Coronavirus

[Parklife]

6 minutes ago, minijc said:

Zeus is like an al wifie.

Absolutely. ?

[dazzy_deff]

5 minutes ago, afc1903mad said:

Its not exactly apples for apples though with the different variants and different periods of outbreaks

I heard on the radio the other day in Scotland that the number of positive cases was back to January levels, but the deaths was 4 now as opposed to circa 60 back then. You can't honestly be proposing that the unvaccinated society is better protected.

It was reported last week that ARI and a hospital in Elgin were at capacity as a result of hospitalisations.

 

Pretty sure the code black at ARI was down to the large number of staff having to self isolate, as opposed to reaching capacity limits.

[afc1903mad]

4 minutes ago, dazzy_deff said:

Pretty sure the code black at ARI was down to the large number of staff having to self isolate, as opposed to reaching capacity limits.

Twofold. Increased cases and staff isolations

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-north-east-orkney-shetland-57756384

 

[Zeus]

1 minute ago, dazzy_deff said:

Pretty sure the code black at ARI was down to the large number of staff having to self isolate, as opposed to reaching capacity limits.

That's what I thought also.  Pretty sure it was in the news. 

Maybe just some "al wifie" gossip however. 

[dazzy_deff]

6 minutes ago, afc1903mad said:

Twofold. Increased cases and staff isolations

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-north-east-orkney-shetland-57756384

 

Yeah but if staff weren't isolating then the hospital would be nowhere near capacity even with the increased cases. Now the self isolation rules are changing we shouldnt see any of these "struggles". 

[dazzy_deff]

21 minutes ago, minijc said:

Zeus is like an al wifie.

Irony meter going through the roof here. 

[minijc]

6 minutes ago, dazzy_deff said:

Irony meter going through the roof here. 

You're better than that Daz ffs.

[afc1903mad]

6 minutes ago, dazzy_deff said:

Yeah but if staff weren't isolating then the hospital would be nowhere near capacity even with the increased cases. Now the self isolation rules are changing we shouldnt see any of these "struggles". 

Probably very true, whilst NHS Grampian is seeing a sharp increase in hospitalisations, its nowhere near the peak that it has been

[Foster14]

I can't believe they are talking about changing self-isolation rules and potentially not applying it across the population.

If those dealing with the most vulnerable people can be deemed safe in that situation, then why aren't other people?

[thedandydon]

That's my loon on a 10day quarantine because someone in his class his tested positive. Whole class off. My daughters classes are about a third down too with kids being told to self isolate. Thankfully only a couple of weeks left till they break up for the summer hols and we can fuck off abroad...or not, as thats been canned aswell. Marvellous.

[afc1903mad]

1 hour ago, Foster14 said:

I can't believe they are talking about changing self-isolation rules and potentially not applying it across the population.

If those dealing with the most vulnerable people can be deemed safe in that situation, then why aren't other people?

I guess its as a result of unfortunate necessity.

As discussed above, Aberdeen is at "code black", deemed at capacity with increased hospitalisations but its just a fraction of where it was at peak as a result of staff isolations.

It will be risk mitigation so absolutely, those testing positive will isolate, but if just a "close contact" they could effectively so a daily lateral flow test

[Matt Armstrong's Dog]

19 hours ago, For Fecks Sake said:

Where you getting that figure from ?

Here are the figures.....

https://www.ons.gov.uk/employmentandlabourmarket/peoplenotinwork/economicinactivity

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2021/jun/15/uk-unemployment-rate-falls-staff-jobs-covid-restrictions

Add the current economically inactive and unemployment figures together and this gives you the true unemployment total of over 10 million people of working age that the Tory government and their friends in the media do not wish to make overly public. However, if you look in the right places, you get a far greater and accurate representation of the actual rate of unemployment in the UK than what is disclosed by mainstream media.

Fair enough the figures may slightly deviate up to the present day, taking into the dates when the above publications were made, but it gives a fair and reasonable representation of how bad things are unemployment-wise.

[Parklife]

Surely some of those captured by that are people who don't want to work? Housewives/husbands etc? 

[Matt Armstrong's Dog]

4 minutes ago, Parklife said:

Surely some of those captured by that are people who don't want to work? Housewives/husbands etc? 

These economically inactive figures represent people who are long-term incapacitated, lone parents of children under 5, carers of family members, people who do not wish to claim benefit or are ineligible to do so, people who have taken early retirement, and students. 

[Poodler]

4 hours ago, dazzy_deff said:

Pretty sure the code black at ARI was down to the large number of staff having to self isolate, as opposed to reaching capacity limits.

‘Code Black’ (lol) happens all the time, hospital reaches capacity every winter, it’s a bit of a non story that, but the dangerous powers of the media like to use it to fear weak people 

[dazzy_deff]

Just now, Poodler said:

‘Code Black’ (lol) happens all the time, hospital reaches capacity every winter, it’s a bit of a non story that, but the dangerous powers of the media like to use it to fear weak people 

Was also going to post that but thought id leave it to people more qualified than me to pitch in with that one. 

[Redforever86]

7 minutes ago, Matt Armstrong's Dog said:

These economically inactive figures represent people who are long-term incapacitated, lone parents of children under 5, carers of family members, people who do not wish to claim benefit or are ineligible to do so, people who have taken early retirement, and students. 

So not people looking for jobs then. Anyone who wants a job and isn't completely incompetent at being a human can get one. 

 

FTR I'm not directing that comment at you. 

[Parklife]

17 minutes ago, Matt Armstrong's Dog said:

These economically inactive figures represent people who are long-term incapacitated, lone parents of children under 5, carers of family members, people who do not wish to claim benefit or are ineligible to do so, people who have taken early retirement, and students. 

