Discussion:
Corvid-19
Add Reply
Mike Ruddock
2020-03-15 13:36:29 UTC
Reply
Permalink
AIAOU in assuming that when Matt-the-Health said this morning that
although the elderly would be encouraged to stay at home this policy
would not be put in place yet, he was thinking that the longer they are
allowed to gad about picking up viruses the more of them would die and
the smaller the bill for pensions, free prescriptions etc etc would be?

A long sentence . . . and that's what MtH deserves.

Mike Ruddock
Mike
2020-03-15 13:55:05 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Mike Ruddock
AIAOU in assuming that when Matt-the-Health said this morning that
although the elderly would be encouraged to stay at home this policy
would not be put in place yet, he was thinking that the longer they are
allowed to gad about picking up viruses the more of them would die and
the smaller the bill for pensions, free prescriptions etc etc would be?
A long sentence . . . and that's what MtH deserves.
Mike Ruddock
Oh you Cynic Mike!
--
Toodle Pip
Vicky Ayech
2020-03-15 13:57:40 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Sun, 15 Mar 2020 13:36:29 +0000, Mike Ruddock
Post by Mike Ruddock
AIAOU in assuming that when Matt-the-Health said this morning that
although the elderly would be encouraged to stay at home this policy
would not be put in place yet, he was thinking that the longer they are
allowed to gad about picking up viruses the more of them would die and
the smaller the bill for pensions, free prescriptions etc etc would be?
A long sentence . . . and that's what MtH deserves.
Mike Ruddock
Not alone. This virus is taylored to wipe out those expensive old
people. Whose pensions are about to be wiped out anyway. ANd who
should not expect to use the limited amount of NHS equipment
available. Mat was asking firms to make more but that takes time and
there are not enough trained people to use that equipment anyway.
Mike
2020-03-15 14:05:06 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Vicky Ayech
On Sun, 15 Mar 2020 13:36:29 +0000, Mike Ruddock
Post by Mike Ruddock
AIAOU in assuming that when Matt-the-Health said this morning that
although the elderly would be encouraged to stay at home this policy
would not be put in place yet, he was thinking that the longer they are
allowed to gad about picking up viruses the more of them would die and
the smaller the bill for pensions, free prescriptions etc etc would be?
A long sentence . . . and that's what MtH deserves.
Mike Ruddock
Not alone. This virus is taylored to wipe out those expensive old
people. Whose pensions are about to be wiped out anyway. ANd who
should not expect to use the limited amount of NHS equipment
available. Mat was asking firms to make more but that takes time and
there are not enough trained people to use that equipment anyway.
Apart from the re-tooling cost and lead-time on manufacturing same, there
is the little matter of training the machinists and assemblers etc. to
carry out the work on a 3 shift 7 day week. We would probably see the first
equipment available to wait for the NHS to find that the staff they had
trained to use it in the new Portakabins was no longer needed due to
patients and Covid-19 having died out.
--
Toodle Pip
Mike
2020-03-15 14:08:23 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Mike
Post by Vicky Ayech
On Sun, 15 Mar 2020 13:36:29 +0000, Mike Ruddock
Post by Mike Ruddock
AIAOU in assuming that when Matt-the-Health said this morning that
although the elderly would be encouraged to stay at home this policy
would not be put in place yet, he was thinking that the longer they are
allowed to gad about picking up viruses the more of them would die and
the smaller the bill for pensions, free prescriptions etc etc would be?
A long sentence . . . and that's what MtH deserves.
Mike Ruddock
Not alone. This virus is taylored to wipe out those expensive old
people. Whose pensions are about to be wiped out anyway. ANd who
should not expect to use the limited amount of NHS equipment
available. Mat was asking firms to make more but that takes time and
there are not enough trained people to use that equipment anyway.
Apart from the re-tooling cost and lead-time on manufacturing same, there
is the little matter of training the machinists and assemblers etc. to
carry out the work on a 3 shift 7 day week. We would probably see the first
equipment available to wait for the NHS to find that the staff they had
trained to use it in the new Portakabins was no longer needed due to
patients and Covid-19 having died out.
I’ve got a brilliant idea - the country that has the largest workforce and
capacity for mass manufacturing could be asked to help...
--
Toodle Pip
Chris McMillan
2020-03-15 18:08:30 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Mike
Post by Mike
Post by Vicky Ayech
On Sun, 15 Mar 2020 13:36:29 +0000, Mike Ruddock
Post by Mike Ruddock
AIAOU in assuming that when Matt-the-Health said this morning that
although the elderly would be encouraged to stay at home this policy
would not be put in place yet, he was thinking that the longer they are
allowed to gad about picking up viruses the more of them would die and
the smaller the bill for pensions, free prescriptions etc etc would be?
A long sentence . . . and that's what MtH deserves.
Mike Ruddock
Not alone. This virus is taylored to wipe out those expensive old
people. Whose pensions are about to be wiped out anyway. ANd who
should not expect to use the limited amount of NHS equipment
available. Mat was asking firms to make more but that takes time and
there are not enough trained people to use that equipment anyway.
Apart from the re-tooling cost and lead-time on manufacturing same, there
is the little matter of training the machinists and assemblers etc. to
carry out the work on a 3 shift 7 day week. We would probably see the first
equipment available to wait for the NHS to find that the staff they had
trained to use it in the new Portakabins was no longer needed due to
patients and Covid-19 having died out.
I’ve got a brilliant idea - the country that has the largest workforce and
capacity for mass manufacturing could be asked to help...
BBC 1, Our World.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/m000gj5f/our-world-wuhan-life-under-lockdown

Even with to the point sentences it’s a very detailed in depth 30 minutes.


Sincerely Chris
Penny
2020-03-15 14:08:17 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Sun, 15 Mar 2020 13:36:29 +0000, Mike Ruddock
Post by Mike Ruddock
AIAOU in assuming that when Matt-the-Health said this morning that
although the elderly would be encouraged to stay at home this policy
would not be put in place yet, he was thinking that the longer they are
allowed to gad about picking up viruses the more of them would die and
the smaller the bill for pensions, free prescriptions etc etc would be?
A long sentence . . . and that's what MtH deserves.
You're certainly not the first to think or say they think current govt
policy is a cull rather than anything to do with squashing sombreros.

Those of us already in 'at risk' groups, IME, tend to avoid crowded places
and take various precautions against infections anyway - as described in
one of my recent posts.

To add to those:
I stopped going swimming a few years back - it's brilliant exercise but I
always caught something after a couple of weeks of visits. Like most Welsh
public pools, it is attached to the high school who use it a lot - this may
be a factor.

I avoid visiting the doctors' surgery if at all possible - though I've
noticed since they introduced telephone triage, there are seldom more than
two other people in the waiting room when I do go. I am also wary of the
check-in screen, the alcohol cleanser dispenser is usually empty.
--
Penny
Annoyed by The Archers since 1959
BrritSki
2020-03-15 16:10:43 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Mike Ruddock
AIAOU in assuming that when Matt-the-Health said this morning that
although the elderly would be encouraged to stay at home this policy
would not be put in place yet, he was thinking that the longer they are
allowed to gad about picking up viruses the more of them would die and
the smaller the bill for pensions, free prescriptions etc etc would be?
No, I think that's a disgraceful suggestion and I am surprised and
shocked that an intelligent person such as yourself would entertain the
idea.
Sally Thompson
2020-03-15 16:45:49 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by BrritSki
Post by Mike Ruddock
AIAOU in assuming that when Matt-the-Health said this morning that
although the elderly would be encouraged to stay at home this policy
would not be put in place yet, he was thinking that the longer they are
allowed to gad about picking up viruses the more of them would die and
the smaller the bill for pensions, free prescriptions etc etc would be?
No, I think that's a disgraceful suggestion and I am surprised and
shocked that an intelligent person such as yourself would entertain the
idea.
I never realised before that you were a politician, BrritSki.
--
Sally in Shropshire, UK
BrritSki
2020-03-15 17:07:13 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Sally Thompson
Post by BrritSki
Post by Mike Ruddock
AIAOU in assuming that when Matt-the-Health said this morning that
although the elderly would be encouraged to stay at home this policy
would not be put in place yet, he was thinking that the longer they are
allowed to gad about picking up viruses the more of them would die and
the smaller the bill for pensions, free prescriptions etc etc would be?
No, I think that's a disgraceful suggestion and I am surprised and
shocked that an intelligent person such as yourself would entertain the
idea.
I never realised before that you were a politician, BrritSki.
I wasn't joking. Suggesting that an elected politician would
deliberately set out to kill people is beyond the pale.

The leaders of this country and all the others round the world have some
desperately difficult decisions to make and I'm thankful I'm not in
their shoes.

Or maybe Mike was just being funny. If I've misread it I apologise as
I'm all for black humour, but it looked serious to me.
Serena Blanchflower
2020-03-15 17:53:09 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by BrritSki
Post by Sally Thompson
Post by BrritSki
Post by Mike Ruddock
AIAOU in assuming that when Matt-the-Health said this morning that
although the elderly would be encouraged to stay at home this policy
would not be put in place yet, he was thinking that the longer they are
allowed to gad about picking up viruses the more of them would die and
the smaller the bill for pensions, free prescriptions etc etc would be?
No, I think that's a disgraceful suggestion and I am surprised and
shocked that an intelligent person such as yourself would entertain the
idea.
I never realised before that you were a politician, BrritSki.
I wasn't joking. Suggesting that an elected politician would
deliberately set out to kill people is beyond the pale.
The leaders of this country and all the others round the world have some
desperately difficult decisions to make and I'm thankful I'm not in
their shoes.
Or maybe Mike was just being funny. If I've misread it I apologise as
I'm all for black humour, but it looked serious to me.
I agree with you.

I think that it's a huge problem for the government that so many people
deeply loathe and mistrust them[1]. This means that, faced with a
deeply worrying situation, all too many people automatically read the
worst possible interpretation of the government's intentions and actions.

As it is, they've having to face a dreadful situation and it's likely
they'll have to make all too many decisions which would challenge
Solomon, without having built up any stock of goodwill or trust with the
people who are most affected. I get the feeling that they are taking
their responsibilities very seriously[2] and probably finding it pretty
sobering. I don't think they are willingly throwing anyone to the
wolves, although they have had to acknowledge that the wolves will get
some of us, regardless.

[1] Frequently with good reason, IMO
[2] Whether they are making the right decisions is a different matter
and we probably won't really have any real idea of that for at least a year.
--
Best wishes, Serena
Sometimes I think I understand everything, then I regain consciousness.
Sid Nuncius
2020-03-16 07:24:05 UTC
Reply
Permalink
<snip>
Post by Serena Blanchflower
Post by BrritSki
I wasn't joking. Suggesting that an elected politician would
deliberately set out to kill people is beyond the pale.
The leaders of this country and all the others round the world have
some desperately difficult decisions to make and I'm thankful I'm not
in their shoes.
Or maybe Mike was just being funny. If I've misread it I apologise as
I'm all for black humour, but it looked serious to me.
I agree with you.
I think that it's a huge problem for the government that so many people
deeply loathe and mistrust them[1].  This means that, faced with a
deeply worrying situation, all too many people automatically read the
worst possible interpretation of the government's intentions and actions.
As it is, they've having to face a dreadful situation and it's likely
they'll have to make all too many decisions which would challenge
Solomon, without having built up any stock of goodwill or trust with the
people who are most affected.  I get the feeling that they are taking
their responsibilities very seriously[2] and probably finding it pretty
sobering.  I don't think they are willingly throwing anyone to the
wolves, although they have had to acknowledge that the wolves will get
some of us, regardless.
[1] Frequently with good reason, IMO
[2] Whether they are making the right decisions is a different matter
and we probably won't really have any real idea of that for at least a year.
Very well said, Serena. My two penn'orth:

I don't believe that anyone in government is deliberately setting out to
kill people. However, if facilities are unable to meet demand choices
will have to be made about who gets priority for treatment. ISTM that
if that happens, young people with their lives ahead, parents of young
children and so on - i.e. younger people in general - should be given
priority over a 65-year-old git like me who has already had a good few
years. There may be other factors, like being a carer and so on, but if
we have to decide who to save I don't think I should be at the front of
the queue. However distasteful, someone in government is going to have
to make these sort of choices, even if only in theory. No matter who is
in government, it's the sort of horrible decision that being in power
sometimes requires.

As you say, the rightness or otherwise of their decisions will only
become apparent as things develop - and possibly not even then. I am
among those without goodwill toward or trust in this government but
until a few days ago thought they were doing a decent job in following
the best advice they could get and apparently acting appropriately.
Their colossal volte-face in the last few days has dented that view very
considerably. The new more stringent policy may be necessary (who
*really* knows?) but such a wild swing without any dramatic new evidence
doesn't inspire confidence.

(For the avoidance of doubt, I am not making a party political point
here. I have no confidence that Her Majesty's Loyal Opposition would be
any more competent if they were in power - and whatever decisions they
made, they would probably be accused of trying to kill off the wealthy
or something.)

Er...that's it, really, except to say that I'm finding the mass
behaviour of people very scary at the moment. I am relying as much as
possible on supermarket deliveries, but I will need to buy a few top-up
perishables today - milk, fruit, veg etc. Heaven knows whether there
will be anything left for those of us who can't fight for food in a crowd.
--
Sid (Make sure Matron is away when you reply)
BrritSki
2020-03-16 08:23:05 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Sid Nuncius
<snip>
Post by Serena Blanchflower
Post by BrritSki
I wasn't joking. Suggesting that an elected politician would
deliberately set out to kill people is beyond the pale.
The leaders of this country and all the others round the world have
some desperately difficult decisions to make and I'm thankful I'm not
in their shoes.
Or maybe Mike was just being funny. If I've misread it I apologise as
I'm all for black humour, but it looked serious to me.
I agree with you.
I think that it's a huge problem for the government that so many
people deeply loathe and mistrust them[1].  This means that, faced
with a deeply worrying situation, all too many people automatically
read the worst possible interpretation of the government's intentions
and actions.
As it is, they've having to face a dreadful situation and it's likely
they'll have to make all too many decisions which would challenge
Solomon, without having built up any stock of goodwill or trust with
the people who are most affected.  I get the feeling that they are
taking their responsibilities very seriously[2] and probably finding
it pretty sobering.  I don't think they are willingly throwing anyone
to the wolves, although they have had to acknowledge that the wolves
will get some of us, regardless.
[1] Frequently with good reason, IMO
[2] Whether they are making the right decisions is a different matter
and we probably won't really have any real idea of that for at least a year.
Very well said, Serena.
<LW>
Post by Sid Nuncius
I don't believe that anyone in government is deliberately setting out to
kill people.  However, if facilities are unable to meet demand choices
will have to be made about who gets priority for treatment.  ISTM that
if that happens, young people with their lives ahead, parents of young
children and so on - i.e. younger people in general - should be given
priority over a 65-year-old git like me who has already had a good few
years.  There may be other factors, like being a carer and so on, but if
we have to decide who to save I don't think I should be at the front of
the queue.  However distasteful, someone in government is going to have
to make these sort of choices, even if only in theory.  No matter who is
in government, it's the sort of horrible decision that being in power
sometimes requires.
I agree. Doctors are having to make these choices right now in Italy and
elsewhere.
Post by Sid Nuncius
As you say, the rightness or otherwise of their decisions will only
become apparent as things develop - and possibly not even then.  I am
among those without goodwill toward or trust in this government but
until a few days ago thought they were doing a decent job in following
the best advice they could get and apparently acting appropriately.
Their colossal volte-face in the last few days has dented that view very
considerably.  The new more stringent policy may be necessary (who
*really* knows?) but such a wild swing without any dramatic new evidence
doesn't inspire confidence.
Also agreed. I doubt if there was any change in the underlying evidence
(and there's actually very little of that) but the reaction of the
population may have led the behavioural scientists to recommend the
change despite the downside you mention
Post by Sid Nuncius
(For the avoidance of doubt, I am not making a party political point
here.  I have no confidence that Her Majesty's Loyal Opposition would be
any more competent if they were in power - and whatever decisions they
made, they would probably be accused of trying to kill off the wealthy
or something.)
Yes, but possibly not in umra :/
Post by Sid Nuncius
Er...that's it, really, except to say that I'm finding the mass
behaviour of people very scary at the moment.
Yes, not helped by the MSM making panic buying one of their top stories :(
Vicky Ayech
2020-03-16 08:53:55 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Mon, 16 Mar 2020 08:23:05 +0000, BrritSki
Post by BrritSki
Post by Sid Nuncius
until a few days ago thought they were doing a decent job in following
the best advice they could get and apparently acting appropriately.
Their colossal volte-face in the last few days has dented that view very
considerably.  The new more stringent policy may be necessary (who
*really* knows?) but such a wild swing without any dramatic new evidence
doesn't inspire confidence.
Also agreed. I doubt if there was any change in the underlying evidence
(and there's actually very little of that) but the reaction of the
population may have led the behavioural scientists to recommend the
change despite the downside you mention
They are not taking the advice of the WHO to collect evidence. Other
countries are testing for the virus to see who has it who has symptoms
and not just those sick enough to be hospitalised. Getting more
information about the pattern of how it works and who is getting it is
important to help inform what is done next.

