c-a-r-f-r-e-w
Member
A step on the way toward the demise of the liberal elite? Or just a blip…
Posts: 6,185
|
Post by c-a-r-f-r-e-w on Aug 19, 2022 9:59:32 GMT
steve - "For those of us not focussed exclusively on covid the implications of lockdown and the cancellation of preventative health care were obvious." . Here is one small part of the hard scientific evidence - www.thelancet.com/action/showPdf?pii=S2215-0366%2822%2900260-7Fully peer reviewed matched cohort study published in the Lancet following 1.2m people across several countries for two years, using medical records to assess the impact of covid infection on a range of neurological conditions, including dementia and brain bleeds. For some of these serious conditions, they found substantially elevated risks with no 'risk horizon' evident within the study period. In other words, the elevated risks of some forms of dementia, ischaemic stroke etc, increased dramatically after even mild covid infection and remained high for at least two years. They also found no difference between Alpha, Delta and Omicron variants, and by extension, no evidence that vaccination helped. So yes, lockdowns were terrible, and had some terrible consequences, alongside the tens of thousands of lives saved from the dreadful point we had reached. But you need to get real and understand what is causing the majority of deaths and sickness today; not lockdowns, but unmitigated spread of a novel pathogen that we barely understand, that is now proven to have wide ranging, serious and persistent health impacts, months and years after even mild infection. That is evidence of Covid causing neurological effects. Which, while of interest, isn’t however much in the way of evidence that lockdown didn’t have significant effects. Here, for example, is a study that is a bit more salient: “The health impacts of lockdowns are not worse than those of large COVID-19 outbreaks, at least in the short term” www.bmj.com/company/newsroom/the-health-impacts-of-lockdowns-are-not-worse-than-those-of-large-covid-19-outbreaks-at-least-in-the-short-term/which does indeed argue that impacts from lockdowns aren’t worse than Covid, but note that it is over a year ago, and there is a worry that some lockdown effects might take longer to come through, hence the worry about the recent spike in excess deaths.
|
|
c-a-r-f-r-e-w
Member
A step on the way toward the demise of the liberal elite? Or just a blip…
Posts: 6,185
|
Post by c-a-r-f-r-e-w on Aug 19, 2022 10:01:49 GMT
From the BMJ article immediately above:
“Stringent control measures aimed at reducing disease mortality and morbidity will be accompanied by negative consequences in many sectors of the economy, the authors conclude. “These harms are real, multifaceted and potentially long term, and are therefore an important factor for policy makers to consider when choosing which intervention packages to implement.”
But they add: “It is often extremely difficult to separate the potential impacts of ‘lockdowns’ from those of the pandemic itself."
They do not conclude that lockdowns cannot cause any harm. “Often the most that it is possible to say is that there are harms associated with both large COVID-19 outbreaks and government interventions to prevent the disease,” they say. “The causal relationships are, unfortunately, extremely difficult to untangle.””
|
|
c-a-r-f-r-e-w
Member
A step on the way toward the demise of the liberal elite? Or just a blip…
Posts: 6,185
|
Post by c-a-r-f-r-e-w on Aug 19, 2022 10:14:12 GMT
Lockdown effects feared to be killing more people than CovidThe Telegraph understands that the Department of Health has ordered an investigation into the figures amid concern that the deaths are linked to delays to and deferment of treatment for conditions such as cancer, diabetes and heart disease. Over the past two months, the number of excess deaths not from Covid dwarfs the number linked to the virus. It comes amid renewed calls for Covid measures such as compulsory face masks in the winter.” Seriously??? There have been delays and deferments in regard to conditions such as cancer, diabetes and heart disease. That is fact. But...these are due to a decade of underfunding and mis-management of our NHS, meaning that when a health emergency such as covid comes along, there are bound to be delays. Nothing to do with wearing masks. Yes, I thought the headline to be perhaps rather unwise: though technically it might be considered accurate, that there is a fear that lockdown effects might be worse than Covid (and in saying it’s just a fear, it implies there are other possibilities), the headline doesn’t really make the other possibilities clear - other possibilities including the impact of underfunding, indirect effects of Covid etc. Later in the article they do note concerns around health service capacity: “ This week, an internal memo from the Royal Albert Edward Infirmary in Wigan, leaked to the Health Service Journal, warned it was becoming “increasingly common” for patients to die in A&E as they waited for treatment.”and... “ Dr Charmaine Griffiths, the British Heart Foundation chief executive, said: “We’re deeply concerned by the initial findings that excess deaths in recent months seem to be being driven by cardiovascular disease.
