Where was the outrage when he actually went on holiday? That’s what I can’t understand, it’s not like it wasn’t well publicised. People are throwing all this outrage out simply because he’s ill when it’s more than likely unrelated to his holiday. If we’re going to get outraged with him for getting Covid then why aren’t we outraged at anyone else for getting Covid? The holiday was a poor idea, I haven’t seen anyone saying otherwise but if the holiday is what people are so angry about, why wait until now to get angry?

Where was the outrage when he actually went on holiday? That’s what I can’t understand, it’s not like it wasn’t well publicised. People are throwing all this outrage out simply because he’s ill when it’s more than likely unrelated to his holiday. If we’re going to get outraged with him for getting Covid then why aren’t we outraged at anyone else for getting Covid? The holiday was a poor idea, I haven’t seen anyone saying otherwise but if the holiday is what people are so angry about, why wait until now to get angry?

 

Because he got covid in a completely unrelated circumstance. The guy is 100 years old, even if there was not covid the likelihood is he would be using the NHS resources this winter because he's old and that's what happens. The holiday is completely unrelated to him getting covid. People are directing their anger to the wrong place. There was no big story when he went on holiday because it was a completely nothing event. "Old man goes on holiday, whilst lots of other people get some winter sun post lockdown" is not a story I would expect the tabloids to run with in early-mid December because no one would care.

Sorry Rooney, I just don't agree. The whole lockdown has been sold and portrayed as everyone sacrificing for the common good. For someone such a symbol of that AND in high risk categories to be going off on holiday abroad straight after the winter lockdown lifted makes a mockery of that in not too dissimilar a way to Cummings or Ferrier.

 

Another not great example of us all being in it together/ younger people disproportionately sacrificing for the benefit of seniors who are represented as scared, helpless, having to stay in their houses & unable to fend for themselves.

 

Once again not saying that it makes me personally angry or whatever, I don't really care either way, but it does make a mockery of his public image & the reasoning behind the rules we are all living by.

Sorry Rooney, I just don't agree. The whole lockdown has been sold and portrayed as everyone sacrificing for the common good. For someone such a symbol of that AND in high risk categories to be going off on holiday abroad straight after the winter lockdown lifted makes a mockery of that in not too dissimilar a way to Cummings or Ferrier.

 

Another not great example of us all being in it together/ younger people disproportionately sacrificing for the benefit of seniors who are represented as scared, helpless, having to stay in their houses & unable to fend for themselves.

 

Once again not saying that it makes me personally angry or whatever, I don't really care either way, but it does make a mockery of his public image & the reasoning behind the rules we are all living by.

 

Yeah, but it wasn't a lockdown in December. He broke no rules so I don't understand the faux outrage at all. He's 100, if he wants to take a risk getting on an all expenses paid trip on a plane than fair, you don't live forever. There is zero correlation between him going on holiday 8-9 weeks ago and getting covid so I honestly just do not get any of the outrage at all.

 

Cummings made a 200 mile trip during a national lockdown. Ferrier should have been self isolating but decided to get a train and get her haircut whilst telling people to obey the rules. Captain Tom got on a plane when everyone else had the opportunity to get on a plane- there is a marked difference. When I was enjoying my substancial meal in my Tier 2 area in December, I was also enjoying it with people from Leeds, Hull, Sheffield, Middlesborough and Newcastle, all Tier 3 areas. Yes, just because you can do something doesn't make it right, but it is complete faux outrage.

 

Another not great example of us all being in it together/ younger people disproportionately sacrificing for the benefit of seniors who are represented as scared, helpless, having to stay in their houses & unable to fend for themselves.

 

But I would say it is predominantly younger people who have been flouting the rules through the pandemic of course there is no evidence for this but when you see the news stories of rule breaking it does seem to be like this. This theory would make sense too as younger people aren't as much at risk directly from the virus. I mean I know there are quite a few predominantly right-wing older anti lockdown people too.