I agree with Sid OAPs have had a life and resources should go to the
young if limited but telling OAPs to stay at home and in quarantine if
alone and sick sounds worrying. If the young mostly don't get ill
enough to need an ICU unit presumably they are not competing for them.

The attitude of this government to the old and sick and disabled over
the last 10 years has not filled me with confidence that they will do
their best rather than try and look good and dish out lucrative
contracts for new services they set up to the usual cronies. And I am
not a Labour Party supporter either.
Sid Nuncius
2020-03-17 06:17:58 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Vicky Ayech
The attitude of this government to the old and sick and disabled over
the last 10 years has not filled me with confidence that they will do
their best rather than try and look good and dish out lucrative
contracts for new services they set up to the usual cronies. And I am
not a Labour Party supporter either.
I think we should be a little careful in our cynicism - for now at least.

Any expression of my view of this Government and this Prime Minister and
his Special Advisor in particular, would require the use of some wholly
reprehensible and thoroughly unumratic language, but until I see some
evidence I'm not prepared to accuse them of exploiting the crisis to
line the pockets of their cronies. I agree with you about their
attitude to the sick and disabled hitherto, and there are people who see
this as a money-making opportunity at the expense of others - not least
those unspeakable sacks of excrement who have cleared supermarkets of
hand sanitiser etc. in order to charge a fortune for it on eBay.
However, in such extreme circumstances, unless I am shown to be wrong
I'm prepared to believe that even this Government are (is?) morally
somewhat better than that.

Whether they are competent remains to be seen. I hope so, for all our
sakes.
--
Sid (Make sure Matron is away when you reply)
Serena Blanchflower
2020-03-17 09:03:00 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Sid Nuncius
Post by Vicky Ayech
The attitude of this government to the old and sick and disabled over
the last 10  years has not filled me with confidence that they will do
their best rather than try and look good and dish out lucrative
contracts for new services they set up to the usual cronies.  And I am
not a Labour Party supporter either.
I think we should be a little careful in our cynicism - for now at least.
Any expression of my view of this Government and this Prime Minister and
his Special Advisor in particular, would require the use of some wholly
reprehensible and thoroughly unumratic language, but until I see some
evidence I'm not prepared to accuse them of exploiting the crisis to
line the pockets of their cronies.  I agree with you about their
attitude to the sick and disabled hitherto, and there are people who see
this as a money-making opportunity at the expense of others - not least
those unspeakable sacks of excrement who have cleared supermarkets of
hand sanitiser etc. in order to charge a fortune for it on eBay.
However, in such extreme circumstances, unless I am shown to be wrong
I'm prepared to believe that even this Government are (is?) morally
somewhat better than that.
Whether they are competent remains to be seen.  I hope so, for all our
sakes.
<languid wave>
--
Best wishes, Serena
Exercise is bunk. If you are healthy you don't need it. If you are
sick, you shouldn't take it. (Henry Ford)
Nick Odell
2020-03-17 18:48:47 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Tue, 17 Mar 2020 06:17:58 +0000, Sid Nuncius
<***@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:


<snip>
...and there are people who see
this as a money-making opportunity at the expense of others - not least
those unspeakable sacks of excrement who have cleared supermarkets of
hand sanitiser etc. in order to charge a fortune for it on eBay.
<snip>

...and I´ve been reading and hearing about the sudden British
obsession with toilet rolls. The same thing has been happening here in
BsAs which is, in my opinion, a little odd since nearly all homes have
bidets anyway.

In case you are not sure what a bidet is, it´s probably that thing you
mistook for a child-height washbasin in somebody´s elegant new
bathroom.

It´s taken me nearly twenty years of coming to Argentina to become
comfortable with concept of the bidet: the first twelve or so years
spent nervously walking round it and wondering how the devil anybody
was meant to use it and the rest gingerly experimenting to find out
how. I suppose I could have searched YouTube for a video but I was
afraid of what I might find and what it would leave in my search
history. There have been accidents and one catastrophe - why have a
hot tap anyway and why, for goodness sake was it connected directly to
the boiler? But I´m getting better at it now.

Nick
Chris J Dixon
2020-03-17 16:01:39 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Nick Odell
...and I´ve been reading and hearing about the sudden British
obsession with toilet rolls. The same thing has been happening here in
BsAs which is, in my opinion, a little odd since nearly all homes have
bidets anyway.
In case you are not sure what a bidet is, it´s probably that thing you
mistook for a child-height washbasin in somebody´s elegant new
bathroom.
It´s taken me nearly twenty years of coming to Argentina to become
comfortable with concept of the bidet: the first twelve or so years
spent nervously walking round it and wondering how the devil anybody
was meant to use it and the rest gingerly experimenting to find out
how. I suppose I could have searched YouTube for a video but I was
afraid of what I might find and what it would leave in my search
history. There have been accidents and one catastrophe - why have a
hot tap anyway and why, for goodness sake was it connected directly to
the boiler? But I´m getting better at it now.
Where was that recipe for poached plums?

Chris
--
Chris J Dixon Nottingham
'48/33 M B+ G++ A L(-) I S-- CH0(--)(p) Ar- T+ H0 ?Q
***@cdixon.me.uk @ChrisJDixon1
Plant amazing Acers.
Nick Odell
2020-03-17 19:22:04 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Chris J Dixon
Post by Nick Odell
...and I´ve been reading and hearing about the sudden British
obsession with toilet rolls. The same thing has been happening here in
BsAs which is, in my opinion, a little odd since nearly all homes have
bidets anyway.
In case you are not sure what a bidet is, it´s probably that thing you
mistook for a child-height washbasin in somebody´s elegant new
bathroom.
It´s taken me nearly twenty years of coming to Argentina to become
comfortable with concept of the bidet: the first twelve or so years
spent nervously walking round it and wondering how the devil anybody
was meant to use it and the rest gingerly experimenting to find out
how. I suppose I could have searched YouTube for a video but I was
afraid of what I might find and what it would leave in my search
history. There have been accidents and one catastrophe - why have a
hot tap anyway and why, for goodness sake was it connected directly to
the boiler? But I´m getting better at it now.
Where was that recipe for poached plums?
<splutter!>

N.
J. P. Gilliver (John)
2020-03-17 19:15:52 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Tue, 17 Mar 2020 at 16:22:04, Nick Odell
Post by Nick Odell
Post by Chris J Dixon
Post by Nick Odell
...and I´ve been reading and hearing about the sudden British
obsession with toilet rolls. The same thing has been happening here in
(Yes, it's bemusing me. Why a lung disease provides a run on TR!)
Post by Nick Odell
Post by Chris J Dixon
Post by Nick Odell
BsAs which is, in my opinion, a little odd since nearly all homes have
bidets anyway.
In case you are not sure what a bidet is, it´s probably that thing you
[]
Post by Nick Odell
Post by Chris J Dixon
Post by Nick Odell
It´s taken me nearly twenty years of coming to Argentina to become
[]
Post by Nick Odell
Post by Chris J Dixon
Post by Nick Odell
the boiler? But I´m getting better at it now.
Ah, bidet's are here again ...
(Credit: Willie Rushton. Sorry if I've said it here already this month.)
Post by Nick Odell
Post by Chris J Dixon
Where was that recipe for poached plums?
<splutter!>
+1!
Post by Nick Odell
N.
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)***@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

pu gnikcab yb naem uoy tahw siht sI
Mike
2020-03-17 16:37:05 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Nick Odell
On Tue, 17 Mar 2020 06:17:58 +0000, Sid Nuncius
<snip>
...and there are people who see
this as a money-making opportunity at the expense of others - not least
those unspeakable sacks of excrement who have cleared supermarkets of
hand sanitiser etc. in order to charge a fortune for it on eBay.
<snip>
...and I´ve been reading and hearing about the sudden British
obsession with toilet rolls. The same thing has been happening here in
BsAs which is, in my opinion, a little odd since nearly all homes have
bidets anyway.
In case you are not sure what a bidet is, it´s probably that thing you
mistook for a child-height washbasin in somebody´s elegant new
bathroom.
It´s taken me nearly twenty years of coming to Argentina to become
comfortable with concept of the bidet: the first twelve or so years
spent nervously walking round it and wondering how the devil anybody
was meant to use it and the rest gingerly experimenting to find out
how. I suppose I could have searched YouTube for a video but I was
afraid of what I might find and what it would leave in my search
history. There have been accidents and one catastrophe - why have a
hot tap anyway and why, for goodness sake was it connected directly to
the boiler? But I´m getting better at it now.
Nick
As a service to Umrats, with just a slight measure of trepidation, I risked
following this link and, I should say I bore in mind that this is a
‘family’ newsgroup, I found itninformative but quite safe!

https://www.wikihow.com/Use-a-Bidet
--
Toodle Pip
BrritSki
2020-03-17 17:35:46 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Mike
As a service to Umrats, with just a slight measure of trepidation, I risked
following this link and, I should say I bore in mind that this is a
‘family’ newsgroup, I found itninformative but quite safe!
https://www.wikihow.com/Use-a-Bidet
I wouldn't recommend using the force of the jet to clean yourself. Could
be quite messy, especially with the pressure from a combi boiler.

Also not hygienic for ladies clearing their rear ends blasting muck
towards their front bottoms...
Sid Nuncius
2020-03-17 18:04:51 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Nick Odell
It´s taken me nearly twenty years of coming to Argentina to become
comfortable with concept of the bidet: the first twelve or so years
spent nervously walking round it and wondering how the devil anybody
was meant to use it and the rest gingerly experimenting to find out
how. I suppose I could have searched YouTube for a video but I was
afraid of what I might find and what it would leave in my search
history. There have been accidents and one catastrophe - why have a
hot tap anyway and why, for goodness sake was it connected directly to
the boiler? But I´m getting better at it now.
<mode=Jim Royle>

Bidet, my arse.

</jr>
--
Sid (Make sure Matron is away when you reply)
Vicky Ayech
2020-03-17 18:29:59 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Tue, 17 Mar 2020 15:48:47 -0300, Nick Odell
Post by Nick Odell
On Tue, 17 Mar 2020 06:17:58 +0000, Sid Nuncius
<snip>
...and there are people who see
this as a money-making opportunity at the expense of others - not least
those unspeakable sacks of excrement who have cleared supermarkets of
hand sanitiser etc. in order to charge a fortune for it on eBay.
<snip>
...and I´ve been reading and hearing about the sudden British
obsession with toilet rolls. The same thing has been happening here in
BsAs which is, in my opinion, a little odd since nearly all homes have
bidets anyway.
In case you are not sure what a bidet is, it´s probably that thing you
mistook for a child-height washbasin in somebody´s elegant new
bathroom.
It´s taken me nearly twenty years of coming to Argentina to become
comfortable with concept of the bidet: the first twelve or so years
spent nervously walking round it and wondering how the devil anybody
was meant to use it and the rest gingerly experimenting to find out
how. I suppose I could have searched YouTube for a video but I was
afraid of what I might find and what it would leave in my search
history. There have been accidents and one catastrophe - why have a
hot tap anyway and why, for goodness sake was it connected directly to
the boiler? But I´m getting better at it now.
Nick
LOL

I always thought them a good idea and every time I had a say in what
went into the bathroom we had one, but this, although new when we
moved in, had no option :( Women who have had babies and need to have
healing soaks with salt water appreciate bidets. Saves wrinking in
baths.
John Ashby
2020-03-17 18:32:16 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Vicky Ayech
On Tue, 17 Mar 2020 15:48:47 -0300, Nick Odell
Post by Nick Odell
On Tue, 17 Mar 2020 06:17:58 +0000, Sid Nuncius
<snip>
...and there are people who see
this as a money-making opportunity at the expense of others - not least
those unspeakable sacks of excrement who have cleared supermarkets of
hand sanitiser etc. in order to charge a fortune for it on eBay.
<snip>
...and I´ve been reading and hearing about the sudden British
obsession with toilet rolls. The same thing has been happening here in
BsAs which is, in my opinion, a little odd since nearly all homes have
bidets anyway.
In case you are not sure what a bidet is, it´s probably that thing you
mistook for a child-height washbasin in somebody´s elegant new
bathroom.
It´s taken me nearly twenty years of coming to Argentina to become
comfortable with concept of the bidet: the first twelve or so years
spent nervously walking round it and wondering how the devil anybody
was meant to use it and the rest gingerly experimenting to find out
how. I suppose I could have searched YouTube for a video but I was
afraid of what I might find and what it would leave in my search
history. There have been accidents and one catastrophe - why have a
hot tap anyway and why, for goodness sake was it connected directly to
the boiler? But I´m getting better at it now.
Nick
LOL
I always thought them a good idea and every time I had a say in what
went into the bathroom we had one, but this, although new when we
moved in, had no option :( Women who have had babies and need to have
healing soaks with salt water appreciate bidets. Saves wrinking in
baths.
I'd have thought that would be the last thing on their minds. Oh, Sorry,
should've gone to specsavers.