“Without significant help for the NHS from the Government now, this situation can only get worse.”
Last week, official England-wide statistics showed emergency care standards had hit an all-time low.”
|
|
|
Post by leftieliberal on Aug 19, 2022 10:16:13 GMT
The UK's education system preserves inequalities (and not just because of private schools) theconversation.com/the-uk-education-system-preserves-inequality-new-report-188761Its conclusion: "Young people from better-off families do better at all levels of the education system. They start out ahead and they end up being more qualified as adults. Instead of being an engine for social mobility, the UK’s education system allows inequalities at home to turn into differences in school achievement. This means that all too often, today’s education inequalities become tomorrow’s income inequalities."
|
|
Danny
Member
Posts: 9,811
|
Post by Danny on Aug 19, 2022 10:16:57 GMT
@danny You are clearly mistaken in your assumption that intervention has prolonged covid given that in those countries who have used different approaches there's no evidence that it's disappeared. That doesn't of course mean there were better approaches than taken here. One of the problems Sweden faced was that even though their industries remained open, eg car manufacture had to cease because external trade ceased. The integrated world economy cannot work if one part closes down. Similarly there was an effect of covid moving from country to country and then returning in a new form from somewhere else. Alec likes to argue that non intervention encourages mutation, whereas I argue that longer duration of an outbreak encourages mutation because it keeps the virus in circulation and increases its chances of returning to those who have already had it. With the possibility one of the minor variants finds a new home in people immune to the original and then takes off. I see the danger period as when there are many people immune to an old strain but who are potential hosts for a new one, but the old strain continues to circulate until a breakthrough mutation establishes. However, if it's true all these interventions never did slow down its spread anyway, just what was the point?
|
|
|
Post by robbiealive on Aug 19, 2022 10:23:15 GMT
The yellow blobs signify a reaction to the quoted post. What exactly I cannot fathom. Could you explain? In a moment of befuddlement more-&-more common in one's senior years, I thought the italicised phrase in the post was a self-description. I soon realised it was yet another example of the poster describing people or posters who don't agree with him as suffering from one form of mental pathology or another. Curiously, when a much milder accusation of that character was (inappropriately) levelled against him by by one of our very long-standing women posters, he reacted with a venom & unpleasantness quite disproportionate to the modest offence he had experienced. I would say, "one has to laugh", but that I would probably find myself labelled as hysterical, suffering from an uncontrolled emotional outburst or some other mental disorder.
|
|
Danny
Member
Posts: 9,811
|
Post by Danny on Aug 19, 2022 10:34:06 GMT
Hardly encouraging, to justify lockdown even on narrow medical terms you rather need to prove outcomes were better, not merely no worse.
|
|
Danny
Member
Posts: 9,811
|
Post by Danny on Aug 19, 2022 10:40:26 GMT
@danny - "you still don't get that being mentioned on death cert doesn't mean covid killed them." Come on in to the real world - you never know - you might like it! Lesson 1: If something is written on the death certificate, it means that the doctor issuing the certificate judges that it contributed to the death. Get that simple fact into your head and you'll start to understand. No. covid regulations specify that even a test which found a patient not to have covid must be entered on the death cert. That counts as a mention on the cert- that they didn't have it!!!
