Can we cruise again?

[churchward]

1 hour ago, Paddle said:

Frangar if you're under 40 it's pointless, under 50 there's no need, under 60 there should be no need and under 70 you're likely to be OK. It's a big error of judgement that we're going to be paying for over many decades.

That is a terribly selfish and down right dangerous attitude.  The whole point of what is happening is to prevent other people being infected and die even if you are not in danger of doing so. 

 

The latest stats from ONS show that although the virus is a greater threat to the older it does kill people 40+ in significant enough numbers. .

 

 

Edited May 13, 2020 by churchward

[churchward]

11 minutes ago, MoominPapa said:

Can you imagine having the responsibility of signing the final safety test?

 

As a small proposal, can I suggest that anyone wishing to refuse a vaccine for Covid-19 should of course have their right to do that respected, but they should be electronically tagged and confined to the house forthwith and forever (unless they relent).

 

MP.

 

Might I suggest they could go out as long as they wear a label that means Total Withdraw of All Treatment or T.W.A.T. for short!?

 

Just in case anyone is in doubt I am joking!

[Richard10002]

15 hours ago, mrsmelly said:

I will make it easier for you. The reality is the government want us all to stop at home where possible. That means you and I as non workers should not now go cavorting all over the country. My wife and I will not be changing anything we do, just out for shopping and nothing else. Thats the common sense bit the PM mentioned so that means.....................oh hang on I best not go any further as the common sense bit means er ...........................................

Every time you open your mouth, you actually confuse things even more. The government have encouraged me to go out all day if I want to, whether that be to exercise, perhaps have a game of golf or tennis, or even park my fat arse on a park bench or a beach, for as long as I like. I think they want me to go home to bed.

 

Sorry I haven't posted all day..... I've been CRUISING!! (Actually, I haven't but I did have a little chuckle earlier  )

[peterboat]

3 hours ago, MoominPapa said:

Maybe we could have compromised a bit with our precious culture and not ended up with more deaths (so far) than any comparable country apart from the USA? Or maybe we could just have elected a competent government rather than the current shower of charlatans.

 

If, for instance, they had locked down at the stage New Zealand did, we'd have essentially no new cases now, and could open up the economy with a good chance of using test, trace and track to keep the lid on things until a vaccine is available. In fact we're opening up "for the economy" when we still have thousands of new cases per day, and therefore no chance of controlling the situation apart from with suppression; even if we they could organise the testing/tracing effort, which looks, frankly, unlikely.

 

It's pretty clear to me that there's nothing to stop a second wave in a few weeks, who knows what will happen then.

 

 

MP.

 

 

 

What happens if a vaccine can't be found? I  can't see anyway out of this except by gradually allowing the population to catch the virus.  Germany is experiencing the problem of early lockdown but now having rising cases 

[Ianws]

1 hour ago, ditchcrawler said:

So, you will put on your gloves and open the lock gates, take them off and bag them before getting back on your boat. Move the boat into the lock and put another pair of gloves on, Close the gate and open the paddles at the other end. once equalised open the gates, take your gloves off and bag them, get on the boat and take it out of the lock. Put on another clean pair of gloves and close the gates. Remove and bag gloves  . If or course you need to handle your ropes while in the lock another pair of gloves would be required. Obviously you have the skills to remove and bag these gloves without contaminating yourself.
Maybe a safer and easier way would be a bowl of disinfected water on the roof of the boat and just wash your hands

 

Rather than a bowl of disinfected water, a bowl and soap would be great. It doesn’t have to be anything antibacterial or antiviral. Soap breaks down the lipids surrounding the virus and that’s the virus gone. Probably the best virus killer.

[MoominPapa]

20 minutes ago, peterboat said:

What happens if a vaccine can't be found? I  can't see anyway out of this except by gradually allowing the population to catch the virus.  Germany is experiencing the problem of early lockdown but now having rising cases 

A vaccine isn't the only hope. Better treatment for the disease caused would help a lot. Compare to AIDS. There's no vaccine for HIV, but there are drugs which ensure it's not a death sentence any longer. Since the human immune system seems to be able to clear a coronavirus infection completely, the situation would be better than for HIV, where drugs to combat it are needed for the rest of the patient's life. For coronavirus, a treatment regime that stops it killing during the acute phase is "all" that's required. With that we could let it rip, and acquire the fabled herd immunity without killing a lot of people.

 

MP.

 

[Machpoint005]

3 hours ago, frangar said:

There’s more to life than total risk aversion

That is true if it's only yourself you are putting at risk. If your action puts others at risk, you have absolutely no right to do it.