john
Vicky Ayech
2020-03-16 09:38:08 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Mon, 16 Mar 2020 08:23:05 +0000, BrritSki
Not testing means they have no idea how many have it.
https://twitter.com/Narrowthefield/status/1238969032528855041
Mike
2020-03-16 17:59:07 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by BrritSki
Post by Sid Nuncius
<snip>
Post by Serena Blanchflower
Post by BrritSki
I wasn't joking. Suggesting that an elected politician would
deliberately set out to kill people is beyond the pale.
The leaders of this country and all the others round the world have
some desperately difficult decisions to make and I'm thankful I'm not
in their shoes.
Or maybe Mike was just being funny. If I've misread it I apologise as
I'm all for black humour, but it looked serious to me.
I agree with you.
I think that it's a huge problem for the government that so many
people deeply loathe and mistrust them[1].  This means that, faced
with a deeply worrying situation, all too many people automatically
read the worst possible interpretation of the government's intentions
and actions.
As it is, they've having to face a dreadful situation and it's likely
they'll have to make all too many decisions which would challenge
Solomon, without having built up any stock of goodwill or trust with
the people who are most affected.  I get the feeling that they are
taking their responsibilities very seriously[2] and probably finding
it pretty sobering.  I don't think they are willingly throwing anyone
to the wolves, although they have had to acknowledge that the wolves
will get some of us, regardless.
[1] Frequently with good reason, IMO
[2] Whether they are making the right decisions is a different matter
and we probably won't really have any real idea of that for at least a year.
Very well said, Serena.
<LW>
Post by Sid Nuncius
I don't believe that anyone in government is deliberately setting out to
kill people.  However, if facilities are unable to meet demand choices
will have to be made about who gets priority for treatment.  ISTM that
if that happens, young people with their lives ahead, parents of young
children and so on - i.e. younger people in general - should be given
priority over a 65-year-old git like me who has already had a good few
years.  There may be other factors, like being a carer and so on, but if
we have to decide who to save I don't think I should be at the front of
the queue.  However distasteful, someone in government is going to have
to make these sort of choices, even if only in theory.  No matter who is
in government, it's the sort of horrible decision that being in power
sometimes requires.
I agree. Doctors are having to make these choices right now in Italy and
elsewhere.
Post by Sid Nuncius
As you say, the rightness or otherwise of their decisions will only
become apparent as things develop - and possibly not even then.  I am
among those without goodwill toward or trust in this government but
until a few days ago thought they were doing a decent job in following
the best advice they could get and apparently acting appropriately.
Their colossal volte-face in the last few days has dented that view very
considerably.  The new more stringent policy may be necessary (who
*really* knows?) but such a wild swing without any dramatic new evidence
doesn't inspire confidence.
Also agreed. I doubt if there was any change in the underlying evidence
(and there's actually very little of that) but the reaction of the
population may have led the behavioural scientists to recommend the
change despite the downside you mention
Post by Sid Nuncius
(For the avoidance of doubt, I am not making a party political point
here.  I have no confidence that Her Majesty's Loyal Opposition would be
any more competent if they were in power - and whatever decisions they
made, they would probably be accused of trying to kill off the wealthy
or something.)
Yes, but possibly not in umra :/
Post by Sid Nuncius
Er...that's it, really, except to say that I'm finding the mass
behaviour of people very scary at the moment.
Yes, not helped by the MSM making panic buying one of their top stories :(
We have been notified by our surgery that no attendances should be made
from Tuesday 17th. March. Telephone contact will still be available.
--
Toodle Pip
Mike
2020-03-16 18:57:35 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Mike
Post by BrritSki
Post by Sid Nuncius
<snip>
Post by Serena Blanchflower
Post by BrritSki
I wasn't joking. Suggesting that an elected politician would
deliberately set out to kill people is beyond the pale.
The leaders of this country and all the others round the world have
some desperately difficult decisions to make and I'm thankful I'm not
in their shoes.
Or maybe Mike was just being funny. If I've misread it I apologise as
I'm all for black humour, but it looked serious to me.
I agree with you.
I think that it's a huge problem for the government that so many
people deeply loathe and mistrust them[1].  This means that, faced
with a deeply worrying situation, all too many people automatically
read the worst possible interpretation of the government's intentions
and actions.
As it is, they've having to face a dreadful situation and it's likely
they'll have to make all too many decisions which would challenge
Solomon, without having built up any stock of goodwill or trust with
the people who are most affected.  I get the feeling that they are
taking their responsibilities very seriously[2] and probably finding
it pretty sobering.  I don't think they are willingly throwing anyone
to the wolves, although they have had to acknowledge that the wolves
will get some of us, regardless.
[1] Frequently with good reason, IMO
[2] Whether they are making the right decisions is a different matter
and we probably won't really have any real idea of that for at least a year.
Very well said, Serena.
<LW>
Post by Sid Nuncius
I don't believe that anyone in government is deliberately setting out to
kill people.  However, if facilities are unable to meet demand choices
will have to be made about who gets priority for treatment.  ISTM that
if that happens, young people with their lives ahead, parents of young
children and so on - i.e. younger people in general - should be given
priority over a 65-year-old git like me who has already had a good few
years.  There may be other factors, like being a carer and so on, but if
we have to decide who to save I don't think I should be at the front of
the queue.  However distasteful, someone in government is going to have
to make these sort of choices, even if only in theory.  No matter who is
in government, it's the sort of horrible decision that being in power
sometimes requires.
I agree. Doctors are having to make these choices right now in Italy and
elsewhere.
Post by Sid Nuncius
As you say, the rightness or otherwise of their decisions will only
become apparent as things develop - and possibly not even then.  I am
among those without goodwill toward or trust in this government but
until a few days ago thought they were doing a decent job in following
the best advice they could get and apparently acting appropriately.
Their colossal volte-face in the last few days has dented that view very
considerably.  The new more stringent policy may be necessary (who
*really* knows?) but such a wild swing without any dramatic new evidence
doesn't inspire confidence.
Also agreed. I doubt if there was any change in the underlying evidence
(and there's actually very little of that) but the reaction of the
population may have led the behavioural scientists to recommend the
change despite the downside you mention
Post by Sid Nuncius
(For the avoidance of doubt, I am not making a party political point
here.  I have no confidence that Her Majesty's Loyal Opposition would be
any more competent if they were in power - and whatever decisions they
made, they would probably be accused of trying to kill off the wealthy
or something.)
Yes, but possibly not in umra :/
Post by Sid Nuncius
Er...that's it, really, except to say that I'm finding the mass
behaviour of people very scary at the moment.
Yes, not helped by the MSM making panic buying one of their top stories :(
We have been notified by our surgery that no attendances should be made
from Tuesday 17th. March. Telephone contact will still be available.
Don’t know where that leaves me with regard to my next blood test
extraction due to be carried out by Nursey for another PSA test - that will
be contacting patients later...
--
Toodle Pip
Mike
2020-03-17 11:17:50 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Mike
Post by Mike
Post by BrritSki
Post by Sid Nuncius
<snip>
Post by Serena Blanchflower
Post by BrritSki
I wasn't joking. Suggesting that an elected politician would
deliberately set out to kill people is beyond the pale.
The leaders of this country and all the others round the world have
some desperately difficult decisions to make and I'm thankful I'm not
in their shoes.
Or maybe Mike was just being funny. If I've misread it I apologise as
I'm all for black humour, but it looked serious to me.
I agree with you.
I think that it's a huge problem for the government that so many
people deeply loathe and mistrust them[1].  This means that, faced
with a deeply worrying situation, all too many people automatically
read the worst possible interpretation of the government's intentions
and actions.
As it is, they've having to face a dreadful situation and it's likely
they'll have to make all too many decisions which would challenge
Solomon, without having built up any stock of goodwill or trust with
the people who are most affected.  I get the feeling that they are
taking their responsibilities very seriously[2] and probably finding
it pretty sobering.  I don't think they are willingly throwing anyone
to the wolves, although they have had to acknowledge that the wolves
will get some of us, regardless.
[1] Frequently with good reason, IMO
[2] Whether they are making the right decisions is a different matter
and we probably won't really have any real idea of that for at least a year.
Very well said, Serena.
<LW>
Post by Sid Nuncius
I don't believe that anyone in government is deliberately setting out to
kill people.  However, if facilities are unable to meet demand choices
will have to be made about who gets priority for treatment.  ISTM that
if that happens, young people with their lives ahead, parents of young
children and so on - i.e. younger people in general - should be given
priority over a 65-year-old git like me who has already had a good few
years.  There may be other factors, like being a carer and so on, but if
we have to decide who to save I don't think I should be at the front of
the queue.  However distasteful, someone in government is going to have
to make these sort of choices, even if only in theory.  No matter who is
in government, it's the sort of horrible decision that being in power
sometimes requires.
I agree. Doctors are having to make these choices right now in Italy and
elsewhere.
Post by Sid Nuncius
As you say, the rightness or otherwise of their decisions will only
become apparent as things develop - and possibly not even then.  I am
among those without goodwill toward or trust in this government but
until a few days ago thought they were doing a decent job in following
the best advice they could get and apparently acting appropriately.
Their colossal volte-face in the last few days has dented that view very
considerably.  The new more stringent policy may be necessary (who
*really* knows?) but such a wild swing without any dramatic new evidence
doesn't inspire confidence.
Also agreed. I doubt if there was any change in the underlying evidence
(and there's actually very little of that) but the reaction of the
population may have led the behavioural scientists to recommend the
change despite the downside you mention
Post by Sid Nuncius
(For the avoidance of doubt, I am not making a party political point
here.  I have no confidence that Her Majesty's Loyal Opposition would be
any more competent if they were in power - and whatever decisions they
made, they would probably be accused of trying to kill off the wealthy
or something.)
Yes, but possibly not in umra :/
Post by Sid Nuncius
Er...that's it, really, except to say that I'm finding the mass
behaviour of people very scary at the moment.
Yes, not helped by the MSM making panic buying one of their top stories :(
We have been notified by our surgery that no attendances should be made
from Tuesday 17th. March. Telephone contact will still be available.
Don’t know where that leaves me with regard to my next blood test
extraction due to be carried out by Nursey for another PSA test - that will
be contacting patients later...
Just had a txt.msg from Surgery:

Your GP surgery is open for Child Immunisations and all Nurse Appointments.
Any pre-booked appointments will still continue unless advised otherwise.
Parkside Family Practice
So... at the moment, I think I still have an appointment with the Vampire
Bat next month.... so far.
--
Toodle Pip
Sam Plusnet
2020-03-17 22:54:03 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Mike
Post by Mike
Post by Mike
Post by BrritSki
Post by Sid Nuncius
<snip>
Post by Serena Blanchflower
Post by BrritSki
I wasn't joking. Suggesting that an elected politician would
deliberately set out to kill people is beyond the pale.
The leaders of this country and all the others round the world have
some desperately difficult decisions to make and I'm thankful I'm not
in their shoes.
Or maybe Mike was just being funny. If I've misread it I apologise as
I'm all for black humour, but it looked serious to me.
I agree with you.
I think that it's a huge problem for the government that so many
people deeply loathe and mistrust them[1].  This means that, faced
with a deeply worrying situation, all too many people automatically
read the worst possible interpretation of the government's intentions
and actions.
As it is, they've having to face a dreadful situation and it's likely
they'll have to make all too many decisions which would challenge
Solomon, without having built up any stock of goodwill or trust with
the people who are most affected.  I get the feeling that they are
taking their responsibilities very seriously[2] and probably finding
it pretty sobering.  I don't think they are willingly throwing anyone
to the wolves, although they have had to acknowledge that the wolves
will get some of us, regardless.
[1] Frequently with good reason, IMO
[2] Whether they are making the right decisions is a different matter
and we probably won't really have any real idea of that for at least a year.
Very well said, Serena.
<LW>
Post by Sid Nuncius
I don't believe that anyone in government is deliberately setting out to
kill people.  However, if facilities are unable to meet demand choices
will have to be made about who gets priority for treatment.  ISTM that
if that happens, young people with their lives ahead, parents of young
children and so on - i.e. younger people in general - should be given
priority over a 65-year-old git like me who has already had a good few
years.  There may be other factors, like being a carer and so on, but if
we have to decide who to save I don't think I should be at the front of
the queue.  However distasteful, someone in government is going to have
to make these sort of choices, even if only in theory.  No matter who is
in government, it's the sort of horrible decision that being in power
sometimes requires.
I agree. Doctors are having to make these choices right now in Italy and
elsewhere.
Post by Sid Nuncius
As you say, the rightness or otherwise of their decisions will only
become apparent as things develop - and possibly not even then.  I am
among those without goodwill toward or trust in this government but
until a few days ago thought they were doing a decent job in following
the best advice they could get and apparently acting appropriately.
Their colossal volte-face in the last few days has dented that view very
considerably.  The new more stringent policy may be necessary (who
*really* knows?) but such a wild swing without any dramatic new evidence
doesn't inspire confidence.
Also agreed. I doubt if there was any change in the underlying evidence
(and there's actually very little of that) but the reaction of the
population may have led the behavioural scientists to recommend the
change despite the downside you mention
Post by Sid Nuncius
(For the avoidance of doubt, I am not making a party political point
here.  I have no confidence that Her Majesty's Loyal Opposition would be
any more competent if they were in power - and whatever decisions they
made, they would probably be accused of trying to kill off the wealthy
or something.)
Yes, but possibly not in umra :/
Post by Sid Nuncius
Er...that's it, really, except to say that I'm finding the mass
behaviour of people very scary at the moment.
Yes, not helped by the MSM making panic buying one of their top stories :(
We have been notified by our surgery that no attendances should be made
from Tuesday 17th. March. Telephone contact will still be available.
Don’t know where that leaves me with regard to my next blood test
extraction due to be carried out by Nursey for another PSA test - that will
be contacting patients later...
Your GP surgery is open for Child Immunisations and all Nurse Appointments.
Any pre-booked appointments will still continue unless advised otherwise.
Parkside Family Practice
So... at the moment, I think I still have an appointment with the Vampire
Bat next month.... so far.
This is going to play hell with the Blood Transfusion service. Large
numbers of donors turning up in one place?
--
Sam Plusnet
J. P. Gilliver (John)
2020-03-17 23:10:09 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Tue, 17 Mar 2020 at 22:54:03, Sam Plusnet <***@home.com> wrote:
[]
Post by Sam Plusnet
This is going to play hell with the Blood Transfusion service. Large
numbers of donors turning up in one place?
Interesting point I hadn't thought of. Plus puncturing the skin etc..

And, if what they usually tell us ("we're constantly in need of blood",
or words to that effect), they _can't_ suspend the "service". OK,
perhaps the reduction in "elective" operations might lower the demand _a
bit_, but it'll still be needed for accidents and other emergencies.
(OK, people not travelling quite as much. But still some demand. Plus, I
don't _think_ it keeps for long.)
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)***@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

All I ask is to _prove_ that money can't make me happy.
J. P. Gilliver (John)
2020-03-17 23:53:30 UTC
Reply
Permalink
I've noticed a quite frequent ad. for sexual lubricant! (Durex rather
than K-Y [which reading elsewhere had led me to believe was the default;
it's not a subject of which I have experience].)

I am split between not entirely approving of them taking advantage of
the situation (because they anticipate more HTS activity than usual!),
and being pleased the subject is being aired.

I also hope - seriously - there will also be some attention paid to the
continuity of supply of contraception (of all kinds, but certainly
prescription), for the same reason.

I'm also split the other way round over the virtual absence of gambling
ad.s: initially I'm delighted, because I consider them despicable, but
I'm sorry they have - I presume - realised that if they _did_ do any
advertising (for online card and slot games), people would see _they_
were taking advantage of a lot of people who'll be bored, and maybe
would demand that Something Were Done they'd not like.
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)***@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

All I ask is to _prove_ that money can't make me happy.
Penny
2020-03-18 08:48:48 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Tue, 17 Mar 2020 23:53:30 +0000, "J. P. Gilliver (John)"
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
I'm also split the other way round over the virtual absence of gambling
I _think_ they have been banned BIMBAM.
--
Penny
Annoyed by The Archers since 1959
DavidK
2020-03-18 12:33:06 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Penny
On Tue, 17 Mar 2020 23:53:30 +0000, "J. P. Gilliver (John)"
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
I'm also split the other way round over the virtual absence of gambling
I _think_ they have been banned BIMBAM.
I hadn't heard that, though I vaguely remember reading that they are no
longer allowed during sport-programmes. I also believe that gambling
using credit-cards is to be made illegal. I have been tempted more than
once to open two accounts and use the free bets to bid both ways on some
event. I know someone who did that when they were off-work and he said
it worked but he didn't make as much as an extra hour of work would have
given him.
Penny
2020-03-18 08:47:51 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Tue, 17 Mar 2020 23:10:09 +0000, "J. P. Gilliver (John)"
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
[]
Post by Sam Plusnet
This is going to play hell with the Blood Transfusion service. Large
numbers of donors turning up in one place?
Interesting point I hadn't thought of. Plus puncturing the skin etc..
And, if what they usually tell us ("we're constantly in need of blood",
or words to that effect), they _can't_ suspend the "service". OK,
perhaps the reduction in "elective" operations might lower the demand _a
bit_, but it'll still be needed for accidents and other emergencies.
(OK, people not travelling quite as much. But still some demand. Plus, I
don't _think_ it keeps for long.)
They certainly freeze plasma* - probably whole blood too.