|
|
c-a-r-f-r-e-w
Member
A step on the way toward the demise of the liberal elite? Or just a blip…
Posts: 6,185
|
Post by c-a-r-f-r-e-w on Aug 19, 2022 10:40:27 GMT
c-a-r-f-r-e-w - that reporting in the Telegraph, and any statements from the DoH linking excess deaths to lockdowns, is tragically idiotic. You will probably recall that up until March this year, we had a run where excess deaths were below average, and then we let omicron take over. Since then, we've had collapsing NHS emergency services and a substantial impact on a week by week basis of NHS diagnostic services. Excess deaths have been high, with confirmed covid accounting for around 50% of the excess, but 'deaths at home' apparently unrelated to covid remaining the biggest single contributor. We know from large scale cohort studies that even mild covid causes hugely elevated risks in a range of illnesses, with death rates significantly higher in the year following a covid infection. (One study out today found various brain and neurological diseases remained twice as common in infected vs uninfected, persisting for the full 2 years of the study). So, we have a health service unable to adequately deal with emergencies and a disease that has been allowed to run riot that we know kills people in significant numbers for months and years after infection, yet the excess deaths occuring now are apparently the result of something that we did over a year ago? This is a diversion. People will die because of it. Sure, Covid may have more impact than some may realise, but the article was concerned with quite a lot of excess deaths which they say are “not directly linked to Covid”: “ Although 469 deaths were because of Covid, the remaining 881 have not been explained and the ONS does not break down the remaining deaths by cause.
Since the beginning of June, the ONS has recorded nearly 10,000 more deaths than the five-year average – around 1,089 a week – none of which is linked to Covid. The figure is more than three times the number of people who died because of the virus over the same period, which stood at 2,811.”Now, there may be indirect effects of Covid to consider (e.g. maybe they died of heart disease, but Covid originally weakened the heart), and indeed that it might be funding rather than lockdown responsible for some of them, but that still leaves the possibility of a significant lockdown effect to investigate.
|
|
|
Post by alec on Aug 19, 2022 10:44:22 GMT
c-a-r-f-r-e-w - yes, I would agree with that article. Lockdowns are harmful, uncontrolled covid would have been far worse, and untangling the precise direct and indirect effects is difficult. Unfortunately the simpletons on the far right, aped by the Telegraph, are mindlessly ignoring huge chunks of evidence and continue to try to score points for discredited and debunked theories, like the Great Barrington Declaration and the anti maskers etc, trying to recruit covid into the culture wars, like Shapps is trying to co-opt cycling as a target. I'm baffled by the idiocy of this wider right wing movement.
|
|
|
Post by alec on Aug 19, 2022 10:45:34 GMT
@danny - "No. covid regulations specify that even a test which found a patient not to have covid must be entered on the death cert. That counts as a mention on the cert- that they didn't have it!!!"
Right oh.
Show me the regulation please.
|
|
c-a-r-f-r-e-w
Member
A step on the way toward the demise of the liberal elite? Or just a blip…
Posts: 6,185
|
Post by c-a-r-f-r-e-w on Aug 19, 2022 10:47:08 GMT
@danny - "you still don't get that being mentioned on death cert doesn't mean covid killed them." Come on in to the real world - you never know - you might like it! Lesson 1: If something is written on the death certificate, it means that the doctor issuing the certificate judges that it contributed to the death. Get that simple fact into your head and you'll start to understand. This is to ignore Danny’s main point, which is that even if Covid did deliver the final blow, it may have been lockdown that weakened them in the first place in some cases.
|
|
|
Post by alec on Aug 19, 2022 10:48:17 GMT
@danny - this is what I have found in 30 seconds of searching - www.ons.gov.uk/aboutus/transparencyandgovernance/freedomofinformationfoi/howcovid19deathsarecategorisedbyons"For deaths involving COVID-19, whether or not there was a positive test result is only one piece of information to be taken into account, alongside the patient's symptoms and other evidence. COVID-19 is only mentioned on the death certificate if the doctor or coroner believes it was part of the reason the person died. A positive test result does not make a death 'count' as involving COVID-19 if COVID-19 did not actually contribute to the death, for example if the person died in an accident."
My emphasis.
