JM2K6 wrote: ↑Tue Sep 08, 2020 4:21 pmThat doesn't make any sense. That would all come under personal risk in some way.Bimbowomxn wrote: ↑Tue Sep 08, 2020 4:18 pm
You’re right , it’s their mental health, their normal health screens and even emergencies. That’s before we get to their ability to earn.
Again, you're wildly missing the point. NL wants people to be able to judge personal risk. The point is that it's not just personalrisk, because people misjudging it can badly impact other, more vulnerable people (and lots of them). Whatever gotcha you think you've played here over "personal risk" simply doesn't make any sense.Bimbowomxn wrote: ↑Tue Sep 08, 2020 4:22 pmNot if your demands on lockdowns damage and remove my rights ......JM2K6 wrote: ↑Tue Sep 08, 2020 4:21 pmThat doesn't make any sense. That would all come under personal risk in some way.Bimbowomxn wrote: ↑Tue Sep 08, 2020 4:18 pm
You’re right , it’s their mental health, their normal health screens and even emergencies. That’s before we get to their ability to earn.
Funny how many kids were behind Greta last year when the plan was to save the planet.Slick wrote: ↑Tue Sep 08, 2020 5:15 pm I was out in central Edinburgh today and mask wearing on the buses during the day was pretty much 100%. School kick out time and pretty much 100% of kids not wearing them on the bus.
This shouldn’t be too fucking difficult to police through parents, teachers and bus drivers, but there we are
Perhaps they should have been at school learning the ropes - some parents either don't believe or are too lazy to teach. I have been watching the kids here and they are generally very good at following the "rules"
Kids are fine. Turn 19, leave home and then the rules don’t apply to you.
I do have some sympathy to be honest. 19, away from home for the first time, just started uni - I’d be/was out every night getting pissed and trying to get laid.Sandstorm wrote: ↑Tue Sep 08, 2020 7:08 pmKids are fine. Turn 19, leave home and then the rules don’t apply to you.
I have to assume that rugby training etc is more or less out again...
Sport is still ok. They’re trying to stop house parties and similar gatherings.
Par for the course when doing clinical trials; & exactly why responsible people are concerned when Politicians decide that they don't need to go thru the standard approval processes when doing validationyermum wrote: ↑Tue Sep 08, 2020 10:12 pm https://www.statnews.com/2020/09/08/ast ... n-the-u-k/
Not sure how serious this is but it looks like bad news for the oxford vaccine...
Fortunately the other Phase III vaccines aren't based on the same approach, so even if it is an issue and not just an unrelated event, it likely does not impact on COVID-19 vaccines generally. Still, not ideal.fishfoodie wrote: ↑Wed Sep 09, 2020 12:22 amPar for the course when doing clinical trials; & exactly why responsible people are concerned when Politicians decide that they don't need to go thru the standard approval processes when doing validationyermum wrote: ↑Tue Sep 08, 2020 10:12 pm https://www.statnews.com/2020/09/08/ast ... n-the-u-k/
Not sure how serious this is but it looks like bad news for the oxford vaccine...
Transverse myelitis is a rare clinical syndrome in which an immune-mediated process causes neural injury to the spinal cord. The pathogenesis of transverse myelitis is mostly of an autoimmune nature, triggered by various environmental factors, including vaccination. Our aim here was to search for and analyze reported cases of transverse myelitis following vaccination. A systematic review of PubMed, EMBASE and DynaMed for all English-language journals published between 1970 and 2009 was preformed, utilizing the key words transverse myelitis, myelitis, vaccines, post-vaccination, vaccination and autoimmunity. We have disclosed 37 reported cases of transverse myelitis associated with different vaccines including those against hepatitis B virus, measles-mumps-rubella, diphtheria-tetanus-pertussis and others, given to infants, children and adults. In most of these reported cases the temporal association was between several days and 3 months, although a longer time frame of up to several years was also suggested. Although vaccines harbor a major contribution to public health in the modern era, in rare cases they may be associated with autoimmune phenomena such as transverse myelitis. The associations of different vaccines with a single autoimmune phenomenon allude to the idea that a common denominator of these vaccines, such as an adjuvant, might trigger this syndrome.
Yul Brunner is going to be pretty hacked off too
Drug maker AstraZeneca pauses COVID-19 vaccine trials for ‘routine’ checks due to ‘potentially unexplained illness’ during tests
The drug giant said it is “routine action” to pause trials whenever there is an unexplained illness among participants. “In large trials, illnesses will happen by chance but must be independently reviewed to check this carefully,” according to AstraZeneca. This comes after nine major pharma companies, including AstraZeneca, signed a petition, committing to not rush the process of developing a vaccine for COVID-19.
https://www.stuff.co.nz/world/europe/30 ... -recoveredItaly's Bergamo is calling back Covid-19 survivors, half say they haven't fully recovered.
That's fucking crazy. I wouldn't be going.Slick wrote: ↑Wed Sep 09, 2020 7:59 am My brother in law is due to get married in 10 days time.
His wife to be (6 months pregnant) and him have just returned from a holiday to France with 10 mates. They all decided to get a test the day after they got back and have all gone back to work etc with no quarantine. Her mother has just announced she is going to Turkey tomorrow and will have a test when she gets back so all will be OK.
Anyway, they were a bit upset last night at the new restrictions and he came out with a great line “these rules are not really for us anyway”. Just doesn’t get that they can pass it on it seems.
I pointed out that 2 guests were in their 80’s (one with cancer) two 75 (one had a stroke last year) and a couple of others in their 70’s - “the chances we have it are pretty small”
Just arseholes.
That’s my thoughts. Difficult situation though so these new rules might have saved a family bust up.Biffer wrote: ↑Wed Sep 09, 2020 9:28 amThat's fucking crazy. I wouldn't be going.Slick wrote: ↑Wed Sep 09, 2020 7:59 am My brother in law is due to get married in 10 days time.
His wife to be (6 months pregnant) and him have just returned from a holiday to France with 10 mates. They all decided to get a test the day after they got back and have all gone back to work etc with no quarantine. Her mother has just announced she is going to Turkey tomorrow and will have a test when she gets back so all will be OK.
Anyway, they were a bit upset last night at the new restrictions and he came out with a great line “these rules are not really for us anyway”. Just doesn’t get that they can pass it on it seems.
I pointed out that 2 guests were in their 80’s (one with cancer) two 75 (one had a stroke last year) and a couple of others in their 70’s - “the chances we have it are pretty small”
Just arseholes.
Probably another balloon floating exercise to be followed by a u-turn.
Scottish band The Proclaimers are offering to help
No mixed messaging there then?The UK health secretary, Matt Hancock, has been accused of blaming the public for the mounting problems with access to Covid-19 tests after he claimed that a quarter of those coming forward for checks were ineligible because they were asymptomatic.
Hancock has spearheaded efforts to expand testing, urging people to get checked if they have symptoms or “have any doubt”.
On 21 July, Hancock tweeted a video of himself speaking in the Commons about the issue, adding the message: “If you have symptoms of #coronavirus, or if you have any doubt, get a coronavirus test. Anybody who needs a test can get a test, & it’s the most important thing that you can do to stop the spread of this virus.”
Been following a spat between the two in Private Eye over the past few months.Hal Jordan wrote: ↑Wed Sep 09, 2020 2:28 pm The Speaker has slapped Hancock for not announcing the six person restriction to the Commons first.
No peerage for him, and a committee to investigate whether Parliament needs a Speaker.
Weren't all MPs tested back in May/June?SaintK wrote: ↑Wed Sep 09, 2020 2:25 pm So the Covid-19 testing fiasco is all us, the general public's faultNo mixed messaging there then?The UK health secretary, Matt Hancock, has been accused of blaming the public for the mounting problems with access to Covid-19 tests after he claimed that a quarter of those coming forward for checks were ineligible because they were asymptomatic.
Hancock has spearheaded efforts to expand testing, urging people to get checked if they have symptoms or “have any doubt”.
On 21 July, Hancock tweeted a video of himself speaking in the Commons about the issue, adding the message: “If you have symptoms of #coronavirus, or if you have any doubt, get a coronavirus test. Anybody who needs a test can get a test, & it’s the most important thing that you can do to stop the spread of this virus.”
Mr Johnson also outlined a "moonshot" plan to control the virus with mass testing.
Stupid is as Stupid does. Or as Stupid suggests in your case Bimbo.Bimbowomxn wrote: ↑Wed Sep 09, 2020 5:55 pm
Book it as a conference, no restriction on work numbers.