Back in the early '80s when I was getting plasma pheresis twice a week I,
having not really heard of AIDS, was a little confused when they made a big
show of the label on the stuff they were giving me, emphasising it was
British pasteurised plasma. One other woman whose session often coincided
with mine, could not (for reasons I have now forgotten) have the
pasteurised stuff and was given 'fresh frozen plasma' instead.
--
Penny
Annoyed by The Archers since 1959
Marmaduke Jinks
2020-03-16 19:31:50 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Mike
Post by BrritSki
Post by Sid Nuncius
<snip>
Post by Serena Blanchflower
Post by BrritSki
I wasn't joking. Suggesting that an elected politician would
deliberately set out to kill people is beyond the pale.
The leaders of this country and all the others round the world have
some desperately difficult decisions to make and I'm thankful I'm not
in their shoes.
Or maybe Mike was just being funny. If I've misread it I apologise as
I'm all for black humour, but it looked serious to me.
I agree with you.
I think that it's a huge problem for the government that so many
people deeply loathe and mistrust them[1]. This means that, faced
with a deeply worrying situation, all too many people automatically
read the worst possible interpretation of the government's intentions
and actions.
As it is, they've having to face a dreadful situation and it's likely
they'll have to make all too many decisions which would challenge
Solomon, without having built up any stock of goodwill or trust with
the people who are most affected. I get the feeling that they are
taking their responsibilities very seriously[2] and probably finding
it pretty sobering. I don't think they are willingly throwing anyone
to the wolves, although they have had to acknowledge that the wolves
will get some of us, regardless.
[1] Frequently with good reason, IMO
[2] Whether they are making the right decisions is a different matter
and we probably won't really have any real idea of that for at least a year.
Very well said, Serena.
<LW>
Post by Sid Nuncius
I don't believe that anyone in government is deliberately setting out to
kill people. However, if facilities are unable to meet demand choices
will have to be made about who gets priority for treatment. ISTM that
if that happens, young people with their lives ahead, parents of young
children and so on - i.e. younger people in general - should be given
priority over a 65-year-old git like me who has already had a good few
years. There may be other factors, like being a carer and so on, but if
we have to decide who to save I don't think I should be at the front of
the queue. However distasteful, someone in government is going to have
to make these sort of choices, even if only in theory. No matter who is
in government, it's the sort of horrible decision that being in power
sometimes requires.
I agree. Doctors are having to make these choices right now in Italy and
elsewhere.
Post by Sid Nuncius
As you say, the rightness or otherwise of their decisions will only
become apparent as things develop - and possibly not even then. I am
among those without goodwill toward or trust in this government but
until a few days ago thought they were doing a decent job in following
the best advice they could get and apparently acting appropriately.
Their colossal volte-face in the last few days has dented that view very
considerably. The new more stringent policy may be necessary (who
*really* knows?) but such a wild swing without any dramatic new evidence
doesn't inspire confidence.
Also agreed. I doubt if there was any change in the underlying evidence
(and there's actually very little of that) but the reaction of the
population may have led the behavioural scientists to recommend the
change despite the downside you mention
Post by Sid Nuncius
(For the avoidance of doubt, I am not making a party political point
here. I have no confidence that Her Majesty's Loyal Opposition would be
any more competent if they were in power - and whatever decisions they
made, they would probably be accused of trying to kill off the wealthy
or something.)
Yes, but possibly not in umra :/
Post by Sid Nuncius
Er...that's it, really, except to say that I'm finding the mass
behaviour of people very scary at the moment.
Yes, not helped by the MSM making panic buying one of their top stories :(
We have been notified by our surgery that no attendances should be made
from Tuesday 17th. March. Telephone contact will still be available.
--
Toodle Pip
So no attendances need be made. Isn't that a bit like that Yes Minister
where the hospital with no beds had a 100% success rate?

MJ
Chris McMillan
2020-03-16 20:01:54 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Marmaduke Jinks
Post by Mike
Post by BrritSki
Post by Sid Nuncius
<snip>
Post by Serena Blanchflower
Post by BrritSki
I wasn't joking. Suggesting that an elected politician would
deliberately set out to kill people is beyond the pale.
The leaders of this country and all the others round the world have
some desperately difficult decisions to make and I'm thankful I'm not
in their shoes.
Or maybe Mike was just being funny. If I've misread it I apologise as
I'm all for black humour, but it looked serious to me.
I agree with you.
I think that it's a huge problem for the government that so many
people deeply loathe and mistrust them[1]. This means that, faced
with a deeply worrying situation, all too many people automatically
read the worst possible interpretation of the government's intentions
and actions.
As it is, they've having to face a dreadful situation and it's likely
they'll have to make all too many decisions which would challenge
Solomon, without having built up any stock of goodwill or trust with
the people who are most affected. I get the feeling that they are
taking their responsibilities very seriously[2] and probably finding
it pretty sobering. I don't think they are willingly throwing anyone
to the wolves, although they have had to acknowledge that the wolves
will get some of us, regardless.
[1] Frequently with good reason, IMO
[2] Whether they are making the right decisions is a different matter
and we probably won't really have any real idea of that for at least a year.
Very well said, Serena.
<LW>
Post by Sid Nuncius
I don't believe that anyone in government is deliberately setting out to
kill people. However, if facilities are unable to meet demand choices
will have to be made about who gets priority for treatment. ISTM that
if that happens, young people with their lives ahead, parents of young
children and so on - i.e. younger people in general - should be given
priority over a 65-year-old git like me who has already had a good few
years. There may be other factors, like being a carer and so on, but if
we have to decide who to save I don't think I should be at the front of
the queue. However distasteful, someone in government is going to have
to make these sort of choices, even if only in theory. No matter who is
in government, it's the sort of horrible decision that being in power
sometimes requires.
I agree. Doctors are having to make these choices right now in Italy and
elsewhere.
Post by Sid Nuncius
As you say, the rightness or otherwise of their decisions will only
become apparent as things develop - and possibly not even then. I am
among those without goodwill toward or trust in this government but
until a few days ago thought they were doing a decent job in following
the best advice they could get and apparently acting appropriately.
Their colossal volte-face in the last few days has dented that view very
considerably. The new more stringent policy may be necessary (who
*really* knows?) but such a wild swing without any dramatic new evidence
doesn't inspire confidence.
Also agreed. I doubt if there was any change in the underlying evidence
(and there's actually very little of that) but the reaction of the
population may have led the behavioural scientists to recommend the
change despite the downside you mention
Post by Sid Nuncius
(For the avoidance of doubt, I am not making a party political point
here. I have no confidence that Her Majesty's Loyal Opposition would be
any more competent if they were in power - and whatever decisions they
made, they would probably be accused of trying to kill off the wealthy
or something.)
Yes, but possibly not in umra :/
Post by Sid Nuncius
Er...that's it, really, except to say that I'm finding the mass
behaviour of people very scary at the moment.
Yes, not helped by the MSM making panic buying one of their top stories :(
We have been notified by our surgery that no attendances should be made
from Tuesday 17th. March. Telephone contact will still be available.
--
Toodle Pip
So no attendances need be made. Isn't that a bit like that Yes Minister
where the hospital with no beds had a 100% success rate?
MJ
It’s on a triage system. The receptionists will simply go into automatic
routine and get the calks booked if need be. I suspect that the walk in
health centre - which is also a GP surgery - won’t be the place to go
though.

Sincerely Chris
Kate B
2020-03-16 23:08:18 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Marmaduke Jinks
Post by Mike
Post by BrritSki
Post by Sid Nuncius
<snip>
Post by Serena Blanchflower
Post by BrritSki
I wasn't joking. Suggesting that an elected politician would
deliberately set out to kill people is beyond the pale.
The leaders of this country and all the others round the world have
some desperately difficult decisions to make and I'm thankful I'm not
in their shoes.
Or maybe Mike was just being funny. If I've misread it I apologise as
I'm all for black humour, but it looked serious to me.
I agree with you.
I think that it's a huge problem for the government that so many
people deeply loathe and mistrust them[1]. This means that, faced
with a deeply worrying situation, all too many people automatically
read the worst possible interpretation of the government's intentions
and actions.
As it is, they've having to face a dreadful situation and it's likely
they'll have to make all too many decisions which would challenge
Solomon, without having built up any stock of goodwill or trust with
the people who are most affected. I get the feeling that they are
taking their responsibilities very seriously[2] and probably finding
it pretty sobering. I don't think they are willingly throwing anyone
to the wolves, although they have had to acknowledge that the wolves
will get some of us, regardless.
[1] Frequently with good reason, IMO
[2] Whether they are making the right decisions is a different matter
and we probably won't really have any real idea of that for at least a year.
Very well said, Serena.
<LW>
Post by Sid Nuncius
I don't believe that anyone in government is deliberately setting out to
kill people. However, if facilities are unable to meet demand choices
will have to be made about who gets priority for treatment. ISTM that
if that happens, young people with their lives ahead, parents of young
children and so on - i.e. younger people in general - should be given
priority over a 65-year-old git like me who has already had a good few
years. There may be other factors, like being a carer and so on, but if
we have to decide who to save I don't think I should be at the front of
the queue. However distasteful, someone in government is going to have
to make these sort of choices, even if only in theory. No matter who is
in government, it's the sort of horrible decision that being in power
sometimes requires.
I agree. Doctors are having to make these choices right now in Italy and
elsewhere.
Post by Sid Nuncius
As you say, the rightness or otherwise of their decisions will only
become apparent as things develop - and possibly not even then. I am
among those without goodwill toward or trust in this government but
until a few days ago thought they were doing a decent job in following
the best advice they could get and apparently acting appropriately.
Their colossal volte-face in the last few days has dented that view very
considerably. The new more stringent policy may be necessary (who
*really* knows?) but such a wild swing without any dramatic new evidence
doesn't inspire confidence.
Also agreed. I doubt if there was any change in the underlying evidence
(and there's actually very little of that) but the reaction of the
population may have led the behavioural scientists to recommend the
change despite the downside you mention
Post by Sid Nuncius
(For the avoidance of doubt, I am not making a party political point
here. I have no confidence that Her Majesty's Loyal Opposition would be
any more competent if they were in power - and whatever decisions they
made, they would probably be accused of trying to kill off the wealthy
or something.)
Yes, but possibly not in umra :/
Post by Sid Nuncius
Er...that's it, really, except to say that I'm finding the mass
behaviour of people very scary at the moment.
Yes, not helped by the MSM making panic buying one of their top stories :(
We have been notified by our surgery that no attendances should be made
from Tuesday 17th. March. Telephone contact will still be available.
--
Toodle Pip
So no attendances need be made. Isn't that a bit like that Yes Minister
where the hospital with no beds had a 100% success rate?
MJ
Our surgery has introduced telephone triage. You talk to them first and
only if they need to take a sample or examine you will they allow you to
come in.
--
Kate B
London
Jenny M Benson
2020-03-17 10:28:06 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by BrritSki
Post by Sid Nuncius
Er...that's it, really, except to say that I'm finding the mass
behaviour of people very scary at the moment.
Yes, not helped by the MSM making panic buying one of their top stories :(
Did people behave like this during the 'flu pandemic of 1918? Shirley
that was far worse in terms of suffering and death - or egg whites needed?
--
Jenny M Benson
Wrexham, UK
BrritSki
2020-03-17 10:49:24 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by BrritSki
Post by Sid Nuncius
Er...that's it, really, except to say that I'm finding the mass
behaviour of people very scary at the moment.
Yes, not helped by the MSM making panic buying one of their top stories :(
Did people behave like this during the 'flu pandemic of 1918?  Shirley
that was far worse in terms of suffering and death - or egg whites needed?
Eggs were sold out at Tesco yesterday mornings.
Well, the edible ones were...
krw
2020-03-17 15:35:27 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Did people behave like this during the 'flu pandemic of 1918?  Shirley
that was far worse in terms of suffering and death - or egg whites needed?
Sorry not old enough to remember. But I bet they did not have Boris
changing his mind every two seconds under the pressure of the media.
--
Kosmo Richard W
www.travelswmw.whitnet.uk
https://tinyurl.com/KRWpics
Penny
2020-03-17 17:23:13 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Tue, 17 Mar 2020 15:35:27 +0000, krw <***@whitnet.uk> scrawled in the
dust...
Post by krw
Did people behave like this during the 'flu pandemic of 1918?  Shirley
that was far worse in terms of suffering and death - or egg whites needed?
Sorry not old enough to remember. But I bet they did not have Boris
changing his mind every two seconds under the pressure of the media.
An American friend posted an article from a local Californian newspaper of
the time a day or two ago, it was informative.

Of course we did not have self-service supermarkets in 1919. Far easier for
the shopkeeper, knowing his customers, to ensure there is enough of the
essentials for everyone and not allow anyone to have more than their share
of the available goods.

We also had a very much slower world when it came to communications. Not
all households had a radio (my grandfather wouldn't have one in the house
for years although he did have a candlestick telephone). I believe the
ridiculous behaviour over toilet rolls was initially prompted by a photo of
empty toilet roll shelves in an Australian supermarket which was (probably)
tweeted.
--
Penny
Annoyed by The Archers since 1959
Sam Plusnet
2020-03-17 22:57:59 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Did people behave like this during the 'flu pandemic of 1918?  Shirley
that was far worse in terms of suffering and death - or egg whites needed?
Sorry not old enough to remember.  But I bet they did not have Boris
changing his mind every two seconds under the pressure of the media.
The UK and the US both have leaders who (IMHO) lack much in the way of
ethical standards.
However I have a little more faith in BJ listening to, and following,
informed advice.
In the US???
--
Sam Plusnet
Joe Kerr
2020-03-17 23:04:38 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Sam Plusnet
Post by Jenny M Benson
Did people behave like this during the 'flu pandemic of 1918?
Shirley that was far worse in terms of suffering and death - or egg
whites needed?
Sorry not old enough to remember.  But I bet they did not have Boris
changing his mind every two seconds under the pressure of the media.
The UK and the US both have leaders who (IMHO) lack much in the way of
ethical standards.
However I have a little more faith in BJ listening to, and following,
informed advice.
In the US???
And at least BJ seems to be taking it seriously and not telling us what
to do in Latin.
--
Ric
Min
2020-03-18 00:28:48 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Jenny M Benson
Post by BrritSki
Post by Sid Nuncius
Er...that's it, really, except to say that I'm finding the mass
behaviour of people very scary at the moment.
Yes, not helped by the MSM making panic buying one of their top stories :(
Did people behave like this during the 'flu pandemic of 1918? Shirley
that was far worse in terms of suffering and death - or egg whites needed?
The reason the H1N1 (Spanish Flu) pandemic was so devastating was that the
worst affected were the 20-40 age group - atypical before or since. I commend
to Umrats 'The Ballad of the Dunny Roll', which deals with the Loo Roll shortage
and is Rather Good.
--
Min
Rosalind Mitchell
2020-03-16 21:24:48 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Sid Nuncius
<snip>
Post by Serena Blanchflower
Post by BrritSki
I wasn't joking. Suggesting that an elected politician would
deliberately set out to kill people is beyond the pale.
The leaders of this country and all the others round the world have
some desperately difficult decisions to make and I'm thankful I'm not
in their shoes.
Or maybe Mike was just being funny. If I've misread it I apologise as
I'm all for black humour, but it looked serious to me.
I agree with you.
I think that it's a huge problem for the government that so many people
deeply loathe and mistrust them[1].  This means that, faced with a
deeply worrying situation, all too many people automatically read the
worst possible interpretation of the government's intentions and actions.
As it is, they've having to face a dreadful situation and it's likely
they'll have to make all too many decisions which would challenge
Solomon, without having built up any stock of goodwill or trust with
the people who are most affected.  I get the feeling that they are
taking their responsibilities very seriously[2] and probably finding it
pretty sobering.  I don't think they are willingly throwing anyone to
the wolves, although they have had to acknowledge that the wolves will
get some of us, regardless.
[1] Frequently with good reason, IMO [2] Whether they are making the
right decisions is a different matter and we probably won't really have
any real idea of that for at least a year.
Very well said, Serena.
<lw>
Post by Sid Nuncius
if that happens, young people with their lives ahead, parents of young
children and so on - i.e. younger people in general - should be given
priority over a 65-year-old git like me who has already had a good few
years.
65 /is/ young, Sid! And if anybody tries to tell me I'm expendable
there'll be hell to pay. You can do what you like but I'm not going to
curl up and die quietly. It'll be with a fight.