 

 

But I would say it is predominantly younger people who have been flouting the rules through the pandemic of course there is no evidence for this but when you see the news stories of rule breaking it does seem to be like this. This theory would make sense too as younger people aren't as much at risk directly from the virus. I mean I know there are quite a few predominantly right-wing older anti lockdown people too.

 

With respect Snake this just sounds like prejudice. You've no evidence it's younger people flouting the rules but you 'just think' it is anyway. Despite the fact that the people most likely to be really heavily anti-lockdown are people also pro civil liberties and taking pot shots at wishy washy lefties believing in the fake China virus etc.

 

Anyway my point was that the narrative put to us as a country is that older people are at risk and in danger and we have to look after them. Which I don't disagree with. My point was that it's harder for that narrative to take hold with people who don't necessarily agree with it or who are on the edge of breaking the rules when they have big news stories like this of older people throwing caution to the wind and going on holidays, having friends and family around, and having social gatherings etc. etc.

 

That kind of thing undermines the narrative of why we are all doing what we can and will make people who are on the fence more likely to think "well if PEOPLE AT RISK are breaking the rules, why am I following them?"

@1356611612401164295

 

 

This is completely sensible, should already have happened and should be happening in more countries to get this stamped out.

 

 

BUT

 

this has been a real stab in the heart for me personally. I know no travel is completely safe right now but when the virus is at low prevalence there’s no more risk flying to somewhere also with low prevalence than there is going to ikea for half a day. I’m not being funny but almost 75% of Scottish cases are this new f***ing Kent variant and we have no community spread of that at all in Berlin. It’s completely selfish I know but being able to have family and friends visit again in the near future has been a bright light at the end of a very dark And lonely tunnel that just got firmly extinguished today

Captain Sir Tom Moore has now died of Coronavirus

Captain Sir Tom Moore has now died of Coronavirus

 

Well it was to be expected really when the family was invited to be with him, which Twitter warriors AGAIN went crazy over when it was so obvious he was dying.

 

RIP Sir Tom- a remarkable man, 100 years old too- amazing. He did an amazing thing in April last year and it's really heartwarming he got to experience things he only dreamed of!

My issue was certainly not with him, just the double standards that the media's perception of him raised.

 

He was a true inspiration and wonderful man, a real loss to the world even if we didn't know it before 2020. RIP.

I guess it's the difference between whether you can and whether you should, which might as well be a microcosm for the whole pandemic.

 

All throughout the government has urged people to do as little as possible, while not actually forbidding things outright sometimes.

 

One might say it's a little ironic for someone whose claim to fame is raising money to help the NHS cope with the pandemic then uses the defense that something ISN'T OUTRIGHT ILLEGAL, just recommended against and unhelpful to do, in order to justify doing it - especially when that thing is solely something to be done for personal pleasure.

 

THIS.

 

I don’t understand why people need to be OUTRIGHT TOLD that they can’t do something in order not to do it. Use your brain, if the thing you want to do is quite precarious and could potentially put yourself/others at risk, it shouldn’t take the government to tell you not to do it.

Anyway — for some good news:

 

@1356655905828462593

 

 

Wait, it’s only effective for three months?

With respect Snake this just sounds like prejudice. You've no evidence it's younger people flouting the rules but you 'just think' it is anyway. Despite the fact that the people most likely to be really heavily anti-lockdown are people also pro civil liberties and taking pot shots at wishy washy lefties believing in the fake China virus etc.

 

Anyway my point was that the narrative put to us as a country is that older people are at risk and in danger and we have to look after them. Which I don't disagree with. My point was that it's harder for that narrative to take hold with people who don't necessarily agree with it or who are on the edge of breaking the rules when they have big news stories like this of older people throwing caution to the wind and going on holidays, having friends and family around, and having social gatherings etc. etc.

 

That kind of thing undermines the narrative of why we are all doing what we can and will make people who are on the fence more likely to think "well if PEOPLE AT RISK are breaking the rules, why am I following them?"

