|
Post by The Drunken Communist on May 15, 2020 11:07:40 GMT
Hopes a coronavirus cure could be on the horizon were raised today after a vaccine developed in Britain showed promising signs in trials on monkeys.
The University of Oxford's experimental jab strengthened the immune system in six rhesus macaques without causing any side effects.
Within 28 days of being vaccinated, all of the animals had COVID-19 antibodies - produced by the body to give it some immunity from the virus.
Researchers said the primates were able to fight off the virus before it penetrated deep into their lungs, where it can become deadly.
The promising results come as human trials of the Oxford University vaccine are already underway.Link.
|
|
|
Post by armadillo on May 15, 2020 11:13:26 GMT
|
|
|
Post by AlliG on May 15, 2020 11:14:03 GMT
I agree that the government have made a complete arse of 90% of this but is the first step not to open schools or at least try to in a reduced capacity due to the low risk? As an outsider it would be the first step due to the low risk to children and the subsequent knock on effect it could have to free up parts of the labour market. Primary schools first due to the importance of early years, relative young age of children and assumed youngish age of parents. There will be exceptions to the above but there should be opt outs. If this isn’t the first step I’m not sure what should be? What if a child passes on the virus through touch, clothing etc and brings it home to the family? Family that have vulnerable people in the household? It's an open question since, after god knows how many months, we still don't have any real concrete evidence to suggest how this virus spreads, how easy it spreads, how long it lives on different types of surfaces other than some waffle from a group of people who have been proven to be total liars from day one. We already have what should be the perfect opportunity for an intensive study of all the above using the schools that have remained open. I can't understand why, when they have been presented with what might be seen as "live" laboratories, the scientists and data analysts are not all over these schools and why the opportunity appears to have been missed before we reached the stage where decisions on the next steps around schools are made.
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on May 15, 2020 11:14:28 GMT
If it’s ok with you I’ll read what the fuck I like Or would you prefer we lived in a communist state where you can only read what the party want you to You're quite right, we live in a democracy and not a totalitarian ( insert 'communist' here, if you're a Daily Mail or Sun reader ) state, thankfully. Don't think anyone has suggested banning it have they?
|
|
|
Post by sportsman on May 15, 2020 11:19:40 GMT
I still say this was and still is a bit in the thinking of how its panning out
|
|
|
Post by crapslinger on May 15, 2020 11:21:40 GMT
Would you class living, working using the Health Service etc. illegally in another country a minor discretion ? I haven't time to think about that, I'm too busy worrying what else your historic offence police are going to be chasing me for. In the case of illegal immigrants living here they are current law breakers, what you have done in your past is your concern.
|
|
|
Post by spitthedog on May 15, 2020 11:23:14 GMT
If you read the Daily Mail you're a twat and that's that. If it’s ok with you I’ll read what the fuck I like Or would you prefer we lived in a communist state where you can only read what the party want you to Lots of twats read what the hell they like....that is democracy.......so I wouldn't worry about it. Nobody is going to to take that right away from you.
|
|
|
Post by elystokie on May 15, 2020 11:28:20 GMT
I haven't time to think about that, I'm too busy worrying what else your historic offence police are going to be chasing me for. In the case of illegal immigrants living here they are current law breakers, what you have done in your past is your concern. It's also yours apparently, the law is the law after all, that's what you said at the start of this and what prompted my reply if you remember? I know you tried to sidetrack it to a different discussion as you always do, but that was the original point in question. Any road, have a lovely day, I have other things to do
|
|
|
Post by crapslinger on May 15, 2020 11:31:23 GMT
If you read the Daily Mail you're a twat and that's that. If it’s ok with you I’ll read what the fuck I like Or would you prefer we lived in a communist state where you can only read what the party want you to He only reads the Beano
|
|
|
Post by iglugluk on May 15, 2020 11:32:36 GMT
You're quite right, we live in a democracy and not a totalitarian ( insert 'communist' here, if you're a Daily Mail or Sun reader ) state, thankfully. Don't think anyone has suggested banning it have they? Unfortunately not, or at least no one with the power to do so, dammit.