R
John Ashby
2020-03-16 22:18:37 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Rosalind Mitchell
Post by Sid Nuncius
<snip>
Post by Serena Blanchflower
Post by BrritSki
I wasn't joking. Suggesting that an elected politician would
deliberately set out to kill people is beyond the pale.
The leaders of this country and all the others round the world have
some desperately difficult decisions to make and I'm thankful I'm not
in their shoes.
Or maybe Mike was just being funny. If I've misread it I apologise as
I'm all for black humour, but it looked serious to me.
I agree with you.
I think that it's a huge problem for the government that so many people
deeply loathe and mistrust them[1].  This means that, faced with a
deeply worrying situation, all too many people automatically read the
worst possible interpretation of the government's intentions and actions.
As it is, they've having to face a dreadful situation and it's likely
they'll have to make all too many decisions which would challenge
Solomon, without having built up any stock of goodwill or trust with
the people who are most affected.  I get the feeling that they are
taking their responsibilities very seriously[2] and probably finding it
pretty sobering.  I don't think they are willingly throwing anyone to
the wolves, although they have had to acknowledge that the wolves will
get some of us, regardless.
[1] Frequently with good reason, IMO [2] Whether they are making the
right decisions is a different matter and we probably won't really have
any real idea of that for at least a year.
Very well said, Serena.
<lw>
Post by Sid Nuncius
if that happens, young people with their lives ahead, parents of young
children and so on - i.e. younger people in general - should be given
priority over a 65-year-old git like me who has already had a good few
years.
65 /is/ young, Sid! And if anybody tries to tell me I'm expendable
there'll be hell to pay. You can do what you like but I'm not going to
curl up and die quietly. It'll be with a fight.
R
And probably *in* a fight.

john
Rosalind Mitchell
2020-03-16 22:23:16 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by John Ashby
Post by Rosalind Mitchell
Post by Sid Nuncius
<snip>
Post by Serena Blanchflower
Post by BrritSki
I wasn't joking. Suggesting that an elected politician would
deliberately set out to kill people is beyond the pale.
The leaders of this country and all the others round the world have
some desperately difficult decisions to make and I'm thankful I'm
not in their shoes.
Or maybe Mike was just being funny. If I've misread it I apologise
as I'm all for black humour, but it looked serious to me.
I agree with you.
I think that it's a huge problem for the government that so many
people deeply loathe and mistrust them[1].  This means that, faced
with a deeply worrying situation, all too many people automatically
read the worst possible interpretation of the government's intentions
and actions.
As it is, they've having to face a dreadful situation and it's likely
they'll have to make all too many decisions which would challenge
Solomon, without having built up any stock of goodwill or trust with
the people who are most affected.  I get the feeling that they are
taking their responsibilities very seriously[2] and probably finding
it pretty sobering.  I don't think they are willingly throwing anyone
to the wolves, although they have had to acknowledge that the wolves
will get some of us, regardless.
[1] Frequently with good reason, IMO [2] Whether they are making the
right decisions is a different matter and we probably won't really
have any real idea of that for at least a year.
Very well said, Serena.
<lw>
Post by Sid Nuncius
if that happens, young people with their lives ahead, parents of young
children and so on - i.e. younger people in general - should be given
priority over a 65-year-old git like me who has already had a good few
years.
65 /is/ young, Sid! And if anybody tries to tell me I'm expendable
there'll be hell to pay. You can do what you like but I'm not going to
curl up and die quietly. It'll be with a fight.
R
And probably *in* a fight.
Or in a motorbike crash, or a hanggliding accident.

R
Vicky Ayech
2020-03-17 08:59:08 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Mon, 16 Mar 2020 22:23:16 -0000 (UTC), Rosalind Mitchell
Post by Rosalind Mitchell
Post by John Ashby
Post by Rosalind Mitchell
Post by Sid Nuncius
<snip>
Post by Serena Blanchflower
Post by BrritSki
I wasn't joking. Suggesting that an elected politician would
deliberately set out to kill people is beyond the pale.
The leaders of this country and all the others round the world have
some desperately difficult decisions to make and I'm thankful I'm
not in their shoes.
Or maybe Mike was just being funny. If I've misread it I apologise
as I'm all for black humour, but it looked serious to me.
I agree with you.
I think that it's a huge problem for the government that so many
people deeply loathe and mistrust them[1].  This means that, faced
with a deeply worrying situation, all too many people automatically
read the worst possible interpretation of the government's intentions
and actions.
As it is, they've having to face a dreadful situation and it's likely
they'll have to make all too many decisions which would challenge
Solomon, without having built up any stock of goodwill or trust with
the people who are most affected.  I get the feeling that they are
taking their responsibilities very seriously[2] and probably finding
it pretty sobering.  I don't think they are willingly throwing anyone
to the wolves, although they have had to acknowledge that the wolves
will get some of us, regardless.
[1] Frequently with good reason, IMO [2] Whether they are making the
right decisions is a different matter and we probably won't really
have any real idea of that for at least a year.
Very well said, Serena.
<lw>
Post by Sid Nuncius
if that happens, young people with their lives ahead, parents of young
children and so on - i.e. younger people in general - should be given
priority over a 65-year-old git like me who has already had a good few
years.
65 /is/ young, Sid! And if anybody tries to tell me I'm expendable
there'll be hell to pay. You can do what you like but I'm not going to
curl up and die quietly. It'll be with a fight.
R
And probably *in* a fight.
Or in a motorbike crash, or a hanggliding accident.
R
The advice was for over 70s. Do I just say I am 68?
Mike
2020-03-17 11:36:26 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Vicky Ayech
On Mon, 16 Mar 2020 22:23:16 -0000 (UTC), Rosalind Mitchell
Post by Rosalind Mitchell
Post by John Ashby
Post by Rosalind Mitchell
Post by Sid Nuncius
<snip>
Post by Serena Blanchflower
Post by BrritSki
I wasn't joking. Suggesting that an elected politician would
deliberately set out to kill people is beyond the pale.
The leaders of this country and all the others round the world have
some desperately difficult decisions to make and I'm thankful I'm
not in their shoes.
Or maybe Mike was just being funny. If I've misread it I apologise
as I'm all for black humour, but it looked serious to me.
I agree with you.
I think that it's a huge problem for the government that so many
people deeply loathe and mistrust them[1].  This means that, faced
with a deeply worrying situation, all too many people automatically
read the worst possible interpretation of the government's intentions
and actions.
As it is, they've having to face a dreadful situation and it's likely
they'll have to make all too many decisions which would challenge
Solomon, without having built up any stock of goodwill or trust with
the people who are most affected.  I get the feeling that they are
taking their responsibilities very seriously[2] and probably finding
it pretty sobering.  I don't think they are willingly throwing anyone
to the wolves, although they have had to acknowledge that the wolves
will get some of us, regardless.
[1] Frequently with good reason, IMO [2] Whether they are making the
right decisions is a different matter and we probably won't really
have any real idea of that for at least a year.
Very well said, Serena.
<lw>
Post by Sid Nuncius
if that happens, young people with their lives ahead, parents of young
children and so on - i.e. younger people in general - should be given
priority over a 65-year-old git like me who has already had a good few
years.
65 /is/ young, Sid! And if anybody tries to tell me I'm expendable
there'll be hell to pay. You can do what you like but I'm not going to
curl up and die quietly. It'll be with a fight.
R
And probably *in* a fight.
Or in a motorbike crash, or a hanggliding accident.
R
The advice was for over 70s. Do I just say I am 68?
Some might say they would prefer ‘69’ nudg-nudge-wink-wink....
--
Toodle Pip
Rosalind Mitchell
2020-03-17 21:23:50 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Vicky Ayech
On Mon, 16 Mar 2020 22:23:16 -0000 (UTC), Rosalind Mitchell
Post by Rosalind Mitchell
Post by John Ashby
Post by Rosalind Mitchell
Post by Sid Nuncius
<snip>
Post by Serena Blanchflower
Post by BrritSki
I wasn't joking. Suggesting that an elected politician would
deliberately set out to kill people is beyond the pale.
The leaders of this country and all the others round the world
have some desperately difficult decisions to make and I'm thankful
I'm not in their shoes.
Or maybe Mike was just being funny. If I've misread it I apologise
as I'm all for black humour, but it looked serious to me.
I agree with you.
I think that it's a huge problem for the government that so many
people deeply loathe and mistrust them[1].  This means that, faced
with a deeply worrying situation, all too many people automatically
read the worst possible interpretation of the government's
intentions and actions.
As it is, they've having to face a dreadful situation and it's
likely they'll have to make all too many decisions which would
challenge Solomon, without having built up any stock of goodwill or
trust with the people who are most affected.  I get the feeling
that they are taking their responsibilities very seriously[2] and
probably finding it pretty sobering.  I don't think they are
willingly throwing anyone to the wolves, although they have had to
acknowledge that the wolves will get some of us, regardless.
[1] Frequently with good reason, IMO [2] Whether they are making
the right decisions is a different matter and we probably won't
really have any real idea of that for at least a year.
Very well said, Serena.
<lw>
Post by Sid Nuncius
if that happens, young people with their lives ahead, parents of
young children and so on - i.e. younger people in general - should
be given priority over a 65-year-old git like me who has already had
a good few years.
65 /is/ young, Sid! And if anybody tries to tell me I'm expendable
there'll be hell to pay. You can do what you like but I'm not going
to curl up and die quietly. It'll be with a fight.
R
And probably *in* a fight.
Or in a motorbike crash, or a hanggliding accident.
R
The advice was for over 70s. Do I just say I am 68?
I'm having visions of police in riot gear rounding up people with Zimmers.

R
Paul Herber
2020-03-17 21:47:51 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Rosalind Mitchell
Post by Vicky Ayech
On Mon, 16 Mar 2020 22:23:16 -0000 (UTC), Rosalind Mitchell
Post by Rosalind Mitchell
Post by John Ashby
Post by Rosalind Mitchell
Post by Sid Nuncius
<snip>
Post by Serena Blanchflower
Post by BrritSki
I wasn't joking. Suggesting that an elected politician would
deliberately set out to kill people is beyond the pale.
The leaders of this country and all the others round the world
have some desperately difficult decisions to make and I'm thankful
I'm not in their shoes.
Or maybe Mike was just being funny. If I've misread it I apologise
as I'm all for black humour, but it looked serious to me.
I agree with you.
I think that it's a huge problem for the government that so many
people deeply loathe and mistrust them[1].  This means that, faced
with a deeply worrying situation, all too many people automatically
read the worst possible interpretation of the government's
intentions and actions.
As it is, they've having to face a dreadful situation and it's
likely they'll have to make all too many decisions which would
challenge Solomon, without having built up any stock of goodwill or
trust with the people who are most affected.  I get the feeling
that they are taking their responsibilities very seriously[2] and
probably finding it pretty sobering.  I don't think they are
willingly throwing anyone to the wolves, although they have had to
acknowledge that the wolves will get some of us, regardless.
[1] Frequently with good reason, IMO [2] Whether they are making
the right decisions is a different matter and we probably won't
really have any real idea of that for at least a year.
Very well said, Serena.
<lw>
Post by Sid Nuncius
if that happens, young people with their lives ahead, parents of
young children and so on - i.e. younger people in general - should
be given priority over a 65-year-old git like me who has already had
a good few years.
65 /is/ young, Sid! And if anybody tries to tell me I'm expendable
there'll be hell to pay. You can do what you like but I'm not going
to curl up and die quietly. It'll be with a fight.
R
And probably *in* a fight.
Or in a motorbike crash, or a hanggliding accident.
R
The advice was for over 70s. Do I just say I am 68?
I'm having visions of police in riot gear rounding up people with Zimmers.
Monty Python's Hell's Grannies
--
Regards, Paul Herber
https://www.paulherber.co.uk/
Vicky Ayech
2020-03-17 21:51:25 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Tue, 17 Mar 2020 21:47:51 +0000, Paul Herber
Post by Paul Herber
Post by Rosalind Mitchell
Post by Vicky Ayech
On Mon, 16 Mar 2020 22:23:16 -0000 (UTC), Rosalind Mitchell
Post by Rosalind Mitchell
Post by John Ashby
Post by Rosalind Mitchell
Post by Sid Nuncius
<snip>
Post by Serena Blanchflower
Post by BrritSki
I wasn't joking. Suggesting that an elected politician would
deliberately set out to kill people is beyond the pale.
The leaders of this country and all the others round the world
have some desperately difficult decisions to make and I'm thankful
I'm not in their shoes.
Or maybe Mike was just being funny. If I've misread it I apologise
as I'm all for black humour, but it looked serious to me.
I agree with you.
I think that it's a huge problem for the government that so many
people deeply loathe and mistrust them[1].  This means that, faced
with a deeply worrying situation, all too many people automatically
read the worst possible interpretation of the government's
intentions and actions.
As it is, they've having to face a dreadful situation and it's
likely they'll have to make all too many decisions which would
challenge Solomon, without having built up any stock of goodwill or
trust with the people who are most affected.  I get the feeling
that they are taking their responsibilities very seriously[2] and
probably finding it pretty sobering.  I don't think they are
willingly throwing anyone to the wolves, although they have had to
acknowledge that the wolves will get some of us, regardless.
[1] Frequently with good reason, IMO [2] Whether they are making
the right decisions is a different matter and we probably won't
really have any real idea of that for at least a year.
Very well said, Serena.
<lw>
Post by Sid Nuncius
if that happens, young people with their lives ahead, parents of
young children and so on - i.e. younger people in general - should
be given priority over a 65-year-old git like me who has already had
a good few years.
65 /is/ young, Sid! And if anybody tries to tell me I'm expendable
there'll be hell to pay. You can do what you like but I'm not going
to curl up and die quietly. It'll be with a fight.
R
And probably *in* a fight.
Or in a motorbike crash, or a hanggliding accident.
R
The advice was for over 70s. Do I just say I am 68?
I'm having visions of police in riot gear rounding up people with Zimmers.
Monty Python's Hell's Grannies
Tiday on the news they said new legislation is being passed to allow
police to detain and 'put those deemed a danger to public safety in
appropriate isolation facilities' to protect public health.
steveski
2020-03-17 22:06:27 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Tue, 17 Mar 2020 21:23:50 -0000 (UTC), Rosalind Mitchell
[]
Post by Rosalind Mitchell
Post by Vicky Ayech
Post by Rosalind Mitchell
Post by John Ashby
And probably *in* a fight.
Or in a motorbike crash, or a hanggliding accident.
R
The advice was for over 70s. Do I just say I am 68?
I'm having visions of police in riot gear rounding up people with Zimmers.
Monty Python's Hell's Grannies
"Make tea not love".
--
Steveski
BrritSki
2020-03-18 08:09:08 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by steveski
On Tue, 17 Mar 2020 21:23:50 -0000 (UTC), Rosalind Mitchell
[]
Post by Rosalind Mitchell
Post by Vicky Ayech
Post by Rosalind Mitchell
Post by John Ashby
And probably *in* a fight.
Or in a motorbike crash, or a hanggliding accident.
R
The advice was for over 70s. Do I just say I am 68?
I'm having visions of police in riot gear rounding up people with Zimmers.
Monty Python's Hell's Grannies
"Make tea not love".
I've forgotten how to. Make tea that is...
Vicky Ayech
2020-03-18 08:27:05 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Wed, 18 Mar 2020 08:09:08 +0000, BrritSki
Post by BrritSki
Post by steveski
On Tue, 17 Mar 2020 21:23:50 -0000 (UTC), Rosalind Mitchell
[]
Post by Rosalind Mitchell
Post by Vicky Ayech
Post by Rosalind Mitchell
Post by John Ashby
And probably *in* a fight.
Or in a motorbike crash, or a hanggliding accident.
R
The advice was for over 70s. Do I just say I am 68?
I'm having visions of police in riot gear rounding up people with Zimmers.
Monty Python's Hell's Grannies
"Make tea not love".
I've forgotten how to. Make tea that is...
I suppose it will have to be Tea for One not Tea for Two
It's Over
The House of the Rising Sun is shut
Ebony Eyes (was on one of the final flights - 1203)
Chris J Dixon
2020-03-18 08:19:08 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Paul Herber
Monty Python's Hell's Grannies
Granny Turisomo



Chris
--
Chris J Dixon Nottingham
'48/33 M B+ G++ A L(-) I S-- CH0(--)(p) Ar- T+ H0 ?Q
***@cdixon.me.uk @ChrisJDixon1
Plant amazing Acers.
BrritSki
2020-03-18 09:45:54 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Chris J Dixon
Post by Paul Herber
Monty Python's Hell's Grannies
Granny Turisomo
http://youtu.be/g1NXtX2l_6Y
WHich reminds that recently TB has stopped automatically following links
such as the above. If I right=click and then select "Open link in
Browser" still nothing happens, I have to select copy link address open
a new tab etc.

