Coronavirus

[Boby Brno]

Just read this from Sadiq Khan in the Independent.

“If London was to go into Tier 3 it would be catastrophic to those industries already really crippled under the Covid pandemic, that could mean many shops going bust, many bars, pubs and restaurants going bust,” the capital’s mayor told Sky News.

 

Seems it’s ok for similar businesses up here to suffer.

[DazBob]

5 minutes ago, Boby Brno said:

Just read this from Sadiq Khan in the Independent.

“If London was to go into Tier 3 it would be catastrophic to those industries already really crippled under the Covid pandemic, that could mean many shops going bust, many bars, pubs and restaurants going bust,” the capital’s mayor told Sky News.

 

Seems it’s ok for similar businesses up here to suffer.

To be fair to Khan (not something you see written on here very often  ) what is happening up North isn't of any concern to him.  He's right in what he's saying.

What he's saying can be applied to every town and City currently under Tier 3 restrictions,  It's the Government that caring a lot less about us scummy Northeners that is the problem, not Khan.

Edited December 9, 2020 by DazBob

[Boby Brno]

1 hour ago, DazBob said:

To be fair to Khan (not something you see written on here very often  ) what is happening up North isn't of any concern to him.  He's right in what he's saying.

What he's saying can be applied to every town and City currently under Tier 3 restrictions,  It's the Government that caring a lot less about us scummy Northeners that is the problem, not Khan.

Yes I appreciate that. I’d like to see Andy Burnham pushing for the restrictions to be lifted though. Put some pressure on the government.

[Casino]

So, let's say they get stuck in 3 cos its absolutely necessary

Less than a week later they are on a free for all

Shambles

[Mounts Kipper]

1 hour ago, DazBob said:

To be fair to Khan (not something you see written on here very often  ) what is happening up North isn't of any concern to him.  He's right in what he's saying.

What he's saying can be applied to every town and City currently under Tier 3 restrictions,  It's the Government that caring a lot less about us scummy Northeners that is the problem, not Khan.

Government support is same for all areas, London area is being kept in tier 2 because it creates the largest portion of the U.K. GDP. Nothing to do with north/south. 

[Sweep]

39 minutes ago, Mounts Kipper said:

Government support is same for all areas, London area is being kept in tier 2 because it creates the largest portion of the U.K. GDP. Nothing to do with north/south. 

correct, some just like to think that the Government do things purely to piss the North off

[Tonge moor green jacket]

I don’t buy into this north/South bollocks neither.

The figures are interesting that they may be suggesting that areas of high population seem to reduce in numbers in tier 3 and maybe struggle a little in tier 2.

Lower population density areas maybe more manageable in tier 2.

[DazBob]

I'd be surprised if anyone wasn't intelligent enough to realise why London appears to have more leniency in their favour when it comes to what folk can and can't do.

It's a bit of a pisser for everyone else like, but it does make sense.

You could argue that other major cities around the country are suffering financially and if they were to all operate at Level 2 then they could be contributing to the Government's coffers ... but let's be honest, for example, Manchester city centre would be absolutely rammed on a weekend with folk from all around the North West who'd be getting on packed trains to go and have a drink and merrily spreading Covid to then take back to their own towns.

As said, it's a pisser but in reality it has to be done.

[MickyD]

44 minutes ago, Sweep said:

correct, some just like to think that the Government do things purely to piss the North off

But it seems rather insensitive that he’s as good as saying we don’t want London businesses to go the way Northern cities have gone.

[Tonge moor green jacket]

1 minute ago, MickyD said:

But it seems rather insensitive that he’s as good as saying we don’t want London businesses to go the way Northern cities have gone.

Maybe, but his job is to look after Londoners' interests. How he achieves that is a different matter. 

Maybe he would be better off having a word with individuals in the parts of London with increasing numbers and getting them to sort themselves out, before their total numbers put them into tier 3.

[Not in Crawley]

All the borough operarte very differently though, and have very different make-ups so things will always change borough to borough. We were one of the highest at the beginning due to the age of the popluation here and the amount of care homes. Once the lockdown began, its a real suburb here for commuters so our numbers really dropped. 

Also, its about the disparity of life expectancy in each borough, which seems to link to raise in cases - work they have to do etc So where I live its in the top ten of life expectancy - across the road in Lewisham its nearer the bottom. Most people where I live are working from home, the streets are pretty quiet and the station is empty at rush hour. In Downham its really busy as people go to work as they do jobs they can't do from home. Its really difficult I guess to target areas.

Was in town last night, after a day in the office, went for a meal in china town (not that busy and decent deals!) before going to a theatre show at the Palace. 1,000 were in, but its still very quiet on places like Shaftesbury Ave, Seven Dials etc. The photos from Saturday on regents street over the weekend remind me of thoe photos of the summer on beaches in Kent. It wasn't as rammed as it looked and on thursday night last week it was like a sunday when that is usually the busiest day of the working week, places like Fortum's was doing decent business but its usualy uncomfortabally busy at this time of year. There just aren't the working folk in the city, and there are no tourists. 