|
|
|
Post by crapslinger on May 15, 2020 11:32:48 GMT
In the case of illegal immigrants living here they are current law breakers, what you have done in your past is your concern. It's also yours apparently, the law is the law after all, that's what you said at the start of this and what prompted my reply if you remember? I know you tried to sidetrack it to a different discussion as you always do, but that was the original point in question. Any road, have a lovely day, I have other things to do You mentioned it FFS off to do a bit of accidental shoplifting are you
|
|
|
Post by Seymour Beaver on May 15, 2020 11:32:53 GMT
Again I agree - to a point - however I think that we don't yet have sufficient control through test and trace. We were slow to lock down and we've been quick to open up without adequate controls in place - sadly I believe that will mean that we end up paying twice. I really hope I'm wrong. I suspect every country will be paying twice or more. I don't think it's escapable. Quite possibly. The question then becomes "How much?"
|
|
|
Post by lordb on May 15, 2020 11:36:01 GMT
You're quite right, we live in a democracy and not a totalitarian ( insert 'communist' here, if you're a Daily Mail or Sun reader ) state, thankfully. Don't think anyone has suggested banning it have they? Absolutely anyone is perfectly entitled to read the Daily Mail Equally the rest of us are perfectly entitled to describe it as forum for lies and filth
|
|
|
Post by OldStokie on May 15, 2020 11:43:24 GMT
Regarding kids returning to school, it's one of the most stupid actions of this government. They could possibly get away with bringing year 6 pupils back but asking teachers to deal with reception class and year 1 is complete lunacy. My lass is an assistant schoolteacher who deals with reception and year 1. For those who don't know anything about these two year groups, they're basicially a nursery class (reception) and a playing class (year 1). Many kids in reception class are just a step up from babies. Some are still in nappies and teachers have to deal with that situation. Also in those classes are kids with special needs, which are both physical and mental. My lass has one child to deal with who is diabetic and needs constant monitoring including administrating insulin when required. For many of these nippers, English is their second language and communication can be difficult. These are the realities. And some bright spark thinks they're able to deal with social distancing? What planet are they on? It's impossible. A reception class is little more than children familiarising themsleves with their peers and the overwhelming majority of their time is spent socially interacting by play. Year 1 is just a step up when they still do many of the things a reception class does but with a bit of ABC's and 1 2 3s. But they're still incapable of social distancing. As an example of what it will be like, if you've got or have had a kid aged 4/5, then try sitting them in a corner of your house for 6 hours and tell them they're to keep away from everyone else in the house. The kids are most unlikely to be affected by the virus, but they come from homes which could be rife with it. Those kids are the perfect carriers. Any adult in their classes are bound to pick up the virus when the kids bring it in. They'll also be spreading it amongst their classmates, who will then take it home, infecting adults there. As I said, it's complete lunacy and any head teacher of a school has every right to reject government advice on the grounds that they have a duty to protect their workforce. Given that fact, it opens a can of worms which could lead to law suits against local authorities for placing their employees in a situation where social distancing is impossible. Any employer in a 'normal' workplace wouldn't get away with breaking the social distancing rules, so why should schools be any different? And before anyone pipes up and says hospitals have to do it, their situation is entirely different. This opening of schools is not a necessity, it's a social experiment dreamed up by lunatics in white collars who have little idea of the consequences of their actions. OS. I'm almost certain that kids who are still wearing nappies are not allowed to go to school in reception class and realistically, how many 4 year olds are still wearing nappies? The case of the diabetic child is irrelevant. He/she wouldn't be allowed back to school due to being in the vulnerable category. The danger is less for the kids and more the broader chance of spreading through to adults but I'd happily have my youngest in school and then isolate from everyone else in the process.DJ, we're dealing with reality here and not what we would like things to be. Some kids are still wearing nappies even when they're five years old. There are reasons why that happens. For instance, autistic children can take much longer to be potty-trained. And they are allowed to go into school wearing nappies. Also, even if a child is weaned out of nappies it doesn't mean they're able to use the toilet properly. The incidents of kiddies soiling themselves (either way) are frequent. Perhaps it would have been better if I used the 'soiling themselves'. Although the nappy comment is true, it could lead to the doubters, like yourself, thinking that all school intake at that age are clean that way. I take your point re the diabetic child. You may be right on that one. I'm not sure I get the point you're making in the part I've highlighted. Are you saying that you'd be prepared to allow your 4/5 year old back to school and accept the chance that they would bring the virus home to spread amongst your family? Or are you saying that you would then completely isolate your child from the rest of the family? OS.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 15, 2020 11:44:53 GMT
The Daily Mail, the newspaper of the extremist right wing populist post-truth era.