Time for you to shut up, I think.
|
|
|
Post by alec on Aug 19, 2022 10:51:48 GMT
c-a-r-f-r-e-w - "This is to ignore Danny’s main point, which is that even if Covid did deliver the final blow, it may have been lockdown that weakened them in the first place." Hard to imagine, tbh, and once again, an evidence free assertion. Likewise - but with very strong evidence in support - covid itself is weakening many people, leading to elevated death rates from other causes not listed as covid. The epidemiology is extremely clear on this, and we also increasingly have medical pathways that explain the long term organ damage leading to post viral illnesses across a range of organ systems.
|
|
|
Post by graham on Aug 19, 2022 10:58:42 GMT
Plenty of other jobs available. How strongly do you support the Arbeit Macht Frei wing of the Tory party? Can we expect Truss to come up with a Final Solution?
|
|
|
Post by moby on Aug 19, 2022 11:00:01 GMT
"Lets keep it simple then...... 'Unionist' and 'Nationalist'."
OK. "Unionists" are those who wish their polity to be a member state of the European Union. "Nationalists" are those who wish their polity to exist outwith that Union.
"You can put your slant as to this and that about attitudes in England and (Wales)."
Since pjw1961 's comment was that "terminology is used "to wind up their English supporters", I restricted my response to that. To see yourself, or your group, as being so important, that everyone else is focussed on you, is a classic form of the "hypervigilant" subtype of narcissistic personality disorder - though I had hoped that a gentler reference would be adequate. It is, of course, not unique to England that some people demonstrate that characteristic to some degree or other. Such people, who often display a contradictory set of attitudes incorporating arrogance and victimhood, are to be found everywhere. I observed it as being regrettably common in Scotland in the 3rd quarter of the 20th century.
"For me the self centredness comes from Scottish Nationalists who see themselves as having an escape route from a failing union and who seem to relish every opportunity to tell us that."
Since the whole point of the constitutional debate in Scotland is to advocate what people think is best for Scotland, of course it is self (or at least polity) centred. Research has shown that the number of people who think Scotland should be in no political union at all is very small, and the prospect of being in both the UK and European Unions for the foreseeable future is vanishingly small, the key question is which of the two available Unions is best for Scotland to be in. Those in other polities will have to make their own choices.
However, I am glad to see you confirming that the UK Union is failing - "a sinking ship" - so we should all consider the best options to replace it.
"It's as if we are all on a sinking ship but some of us have access to a lifeboat. Imagine being in the group that don't have access to the lifeboat!"
Perhaps not the best analogy. The officers commanding the tramp steamer "UK" ensured that there were no lifeboats. Those with a bit of gumption are building a raft, while others just sit around moaning about those selfish buggers who don't choose to drown with the rest of us.
"Many people in England and Wales have very similar views and attitudes to people in Scotland"
True - but a non-sequitur. Just as many in Ireland, IoM and the Channel Islands (not to mention in other states around the world) have the same. Sharing such attitudes does not entail being in a political union.
"There is more that unifies us than divides us in relation to culture, language, foreign affairs, defence etc. The areas that are different can be managed by devolution and both Labour and LibDems have an honourable history in devolving power."
Since foreign affairs and defence are matters reserved to Westminster, it should be obvious that they cannot be managed by devolution. Hireton has already dealt with your other points. No don't agree with this characterisation. It's dismissive of devolution and is just reframing a wider debate into areas you wish to restrict it to. As to your comments about 'a classic form of the "hypervigilant" subtype of narcissistic personality disorder' and 'arrogance and victimhood'... I would usually characterise that as your usual over the top 'flannel' directed towards people who disagree with you. It's also quite distasteful to use mental health pathology in such a casual way.
|
|
|
Post by alec on Aug 19, 2022 11:01:25 GMT
|
|
c-a-r-f-r-e-w
Member
A step on the way toward the demise of the liberal elite? Or just a blip…
Posts: 6,185
|
Post by c-a-r-f-r-e-w on Aug 19, 2022 11:02:34 GMT
No, but the Daily Telegraph has. Probably many years ago too. It's the house magazine for upper class twits these days. Well, the Telegraph were reporting the concerns of the DoH: ” Questioned by The Telegraph, the Department of Health admitted it had asked the Office for Health Improvement and Disparities to look into the figures and had discovered that the majority were linked to largely preventable heart and stroke and diabetes-related conditions.” and indeed the concerns of others, like the Stroke Association: “ Juliet Bouvier, the Stroke Association chief executive, said: “We know people haven’t been having their routine appointments for the past few years now, so we’ve been anticipating a rise in strokes for quite a while now.
“This lack of opportunity to identify risk factors for stroke, coupled with increasing ambulance delays, is a recipe for increased stroke mortality and disability in those that survive.””
|
|
c-a-r-f-r-e-w
Member
A step on the way toward the demise of the liberal elite? Or just a blip…
Posts: 6,185
|
Post by c-a-r-f-r-e-w on Aug 19, 2022 11:31:34 GMT
An excellent and measured debunking of the myths in the D Tel article about lockdown here - this is a bit more like it, where he tries to take all reasonable possibilities into account: “ So what are the underlying causes? I think three main factors: 1. elevated cardiovascular risks after covid infection 2. current delays for urgent treatment in the NHS 3. missed and delayed diagnoses early in the pandemic” …however, it doesn’t necessarily take all reasonable concerns into account, for example the possibility that lockdown measures may have led to more people being sedentary, thus resulting in more heart issues, alongside working from home leading to more alcohol consumption with health issues arising etc.
|
|
c-a-r-f-r-e-w
Member
A step on the way toward the demise of the liberal elite? Or just a blip…
Posts: 6,185
|
Post by c-a-r-f-r-e-w on Aug 19, 2022 11:36:39 GMT
There is another Telegraph article running concurrently, which both considers how Covid might result in some excess deaths indirectly, say by weakening the heart, but also how lockdown measures might also lead to excess deaths, exacerbated by lack of capacity/funding.
“Some experts think the excess deaths may still be people whose health was weakened by a Covid infection, which is known to increase the risk of stroke and heart attacks.
Research has also shown that people who have recovered from a Covid infection are at increased risk of cardiovascular disease.
Dr Adam Jacobs, the senior director of biostatistics at Premier Research, said: “It’s certainly possible that just allowing millions of people to be infected could have increased deaths from cardiovascular disease as an indirect effect of Covid.”
However, others believe the excess deaths are likely to be a complex response to government policies and restrictions to tackle the virus.”
and…
“Prof Robert Dingwall, of Nottingham Trent University, a former government adviser during the pandemic, said: “The picture seems very consistent with what some of us were suggesting from the beginning.
“We are beginning to see the deaths that result from delay and deferment of treatment for other conditions, like cancer and heart disease, and from those associated with poverty and deprivation.
“These come through more slowly – if cancer is not treated promptly, patients don't die immediately but do die in greater numbers more quickly than would otherwise be the case.””
and…
“Dr Tom Jefferson, also of the Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine, added: “Clearly, Covid is not really an issue any more and instead there appears to be an increase in cardiovascular events and diabetes which fits in with a more sedentary lifestyles brought about by the pandemic restrictions.
“Increased alcohol and food intake, not exercising enough, stress, not getting treatment can all lead to strokes and heart attacks. Then you ring the ambulance and it doesn’t come.””
|
|
|
Post by alec on Aug 19, 2022 12:07:56 GMT
c-a-r-f-r-e-w - I think anyone who says "Clearly, Covid is not really an issue any more..." needs to be treated very carefully indeed, when covid remains one of the leading causes of death in the UK and the evidence for long term impacts is mounting. Also worth noting that Prof Dingwall got eseveral big calls wrong on covid and was tainted by association with some of the financial backers of the GBD, including notorious anti vax groups. That said, the underlying sentiments here are fine. No one here is denying the long term impacts of lockdown, nor have they ever done so. Interesting thought though is whether Prof Dingwall watched the recent Panorama documentary on covid impacts on cancer care. A women who was recently diagnosed with terminal stage 4 cancer which would have been eminently treatable had she had rapid access to diagnostics and treatment. Her case came way after any lockdowns, with the delays entirely caused by the high covid levels clogging up the NHS services she needed for a rapid diagnosis. She is going to die, precisely because we are allowing far too much infection now. If only Prof Dingwall could vacate the minimizers camp and apply the same thinking he is using against lockdowns to the real issue, which is the unmitigated community transmission of covid, we might start to get somewhere. Here's a final thought; the recently announced autumn booster campaign now makes it official: the UK is doing less to mitigate covid than we are doing to mitigate seasonal flu. Any sensible person would find that bizarre.
