COVID-19 (Coronavirus)

But now we’re talking about something different. My point stands when it comes to the statistics you’re disputing - figures, history, and information into how they’re collected is presented on the Coronavirus dashboard.

On the topic of Cronyism that we’re seeing, we can agree - it’s deplorable, especially when you start to see the connections between those involved (Dido Harding’s husband, John Penrose, is the government’s anti-corruption champion, for example). It comes to something when it comes to investigating yourself and finding no evidence of wrongdoing.

We are fighting a seemingly loosing battle at the minute, yes, but one has to hope that once the vaccines start to take effect we’ll see the resultant deaths reduce overall. Then we can move onto tackling other things now we know the NHS can continue to care for everyone and not just those in dire straights with Covid.

Additionally, given a party that’s led by a team that backed “taking back control of our borders”, and won two general elections on that, I continue to find it amazing that they refuse to have effective border controls in place.

Personally, I’d trust whichever team isn’t willing to sacrifice other humans*, with a limited attempt at protecting them, all because they’re watching their investments go down the pan. We can’t save everyone, that’s a fact, but letting the virus rip through society would devastate us and overrun the NHS in no time at all. You don’t need a scientist to tell you that - you can see it. Look at the volume of cases with measures in place - what do you think would happen if they weren’t?

*Sadly there will come a point where we have to tolerate/accept a certain amount of risk - as we do with the flu. We aren’t there yet, we won’t be for a while, and we definitely weren’t there at the start of the pandemic.

1 Like

Well, the parts of the world that got it right followed the WHO advice, which was to lock down fast and early and stay locked down until the virus has almost completely fizzled out. That’s what China, Korea, Singapore, Australia etc etc did and they are the countries which now don’t have a problem.

We are in this mess because we were too anti-lockdown and still are. Either the government delays the lockdowns or they announce one and people ignore it.


I think it really demonstrates a special kind of British exceptionalism when we wouldn’t just follow the tried and tested practices of the Asian countries that battled SARs, and figured we can “do it on our own”.


This whole mess is because of the govt’s incompetent handling, not because lockdowns don’t work. :upside_down_face: Lockdowns work when implemented correctly with actual weight behind them instead of these limp wristed threats and vague guidelines that vary from place to place.

The public are confused at the constantly changing “guidelines” and they’re burnt out. Plus these guidelines aren’t followed or taken seriously because they are simply just guidelines.
Other countries pass actual laws fining/ jailing people who wilfully misbehave and don’t wear masks/ have huge parties. Major updates, like lockdowns/ easing of restrictions are texted to every individual directly. Maybe it’s seen as “draconian” to the US/UK but coming down on it hard has conclusively worked in numerous countries. I guess there’s something about cultural differences and putting the collective society first over individual comfort unlike here!

The govt wasted so much time trying to make herd immunity work because economy which puts us months behind everyone else :woman_facepalming:t2: Hospitals are understaffed and had not enough PPE during the initial outbreak- and these essentials then became profit areas thanks to their nepotism and cronyism. Failures on multiple levels and it’s the public who suffers as a result.


It can all be traced back to the first lockdown last year, when the government

  • Locked down weeks too late
  • Lifted the lockdown too early

It’s difficult to blame Sage for anything, because the government have never listened to their advice and consistently held off from acting on any of it until weeks later. We’ll never know how different things would’ve been if Sage’s recommendations were acted on promptly.


This is the hallmark of this sort of post. Everything sounds totally reasonable, but in reality is quietly insidious.

The effect - whether intended or not - is to undermine trust in fact, in data and in response. It’s ironic that this poster talks about “under-miming [sic] the trust of the government”. Because that’s exactly what they are doing.

Now, there is very reasonable debate to be had about the response to the emergency, and the political choices made. Instead, this poster takes aim at some of the fundamentals, the “misleading figures” - the inference being that the hospitals aren’t full of covid patients, instead they’re somehow full of sprained ankles and broken legs of people who happen to have covid. This is factually incorrect.