Anyone else seeing the same ? Chrome is set correctly as my default
browser and can't find any obvious settings in TB that would correct this...

TIA
Serena Blanchflower
2020-03-18 10:09:03 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by BrritSki
Post by Chris J Dixon
Post by Paul Herber
Monty Python's Hell's Grannies
Granny Turisomo
http://youtu.be/g1NXtX2l_6Y
WHich reminds that recently TB has stopped automatically following links
such as the above. If I right=click and then select "Open link in
Browser" still nothing happens, I have to select copy link address open
a new tab etc.
No, it's working well here (with Firefox and TB 68.6.0). I opened it
first time, by just clicking on the link and then a second time by
righ-clicking and selecting to open the link. Both times were successful.

Oh, I wish I had a trundler like that! OK, I'd never be able to get
onto one, nor to stay on it and drive it, once ensconced, but they do
look fun :)
--
Best wishes, Serena
There is nothing stronger in the world than gentleness (Han Suyin)
Vicky Ayech
2020-03-18 11:06:05 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Wed, 18 Mar 2020 10:09:03 +0000, Serena Blanchflower
Post by Serena Blanchflower
Post by BrritSki
Post by Chris J Dixon
Post by Paul Herber
Monty Python's Hell's Grannies
Granny Turisomo
http://youtu.be/g1NXtX2l_6Y
WHich reminds that recently TB has stopped automatically following links
such as the above. If I right=click and then select "Open link in
Browser" still nothing happens, I have to select copy link address open
a new tab etc.
No, it's working well here (with Firefox and TB 68.6.0). I opened it
first time, by just clicking on the link and then a second time by
righ-clicking and selecting to open the link. Both times were successful.
Oh, I wish I had a trundler like that! OK, I'd never be able to get
onto one, nor to stay on it and drive it, once ensconced, but they do
look fun :)
B is insisting those are not their legs so they are not motor driven.
They are walking. I looked carefully and can't see legs underneath.
They are a bit immodest.
Serena Blanchflower
2020-03-18 11:12:15 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Vicky Ayech
B is insisting those are not their legs so they are not motor driven.
They are walking. I looked carefully and can't see legs underneath.
They are a bit immodest.
I think it's quite possible that B is correct about the legs but they're
not walking; they're mounted on Segways, so they could be standing on
the Segway platform (and you wouldn't be able to see their legs).
--
Best wishes, Serena
Be yourself, everyone else is taken (Oscar Wilde)
Penny
2020-03-18 11:15:08 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Wed, 18 Mar 2020 11:06:05 +0000, Vicky Ayech <***@gmail.com>
scrawled in the dust...
Post by Vicky Ayech
On Wed, 18 Mar 2020 10:09:03 +0000, Serena Blanchflower
Post by Serena Blanchflower
Post by BrritSki
Post by Chris J Dixon
Post by Paul Herber
Monty Python's Hell's Grannies
Granny Turisomo
http://youtu.be/g1NXtX2l_6Y
WHich reminds that recently TB has stopped automatically following links
such as the above. If I right=click and then select "Open link in
Browser" still nothing happens, I have to select copy link address open
a new tab etc.
No, it's working well here (with Firefox and TB 68.6.0). I opened it
first time, by just clicking on the link and then a second time by
righ-clicking and selecting to open the link. Both times were successful.
Oh, I wish I had a trundler like that! OK, I'd never be able to get
onto one, nor to stay on it and drive it, once ensconced, but they do
look fun :)
B is insisting those are not their legs so they are not motor driven.
They are walking. I looked carefully and can't see legs underneath.
They are a bit immodest.
They are Segways - look at the size of the (2) wheels.
--
Penny
Annoyed by The Archers since 1959
Chris J Dixon
2020-03-18 12:00:47 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Penny
scrawled in the dust...
Post by Vicky Ayech
On Wed, 18 Mar 2020 10:09:03 +0000, Serena Blanchflower
Post by Serena Blanchflower
Post by BrritSki
Post by Chris J Dixon
Post by Paul Herber
Monty Python's Hell's Grannies
Granny Turisomo
http://youtu.be/g1NXtX2l_6Y
WHich reminds that recently TB has stopped automatically following links
such as the above. If I right=click and then select "Open link in
Browser" still nothing happens, I have to select copy link address open
a new tab etc.
No, it's working well here (with Firefox and TB 68.6.0). I opened it
first time, by just clicking on the link and then a second time by
righ-clicking and selecting to open the link. Both times were successful.
Oh, I wish I had a trundler like that! OK, I'd never be able to get
onto one, nor to stay on it and drive it, once ensconced, but they do
look fun :)
B is insisting those are not their legs so they are not motor driven.
They are walking. I looked carefully and can't see legs underneath.
They are a bit immodest.
They are Segways - look at the size of the (2) wheels.
Indeed they are. I have seen them live, and they were great fun.

Chris
--
Chris J Dixon Nottingham
'48/33 M B+ G++ A L(-) I S-- CH0(--)(p) Ar- T+ H0 ?Q
***@cdixon.me.uk @ChrisJDixon1
Plant amazing Acers.
Jenny M Benson
2020-03-18 10:11:30 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by BrritSki
Post by Chris J Dixon
http://youtu.be/g1NXtX2l_6Y
WHich reminds that recently TB has stopped automatically following links
such as the above. If I right=click and then select "Open link in
Browser" still nothing happens, I have to select copy link address open
a new tab etc.
Working fine for me and Chrome.

Glad you mentioned it because I'd somehow missed that link before.
--
Jenny M Benson
Wrexham, UK
Nick Odell
2020-03-18 15:09:55 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Wed, 18 Mar 2020 09:45:54 +0000, BrritSki
Post by BrritSki
Post by Chris J Dixon
Post by Paul Herber
Monty Python's Hell's Grannies
Granny Turisomo
http://youtu.be/g1NXtX2l_6Y
WHich reminds that recently TB has stopped automatically following links
such as the above. If I right=click and then select "Open link in
Browser" still nothing happens, I have to select copy link address open
a new tab etc.
Anyone else seeing the same ? Chrome is set correctly as my default
browser and can't find any obvious settings in TB that would correct this...
TIA
I´m finding the same thing happening here in Firefox. I´m using an old
Win7 machine in Spanish(1)(2)(3) which I allowed to update itself but
which doesn´t seem to have gone to the latest version.

Nick
(1)I left all my own hardware behind so that Liliana could bring back
her new shiny UK-purchased device while I brought back her older stuff
and we thereby avoided attracting attention in customs.
(2)Sorry about the rounded brackets but it needs some devilish
combination of keys to force the square sort and I can never remember
what they are.
(3)And if my apostrophes are annoying you, please say. They are coming
out here as a superscript comma but displaying in google groups as
something weird. I can easily change Nick´s writing style for the
writing style of Nick if it helps readers.
BrritSki
2020-03-18 12:16:50 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Nick Odell
(3)And if my apostrophes are annoying you, please say. They are coming
out here as a superscript comma but displaying in google groups as
something weird.
I only noticed they were odd when you mentioned it :)
Sid Nuncius
2020-03-17 06:01:50 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Rosalind Mitchell
Post by Sid Nuncius
if that happens, young people with their lives ahead, parents of young
children and so on - i.e. younger people in general - should be given
priority over a 65-year-old git like me who has already had a good few
years.
65 /is/ young, Sid! And if anybody tries to tell me I'm expendable
there'll be hell to pay. You can do what you like but I'm not going to
curl up and die quietly. It'll be with a fight.
Oh, I don't think anyone is simply expendable and nor do I intend to
give up and die. I won't go gentle into that good night. I just think
that if there's a direct choice between saving my life and that of a
much younger person, a parent of young children and so on then it
wouldn't be right for me to have priority.

Put crudely, I won't be fighting to take a ventilator from a child.
--
Sid (Make sure Matron is away when you reply)
Vicky Ayech
2020-03-17 09:11:20 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Tue, 17 Mar 2020 06:01:50 +0000, Sid Nuncius
Post by Sid Nuncius
Post by Rosalind Mitchell
Post by Sid Nuncius
if that happens, young people with their lives ahead, parents of young
children and so on - i.e. younger people in general - should be given
priority over a 65-year-old git like me who has already had a good few
years.
65 /is/ young, Sid! And if anybody tries to tell me I'm expendable
there'll be hell to pay. You can do what you like but I'm not going to
curl up and die quietly. It'll be with a fight.
Oh, I don't think anyone is simply expendable and nor do I intend to
give up and die. I won't go gentle into that good night. I just think
that if there's a direct choice between saving my life and that of a
much younger person, a parent of young children and so on then it
wouldn't be right for me to have priority.
Put crudely, I won't be fighting to take a ventilator from a child.
MTAAW. Especially as I have grandchildren. They deserve to have a
life.
steve hague
2020-03-17 09:25:36 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Sid Nuncius
Post by Rosalind Mitchell
Post by Sid Nuncius
if that happens, young people with their lives ahead, parents of young
children and so on - i.e. younger people in general - should be given
priority over a 65-year-old git like me who has already had a good few
years.
65 /is/ young, Sid! And if anybody tries to tell me I'm expendable
there'll be hell to pay. You can do what you like but I'm not going to
curl up and die quietly. It'll be with a fight.
Oh, I don't think anyone is simply expendable and nor do I intend to
give up and die.  I won't go gentle into that good night.  I just think
that if there's a direct choice between saving my life and that of a
much younger person, a parent of young children and so on then it
wouldn't be right for me to have priority.
Put crudely, I won't be fighting to take a ventilator from a child.
Totally agree Sid. Though as I understand it, children don't seem to get
corona virus, or if they do the symptoms are mild to non- existant.
Steve
Clive Arthur
2020-03-17 14:45:47 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On 15/03/2020 17:07, BrritSki wrote:

<snip>
Post by BrritSki
I wasn't joking. Suggesting that an elected politician would
deliberately set out to kill people is beyond the pale.
Even Tony Blair?
--
Cheers
Clive
Sam Plusnet
2020-03-15 20:35:10 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Mike Ruddock
AIAOU in assuming that when Matt-the-Health said this morning that
although the elderly would be encouraged to stay at home this policy
would not be put in place yet, he was thinking that the longer they are
allowed to gad about picking up viruses the more of them would die and
the smaller the bill for pensions, free prescriptions etc etc would be?
A long sentence . . . and that's what MtH deserves.
Looking at the graphs published so far, the chances of becoming
seriously ill from C-19 are elevated in the over 70s. That means a
serious impact on hospital beds, and a sudden surge in patient numbers
would sink the NHS.
Since it doesn't look as though anyone can stop this thing working its
way through the population, the best bet is to slow it down.
You end up with the same number of patients, but the load on the NHS is
spread over a longer period.

P.S. I wonder how many of the medical supplies needed come from the
enormously disrupted supply chain originating in China?
--
Sam Plusnet
krw
2020-03-15 22:24:03 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Matt-the-Health said this morning that although the elderly would be
encouraged to stay at home this policy
Am I alone in thinking that the unforeseen consequence of locking up the
elderly at home alone will be a huge increase in people dying in their
homes alone and being discovered some considerable time later when they
need not have died?

Or am I just a pessimist?
--
Kosmo Richard W
www.travelswmw.whitnet.uk
https://tinyurl.com/KRWpics
Vicky Ayech
2020-03-15 22:28:36 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by krw
Matt-the-Health said this morning that although the elderly would be
encouraged to stay at home this policy
Am I alone in thinking that the unforeseen consequence of locking up the
elderly at home alone will be a huge increase in people dying in their
homes alone and being discovered some considerable time later when they
need not have died?
Or am I just a pessimist?
Pessimism seems a sensible attitude at present as far as predicting
the future. But if we isolated OAPs can keep reasonably cheerful and
find ways to make life at home pleasant we should be able to get
through it. The problem is for any who isolated too late and already
have the virus and get ill. If they need hospital care will it be
available?
Joe Kerr
2020-03-15 22:50:08 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by krw
Matt-the-Health said this morning that although the elderly would be
encouraged to stay at home this policy
Am I alone in thinking that the unforeseen consequence of locking up the
elderly at home alone will be a huge increase in people dying in their
homes alone and being discovered some considerable time later when they
need not have died?
Or am I just a pessimist?
There is also the matter of their mental health, especially if they live
alone. Also their physical health if they are deprived of exercise and
fresh air.
--
Ric
Anne B
2020-03-16 19:33:51 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Joe Kerr
Post by krw
Matt-the-Health said this morning that although the elderly would be
encouraged to stay at home this policy
Am I alone in thinking that the unforeseen consequence of locking up
the elderly at home alone will be a huge increase in people dying in
their homes alone and being discovered some considerable time later
when they need not have died?
Or am I just a pessimist?
There is also the matter of their mental health, especially if they live
alone. Also their physical health if they are deprived of exercise and
fresh air.
I have absolutely no intention of allowing myself to be deprived of
exercise and fresh air.

I am in the fortunate position of living in a place surrounded by
forests, moorland and stony beaches, all of them visited by very few
people.

So (unless it becomes a criminal offence) I shall not hesitate to drive
(alone) to remotish spots, where I am very unlikely to meet anyone else,
and if I do there is plenty of space to keep well away from them.

Anne B
Chris McMillan
2020-03-16 20:01:55 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Anne B
Post by Joe Kerr
Post by krw
Matt-the-Health said this morning that although the elderly would be
encouraged to stay at home this policy
Am I alone in thinking that the unforeseen consequence of locking up
the elderly at home alone will be a huge increase in people dying in
their homes alone and being discovered some considerable time later
when they need not have died?
Or am I just a pessimist?
There is also the matter of their mental health, especially if they live
alone. Also their physical health if they are deprived of exercise and
fresh air.
I have absolutely no intention of allowing myself to be deprived of
exercise and fresh air.
I am in the fortunate position of living in a place surrounded by
forests, moorland and stony beaches, all of them visited by very few
people.
So (unless it becomes a criminal offence) I shall not hesitate to drive
(alone) to remotish spots, where I am very unlikely to meet anyone else,
and if I do there is plenty of space to keep well away from them.
Anne B
It does say that even people without the virus should take exercise and
keep away from others. Dog owners won’t stop walking their dogs after all.


Sincerely Chris
Vicky Ayech
2020-03-16 20:42:41 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Mon, 16 Mar 2020 19:33:51 +0000, Anne B
Post by Anne B
Post by Joe Kerr
Post by krw
Matt-the-Health said this morning that although the elderly would be
encouraged to stay at home this policy
Am I alone in thinking that the unforeseen consequence of locking up
the elderly at home alone will be a huge increase in people dying in
their homes alone and being discovered some considerable time later
when they need not have died?
Or am I just a pessimist?
There is also the matter of their mental health, especially if they live
alone. Also their physical health if they are deprived of exercise and
fresh air.
I have absolutely no intention of allowing myself to be deprived of
exercise and fresh air.
I am in the fortunate position of living in a place surrounded by
forests, moorland and stony beaches, all of them visited by very few
people.
So (unless it becomes a criminal offence) I shall not hesitate to drive
(alone) to remotish spots, where I am very unlikely to meet anyone else,
and if I do there is plenty of space to keep well away from them.
Anne B
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8114189/Spanish-police-use-megaphones-tell-people-stay-indoors-face-25-000-fines.html

Our PM did say more rules would come ina week and they aer drafting
laws
Anne B
2020-03-16 22:23:48 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Vicky Ayech
On Mon, 16 Mar 2020 19:33:51 +0000, Anne B
Post by Anne B
Post by Joe Kerr
Post by krw
Matt-the-Health said this morning that although the elderly would be
encouraged to stay at home this policy
Am I alone in thinking that the unforeseen consequence of locking up
the elderly at home alone will be a huge increase in people dying in
their homes alone and being discovered some considerable time later
when they need not have died?
Or am I just a pessimist?
There is also the matter of their mental health, especially if they live
alone. Also their physical health if they are deprived of exercise and
fresh air.
I have absolutely no intention of allowing myself to be deprived of
exercise and fresh air.
I am in the fortunate position of living in a place surrounded by
forests, moorland and stony beaches, all of them visited by very few
people.
So (unless it becomes a criminal offence) I shall not hesitate to drive
(alone) to remotish spots, where I am very unlikely to meet anyone else,
and if I do there is plenty of space to keep well away from them.
Anne B
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8114189/Spanish-police-use-megaphones-tell-people-stay-indoors-face-25-000-fines.html
Our PM did say more rules would come ina week and they aer drafting
laws
I have arranged to borrow a dog if necessary.

Anne B
Kate B
2020-03-16 23:06:22 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Vicky Ayech
On Mon, 16 Mar 2020 19:33:51 +0000, Anne B
Post by Anne B
Post by Joe Kerr
Post by krw
Matt-the-Health said this morning that although the elderly would be
encouraged to stay at home this policy
Am I alone in thinking that the unforeseen consequence of locking up
the elderly at home alone will be a huge increase in people dying in
their homes alone and being discovered some considerable time later
when they need not have died?
Or am I just a pessimist?
There is also the matter of their mental health, especially if they live
alone. Also their physical health if they are deprived of exercise and
fresh air.
I have absolutely no intention of allowing myself to be deprived of
exercise and fresh air.
I am in the fortunate position of living in a place surrounded by
forests, moorland and stony beaches, all of them visited by very few
people.
So (unless it becomes a criminal offence) I shall not hesitate to drive
(alone) to remotish spots, where I am very unlikely to meet anyone else,
and if I do there is plenty of space to keep well away from them.
Anne B
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8114189/Spanish-police-use-megaphones-tell-people-stay-indoors-face-25-000-fines.html
Our PM did say more rules would come ina week and they aer drafting
laws
Family living in Spain - Barcelona and Malaga - say that police are
stopping people from going out unless they can prove it's for a good
reason. You can be fined for sitting on a park bench. In France, Macron
said that everyone would have to fill out a form and carry it with them,
stating what their purpose was in being out on the streets. This is all
very scary.
--
Kate B
London
Vicky Ayech
2020-03-17 09:08:14 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Kate B
Post by Vicky Ayech
On Mon, 16 Mar 2020 19:33:51 +0000, Anne B
On
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8114189/Spanish-police-use-megaphones-tell-people-stay-indoors-face-25-000-fines.html
Our PM did say more rules would come ina week and they aer drafting
laws
Family living in Spain - Barcelona and Malaga - say that police are
stopping people from going out unless they can prove it's for a good
reason. You can be fined for sitting on a park bench. In France, Macron
said that everyone would have to fill out a form and carry it with them,
stating what their purpose was in being out on the streets. This is all
very scary.
If you listen to Boris onthe radio, not seeing his sincere expression,
his delivery sounds as if he is spinning lies, even when what he is
saying could be reasonable steps to take. I mean he adds stuff about
the country and OUR NHS and other flag-waving usuals and brings in
'science'. He can't just say it. Ok is it just me then because i am a
GOW? (under 70)
J. P. Gilliver (John)
2020-03-16 23:27:22 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Mon, 16 Mar 2020 at 19:33:51, Anne B <***@btinternet.com>
wrote:
[]
Post by Anne B
I have absolutely no intention of allowing myself to be deprived of
exercise and fresh air.
I am in the fortunate position of living in a place surrounded by
forests, moorland and stony beaches, all of them visited by very few
people.
So (unless it becomes a criminal offence) I shall not hesitate to drive
That _is_ a concern: the question of enforcement is something they have
- probably for good reasons - been very backcoming about. (OK, what _is_
the opposite of forthcoming? OK, reticent will do.)
Post by Anne B
(alone) to remotish spots, where I am very unlikely to meet anyone
else, and if I do there is plenty of space to keep well away from them.
Anne B
Lucky you. And I say that without malice: I am genuinely glad for you.
Sounds lovely!
_My_ pennorth on the matter:

We _definitely_ need more testing, so we have a better idea of what's
happening where - and front-line workers should definitely have access
to tests, every day if they want.

Next: We should be getting clear, unvarnished, figures, at least every
day - number tested, number of those positive/negative, number dead,
NUMBER RECOVERED, and some RATIOS.

Only _after_ those have been given, should be have some strategies
announced.

What those strategies should _be_, I'm not so sure. Like otherrats, I
don't think anyone in government actually _wants_ to kill people
(tempting though it might be to claim "they" are trying to kill off
those who will be expensive). Whether this "herd immunity" lark is
actually a good or bad way to achieve it (regardless of whether any
other country is doing it), I just DON'T KNOW. Boris saying "lots of
people will die" is certainly not good PR, but that doesn't mean it's
not true - again, we just DON'T KNOW. Unless a cure is found, there
_will_ be lots of deaths, _whichever_ way we go about it - even if the
NHS _isn't_ overwhelmed; just from the fact that, in time, most of us
_will_ get it. (Figures seem to be settling on: about 80% of us will get
it; about 20% will require hospitalisation, 5-15% seriously; the actual
death rate somewhere between 0.6% and 3% [with 5% as an outlier]. That's
a lot of dead.)

Best figures I can get: 2020-3-16, 9 a.m. for the first line:
44,105 tested, of which 1,543 positive, rest negative.
55 dead.
_Estimated_ number of _actual_ cases: 35,000-50,000.
NUMBER RECOVERED: NOT AVAILABLE. I really want this one, however
unreliable!

So _ratios_:
3.5% of those tested - positive. (Expected more like 80% in long run.)
0.125% of those tested - dead. (Expected higher eventually.)
3.6% of those tested positive have died.

That last is the best I have for the UK death rate, but it's very
flawed: it'll be worse because more of those tested positive will die;
it'll be better because - I had a reason but have forgotten it.

3.6% of 80% of the population is a lot. (Even if it's 0.6%, it's a lot.)
And that's _without_ NHS overload. Let's just hope we can avoid overload
(I fear not, but hope I'm wrong), and a cure comes along.

And the economy doesn't collapse.
Today's Borisisms - don't go out, but no actual orders to close - will
kill bars/restaurants/theatres/cinemas (and bust those who work there),
etc., unless something slightly different is planned; even if it wasn't
the intention to evade that responsibility, the _appearance_ that it is
will be seized on by an awful lot of people, not just the opposition.
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)***@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

I'm the oldest woman on primetime not baking cakes.
- Anne Robinson, RT 2015/8/15-21
krw
2020-03-17 14:43:55 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
Next: We should be getting clear, unvarnished, figures, at least every
day - number tested, number of those positive/negative, number dead,
NUMBER RECOVERED, and some RATIOS.
I am not so sure. DO you remember that every bank holiday they told us
how many had died on the roads? Eventually someone twigged it was less
than died on a normal day so it stopped. Context is highly important -
all we get at the moment is "underlyng health issues" - of which I have
at least one.
--
Kosmo Richard W
www.travelswmw.whitnet.uk
https://tinyurl.com/KRWpics
Chris J Dixon
2020-03-17 15:07:34 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by krw
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
Next: We should be getting clear, unvarnished, figures, at least every
day - number tested, number of those positive/negative, number dead,
NUMBER RECOVERED, and some RATIOS.
I am not so sure. DO you remember that every bank holiday they told us
how many had died on the roads? Eventually someone twigged it was less
than died on a normal day so it stopped. Context is highly important -
all we get at the moment is "underlyng health issues" - of which I have
at least one.
A comparative plot of deaths from seasonal flu compared with
those from Covid-19 would show that the latter are currently very
low, but are predicted to rise dramatically.

Looks like this will be the last time I do the weekly shop
myself, having to hand over to BOFE for the foreseeable.

Already erasing theatre and other events from the calendar, who
knows when things will recover. At least we have room, a garden,
and easy access to countryside walks.

I wonder which aspects of our lives will be changed forever by
this traumatic time, in the same way we ascribe societal changes
to the World Wars?

Chris
--
Chris J Dixon Nottingham
'48/33 M B+ G++ A L(-) I S-- CH0(--)(p) Ar- T+ H0 ?Q
***@cdixon.me.uk @ChrisJDixon1
Plant amazing Acers.
Kate B
2020-03-17 17:19:33 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Chris J Dixon
I wonder which aspects of our lives will be changed forever by
this traumatic time, in the same way we ascribe societal changes
to the World Wars?
Lord Hennessy was talking about this on WatO today, saying that there
will undoubtedly be seen to be a BC and AC period when people write the
history of the 21st century.

As regards war, though, I actually think not so much changed immediately
after WWII. It took until the late fifties/sixties for real change to
happen, and I'd attribute that more to the collapse of Empires that
started in 1917, rather than the wars themselves - apart from women's
suffrage, of course. We talk of the 'long eighteenth century' from Queen
Anne to Waterloo, and the 'long nineteenth century' from Waterloo to
Versailles (actually, more of a 'displaced century'). I suspect future
historians, supposing anyone actually survives, may speak of the 'long
twentieth century', from 1919 to 2021.

Apropos who survives... a pious American friend asked me to join in a
'wave of prayer' to make the virus simply go away. I replied 'praise God
and pass the hand-sanitiser', which I am not sure she really
appreciated. But I was sorely tempted to ask her whether perhaps this
might not indeed be God's plan. Instead of a flood that removed all but
one righteous family from the face of the earth, which frankly was shown
pretty soon afterwards not to have been effective, here we have a plague
that simply removes all the Bad Old People Who Were About To Destroy The
Planet, in favour of Greta and the innocents. Pollution is down already.
Does God have a result, or not?
--
Kate B
London
John Ashby
2020-03-17 18:06:56 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Kate B
Post by Chris J Dixon
I wonder which aspects of our lives will be changed forever by
this traumatic time, in the same way we ascribe societal changes
to the World Wars?
Lord Hennessy was talking about this on WatO today, saying that there
will undoubtedly be seen to be a BC and AC period when people write the
history of the 21st century.
As regards war, though, I actually think not so much changed immediately
after WWII. It took until the late fifties/sixties for real change to
happen, and I'd attribute that more to the collapse of Empires that
started in 1917, rather than the wars themselves - apart from women's
suffrage, of course. We talk of the 'long eighteenth century' from Queen
Anne to Waterloo, and the 'long nineteenth century' from Waterloo to
Versailles (actually, more of a 'displaced century'). I suspect future
historians, supposing anyone actually survives, may speak of the 'long
twentieth century', from 1919 to 2021.
I fear the sequel to the long twentieth century. If, as already seems to
be happening, various rights we have taken for granted are "temporarily
suspended" for the duration, we will need to be vigilant in demanding
their restoration come VV day. Already local elections have been
postponed, jury trials stopped in Scotland, Democrat primaries cancelled
in the US to name but a few. Given the potential damage to the very
concept of a capitalist economy that may occur, the shock of covid-19
may attack democracy and basic human rights. Worst case scenario,
perhaps, but there will be politicians keen to exploit this.
Post by Kate B
Apropos who survives...  a pious American friend asked me to join in a
'wave of prayer' to make the virus simply go away. I replied 'praise God
and pass the hand-sanitiser', which I am not sure she really
appreciated. But I was sorely tempted to ask her whether perhaps this
might not indeed be God's plan. Instead of a flood that removed all but
one righteous family from the face of the earth, which frankly was shown
pretty soon afterwards not to have been effective, here we have a plague
that simply removes all the Bad Old People Who Were About To Destroy The
Planet, in favour of Greta and the innocents. Pollution is down already.
Does God have a result, or not?
God, perhaps not, but Gaia probably.

john
Nick Odell
2020-03-18 15:15:53 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by John Ashby
Post by Kate B
Post by Chris J Dixon
I wonder which aspects of our lives will be changed forever by
this traumatic time, in the same way we ascribe societal changes
to the World Wars?
Lord Hennessy was talking about this on WatO today, saying that there
will undoubtedly be seen to be a BC and AC period when people write the
history of the 21st century.
As regards war, though, I actually think not so much changed immediately
after WWII. It took until the late fifties/sixties for real change to
happen, and I'd attribute that more to the collapse of Empires that
started in 1917, rather than the wars themselves - apart from women's
suffrage, of course. We talk of the 'long eighteenth century' from Queen
Anne to Waterloo, and the 'long nineteenth century' from Waterloo to
Versailles (actually, more of a 'displaced century'). I suspect future
historians, supposing anyone actually survives, may speak of the 'long
twentieth century', from 1919 to 2021.
I fear the sequel to the long twentieth century. If, as already seems to
be happening, various rights we have taken for granted are "temporarily
suspended" for the duration, we will need to be vigilant in demanding
their restoration come VV day. Already local elections have been
postponed, jury trials stopped in Scotland, Democrat primaries cancelled
in the US to name but a few. Given the potential damage to the very
concept of a capitalist economy that may occur, the shock of covid-19
may attack democracy and basic human rights. Worst case scenario,
perhaps, but there will be politicians keen to exploit this.
Post by Kate B
Apropos who survives...  a pious American friend asked me to join in a
'wave of prayer' to make the virus simply go away. I replied 'praise God
and pass the hand-sanitiser', which I am not sure she really
appreciated. But I was sorely tempted to ask her whether perhaps this
might not indeed be God's plan. Instead of a flood that removed all but
one righteous family from the face of the earth, which frankly was shown
pretty soon afterwards not to have been effective, here we have a plague
that simply removes all the Bad Old People Who Were About To Destroy The
Planet, in favour of Greta and the innocents. Pollution is down already.
Does God have a result, or not?
God, perhaps not, but Gaia probably.
Nice to see that James Lovelock (101 years old this comin July) is
still around .

Nick
Joe Kerr
2020-03-17 21:31:39 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Kate B
Post by Chris J Dixon
I wonder which aspects of our lives will be changed forever by
this traumatic time, in the same way we ascribe societal changes
to the World Wars?
Lord Hennessy was talking about this on WatO today, saying that there
will undoubtedly be seen to be a BC and AC period when people write the
history of the 21st century.
As regards war, though, I actually think not so much changed immediately
after WWII. It took until the late fifties/sixties for real change to
happen, and I'd attribute that more to the collapse of Empires that
started in 1917, rather than the wars themselves - apart from women's
suffrage, of course. We talk of the 'long eighteenth century' from Queen
Anne to Waterloo, and the 'long nineteenth century' from Waterloo to
Versailles (actually, more of a 'displaced century'). I suspect future
historians, supposing anyone actually survives, may speak of the 'long
twentieth century', from 1919 to 2021.
There was a major impact on food and diet resulting from items becoming
unavailable in WWII. Not just imported items but also many home produced
items that were restricted, standardised and industrialised. I'm
thinking particularly of cheese where hundred, if not thousands, of
local farm cheeses were replaced with, I think, four standardised
recipes produced in factories. There was also the loss of the best part
of a generation that grew up without learning how to grow, manufacture
or cook these products. A situation that didn't recover until probably
the 90's, and still hasn't completely.