 

I think it is uncalled for to call Snake prejudiced here. He is only going off the information he has access to and it isn’t the older generation holding illegal raves. It is a very small minority of any demographic that has been breaking rules very deliberately. But the fact remains that in this case, no rules were broken. It probably wasn’t the best idea to go on holiday at the time but who are we to judge? I don’t think any of us can unless we have literally not left the house since last March. If you went to a pub, restaurant or gym over the last 10 months even when it was allowed, it probably wasn’t the right thing to do. But can you honestly say you didn’t? I went on a staycation and everything was fine but in hindsight it probably wasn’t the right thing to do. Given he has now passed, I expect his family have no regrets taking him to Barbados for his last Christmas. It might not have been the right thing to do but at least he enjoyed himself one last time and didn’t break any rules to do so.

 

I might get your point if all we saw was hoards of elderly people living dangerously and breaking of the rules, but this isn’t what we’re seeing. We are seeing plenty of younger people doing the same thing because ‘it’s so unlikely I’ll die’. No one is observing Captain Tom going to Barbados and thinking it’s ok to do what they want. It’s very clear besides that his much younger family members were the ones organising the trip and assessing the risk. And seeing as it’s almost certain he got ill back home, it seems like it was ok.

 

I feel like there’s a little bit of prejudice from you here. I’ve bitten my tongue at a lot of your comments about the older generation in this thread over the last few months but I couldn’t this time.

Wait, it’s only effective for three months?

I think that’s referencing the UK’s policy of delaying the second vaccination for 12 weeks. After the second dose, it is 82.4% effective.

I might get your point if all we saw was hoards of elderly people living dangerously and breaking of the rules, but this isn’t what we’re seeing. We are seeing plenty of younger people doing the same thing because ‘it’s so unlikely I’ll die’. No one is observing Captain Tom going to Barbados and thinking it’s ok to do what they want. It’s very clear besides that his much younger family members were the ones organising the trip and assessing the risk. And seeing as it’s almost certain he got ill back home, it seems like it was ok.

 

I would argue that this isn't what we're seeing because throughout the pandemic the media have heavily pushed at every opportunity the narrative that young people are demons and older people are victims, even when studies show high compliance from young people and many older people pushing back against restrictions, and when political demographics match up to that, with rightwingers - who trend older - pushing back against 'being told how to live my life' and also making up the majority of anti-5G conspiracy theorists etc. when you see the pictures in the media - never many young faces in amongst them.

 

Meanwhile people who are leftwing who trend younger are also people who are broadly in favour of stronger and longer lockdowns and following the science and erring on the side of caution.

 

I find it interesting and also somewhat hypocritical that the media, broadly, have consistently run with both of these narratives without at any point admitting that they conflict - that it cannot be simultaneously true that older people are ALL following the rules to the T and hiding away and being victimised by younger people who are having parties and spreading the virus and prolonging things, while also being the demographic that (accoding to voting stats and photo evidence) makes up the rightwing pushback against restrictions, masks and the anti-5G brigade.

 

There's an element of Emperor's New Clothes to it.

 

Of course, ironically enough, I also think that the 'leftwingers and young people are completely pro lockdowns' is also a media invention that handily skips over the trends that make lockdowns comparatively harder on people who are living in less secure accommodation, who havelost income and a much greater social life than for people who are more established and materially wealthy.

 

But I should make clear that when I comment in these threads I am doing so based on stats and trends, not generally my personal opinion, and that when I talk about something affecting older people or younger people, that's a generalisation based on demographics, rather than a personal attack on individuals. I don't think, personally, that that constitutes a prejudice - but I am happy to agree to disagree if you do.

 

I would argue that this isn't what we're seeing because throughout the pandemic the media have heavily pushed at every opportunity the narrative that young people are demons and older people are victims, even when studies show high compliance from young people and many older people pushing back against restrictions, and when political demographics match up to that, with rightwingers - who trend older - pushing back against 'being told how to live my life' and also making up the majority of anti-5G conspiracy theorists etc. when you see the pictures in the media - never many young faces in amongst them.

