COVID-19 — Coronavirus

[Churchlawtonblue]

The app can't be made compulsory, much as I tend to agree with your point.
Not everyone has a mobile phone, especially those most vulnerable. My parents for instance, have an old nokia that they use for emergencies only. They wouldnt know what an app was, let alone how to use it.

they should be given the phone and toldhow to use it. We need radical measures not excuses like the i cant use a mask brigade.

 

[Churchlawtonblue]

The NHS app is anonymous.
You cannot be traced through it.
So it cannot be enforced.

change the app. make it law. Too liberal in this country. In some euopean countries ID cards are compulsory. The liberals reject that idea every time it suggested in the UK. Small price to pay imo.

 

[mosssideblue]

But I think you should be able to let the majority get on with their lives while protecting the vulnerable. If we could protect the vulnerable would you be in favour of others getting on with their lives.

How on earth can I answer that without knowing what "protect the vulnerable" actually means, and not broad brush strokes

 

[mosssideblue]

Make them compulsory, they are about £50 retail so give them to people who cant afford. the cost would be peanuts compared to what we have wasted.

Your being silly now

 

[mackenzie]

It’s worrying how many times on this thread you keep reading ‘until a vaccine comes along.‘

I suspect governments understandably don’t want to relay to people that even if we do get a vaccine it will not be the silver bullet everyone understand it to be in their heads. It will be another very important mitigation tool at our disposal - however, what I suspect a lot of people on here refer to as ‘the vaccine’ is actually a sterilizing vaccine which provides life long immunity which as I understand it seems very unlikely from leading scientists and the WHO.

So, the same question which in my head has always been key to getting global population compliance with immediate strategies is - what exactly is our exit strategy if we accept that this virus will probably not be eradicated for some considerable time?

And that is the big question that nobody, either in Government, the media or on here, seems to be considering.

 

[Churchlawtonblue]

It’s worrying how many times on this thread you keep reading ‘until a vaccine comes along.‘

I suspect governments understandably don’t want to relay to people that even if we do get a vaccine it will not be the silver bullet everyone understand it to be in their heads. It will be another very important mitigation tool at our disposal - however, what I suspect a lot of people on here refer to as ‘the vaccine’ is actually a sterilizing vaccine which provides life long immunity which as I understand it seems very unlikely from leading scientists and the WHO.

So, the same question which in my head has always been key to getting global population compliance with immediate strategies is - what exactly is our exit strategy if we accept that this virus will probably not be eradicated for some considerable time?

its dawned on me the past few weeks based on what ive read. we need to. move on wjth our lives and live with this virus somehow. continued lockdowns on their own are clearly not the solution and are not an exit strategy.

 

[crublue1]

they should be given the phone and toldhow to use it. We need radical measures not excuses like the i cant use a mask brigade.

Ha ha good luck explaining it to my dad.
I agree with your principle point though.

 

[Churchlawtonblue]

Your being silly now

yes of course im being silly. lol making people carry something that saves people lives. I remember the objections to wearing a seat belt when that law was passed. Bizzare eh?? its called thinking outside the box.

 

[mosssideblue]

change the app. make it law. Too liberal in this country. In some euopean countries ID cards are compulsory. The liberals reject that idea every time it suggested in the UK. Small price to pay imo.

Not everyone, particularly the elderly are IT savvy, surely you understand that

 

[Churchlawtonblue]

How on earth can I answer that without knowing what "protect the vulnerable" actually means, and not broad brush strokes

nice swerve there. come back to me when you feel up to answering the question.

 

[mosssideblue]

yes of course im being silly. lol making people carry something that saves people lives. I remember the objections to wearing a seat belt when that law was passed. Bizzare eh?? its called thinking outside the box.

Do you really think 87 year old Ethel understands what an I phone actually is?

 

[mosssideblue]

nice swerve there. come back to me when you feel up to answering the question.

There isnt a question. You are asking me to answer something without giving me the detail

 

[crublue1]

Do you really think 87 year old Ethel understands what an I phone actually is?

Over to Mr rooney for an expert opinion..

 

[Churchlawtonblue]

Not everyone, particularly the elderly are IT savvy, surely you understand that

most can change channel on a tv. people manage. there mjght be a small proportion of people who cant. they will need help and may need to take extra measures. one size doesnt fit all in society. thats the way things are im affraid.

It amazes me how peoole reject a few restrictions on their lives these days. Imagine living off ration cards, having blackouts, and id cards like we needed to 75 years ago. difficult times require sacrifices and a mobile phone isnt a big hardship imo. again its the liberal society we live in.

 

[Churchlawtonblue]

There isnt a question. You are asking me to answer something without giving me the detail

simple yes or no, if we could shield vulnerable people, would you be in favour of the those who wernt vulnerable getting on with their lives? it doesn't require any detail.

 

[Deleted member 77198]

France is expected to follow Germany's lead and enter its own four-week national lockdown soon, local media has widely reported.

France reported its highest daily death count since April on Tuesday, with 523 virus-linked deaths. It has also been confirming tens of thousands of cases each day, with a record 52,010 reported on Saturday.

And more than half of the country's intensive care units are filled with COVID-19 patients.

Why are we mucking about , we got it wrong last time

I think we’ll do the same once the November resit exams have finished, so that numbers are lower so we can have a proper Christmas

 

[mcfc1632]

If more of the population could be trusted to follow the masks and the 2 meter rule that might be an option. Unfortunately every day too many examples of people who don't give a toss. So until they wise up you can forget your solution.

Is the level of people ignoring the rules generally that bad??

I see lots of posts on here commenting about selfish bastards that simply refuse to obey the rules.

Where I live I see hardly any failures to observe the rules

Is it really that bad?

 

[kevin horlocks wand]

I think we’ll do the same once the November resit exams have finished, so that numbers are lower so we can have a proper Christmas

I can hear Chris Rea now on the radio.

locking down for Christmas....

 

[mosssideblue]

most can change channel on a tv. people manage. there mjght be a small proportion of people who cant. they will need help and may need to take extra measures. one size doesnt fit all in society. thats the way things are im affraid.

It amazes me how peoole reject a few restrictions on their lives these days. Imagine living off ration cards, having blackouts, and id cards like we needed to 75 years ago. difficult times require sacrifices and a mobile phone isnt a big hardship imo. again its the liberal society we live in.

I dont have any axe to grind with you and I hope you acknowledge that we both want the best for everyone, but your last couple of suggestions imo, are too OTT and would not address the bigger problems. I Phones are not for everyone and no doubt some would moan at their lack of privacy if forced to have one.

You asked me would I be OK with allowing the young uns to get on with life if the vulnerable were protected, but that is such a statement to say, as even you have not been able to articulate what that actually means on a day to day basis for the vulnerable.

There are no easy answers Im afraid

 

[mosssideblue]

simple yes or no, if we could shield vulnerable people, would you be in favour of the those who wernt vulnerable getting on with their lives? it doesn't require any detail.

Of course it requires detail. Locking someone up for 24hrs a day would be shielding, but we both know that isnt acceptable, so put some meat on the bone