So in answer to my question : "yes"

[Matt Armstrong's Dog]

9 minutes ago, Redforever86 said:

So not people looking for jobs then. Anyone who wants a job and isn't completely incompetent at being a human can get one. 

 

FTR I'm not directing that comment at you. 

I know you are not min, and I fully agree with you.

There are jobs out there for those that are able and willing to work, providing personal circumstances and logistics are not barriers to being able to look and apply for, and ultimately secure employment. 

In an ideal world, free from current restrictions, this indeed can be achieved. You have to be prepared to be very patient though as the days of losing a job on a Friday and starting a new one on the following Monday are long gone. 

[For Fecks Sake]

31 minutes ago, Matt Armstrong's Dog said:

Here are the figures.....

https://www.ons.gov.uk/employmentandlabourmarket/peoplenotinwork/economicinactivity

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2021/jun/15/uk-unemployment-rate-falls-staff-jobs-covid-restrictions

Add the current economically inactive and unemployment figures together and this gives you the true unemployment total of over 10 million people of working age that the Tory government and their friends in the media do not wish to make overly public. However, if you look in the right places, you get a far greater and accurate representation of the actual rate of unemployment in the UK than what is disclosed by mainstream media.

Fair enough the figures may slightly deviate up to the present day, taking into the dates when the above publications were made, but it gives a fair and reasonable representation of how bad things are unemployment-wise.

Judging from the graph in the first link, the figure is a fairly static one and currently lower than that during the last Labour Govt (97 -2007) so not sure its actually an accurate representation of the actual rate of unemployment. Which is probably the reason why the media don't use or report it.

[Matt Armstrong's Dog]

6 minutes ago, Parklife said:

So in answer to my question : "yes"

That part perhaps could be answered as "yes" to your question, as some folk may have over £16000 in savings, therefore are either ineligible to qualify for UC or JSA because of this, or simply wish to take time out from employment and live off of their savings, whatever they may be. 

[afc1903mad]

4 minutes ago, For Fecks Sake said:

Judging from the graph in the first link, the figure is a fairly static one and currently lower than that during the last Labour Govt (97 -2007) so not sure its actually an accurate representation of the actual rate of unemployment. Which is probably the reason why the media don't use or report it.

You could also factor that whilst the inactivity graph is fairly static, the population has increased, meaning there must be more people in work. the question then considers what the values is of the work being carried out.

[Joe pike]

15 minutes ago, Matt Armstrong's Dog said:

I know you are not min, and I fully agree with you.

There are jobs out there for those that are able and willing to work, providing personal circumstances and logistics are not barriers to being able to look and apply for, and ultimately secure employment. 

In an ideal world, free from current restrictions, this indeed can be achieved. You have to be prepared to be very patient though as the days of losing a job on a Friday and starting a new one on the following Monday are long gone. 

MAD you are missing a trick here.

Set yourself up as an employment consultant.

Nobody has more experience.

 

[Matt Armstrong's Dog]

17 minutes ago, For Fecks Sake said:

Judging from the graph in the first link, the figure is a fairly static one and currently lower than that during the last Labour Govt (97 -2007) so not sure its actually an accurate representation of the actual rate of unemployment. Which is probably the reason why the media don't use or report it.

Possibly min, but it is a representation of people of working age who potentially could be employed if it were not for certain circumstances that dictate they are unable to or are unwilling to. 

[Matt Armstrong's Dog]

14 minutes ago, Joe pike said:

MAD you are missing a trick here.

Set yourself up as an employment consultant.

Nobody has more experience.

 

Once things eventually return back to normal, when the powers-than-be release their filthy vice-like grip on all of us, I will actively be looking to hopefully get employed with the RNIB to do exactly that or a position of a similar capacity, Joe min. Nothing is ever guaranteed though.

The wheels were in motion last January (2020) with the RNIB with a view to getting employment with the organisation but it has become dormant due to these bloody restrictions/lockdowns we have all been subjected to since March 2020.

[maryhilldon]

5 hours ago, afc1903mad said:

Its not exactly apples for apples though with the different variants and different periods of outbreaks

I heard on the radio the other day in Scotland that the number of positive cases was back to January levels, but the deaths was 4 now as opposed to circa 60 back then. You can't honestly be proposing that the unvaccinated society is better protected.

It was reported last week that ARI and a hospital in Elgin were at capacity as a result of hospitalisations.

 

Over a third of recent Covid hospitalisations have previously been vaccinated!?  Seems the vaccine isn't all that effective. 

[afc1903mad]

6 minutes ago, maryhilldon said:

Over a third of recent Covid hospitalisations have previously been vaccinated!?  Seems the vaccine isn't all that effective. 

I recall when I got my first dose (of Pfiser ;)) that it was approx 60% effective after 10 days from the jab. For the second jab, I was told I was approx 95% covered after 10 days from the jab.

So no, its not 100% effective for sure and what is being mentioned is that the vaccine is effective in reducing the effects i.e. some are able to ride out the effects at home i.e. less are hospitalised and fewer are dying.

Do we know how many were fully vaccinated?

 

Covid will end up like the Flu, vaccinations will be available, but there will still be deaths attributed to the disease 

[Redforever86]

50 minutes ago, maryhilldon said:

Over a third of recent Covid hospitalisations have previously been vaccinated!?  Seems the vaccine isn't all that effective. 

Yes, you'd rather not have the jab and be dead instead of just in hospital?

[maryhilldon]

14 minutes ago, Redforever86 said:

Yes, you'd rather not have the jab and be dead instead of just in hospital?

Aye, obviously. 

[Redforever86]

3 minutes ago, maryhilldon said:

Aye, obviously. 

Glad we agree.