Jump to content

Responsible or Irresponsible Tier 3 Cruising?


PD1964

Featured Posts

3 minutes ago, The Happy Nomad said:

 

I was amazed last night to see on the news that Morrison's are going to ask people who are not wearing a mask and don't have a medical exemption to leave their stores. They will be offered a mask but if they refuse the offer they will not be allowed entry.

 

I can't believe its taken so long for them to catch on to this and enforce it.

It's not like it's been the law since last summer has it?  Oh hang on...

 

Hopefully, this will be seen as a good business move by other supermarkets and they'll all follow suit.  I suppose the downside would be if people think "oh Morrisons is the safest supermarket now, let's all go there!"

 

A friend of mine who needed to catch the occassional train last autumn told me that there's always people on the carriages not wearing masks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, doratheexplorer said:

I don't spray my shopping but I do leave it to one side overnight after it's arrived.  Does that make me a nutter?  If everyone was suitably cautious, we wouldn't be in this situaton.

 

A few days ago I was accused of typing twaddle (by a mod, no less), for saying that people should not be shopping in pairs where they can avoid it.  Then on this morning's news the supermarkets were again urging people to shop alone if they can.

You may not have noticed in your rush to condemn that it wasn't me who suggested those who spray things are nutter.

 

But don't let the facts get in the way of a good rant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Jerra said:

You may not have noticed in your rush to condemn that it wasn't me who suggested those who spray things are nutter.

 

But don't let the facts get in the way of a good rant.

You may not have noticed, but I never said you did.  In fact I didn't even give an opinion on people who spray things.

 

But don't let the facts get in the way of a good rant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, doratheexplorer said:

You may not have noticed, but I never said you did.  In fact I didn't even give an opinion on people who spray things.

 

But don't let the facts get in the way of a good rant.

I did notice however the fact you quoted me rather than the person who said it clearly showed it was addressed to me.

 

Quoting you if I was replying to MrSmelly would I suspect get you protesting.

 

By the way pointing out a mistake to someone isn't ranting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Jerra said:

I did notice however the fact you quoted me rather than the person who said it clearly showed it was addressed to me.

 

Quoting you if I was replying to MrSmelly would I suspect get you protesting.

 

By the way pointing out a mistake to someone isn't ranting.

And me asking whether leaving things overnight counts me as a nutter?  Is that ranting?  Asking a question makes me a ranter?

 

I was simply continuing the discussion.  But since you mention it, your post did very strongly imply that you consider people who spray their shopping are nutters.

image.png.b380ce75372cabc38faf0b0de176b96d.png

 

So I asked whether I'm also a nutter for leaving things overnight.  Apparently that's a 'rant' now.

 

Personally I wouldn't suggest someone is a nutter for spraying shopping.  But it's not something I would do either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, doratheexplorer said:

And me asking whether leaving things overnight counts me as a nutter?  Is that ranting?  Asking a question makes me a ranter?

 

I was simply continuing the discussion.  But since you mention it, your post did very strongly imply that you consider people who spray their shopping are nutters.

image.png.b380ce75372cabc38faf0b0de176b96d.png

 

So I asked whether I'm also a nutter for leaving things overnight.  Apparently that's a 'rant' now.

 

Personally I wouldn't suggest someone is a nutter for spraying shopping.  But it's not something I would do either.

Where and when have I ever described anybody as a nutter?   I will save you the search I haven't so yet again that should have been linked to the poster who described people as nutter.

 

It isn't rocket science.   In a discussion you reply to the person who made the point you are replying to.   You replied to me about a point I hadn't made and seem to want to continue to do so.

 

EDIT to add you clearly didn't see the other interpretation which was possible for my there is a poster who sprays.

 

The other interpretation which you clearly missed is you are likely to offend somebody as there are people who do just that.   She has replied and didn't seem offended but you seem to be being offended on her behalf.

Edited by Jerra
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Jerra said:

Where and when have I ever described anybody as a nutter?   I will save you the search I haven't so yet again that should have been linked to the poster who described people as nutter.

 

It isn't rocket science.   In a discussion you reply to the person who made the point you are replying to.   You replied to me about a point I hadn't made and seem to want to continue to do so.

You're accusing me of things I haven't done. 

 

Clearly you meant something different in post 495 to that which I understood from it.  Can you expand?  It's just that Alan said there are nutters on the forum and you immediately replied that one person sprays their shopping. I'm not sure what you meant there other than implying that said person is a nutter.  If you did not mean to imply that, then what did you mean?

 

But I'll say again, I've never said you described anyone as a nutter, so please stop misquoting me. 

 

Have you got out of bed the wrong side, or are you just looking for an argument?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Jerra said:

Where and when have I ever described anybody as a nutter?   I will save you the search I haven't so yet again that should have been linked to the poster who described people as nutter.

 

It isn't rocket science.   In a discussion you reply to the person who made the point you are replying to.   You replied to me about a point I hadn't made and seem to want to continue to do so.

 

EDIT to add you clearly didn't see the other interpretation which was possible for my there is a poster who sprays.

 

The other interpretation which you clearly missed is you are likely to offend somebody as there are people who do just that.   She has replied and didn't seem offended but you seem to be being offended on her behalf.

I wasn't offended at all.  Just curious about what people thought of my own choices?  Thanks for expanding on what you meant.  It wasn't at all clear to me before. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, doratheexplorer said:

I wasn't offended at all.  Just curious about what people thought of my own choices?  Thanks for expanding on what you meant.  It wasn't at all clear to me before. 

I think anyone is entitled to do anything they want that makes them feel safe.

What does intrigue me is that I've hardly been out of the house for a year apart from visiting one ill person who I support (who is healthy apart from the cancer), the co-op at eight in the morning when it's empty, and the only person I've been anywhere near is my wife, who is even more careful than me, and I've got a cold.

  • Greenie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

As has been mentioned in other posts, the usual procedure is for the government to decide policy first and then present figures to support it.  

 

A proper track and trace system would be able to provide reliable data as to where someone became infected. As far as I am aware, such data does not exist, so the relative risks of infection from being in an enclosed space and being outside appear to be a matter of surmise. 

 

All the cases I am personally aware of have been infected from indoor situations.

 

A cousin was an early casualty, probably caught covid in a packed aeroplane when coming back to the UK after a winter break in Spain at the end of January. He got it, his wife didn't. Only after he collapsed at home did she realise it wasn't a case of "man flu". Over 2 months in intensive care, including 3 weeks in a medically-induced coma,  a spell on a ventilator and then a trachyotomy. Physio to get him to walk again, but fortunately ok now, so you can understand why our family do take covid very seriously indeed. 

 

The others I know of have caught it either from schools or hospitals: a self-isolating couple in their 70's when the wife took the husband (blind) to a hospital appointment; a friend's daughter, who is a surgeon, from helping out on a covid ward and who suddenly developed symptoms at the end of an emergency caesarean operation that were so bad that a colleague had to finish up for her (so all the theatre staff plus her patients  were potentially infected).

 

At least the government now concedes the blindingly obvious fact that schools are a vector for infection: before christmas a friend's 3 year old brought it back from playschool. Her symptoms only lasted a day (arguably supporting Boris's weasel words that schools are safe for pupils), but she gave to to her bubble (both parents plus one set of grandparents). A neighbour's granddaughter got it at her 6th form college and passed it to her parents. While typing this my wife told me that a couple we know are now in hospital after getting it from their daughter, who got it from school. Just before christmas, 25 teachers at a local prep school of only 160 pupils went down with it, and a teacher friend informs us that, in our area, the infection rate for teachers is about  double the local rate.

 

Even if data were collected from infected persons with a view to tracing the source of their infection, no-one who got it from (say) attending an illegal rave is going to admit it and risk prosecution.

 

I don't know of anyone who has been self-isolating and socially-distancing who has got it from socially-distanced shopping or outdoor exercise, and judging by the latest news reports of police arresting people attending illegal indoor parties, pub lock-ins etc., situations where people mix indoors seems the major problem. I suspect that the cases the police have attended are but the tip of the iceberg.

 

So back to the thread topic, I don't see that someone self-isolating on a boat and maintaining social distancing when on land, represents any more of a threat than shoppng in Tesco's. 

 

Sorry for the ramble, but as an ex-professional engineer I was used to carefully collecting accurate data and drawing conclusions from it,  unlike politicians who usually draw conclusions first, look for data afterwards, and are then secretive about the data that they rely on, making it difficult for anyone to challenge it. 

 

 

 

 

Edited by Ronaldo47
Further comment; typos
  • Greenie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Ronaldo47 said:

 

 

Sorry for the ramble, but as an ex-professional engineer I was used to carefully collecting accurate data and drawing conclusions from it,  unlike politicians who usually draw conclusions first, look for data afterwards, and are then secretive about the data that they rely on, making it difficult for anyone to challenge it. 

Your kind of approach would spoil half the fun on here.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, The Happy Nomad said:

We wipe our (home delivery) shopping down with anti-bac wipes. Along with anything else delivered to the house. Some items are simply quarantined for 72 hours if not needed sooner.

 

Fresh produce is rinsed under running water were possible, which is recommended anyway even in non covid times.

 

I'm not sure if that makes us mentally certifiable or not but will continue doing so for the foreseeable.

Better safe than sorry.

I always wash my hands after opening the post (and throwing the envelopes away). I've no reason to believe that our postman is crawling with viruses, but washing my hands takes only about 20 seconds and it sets my mind at rest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, Ronaldo47 said:

As has been mentioned in other posts, the usual procedure is for the government to decide policy first and then present figures to support it.  

 

A proper track and trace system would be able to provide reliable data as to where someone became infected. As far as I am aware, such data does not exist, so the relative risks of infection from being in an enclosed space and being outside appear to be a matter of surmise. 

 

All the case I am personally aware of have been infected from indoor situations.

 

A cousin was an early casualty, probably caught in a packed aeroplane when coming back to the UK after a winter break in Spain at the end of January. He got it, his wife didn't. Only after he collapsed at home did she realised it wasn't a case of "man flu". Over 2 months in intensive care, including 3 weeks in a medically-induced coma,  a spell on a ventilator and then a trachyotomy. Physio to get him to walk again, but fortunately ok now, so you can understand why our family do take covid very seriously indeed. 

 

The others I know of have caught it either from schools or hospitals: a self-isolating couple in their 70's when the wife took the husband (blind) to a hospital appointment; a friend's daughter, who is a surgeon, from helping out on a covid ward and who suddenly developed symptoms at the end of an emergency caesarean operation that were so bad that a colleage had to finish up for her (so all the theatre staff plus her patients  were potentially infected).

 

At least the government now concedes the blindingly obvious fact that schools are a vector for infection: before christmas a friend's 3 year old brought it back from playshool. Her symptoms only lasted a day, but she gave to to her bubble (both parents plus one set of grandparents). A neighbour's granddaughter got it at her 6th form college and passed it to her parents. While typing this my wife told me that a couple we know are now in hospital after getting it from their daughter, who got it from school. Just before christmas, 25 teachers at a local prep school of only 160 pupils went down with it, and a teacher friend informs us that, in our area, the infection rate for teachers is about  double the local rate.  

 

I don't know of anyone who has been self-isolating and socially-distancing who has got it from socially-distanced shopping or outdoor exercise, and judging by the latest news reports of police arresting people attending illegal indoor parties, pub lock-ins etc., situations where people mix indoors seems the major problem. I suspect that the cases the police have attended are but the tip of the iceberg.

 

So back to the thread topic, I don't see that someone self-isolating on a boat and maintaining social distancing when on land, represents any more of a threat than shoppng in Tesco's. 

 

Sorry for the ramble, but as an ex-professional engineer I was used to carefully collecting accurate data and drawing conclusions from it,  unlike politicians who usually draw conclusions first, look for data afterwards, and are then secretive about the data that they rely on, making it difficult for anyone to challenge it. 

 

 

 

 

Interesting post.  Your final paragraph about carefully collecting data is somewhat undermined by all the preceding paragraphs where you've presented supposition as fact.  The fact is, you don't know where these people caught it.  You (and others) have made a judgement based on probability.  It is entirely possible that one of more of your examples did pick it up while shopping.  As you have said yourself, the government's track and trace system cannot reliably determine where someone became infected, so why should your observation be any more accurate?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

True enough, but the point is that, in the absence of reliable data, the government are free to make any assertion they like.  Governments like to be in this position. As I mentioned on another thread, a course I was sent on when I was working in the Civil Service included a module on government statistics, where, as an exercise, participants had to extract figures from the same set of genuine official statistics to support two completely opposite policy statements. Hence my cynicism when ministers say that the data supports their position: quite possibly factually correct only because they have only presented the data that does support their position. 

 

I agree that the stastically small number of cases I mentioned are statisticaly insignificant, but would think that the higher-than-average infection rate of local teachers is statistically significant. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Ronaldo47 said:

True enough, but the point is that, in the absence of reliable data, the government are free to make any assertion they like.  Governments like to be in this position. As I mentioned on another thread, a course I was sent on when I was working in the Civil Service included a module on government statistics, where, as an exercise, participants had to extract figures from the same set of genuine official statistics to support two completely opposite policy statements. Hence my cynicism when ministers say that the data supports their position: quite possibly factually correct only because they have only presented the data that does support their position. 

 

I agree that the stastically small number of cases I mentioned are statisticaly insignificant, but would think that the higher-than-average infection rate of local teachers is statistically significant. 

Well just to add to your stats our son in law is a teacher and he caught it in March last year, was hospitalised and had a stint in ICU.

 

It is entirely possible he didn't catch it at work but the balance of probability would suggest it was more likely he caught it in the classroom.

 

As it happens today is his first 'proper' week back at work. He's home schooling his class via zoom (or it could be teams or Google meet) from home.