I return to my earlier point: what’s the motive here? If we believe that hospitals are in danger of being overwhelmed then this is a pointless debate to have. If we believe that Covid is a disease that is causing significant excess death, then it’s a pointless debate to have. If, though, you believe in conspiracy theories, then it makes sense why you’d want to - very subtly, and “reasonably” start a narrative.

I think this sums up the poster’s position:

The word ‘debunked’ is very telling.

I’m not going to engage further to debate this - but a reminder that this forum is moderated and harmful or misleading posts may be removed.


Controversial opinion I’m sure, but I agree with just about everything he’s saying.

It’s an issue that’s been troubling me for a while, but it’s a point of contention I’ve been reluctant to raise and discuss, because I fear it could be erroneously construed as being dismissive and unsympathetic towards a person’s disability. I know how that feels. Likewise, folk who may be abusing this may react defensively when confronted, sparking a disagreement I’d much rather avoid.

So my question for the community here; is there anyone among us who, for whatever reason, cannot wear a mask, willing to share their experience and be open to a respectful discussion and probing on this so that I, and perhaps others, can learn a few things?

And for everyone else, how do you feel about mask exemptions?


Absolutely fine. In fact I’m beyond disgusted at the way people who are unable to wear masks get treated.


I agree with pretty much everything in it too.

If you are not ABLE to wear a mask whilst shopping, then have someone else go for you, or at the very least go in, get what you need and get out again. Don’t start browsing and treating it like a day out. You are exempted from wearing a mask, not exempt from being a bad person.

I went to view a house at the weekend (wearing a mask). The vendor opened the door and said that they are exempt, so I chose not to view the property. The agent called me to ask how it went, I told them, and now the agent has dropped that property from their books. Actions have consequences, and we don’t like in a perfect world.


Personally, I think if you’re exempt from wearing a mask - like, actually, 100% legitimately - you’re probably in one of the main at risk groups, and so should probably not be out and about during the pandemic.

I think the problem is, that there are a lot of people who are anti-mask who say they have an exemption, but don’t actually. So everyone assumes those people without a mask are simply being anti-mask.

It’s a shame, but it’s the case with a lot of things in this world. A small minority of people always ruin stuff for other people.


I’m beyond disgusted that people pretend to be exempt because they don’t want to wear a mask.


The only thing I would add to that is that it is hard to know if someone is exempt or not. If they say they are, it is very hard to respond


Which is why some shops have basically started refusing anyone that doesn’t wear a mask. They don’t now have to ask someone why they can’t wear a mask, there’s no exemptions. It’s wear a mask, or don’t come in.

Right, or wrong, I don’t really care at this point. As I said above, it’s a shame that a small minority of anti-maskers have ruined it for people that legitimately can’t wear a mask. But this pandemic has been so poorly handled, that some strong handed rules by supermarkets is probably one of the key ways we’ll be able to get out and about sooner.


The video in the article is pretty concerning, looks the same as pre covid

Not sure how trains not stopping helps with overcrowding on a platform…

1 Like

Nothing good is going to come from this discussion so I’m out.

While I agree with the article, I’ve always disagreed with the use of the word ‘exemption’ throughout the pandemic so far. I’m indecisive on what I’d replace it with if it were down to me though. At this point the word seems too encouraging (for some) to think of an excuse not to wear a mask.


Just before Christmas I was queuing outside a shop, the 3 people in front of me, only 1 had a mask on. The employee asked them to put on a mask, there was a discussion about being exempt, which I didn’t hear all of, but they all ended up putting masks on so they could go in.

Was it a vital shop? FOOT LOCKER!

I have a far bigger problem with people who don’t wear it over their nose.


Reminds me of this image ……


The mask exemption clauses in the government guidelines are written in such a way as to effectively make mask wearing optional.

Now those guidelines may be stupidly written, and have no force of law behind them, but I still find it hard to muster up much ire for individuals who are acting in a way the government tells them is ok.

I save that anger for the government that enables such broad and unverifiable exemptions.

1 Like

Turns out I wear my underwear incorrectly :man_facepalming: