+- The UK Babe Channels Forum (https://www.babeshows.co.uk)
+-- Forum: General (/forumdisplay.php?fid=19)
+--- Forum: All Other Subjects (/forumdisplay.php?fid=114)
+---- Forum: News Zone (/forumdisplay.php?fid=111)
+---- Thread: Coronavirus - is enough being done to contain it? (/showthread.php?tid=80274)
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356
RE: Coronavirus - is enough being done to contain it? - Chrisst - 18-05-2020 10:37
(18-05-2020 07:46 )Goodfella3041 Wrote: All of which poses an ethical conundrum: are we willing to gamble with the lives of our parents and grandparents for the sake of securing our own livelihoods and prosperity?
I think that our forebears would say we should.
I remain of the opinion that too much has been made of the flu and would point to the number dying from old age, smoking, wars and in 1918 and the desire shown by many to disobey the lockdown. I'm also cynical about the desire of the media to sex the thing up.
I've written before that in the light of experience I wouldn't expect Covid 20 to result in the world being brought to a standstill.
RE: Coronavirus - is enough being done to contain it? - southsidestu - 18-05-2020 12:41
^Jesus Chrisst
RE: Coronavirus - is enough being done to contain it? - lovebabes56 - 18-05-2020 13:19
(18-05-2020 07:46 )Goodfella3041 Wrote: All of which poses an ethical conundrum: are we willing to gamble with the lives of our parents and grandparents for the sake of securing our own livelihoods and prosperity?
I think that our forebears would say we should.
Which poses another question - how would our forebears coped with this?
RE: Coronavirus - is enough being done to contain it? - Chrisst - 18-05-2020 16:16
A very good question LB. I'd been wondering how this might have been perceived in the 1970's, a decade I remember so well.
I think that communication is key: We'd have followed it through TV and the newspapers so on the one hand would have remained in ignorance more but then again we'd have not fretted about what we didn't know about.
There'd have been fewer deaths because there'd have been fewer people and less international travel. Any action by the authorities might have been more effective not least because of a greater respect then for the rule of law.
Overall the sense of paranoia would have been the same.
RE: Coronavirus - is enough being done to contain it? - Goodfella3041 - 18-05-2020 17:28
(18-05-2020 16:16 )Chrisst Wrote: A very good question LB. I'd been wondering how this might have been perceived in the 1970's, a decade I remember so well.
I think that communication is key: We'd have followed it through TV and the newspapers so on the one hand would have remained in ignorance more but then again we'd have not fretted about what we didn't know about.
I'm not so sure about this.
Back in the day, there was no rolling, 24-hour news and no Internet or Twitter to force-feed us information every minute of every day. But the news was also far more neutral and fact-based, with less editorialising, less ideology, less opinion. It was more measured and journalistic and generally less 'shouty' and sensationalistic.
I kinda miss it, to be honest. We have a lot more 'noise' now, but the 'signal' is weaker than ever. A 'Boris Johnson' would not have been tenable as a politician -- much less a prime minister -- without the oxygen of a frenetic media that won't stay on one story long enough to go more than an inch deep.
If this had happened then, I think government would have been much quicker to defer to the science, swifter in its response, and more unified in its messaging. We would have fallen into line and followed the rules. For those reasons, I think far fewer people would have died.
Returning to the original question, I don't think that as a people we are any more or less obedient, no more or less altruistic or avaricious. We are, after all, just products of our parents. But I do think that all generations -- as citizens, voters and consumers -- have a conjured a world that is much more poorly served by its media and its government. And things are much worse as a consequence.
RE: Coronavirus - is enough being done to contain it? - lovebabes56 - 18-05-2020 18:20
I would agree there was a far less frenetic media, and was fairly neutral and agree there was little chance that a 'Boris Johnson' type politician being prime minister then, probably had Jeremy Thorpe won the election in '74 that would have been the closest comparison to a BJ style election win. In any case, I think Thatcher changed the face of Politics let alone the idea of a woman being prime minster - the minute she won the Tory leadership.
I seem to remember there were a few epidemics around at the time I'm sure Measles or Polio was one. I know there were vigorous vaccinations programmes for both diseases and one for German Measles sat the time, but I don't think there was one that spread through the adult community as rapidly COVID has until AIDS reared it's head.
RE: Coronavirus - is enough being done to contain it? - Charlemagne - 18-05-2020 18:35
I see that a Hong Kong team have shown that wearing masks reduces transmission up to 75%.
The same face masks that the government said weren't of any use in keeping down the R rate.
RE: Coronavirus - is enough being done to contain it? - lovebabes56 - 19-05-2020 07:18
If that is the case I hope BJ will now reconsider their position on the masks
RE: Coronavirus - is enough being done to contain it? - lovebabes56 - 19-05-2020 07:22
(18-05-2020 10:37 )Chrisst Wrote:There were several callers on five live yesterday who had said they flouted (& some who said they were considering flouting) the lockdown rules(18-05-2020 07:46 )Goodfella3041 Wrote: All of which poses an ethical conundrum: are we willing to gamble with the lives of our parents and grandparents for the sake of securing our own livelihoods and prosperity?
I think that our forebears would say we should.
I remain of the opinion that too much has been made of the flu and would point to the number dying from old age, smoking, wars and in 1918 and the desire shown by many to disobey the lockdown. I'm also cynical about the desire of the media to sex the thing up.
I've written before that in the light of experience I wouldn't expect Covid 20 to result in the world being brought to a standstill.
RE: Coronavirus - is enough being done to contain it? - Tractor boy - 19-05-2020 23:37
(18-05-2020 18:35 )Charlemagne Wrote: I see that a Hong Kong team have shown that wearing masks reduces transmission up to 75%.
The same face masks that the government said weren't of any use in keeping down the R rate.
If masks didn't work, why would NHS staff want them ? The Government say they don't work because they know there isn't enough to go around.