Edited by The Happy Nomad
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Ronaldo47 said:

True enough, but the point is that, in the absence of reliable data, the government are free to make any assertion they like.  Governments like to be in this position. As I mentioned on another thread, a course I was sent on when I was working in the Civil Service included a module on government statistics, where, as an exercise, participants had to extract figures from the same set of genuine official statistics to support two completely opposite policy statements. Hence my cynicism when ministers say that the data supports their position: quite possibly factually correct only because they have only presented the data that does support their position. 

 

I agree that the stastically small number of cases I mentioned are statisticaly insignificant, but would think that the higher-than-average infection rate of local teachers is statistically significant. 

"85% of people found that xyx facial treatment was a benefit" small print: 97 responses - unprinted: 300 people were asked and the 'right' 97 were selected for the report!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, The Happy Nomad said:

Well just to add to your stats our son in law is a teacher and he caught it in March last year, was hospitalised and had a stint in ICU.

 

It is entirely possible he didn't catch it at work but the balance of probability would suggest it was more likely he caught it in the classroom.

 

As it happens today is his first 'proper' week back at work. He's home schooling his class via zoom (or it could be teams or Google meet) from home.

I wouldnt mind betting that 90% of peeps under 70 who contracted the virus went to a supermarket in the week when they were infected. Positive proof ?that most transmission is in supermarkets for any aspiring government statician.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Been listening to the radio this evening. Funnily enough, experts on both Radio 4 and LBC were of the opinion that illegal inside contact was by far the major concern. Neither expressed any concern about outside activities, virtually dismissing them as irrelevant without actually saying so. I got the impression that they were (understandably perhaps) reluctant to actually contradict the official government line. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, Dr Bob said:

I wouldnt mind betting that 90% of peeps under 70 who contracted the virus went to a supermarket in the week when they were infected. Positive proof ?that most transmission is in supermarkets for any aspiring government statician.

I remember reading that many years ago US tobacco lobbyists, when trying to minimise the significance of a published correlation between smoking and lung cancer, publicised a statistic that 95% of people who had died in air crashes had eaten pickled onions in the previous year.

Edited by alias
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, alias said:

I remember reading that many years ago US tobacco lobbyists, when trying to minimise the significance a published correlation between smoking and lung cancer, publicised a statistic that 95% of people who had died in air crashes had eaten pickled onions in the previous year.

Well, after eating many pickled onions over the years, they do have some serious side effects.

8 minutes ago, Ronaldo47 said:

Been listening to the radio this evening. Funnily enough, experts on both Radio 4 and LBC were of the opinion that illegal inside contact was by far the major concern. Neither expressed any concern about outside activities, virtually dismissing them as irrelevant without actually saying so. I got the impression that they were (understandably perhaps) reluctant to actually contradict the official government line. 

Birmingham and west midlands is under exactly the same situation, it is pockets of..population that are not only ignoring, but actively going against guidelines and laws, thus putting their elders and the NHS at serious risk of collapse.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, matty40s said:

Well, after eating many pickled onions over the years, they do have some serious side effects.

Birmingham and west midlands is under exactly the same situation, it is pockets of..population that are not only ignoring, but actively going against guidelines and laws, thus putting their elders and the NHS at serious risk of collapse.

What do you mean....pockets of population? 

Do you mean it's all Aston Villa fans or is it supporters of different breweries or is it different races? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/01/2021 at 19:42, Jerra said:

So why are they still pushing wash your hands.   That was the point I was making is, it seems infection from touching anything is fairly unlikely and yet they keep hammering away at wash your hands.

 

IMO if it is so unlikely from touch why not make the message clearer by cutting out the hands and stressing the masks and social distancing and stay at home.

How much harder do they need to try to stress the message? 

 

Best idea would be to issue responsible people like me with special mini bows and arrows, the kind with rubber suckers, so we can target those who appear to be outside their homes, not exercising and not shopping or working. 

Edited by LadyG
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, LadyG said:

Best idea would be to issue responsible people like me with special mini bows and arrows, the kind with rubber suckers, so we can target those who appear to be outside their homes, not exercising and not shopping or working. 

 

so you’ve now escalated from setting traps to actively hunting them Hunger Games style?

you’ll be getting a banjo next and going full-on Deliverance :) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Hudds Lad said:

 

so you’ve now escalated from setting traps to actively hunting them Hunger Games style?

you’ll be getting a banjo next and going full-on Deliverance :) 

Yes indeed, very kindly a lady out for a walk the other day prayed for a miracle to get me back on 't Internet and repair my boat, I thought she was a bit OTT asking for miracles on a day to day basis, but actually it might have worked, as, indeed all is now repaired. 

Oh yea of little Faith.

 

Edited by LadyG
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.