As long as you know none of what is in there is true. But if you don't realise its all lies, then that is a concern.
That is my worry, people think it's true.
|
|
|
Post by iglugluk on May 15, 2020 12:11:36 GMT
The Daily Mail, the newspaper of the extremist right wing populist post-truth era. As long as you know none of what is in there is true. But if you don't realise its all lies, then that is a concern. That is my worry, people think it's true. You are right to be worried by that fact. Both The Mail and The Sun are hate filled rags with undue influence.
|
|
|
Post by spitthedog on May 15, 2020 12:11:56 GMT
If it’s ok with you I’ll read what the fuck I like Or would you prefer we lived in a communist state where you can only read what the party want you to He only reads the Beano It would be useful on a forum if posters could tell the difference between a) offering an opinion i.e Daily Mail readers are twats (whether you agree or not) and b) advocating censorship (defensive and reactionary nature of response) The two things are not even remotely connected. Reacting by suggesting the poster is doing the latter completely (and probably deliberately) takes the discussion away from the topic which is a newspaper advocating zero protection for workers in a country where workers already have next to no rights, at the same time smearing people who are trying to represent those interests as Commie bastards. The headline is intentionally divisive. Giving the false impression that it is only whacky bunch of Reds are stopping this from happening (where have I heard that before!!) Speaking to teachers (as I do every day through my work) they don't have any assurances that it is safe to go back to work, and feel they are being pressurised into work in unsafe environments, are also concerned about the psychological impact on children (taught in an environment where they are unnaturally distanced) and therefore the newspaper headline is deliberately misleading and under-researched. They are concerned about many things that this newspaper deliberately and strategically ignores buts its only nasty Unions who are the spoilers.
|
|
|
Post by stokeson on May 15, 2020 12:13:44 GMT
I still say this was and still is a bit in the thinking of how its panning out "hardly been a success story,ecept in right-wing fiction".Right up your street.....
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on May 15, 2020 12:18:08 GMT
|
|
|
Post by algor on May 15, 2020 12:20:08 GMT
The Daily Mail, the newspaper of the extremist right wing populist post-truth era. As long as you know none of what is in there is true. But if you don't realise its all lies, then that is a concern. That is my worry, people think it's true. Of course on the flip side many would say similar things about the Guardian and the Mirror, that's plebotics! I miss the Daily Sport
|
|
|
Post by spitthedog on May 15, 2020 12:20:35 GMT
I'm almost certain that kids who are still wearing nappies are not allowed to go to school in reception class and realistically, how many 4 year olds are still wearing nappies? The case of the diabetic child is irrelevant. He/she wouldn't be allowed back to school due to being in the vulnerable category. The danger is less for the kids and more the broader chance of spreading through to adults but I'd happily have my youngest in school and then isolate from everyone else in the process.DJ, we're dealing with reality here and not what we would like things to be. Some kids are still wearing nappies even when they're five years old. There are reasons why that happens. For instance, autistic children can take much longer to be potty-trained. And they are allowed to go into school wearing nappies. Also, even if a child is weaned out of nappies it doesn't mean they're able to use the toilet properly. The incidents of kiddies soiling themselves (either way) are frequent. Perhaps it would have been better if I used the 'soiling themselves'. Although the nappy comment is true, it could lead to the doubters, like yourself, thinking that all school intake at that age are clean that way. I take your point re the diabetic child. You may be right on that one. I'm not sure I get the point you're making in the part I've highlighted. Are you saying that you'd be prepared to allow your 4/5 year old back to school and accept the chance that they would bring the virus home to spread amongst your family? Or are you saying that you would then completely isolate your child from the rest of the family? OS. All school teachers I am talking to are saying the most logical move, if there is going to be a phased return would be to start with Yr 10s. That is students who are going to have the best grasp of social distancing. It makes complete sense. Returning toddlers to school first is just madness. It's just completely driven by short term economic interests with no intelligence or common sense. Where young children plus a deadly virus are concerned then economic interests should not be the primary driver at a very critical stage imho.
|
|
|
Post by Seymour Beaver on May 15, 2020 12:24:25 GMT
The Daily Mail, the newspaper of the extremist right wing populist post-truth era. As long as you know none of what is in there is true. But if you don't realise its all lies, then that is a concern. That is my worry, people think it's true. With something like the Daily Star it is so laughably far fetched you know the it is bollocks and is therefore harmless. The Mail however is far more dinister in that it takes a grain of truth or a single instance to play out a narrative that taps into the fears and prejudices of a section of our country - and in doing so reinforces and gives them justification for holding those views. That is much more pernicious. Note on the Daily Star. In my eyes their one moment of maturity came on the death of the Princess of Wales. While all others had thoroughly morbid headlines the Star had a front page photograph of a laughing Diana running to meet a wave with the poignant headline "Free At Last"
|
|
|
Post by davejohnno1 on May 15, 2020 12:25:28 GMT
I'm almost certain that kids who are still wearing nappies are not allowed to go to school in reception class and realistically, how many 4 year olds are still wearing nappies? The case of the diabetic child is irrelevant. He/she wouldn't be allowed back to school due to being in the vulnerable category. The danger is less for the kids and more the broader chance of spreading through to adults but I'd happily have my youngest in school and then isolate from everyone else in the process.DJ, we're dealing with reality here and not what we would like things to be. Some kids are still wearing nappies even when they're five years old. There are reasons why that happens. For instance, autistic children can take much longer to be potty-trained. And they are allowed to go into school wearing nappies. Also, even if a child is weaned out of nappies it doesn't mean they're able to use the toilet properly. The incidents of kiddies soiling themselves (either way) are frequent. Perhaps it would have been better if I used the 'soiling themselves'. Although the nappy comment is true, it could lead to the doubters, like yourself, thinking that all school intake at that age are clean that way. I take your point re the diabetic child. You may be right on that one. I'm not sure I get the point you're making in the part I've highlighted. Are you saying that you'd be prepared to allow your 4/5 year old back to school and accept the chance that they would bring the virus home to spread amongst your family? Or are you saying that you would then completely isolate your child from the rest of the family? OS. Im not saying I'd isolate a 6 year old from his mum dad and brother but I'd happily avoid any contact with our wider family and friends who ordinarily we'd see regularly so that our only contact remained our own family unit, if that meant he could go back to school. I'd happily do that for as long as was necessary, even into next year. The situations you describe are extreme examples of problem children who probably are too vulnerable to be in mainstream schools anyway. There are certainly no kids of that nature in my sons school.
|
|
|
Post by crapslinger on May 15, 2020 12:26:24 GMT
He only reads the Beano It would be useful on a forum if posters could tell the difference between a) offering an opinion i.e Daily Mail readers are twats (whether you agree or not) and b) advocating censorship (defensive and reactionary nature of response) The two things are not even remotely connected. Reacting by suggesting the poster is doing the latter completely (and probably deliberately) takes the discussion away from the topic which is a newspaper advocating zero protection for workers in a country where workers already have next to no rights, at the same time smearing people who are trying to represent those interests as Commie bastards. The headline is intentionally divisive. Giving the false impression that it is only whacky bunch of Reds are stopping this from happening (where have I heard that before!!) Speaking to teachers (as I do every day through my work) they don't have any assurances that it is safe to go back to work, and feel they are being pressurised into work in unsafe environments, are also concerned about the psychological impact on children (taught in an environment where they are unnaturally distanced) and therefore the newspaper headline is deliberately misleading and under-researched. They are concerned about many things that this newspaper deliberately and strategically ignores buts its only nasty Unions who are the spoilers. Which country has no workers rights ? are we talking about the PRC ?
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 15, 2020 12:31:15 GMT
His face on 28 seconds, "fuck I've been rumbled"
|
|
|
Post by dutchstokie on May 15, 2020 12:31:40 GMT
|
|
|
Post by crapslinger on May 15, 2020 12:32:21 GMT
The Daily Mail, the newspaper of the extremist right wing populist post-truth era. As long as you know none of what is in there is true. But if you don't realise its all lies, then that is a concern. That is my worry, people think it's true. With something like the Daily Star it is so laughably far fetched you know the it is bollocks and is therefore harmless. The Mail however is far more dinister in that it takes a grain of truth or a single instance to play out a narrative that taps into the fears and prejudices of a section of our country - and in doing so reinforces and gives them justification for holding those views. That is much more pernicious. Note on the Daily Star. In my eyes their one moment of maturity came on the death of the Princess of Wales. While all others had thoroughly morbid headlines the Star had a front page photograph of a laughing Diana running to meet a wave with the poignant headline "Free At Last" Who mentioned the Star ? more dinister is The Morning Star
|
|
|
Post by mrcoke on May 15, 2020 12:35:32 GMT
this government? The rest of europe are managing it so are they all bad aswell? The rest of Europe aren't. Those countries in Europe who controlled it early with shutdown and extensive test and trace are. The UK is alone in countries with 20k plus deaths to be attempting it. As usual another lie based on a misleading statistic. The UK has a lot of deaths and it is one of the most populated countries in Europe. Belgium has been hit worse by the virus and has a higher death rate than the UK and are opening schools, zoos, and museums. www.euractiv.com/section/politics/news/belgium-set-to-reopen-schools-markets-museums-and-zoos/
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 15, 2020 12:38:24 GMT
The rest of Europe aren't. Those countries in Europe who controlled it early with shutdown and extensive test and trace are. The UK is alone in countries with 20k plus deaths to be attempting it. As usual another lie based on a misleading statistic. The UK has a lot of deaths and it is one of the most populated countries in Europe. Belgium has been hit worse by the virus and has a higher death rate than the UK and are opening schools, zoos, and museums. www.euractiv.com/section/politics/news/belgium-set-to-reopen-schools-markets-museums-and-zoos/For clarity 98% of Belgium's "excess deaths" have been attributed to Coronavirus compared to our 72%, so whilst at the moment they have a higher death rate that may not be the case when the dust settles and the counts are verified.......
|
|
|
Post by Seymour Beaver on May 15, 2020 12:39:08 GMT
With something like the Daily Star it is so laughably far fetched you know the it is bollocks and is therefore harmless. The Mail however is far more dinister in that it takes a grain of truth or a single instance to play out a narrative that taps into the fears and prejudices of a section of our country - and in doing so reinforces and gives them justification for holding those views. That is much more pernicious. Note on the Daily Star. In my eyes their one moment of maturity came on the death of the Princess of Wales. While all others had thoroughly morbid headlines the Star had a front page photograph of a laughing Diana running to meet a wave with the poignant headline "Free At Last" Who mentioned the Star ? more dinister is The Morning Star I did. The Morning Star has a circulation of less than 10,000. The Daily Mail has 1.2 million. Spot the difference The Morning Star may well be more dinister but no fucker reads it. Shame the same is not true of the Mail.
|
|