I agree it seems silly that we are in tier two, and Kent is in tier three - but that's been done just because of Medway and you have to blanket it. I really won't be surpised to see us in tier three next week, but given the proximity to christmas I bet we stay in tier 2.

[Sweep]

32 minutes ago, MickyD said:

But it seems rather insensitive that he’s as good as saying we don’t want London businesses to go the way Northern cities have gone.

Better he say it than do nothing though, if London goes tits up, it causes a problem for the entire nation, if Manchester or Liverpool go tits up, it's more of a local issue (not that it makes it right may I add) - I'd argue that Khan's doing what he thinks is right for the City he looks after, and that's all he's concerned about, quite rightly  -  It's Burnhams job to make sure that he speaks up and does what is best for his CIty.

 

[Escobarp]

1 minute ago, Sweep said:

Better he say it than do nothing though, if London goes tits up, it causes a problem for the entire nation, if Manchester or Liverpool go tits up, it's more of a local issue (not that it makes it right may I add) - I'd argue that Khan's doing what he thinks is right for the City he looks after, and that's all he's concerned about, quite rightly  -  It's Burnhams job to make sure that he speaks up and does what is best for himself .

 

EFA

[little whitt]

14 hours ago, Rudy said:

I didn’t need a pandemic to avoid them like the plague

THIS

[tyldesley_white]

this will not help getting people to get the vaccine

https://www.bbc.com/news/health-55244122

 

[kent_white]

16 minutes ago, tyldesley_white said:

this will not help getting people to get the vaccine

https://www.bbc.com/news/health-55244122

 

It should do. It means the reporting system is working properly.

I take your point though.

[tyldesley_white]

Just now, kent_white said:

It should do. It means the reporting system is working properly.

I take your point though.

It will just make more people think that "this has not been tested properly", I agree with you on the reporting side off it, but it something they could do without 

[Morizio]

6 minutes ago, kent_white said:

It should do. It means the reporting system is working properly.

I take your point though.

After reading the article and the two types of unwanted reaction that can occur, it is the least serious one in this case. Am I right in thinking this?

Is it the flu vaccine that can result with an anaphylaxis reaction?

[Spider]

24 minutes ago, kent_white said:

It should do. It means the reporting system is working properly.

I take your point though.

You know the media don't work like that

They didn't die, nothing to see here.

[Rudy]

Just now, Spider said:

You know the media don't work like that

They didn't die, nothing to see here.

The Daily Mail

VACCINE CAUSES SEVERE SKIN OUTBREAK REACTION

A source who had the vaccine was quoted as saying “I got my injection and I was covered in a rash, This African woman injected me, might be because she did it”

[Spider]

3 minutes ago, Rudy said:

The Daily Mail

VACCINE CAUSES SEVERE SKIN OUTBREAK REACTION

A source who had the vaccine was quoted as saying “I got my injection and I was covered in a rash, This African woman injected me, might be because she did it”

[kent_white]

52 minutes ago, Morizio said:

After reading the article and the two types of unwanted reaction that can occur, it is the least serious one in this case. Am I right in thinking this?

Is it the flu vaccine that can result with an anaphylaxis reaction?

Yes. Whenever we give a vaccine we are hoping to provoke an immune response. 

Anaphylactic shock is when that immune response is immediate and overwhelming. So even when we give a flu jab - we always carry an adrenaline shot in case of the massively unlikely scenario that somebody has anaphylactic shock.

What these people had is much less severe but still needs reporting in the usual way.

[Morizio]

19 minutes ago, kent_white said:

Yes. Whenever we give a vaccine we are hoping to provoke an immune response. 

Anaphylactic shock is when that immune response is immediate and overwhelming. So even when we give a flu jab - we always carry an adrenaline shot in case of the massively unlikely scenario that somebody has anaphylactic shock.

What these people had is much less severe but still needs reporting in the usual way.

Thank you for sharing your knowledge and clarifying this.

So I'm taking from this that we are lucky its the least sever type of reaction that can occur.

[kent_white]

1 minute ago, Morizio said:

Thank you for sharing your knowledge and clarifying this.

So I'm taking from this that we are lucky its the least sever type of reaction that can occur.

Yeah - we might still see someone get full anaphylactic shock at some stage - but the chances are small. And even smaller now these less severe cases have been highlighted and the guidance has changed. 

What's happening now is normal - we just need to keep an eye on it and figure out whether the rates are any higher than we'd usually expect.

Definitely no need to panic! 🙂👍

[1969]

Bolton starting vaccination's on Tuesday