to that crowd knowing the risks is where the stupidity, for me is. Especially given the fact it would be a relatively tight space indoors where the virus is more likely to spread. 

I totally agree with the bottom line you mention. I can't imagine the pain I'd feel not being able to go to a funeral of a relative/friend. 

There have been far worse events/gatherings which I'm more shocked about i.e. an illegal rave over the weekend in Bath where over 3000 (!!!) people turned up. 

Fair enough, I wasn't suggesting that they were okay because of the hand sanitizers and social distancing, but I do think we need to have context with certain events and not paint everything with a broad brush. 

Like you said, this isn't a rave, a party, a concert, a sporting event, or any other social gathering. It was a funeral and I couldn't imagine losing someone very close to me during this pandemic and telling people that they can't come and pay their respects. 

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

football forum
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...