 

[Richard10002]

8 hours ago, mrsmelly said:

coming out and excercising is fine just coming out and about as before is not what they want as spreading the cold will continue, like they have said sixty four billion times lets not undo the good that we have done by being locked down, its common se..........................oh wait a minute, that is blatantly not very common.

So.... are we supposed to be Staying at Home, or are we free to go out for as much of the day as we like, as long as we Stay Alert. Your message is very very confused.

[Machpoint005]

56 minutes ago, churchward said:

That is a terribly selfish and down right dangerous attitude. 

 

Indeed. I couldn't have put it better myself.

 

 

[The Welsh Cruiser]

1 hour ago, MoominPapa said:

Can you imagine having the responsibility of signing the final safety test?

 

As a small proposal, can I suggest that anyone wishing to refuse a vaccine for Covid-19 should of course have their right to do that respected, but they should be electronically tagged and confined to the house forthwith and forever (unless they relent).

 

MP.

 

Should those who wouldn't wish to bequeath their organs on death, perhaps for cultural or religious reasons, be denied organ transplants if these are required to save their lives? 

[peterboat]

5 minutes ago, MoominPapa said:

A vaccine isn't the only hope. Better treatment for the disease caused would help a lot. Compare to AIDS. There's no vaccine for HIV, but there are drugs which ensure it's not a death sentence any longer. Since the human immune system seems to be able to clear a coronavirus infection completely, the situation would be better than for HIV, where drugs to combat it are needed for the rest of the patient's life. For coronavirus, a treatment regime that stops it killing during the acute phase is "all" that's required. With that we could let it rip, and acquire the fabled herd immunity without killing a lot of people.

 

MP.

 

Again those drugs could like in AIDs take years to develop so same issue.  Andy the Dodah we are all in (that's the world) is very deep and life changing fingers crossed for an effective vaccine soon

[Richard10002]

8 hours ago, Traveller said:

Regarding the CRT announcement. I sought some clarification on their "avoid using locks and manned structures if possible". Here is their helpful response:
 

Staffed structures will take longer to re-open so we advise to check online before you travel for specific details as they may not be open. In relation to the use of locks, it’s about keeping your journey short and recognising that while they have mostly been out of use for 7 weeks there may be faults that we haven’t identified or had time to check yet – we’re doing that over the next few weeks, so avoid if possible relates to this. We hope this helps to clarify your concern. Thank you.

 

 

 

Chat conversation end

 

Type a message...

That seems to say that you CAN use locks, but should be aware that some may not works as well as they should, or at all.

[Richard10002]

4 hours ago, MoominPapa said:

I scrolled back to find your original posting. Given your circumstances, I can't see any reason why you shouldn't become a liveboard boater and work under the rules for such. I certainly see the point of banning nights away from home, but what you are proposing, I think, is that you'd move onto the boat _and_stay_there_, not returning to your current abode for the foreseeable future. That seems sensible to me.

 

MP.

 

Those would be my thoughts too. Moving home is allowed, and this would definitely be a home move.

[Richard10002]

3 hours ago, Sir Nibble said:

You can only chose from what's on offer, and that wasn't.

Very true..... like Nicola Sturgeon said about one recent choice, "it would be like making me choose between syphilis and gonorrhea", or something like that.

 

Once chosen, we can only comment on what was chosen for us, and on what they have done or do. The fact that the other lot may not have been as good is irrelevant, and not much of a defence of the indefensible..

 

It's a bit like the football/sports saying, "you can only beat the team in front of you".

[Richard10002]

2 hours ago, Ex Brummie said:

If no agreement is reached then WTO is the default; job done !!!

Nobody cares any more.... not quite sure why people still go on about it.

[Wanderer Vagabond]

1 hour ago, The Welsh Cruiser said:

I'm not sure who is going to absolutely force the government to do anything?

 

Yes, lots more people are going to die. Most healthy people will survive. If the NHS were to be overwhelmed it would be a disaster, let's hope the calculations that have been made are accurate. The government can't continue to confine healthy people to their homes indefinitely while their futures are destroyed, in order that a minority of people who have health issues are better protected. The government has already suggested that those at greatest risk should take special precautions, I'd imagine they'd reinforce this message as more things are opened up.

 

Perhaps you are one of the type that believe the government should pay its citizens indefinitely, with money it hasn't got, so that those who already have a relatively short life expectancy can maintain this. There are 10's of millions of people whose futures are being destroyed, 100's of thousands of businesses at risk of failure.

 

It's not sustainable.   

And you seem to be of the type that doesn't seem to realise that coming out of lockdown too early could send us straight back into it with even more dire economic results. Once we are out of lockdown I'd like to remain out of it. If infections and deaths climb back to where they were in mid April the Government will be forced to act, unless Cummings gets his way with let the old die.

[MoominPapa]

30 minutes ago, The Welsh Cruiser said:

Should those who wouldn't wish to bequeath their organs on death, perhaps for cultural or religious reasons, be denied organ transplants if these are required to save their lives? 

I dunno, what's that got to do with my original point?

 

MP.

[Richard10002]

1 hour ago, The Welsh Cruiser said:

I'm not sure who is going to absolutely force the government to do anything?

In this particular instance, it will be circumstances, rather than "who".

 

When infections and deaths start to rise again, they will ignore them initially, saying the NHS will be fine. There will then come point where they start to believe that the NHS will not be fine, and their hand will be forced, (as before, it will be too late because they will resist it"

[The Welsh Cruiser]

3 minutes ago, MoominPapa said:

I dunno, what's that got to do with my original point?

 

MP.

You suggested a forced vaccination program, with negative consequences for those who don't comply. 

2 minutes ago, Richard10002 said:

In this particular instance, it will be circumstances, rather than "who".

 

When infections and deaths start to rise again, they will ignore them initially, saying the NHS will be fine. There will then come point where they start to believe that the NHS will not be fine, and their hand will be forced, (as before, it will be too late because they will resist it"

You could be right, but hopefully the modelling carried out prior to the recent changes will be reasonably accurate. Only time will tell if this is the case. 

[churchward]

2 minutes ago, The Welsh Cruiser said:

You suggested a forced vaccination program, with negative consequences for those who don't comply. 

There are and have been plenty of examples of compulsory vaccination/inoculation programs in the UK over the years.

[The Welsh Cruiser]

Just now, churchward said:

There are and have been plenty of examples of compulsory vaccination/inoculation programs in the UK over the years.

Only for children, is my understanding. In recent times, at least.

[churchward]

Just now, The Welsh Cruiser said:

Only for children, is my understanding. In recent times, at least.

Yes, but they are humans too despite what people sometimes say. The point being that it is not much of a stretch to make vaccination compulsory for Covid-19 should one become available. However, the virus can be slowed significantly and even stopped by much less than 100% vaccination immunity anything above 60-70% is enough since anyone with the virus is then likely to be encountering someone immune so cannot pass it on thus stopping the R rate being above 1.

 

Although why anyone would choose not to have one is perplexing. 

[Ange]

There's a lot of NHS workers who should have had many more years of life if they hadn't been killed by the virus. It doesn't only kill off the elderly and those who wouldn't expect many more months or years.

The one that touched me most, probably because it's very close to home and my daughter in law was working at Margate hospital until she went on maternity leave just before the virus struck was Aimee O'Rourke. She was 39, no health problems, three young daughters. Those daughters have to live their lives without their mum. That broke my heart - I'm 54 and I still need my mum when I hit a low point. I can't imagine how many times in their lives those girls will wish their mum was with them.

It's a fallacy that the virus if let loose will only kill off folks that had little time left anyway. I still can't believe that someone would be callous enough to even think that, let alone say it.

Internet anonymity allows that though doesn't it.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/uk-england-kent-52151231

Edited May 14, 2020 by Ange

[frangar]

5 hours ago, Machpoint005 said:

That is true if it's only yourself you are putting at risk. If your action puts others at risk, you have absolutely no right to do it.

 

By getting in a motor vehicle we are putting others lives at risk yet that’s not about to be banned anytime soon. 

6 hours ago, MoominPapa said:

Can you imagine having the responsibility of signing the final safety test?

 

As a small proposal, can I suggest that anyone wishing to refuse a vaccine for Covid-19 should of course have their right to do that respected, but they should be electronically tagged and confined to the house forthwith and forever (unless they relent).

 

MP.

 

I take it you have signed up for vaccine trials then? I’m glad you have such faith in modern medicine...I work on too many medical conferences & hear too many cases of when things don’t  go quite as planned. 

Edited May 14, 2020 by frangar

[Slim]

19 hours ago, bizzard said:

I was in Aldi at 8am this morning and I saw bloke playing with his smart phone, he suddenly sneezed and snot went all over it, he then wiped it on his pants and wiped his nose on his coat sleeve.  I retreated and monitored his movements keeping a 50 yards distance from him. Couldn't wait to get out of there, forgot tea bags.

Wouldn't have happened in Waitrose, there he would have used his wife's fur coat.?