While not exactly a perfect comparison take a look at Mrs Beeton's Book
of you know what and see all the ingredients that were considered normal
English fare less than 100 years earlier but were absent, or considered
exotic[1] foreign foods during most of our lifetimes.
Post by Kate B
Apropos who survives...  a pious American friend asked me to join in a
'wave of prayer' to make the virus simply go away. I replied 'praise God
and pass the hand-sanitiser', which I am not sure she really
appreciated. But I was sorely tempted to ask her whether perhaps this
might not indeed be God's plan. Instead of a flood that removed all but
one righteous family from the face of the earth, which frankly was shown
pretty soon afterwards not to have been effective, here we have a plague
that simply removes all the Bad Old People Who Were About To Destroy The
Planet, in favour of Greta and the innocents. Pollution is down already.
Does God have a result, or not?
The Vatican is holding its Easter celebrations behind closed doors. That
looks like a major lack of faith to me.
[1] I said Exotic!
--
Ric
Vicky Ayech
2020-03-17 21:55:04 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Joe Kerr
Post by Kate B
Post by Chris J Dixon
I wonder which aspects of our lives will be changed forever by
this traumatic time, in the same way we ascribe societal changes
to the World Wars?
Lord Hennessy was talking about this on WatO today, saying that there
will undoubtedly be seen to be a BC and AC period when people write the
history of the 21st century.
As regards war, though, I actually think not so much changed immediately
after WWII. It took until the late fifties/sixties for real change to
happen, and I'd attribute that more to the collapse of Empires that
started in 1917, rather than the wars themselves - apart from women's
suffrage, of course. We talk of the 'long eighteenth century' from Queen
Anne to Waterloo, and the 'long nineteenth century' from Waterloo to
Versailles (actually, more of a 'displaced century'). I suspect future
historians, supposing anyone actually survives, may speak of the 'long
twentieth century', from 1919 to 2021.
There was a major impact on food and diet resulting from items becoming
unavailable in WWII. Not just imported items but also many home produced
items that were restricted, standardised and industrialised. I'm
thinking particularly of cheese where hundred, if not thousands, of
local farm cheeses were replaced with, I think, four standardised
recipes produced in factories. There was also the loss of the best part
of a generation that grew up without learning how to grow, manufacture
or cook these products. A situation that didn't recover until probably
the 90's, and still hasn't completely.
While not exactly a perfect comparison take a look at Mrs Beeton's Book
of you know what and see all the ingredients that were considered normal
English fare less than 100 years earlier but were absent, or considered
exotic[1] foreign foods during most of our lifetimes.
Post by Kate B
Apropos who survives...  a pious American friend asked me to join in a
'wave of prayer' to make the virus simply go away. I replied 'praise God
and pass the hand-sanitiser', which I am not sure she really
appreciated. But I was sorely tempted to ask her whether perhaps this
might not indeed be God's plan. Instead of a flood that removed all but
one righteous family from the face of the earth, which frankly was shown
pretty soon afterwards not to have been effective, here we have a plague
that simply removes all the Bad Old People Who Were About To Destroy The
Planet, in favour of Greta and the innocents. Pollution is down already.
Does God have a result, or not?
The Vatican is holding its Easter celebrations behind closed doors. That
looks like a major lack of faith to me.
[1] I said Exotic!
I remember when oranges and bananas were a big deal. Satsumas were not
around then. When we drove back from a visit to Austria in 1949 or
1950 we brought meat with us, smuggled in under the car seat. I don't
know if it was from Austria, which must have taken a few days, or from
maybe France or somewhere on the way. But it seems odd that war-torn
Europe had meat and it was worth bringing back.
Nick Odell
2020-03-18 15:19:38 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Tue, 17 Mar 2020 21:55:04 +0000, Vicky Ayech
Post by Vicky Ayech
Post by Joe Kerr
Post by Kate B
Post by Chris J Dixon
I wonder which aspects of our lives will be changed forever by
this traumatic time, in the same way we ascribe societal changes
to the World Wars?
Lord Hennessy was talking about this on WatO today, saying that there
will undoubtedly be seen to be a BC and AC period when people write the
history of the 21st century.
As regards war, though, I actually think not so much changed immediately
after WWII. It took until the late fifties/sixties for real change to
happen, and I'd attribute that more to the collapse of Empires that
started in 1917, rather than the wars themselves - apart from women's
suffrage, of course. We talk of the 'long eighteenth century' from Queen
Anne to Waterloo, and the 'long nineteenth century' from Waterloo to
Versailles (actually, more of a 'displaced century'). I suspect future
historians, supposing anyone actually survives, may speak of the 'long
twentieth century', from 1919 to 2021.
There was a major impact on food and diet resulting from items becoming
unavailable in WWII. Not just imported items but also many home produced
items that were restricted, standardised and industrialised. I'm
thinking particularly of cheese where hundred, if not thousands, of
local farm cheeses were replaced with, I think, four standardised
recipes produced in factories. There was also the loss of the best part
of a generation that grew up without learning how to grow, manufacture
or cook these products. A situation that didn't recover until probably
the 90's, and still hasn't completely.
While not exactly a perfect comparison take a look at Mrs Beeton's Book
of you know what and see all the ingredients that were considered normal
English fare less than 100 years earlier but were absent, or considered
exotic[1] foreign foods during most of our lifetimes.
Post by Kate B
Apropos who survives...  a pious American friend asked me to join in a
'wave of prayer' to make the virus simply go away. I replied 'praise God
and pass the hand-sanitiser', which I am not sure she really
appreciated. But I was sorely tempted to ask her whether perhaps this
might not indeed be God's plan. Instead of a flood that removed all but
one righteous family from the face of the earth, which frankly was shown
pretty soon afterwards not to have been effective, here we have a plague
that simply removes all the Bad Old People Who Were About To Destroy The
Planet, in favour of Greta and the innocents. Pollution is down already.
Does God have a result, or not?
The Vatican is holding its Easter celebrations behind closed doors. That
looks like a major lack of faith to me.
[1] I said Exotic!
I remember when oranges and bananas were a big deal. Satsumas were not
around then. When we drove back from a visit to Austria in 1949 or
1950 we brought meat with us, smuggled in under the car seat. I don't
know if it was from Austria, which must have taken a few days, or from
maybe France or somewhere on the way. But it seems odd that war-torn
Europe had meat and it was worth bringing back.
My cousin recently unearthed a very early photo of me and my dad. I
was able to date it approximately because I was holding a banana for
the benefit of the camera and I imagine that was the first time I had
seen one.

Nick
Serena Blanchflower
2020-03-18 12:34:37 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Nick Odell
On Tue, 17 Mar 2020 21:55:04 +0000, Vicky Ayech
Post by Vicky Ayech
Post by Joe Kerr
Post by Kate B
Post by Chris J Dixon
I wonder which aspects of our lives will be changed forever by
this traumatic time, in the same way we ascribe societal changes
to the World Wars?
Lord Hennessy was talking about this on WatO today, saying that there
will undoubtedly be seen to be a BC and AC period when people write the
history of the 21st century.
As regards war, though, I actually think not so much changed immediately
after WWII. It took until the late fifties/sixties for real change to
happen, and I'd attribute that more to the collapse of Empires that
started in 1917, rather than the wars themselves - apart from women's
suffrage, of course. We talk of the 'long eighteenth century' from Queen
Anne to Waterloo, and the 'long nineteenth century' from Waterloo to
Versailles (actually, more of a 'displaced century'). I suspect future
historians, supposing anyone actually survives, may speak of the 'long
twentieth century', from 1919 to 2021.
There was a major impact on food and diet resulting from items becoming
unavailable in WWII. Not just imported items but also many home produced
items that were restricted, standardised and industrialised. I'm
thinking particularly of cheese where hundred, if not thousands, of
local farm cheeses were replaced with, I think, four standardised
recipes produced in factories. There was also the loss of the best part
of a generation that grew up without learning how to grow, manufacture
or cook these products. A situation that didn't recover until probably
the 90's, and still hasn't completely.
While not exactly a perfect comparison take a look at Mrs Beeton's Book
of you know what and see all the ingredients that were considered normal
English fare less than 100 years earlier but were absent, or considered
exotic[1] foreign foods during most of our lifetimes.
Post by Kate B
Apropos who survives...  a pious American friend asked me to join in a
'wave of prayer' to make the virus simply go away. I replied 'praise God
and pass the hand-sanitiser', which I am not sure she really
appreciated. But I was sorely tempted to ask her whether perhaps this
might not indeed be God's plan. Instead of a flood that removed all but
one righteous family from the face of the earth, which frankly was shown
pretty soon afterwards not to have been effective, here we have a plague
that simply removes all the Bad Old People Who Were About To Destroy The
Planet, in favour of Greta and the innocents. Pollution is down already.
Does God have a result, or not?
The Vatican is holding its Easter celebrations behind closed doors. That
looks like a major lack of faith to me.
[1] I said Exotic!
I remember when oranges and bananas were a big deal. Satsumas were not
around then. When we drove back from a visit to Austria in 1949 or
1950 we brought meat with us, smuggled in under the car seat. I don't
know if it was from Austria, which must have taken a few days, or from
maybe France or somewhere on the way. But it seems odd that war-torn
Europe had meat and it was worth bringing back.
My cousin recently unearthed a very early photo of me and my dad. I
was able to date it approximately because I was holding a banana for
the benefit of the camera and I imagine that was the first time I had
seen one.
After my mother left school, her first job was as a junior housemistress
in a small prep school. This was in the mid-late 1940s, when rationing
was still in operation and when bananas were available they could only
be got on children's rations. There would be one banana placed on the
staff table, for Mum, as she was still on children's rations!
--
Best wishes, Serena
Morality is doing what's right regardless of what you're told. Obedience
is doing what you're told regardless of what is right (H.L. Mencken)
BrritSki
2020-03-18 08:07:24 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Joe Kerr
While not exactly a perfect comparison take a look at Mrs Beeton's Book
of you know what and see all the ingredients that were considered normal
English fare less than 100 years earlier but were absent, or considered
exotic[1] foreign foods during most of our lifetimes.
Still available at a good wet market near Wuhan :(
Mike
2020-03-18 11:21:39 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by BrritSki
Post by Joe Kerr
While not exactly a perfect comparison take a look at Mrs Beeton's Book
of you know what and see all the ingredients that were considered normal
English fare less than 100 years earlier but were absent, or considered
exotic[1] foreign foods during most of our lifetimes.
Still available at a good wet market near Wuhan :(
BTN!
--
Toodle Pip
Nick Odell
2020-03-18 15:16:51 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by BrritSki
Post by Joe Kerr
While not exactly a perfect comparison take a look at Mrs Beeton's Book
of you know what and see all the ingredients that were considered normal
English fare less than 100 years earlier but were absent, or considered
exotic[1] foreign foods during most of our lifetimes.
Still available at a good wet market near Wuhan :(
BTN!
Seconded!!!

N.
Nick Odell
2020-03-18 15:45:52 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Tue, 17 Mar 2020 21:31:39 +0000, Joe Kerr <***@cheerful.com>
wrote:

<snip>
Post by Joe Kerr
The Vatican is holding its Easter celebrations behind closed doors. That
looks like a major lack of faith to me.
Lots of believers trust in science and lots of scientists are
believers. They ought not be mutually exclusive - as this old joak
suggests:

There was a fundamentalist believer (insert religion of choice here)
It started to rain very hard. The waters began to rise.
"Lord, save me from this flood." he cried.
A civil defence volunteer in waders came up to the house and offered
to take him to the community shelter.
"No, no, I will wait here. My Lord will save me."

The waters rose higher and now he was praying at a first floor window.
"Lord, I implore you, save me, save me from this flood." he cried.
An inflatable rescue launch came by and the skipper called out, "Jump
aboard and we will take you to safety!"
"No, no, I will wait here. My Lord will save me."

The waters rose even higher and now he was clinging onto the roof.
"Lord, Lord, I impeach you, I implore you, save me, save me, save me
from this flood!!!"
A helicopter clattered into view and hovered over the house. The pilot
called on the loudspeakers, "We will lower a harness to you and
airlift you to higher ground."
"No, no, I am going to stay here. I know my Lord will save me."

The waters rose higher still and he drowned.

At the Pearly Gates, the man encountered God. The man was furious.
"God! What kind of God do you think you are? I have believed in you
all my life, I have observed all the religious practices and prayed
constantly to you. I am a true believer and you left me to drown."

"Son," came the reply. "I sent a guide, a boat and a helicopter. What
more did you expect?"

Nick

Vicky Ayech
2020-03-17 18:34:54 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Chris J Dixon
Post by krw
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
Next: We should be getting clear, unvarnished, figures, at least every
day - number tested, number of those positive/negative, number dead,
NUMBER RECOVERED, and some RATIOS.
I am not so sure. DO you remember that every bank holiday they told us
how many had died on the roads? Eventually someone twigged it was less
than died on a normal day so it stopped. Context is highly important -
all we get at the moment is "underlyng health issues" - of which I have
at least one.
A comparative plot of deaths from seasonal flu compared with
those from Covid-19 would show that the latter are currently very
low, but are predicted to rise dramatically.
Looks like this will be the last time I do the weekly shop
myself, having to hand over to BOFE for the foreseeable.
Already erasing theatre and other events from the calendar, who
knows when things will recover. At least we have room, a garden,
and easy access to countryside walks.
I wonder which aspects of our lives will be changed forever by
this traumatic time, in the same way we ascribe societal changes
to the World Wars?
Chris
Somerats have medical conditions that mean they stay in most of the
time anyway as are not well enough to go out. Their lives won't change
much. They already get most htings delivered and are unable to go to
cinemas and theatres etc. Funny how a disadvantage can prepare you
for other stuff.
Joe Kerr
2020-03-17 15:11:43 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
Next: We should be getting clear, unvarnished, figures, at least every
day - number tested, number of those positive/negative, number dead,
NUMBER RECOVERED, and some RATIOS.
I am not so sure.  DO you remember that every bank holiday they told us
how many had died on the roads?  Eventually someone twigged it was less
than died on a normal day so it stopped.  Context is highly important -
all we get at the moment is "underlyng health issues" -  of which I have
at least one.
When they talk about elderly people dying from some epidemic or other
what exactly do they mean? If it is somebody in poor health dying a
month earlier than expected it may well be distressing for those
concerned but does not seem to be a big problem (or much of a statistic)
compared with somebody in reasonable health for their age dying 10 years
prematurely.

As regards underlying conditions: High blood pressure is an often quoted
(and widespread) example. Do they mean undiagnosed people or does it
include treated people where the pressure is no longer high?
--
Ric
Clive Arthur
2020-03-17 15:21:21 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On 17/03/2020 15:11, Joe Kerr wrote:

<snip>
Post by Joe Kerr
As regards underlying conditions: High blood pressure is an often quoted
(and widespread) example. Do they mean undiagnosed people or does it
include treated people where the pressure is no longer high?
AIUI, taking certain high blood pressure medication - ACE inhibitors -
is thought to make you more susceptible to the virus.
--
Cheers
Clive
Joe Kerr
2020-03-17 21:35:22 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Sid Nuncius
<snip>
Post by Joe Kerr
As regards underlying conditions: High blood pressure is an often
quoted (and widespread) example. Do they mean undiagnosed people or
does it include treated people where the pressure is no longer high?
AIUI, taking certain high blood pressure medication - ACE inhibitors -
is thought to make you more susceptible to the virus.
I was really intending that as an example of a more general point, but
thanks for the reminder. My entire family has high BP (possibly
depending on the day of the week). I must try to check what they are on.
--
Ric
Flop
2020-03-17 18:42:30 UTC
Reply
Permalink
I am not so sure.  DO you remember that every bank holiday they told us
how many had died on the roads?  Eventually someone twigged it was less
than died on a normal day so it stopped.  Context is highly important -
all we get at the moment is "underlyng health issues" -  of which I have
at least one.
... or death during a marathon. 'A terrible loss'.

But marathons may have 20-30,000 runners. And with a 70 year lifespan of
365 days per year , this gives approximately 25,000 days.
So the odds of someone dying is quite large.
--
Flop

Truly the Good Lord gave us computers that we might learn patience
Sam Plusnet
2020-03-16 23:53:21 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Anne B
Post by Joe Kerr
Post by krw
Matt-the-Health said this morning that although the elderly would be
encouraged to stay at home this policy
Am I alone in thinking that the unforeseen consequence of locking up
the elderly at home alone will be a huge increase in people dying in
their homes alone and being discovered some considerable time later
when they need not have died?
Or am I just a pessimist?
There is also the matter of their mental health, especially if they
live alone. Also their physical health if they are deprived of
exercise and fresh air.
I have absolutely no intention of allowing myself to be deprived of
exercise and fresh air.
I am in the fortunate position of living in a place surrounded by
forests, moorland and stony beaches, all of them visited by very few
people.
So (unless it becomes a criminal offence) I shall not hesitate to drive
(alone) to remotish spots, where I am very unlikely to meet anyone else,
and if I do there is plenty of space to keep well away from them.
Wofe tells me we are expected to continue getting healthy exercise - but
to avoid other people.

It reminded us both of "Music and Movement" in Junior school.

"Find a space children!"
"That's it"
--
Sam Plusnet
Loading...