|
|
|
Post by mercian on Aug 19, 2022 12:12:12 GMT
Plenty of other jobs available. Totally missing the point. If we allow companies the ability to sack people because they can where does that leave rights etc? How does anybody plan life (mortgages, where they live schools etc knowing they can be just sacked?) Or are you saying employees are worthless to be used and abused by corporations? I thought you brexit supporters were for the little people? Obviously not, by your attitude. Also, and you're happy with P&O out and out lying? Of course companies can sack people. If they couldn't every company would be full of work-shy slackers. Good employees are not worthless of course but companies must be able to get rid of those they don't want. I'm not sure what you mean by P&O lying, but I'm not keen on the fact that I understand that they've found a way of circumventing the minimum wage. "How does anybody plan life (mortgages, where they live schools etc knowing they can be just sacked?)" The same way they've always done.
|
|
|
Post by alec on Aug 19, 2022 12:12:43 GMT
Also worth noting that Prof Dingwall is a sociologist, not a medical expert.
|
|
c-a-r-f-r-e-w
Member
A step on the way toward the demise of the liberal elite? Or just a blip…
Posts: 6,185
|
Post by c-a-r-f-r-e-w on Aug 19, 2022 12:21:18 GMT
c-a-r-f-r-e-w - "This is to ignore Danny’s main point, which is that even if Covid did deliver the final blow, it may have been lockdown that weakened them in the first place." Hard to imagine, tbh, and once again, an evidence free assertion. Likewise - but with very strong evidence in support - covid itself is weakening many people, leading to elevated death rates from other causes not listed as covid. The epidemiology is extremely clear on this, and we also increasingly have medical pathways that explain the long term organ damage leading to post viral illnesses across a range of organ systems. Well, absence of evidence is not necessarily evidence of absence, and science often advances by considering areas where there is currently insufficient evidence, and that’s why they might be looking into the excess deaths data. Equally you haven’t provided much evidence to counter the possibility. There is perhaps quite a bit of circumstantial evidence to suggest lockdown effects ought to be taken seriously. If we accept, for example, that a more sedentary lifestyle might lead to health problems, and additionally increased intake of alcohol and food, then it’s reasonable to consider that lockdown might have an effect. There is also the issue of missed appointments, and maybe a lack of face-to-face contact with GPs, some of which might be funding-related, but not necessarily all. (Even if there were capacity issues, one might need to take that into account when considering the efficacy of lockdown) I already agreed that Covid might be weakening people, but that isn’t necessarily a great reason to ignore other potential factors.
|
|
|
Post by pete on Aug 19, 2022 12:23:08 GMT
Totally missing the point. If we allow companies the ability to sack people because they can where does that leave rights etc? How does anybody plan life (mortgages, where they live schools etc knowing they can be just sacked?) Or are you saying employees are worthless to be used and abused by corporations? I thought you brexit supporters were for the little people? Obviously not, by your attitude. Also, and you're happy with P&O out and out lying? Of course companies can sack people. If they couldn't every company would be full of work-shy slackers. Good employees are not worthless of course but companies must be able to get rid of those they don't want. I'm not sure what you mean by P&O lying, but I'm not keen on the fact that I understand that they've found a way of circumventing the minimum wage. "How does anybody plan life (mortgages, where they live schools etc knowing they can be just sacked?)" The same way they've always done. Again, missing the point. This was nothing to do with slackers, as well you know.
|
|
c-a-r-f-r-e-w
Member
A step on the way toward the demise of the liberal elite? Or just a blip…
Posts: 6,185
|
Post by c-a-r-f-r-e-w on Aug 19, 2022 12:29:19 GMT
c-a-r-f-r-e-w - I think anyone who says "Clearly, Covid is not really an issue any more..." needs to be treated very carefully indeed, when covid remains one of the leading causes of death in the UK and the evidence for long term impacts is mounting. Also worth noting that Prof Dingwall got eseveral big calls wrong on covid and was tainted by association with some of the financial backers of the GBD, including notorious anti vax groups. That said, the underlying sentiments here are fine. No one here is denying the long term impacts of lockdown, nor have they ever done so. Interesting thought though is whether Prof Dingwall watched the recent Panorama documentary on covid impacts on cancer care. A women who was recently diagnosed with terminal stage 4 cancer which would have been eminently treatable had she had rapid access to diagnostics and treatment. Her case came way after any lockdowns, with the delays entirely caused by the high covid levels clogging up the NHS services she needed for a rapid diagnosis. She is going to die, precisely because we are allowing far too much infection now. If only Prof Dingwall could vacate the minimizers camp and apply the same thinking he is using against lockdowns to the real issue, which is the unmitigated community transmission of covid, we might start to get somewhere. Here's a final thought; the recently announced autumn booster campaign now makes it official: the UK is doing less to mitigate covid than we are doing to mitigate seasonal flu. Any sensible person would find that bizarre. No doubt there are various vested interests in play. Some big Pharma might be keen to focus on medicines rather than impact of lockdown. Some scientists might be invested in lockdown, just as some might be invested against it. But the ad hominems don’t mean one can necessarily ignore the impact of lockdown-related effects. Indeed, if they are feeding through more now, it might be an idea to make more provision for them.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 19, 2022 12:34:12 GMT
Of course companies can sack people. And at the tribunal they can try to show why shouldn't either reinstate the worker or pay handsome compensation.
|
|
c-a-r-f-r-e-w
Member
A step on the way toward the demise of the liberal elite? Or just a blip…
Posts: 6,185
|
Post by c-a-r-f-r-e-w on Aug 19, 2022 12:40:44 GMT
c-a-r-f-r-e-w - yes, I would agree with that article. Lockdowns are harmful, uncontrolled covid would have been far worse, and untangling the precise direct and indirect effects is difficult. Unfortunately the simpletons on the far right, aped by the Telegraph, are mindlessly ignoring huge chunks of evidence and continue to try to score points for discredited and debunked theories, like the Great Barrington Declaration and the anti maskers etc, trying to recruit covid into the culture wars, like Shapps is trying to co-opt cycling as a target. I'm baffled by the idiocy of this wider right wing movement. The headline was provocative, but we do live in the era of clickbait. In the body of the articles themselves though, they do note the concerns around funding and indirect Covid effects, while adding in concerns around health impacts of lockdown, deprivation etc. (For me, it’s not about trying to say so-and-so is a simpleton etc., or even necessarily trying to campaign for a particular approach, but just trying to get a better picture of what’s really going on, all the factors etc., and indeed seeing how the media portray these things, how people respond to the media etc.)
|
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,262
Member is Online
|
Post by steve on Aug 19, 2022 12:58:27 GMT
War criminal Putin's policy of storing his invasion forces munitions and aircraft in the open so the Ukrainians can blow them up seems to be going well. youtu.be/0LUcOnt0mLE
|
|
oldnat
Member
Extremist - Undermining the UK state and its institutions
Posts: 6,083
|
Post by oldnat on Aug 19, 2022 12:58:40 GMT
In addition to attitudes to the Tory candidates, the poll asked "do you have a favourable or unfavourable opinion of the following political parties?"
Party : Favourable : Unfavourable : Meh
SNP : 44 : 39 : 14 SCon : 20 : 58 : 18 SGP : 35 : 35 : 26 SLab : 32 : 35 : 30 SLD : 22 : 35 : 37
Unsurprising that more people have a positive or negative view of the parties in Scotland's 2 governments, nor that SCon continue to be the least popular party in Scotland - as they have been for more than half a century.
|
|