 

Meanwhile people who are leftwing who trend younger are also people who are broadly in favour of stronger and longer lockdowns and following the science and erring on the side of caution.

 

I find it interesting and also somewhat hypocritical that the media, broadly, have consistently run with both of these narratives without at any point admitting that they conflict - that it cannot be simultaneously true that older people are ALL following the rules to the T and hiding away and being victimised by younger people who are having parties and spreading the virus and prolonging things, while also being the demographic that (accoding to voting stats and photo evidence) makes up the rightwing pushback against restrictions, masks and the anti-5G brigade.

 

There's an element of Emperor's New Clothes to it.

 

Of course, ironically enough, I also think that the 'leftwingers and young people are completely pro lockdowns' is also a media invention that handily skips over the trends that make lockdowns comparatively harder on people who are living in less secure accommodation, who havelost income and a much greater social life than for people who are more established and materially wealthy.

 

But I should make clear that when I comment in these threads I am doing so based on stats and trends, not generally my personal opinion, and that when I talk about something affecting older people or younger people, that's a generalisation based on demographics, rather than a personal attack on individuals. I don't think, personally, that that constitutes a prejudice - but I am happy to agree to disagree if you do.

 

I think you're really reading too much in to the semantics. Everything we consume is often a generalisation of a stereotype. Are all young people breaking the rules? No. Are old people sticking to the rules? No. However from the data we do have, you can assume a high likelihood that there are more young people breaking the rules than there is sticking to the rules. That may change with the vaccine, but let's worry about that when the economy opens up again.

 

I also think you're getting old and young really mixed up and also getting confused with general politics too with right/left wings. What you will probably actually find is those at the extremes of the left and right probably have more in common with their personal viewpoints to lockdowns than you would imagine. Personally I would class someone as old, is probably someone eligible for their state pension (so over 65 basically). You are not telling me that any form of anti-lockdown rallies have their core support as the over 65s. Yes you might find the odd person who is over 65, but if you did a snap audit of all attendees the majority would be under 65.

 

 

Anyway — for some good news:

 

@1356655905828462593

 

It is great news. Makes you wonder if more countries may follow the lead now and delay second doses, especially for the AZ vaccine.

Wait, it’s only effective for three months?

 

No it's data regarding the 12 week interval the government are pushing for. Here's some of the data from the article:

Analyses reveal single standard dose efficacy from day 22 to day 90 post vaccination of 76% with protection not falling in this three-month period

 

After the second dose vaccine efficacy from two standard doses is 82.4% with the 3-month interval being used in the UK. (82.4% effective, with a 95% confidence interval of 62.7% - 91.7% at 12+ weeks)

 

Data supports the 4-12 week prime-boost dosing interval recommended by many global regulators

 

Analyses of PCR positive swabs in UK population suggests vaccine may have substantial effect on transmission of the virus with 67% reduction in positive swabs among those vaccinated

 

The data showing the vaccine also potentially reduces transmission is another big positive.

I would argue that this isn't what we're seeing because throughout the pandemic the media have heavily pushed at every opportunity the narrative that young people are demons and older people are victims, even when studies show high compliance from young people and many older people pushing back against restrictions, and when political demographics match up to that, with rightwingers - who trend older - pushing back against 'being told how to live my life' and also making up the majority of anti-5G conspiracy theorists etc. when you see the pictures in the media - never many young faces in amongst them.

 

Meanwhile people who are leftwing who trend younger are also people who are broadly in favour of stronger and longer lockdowns and following the science and erring on the side of caution.

 

I find it interesting and also somewhat hypocritical that the media, broadly, have consistently run with both of these narratives without at any point admitting that they conflict - that it cannot be simultaneously true that older people are ALL following the rules to the T and hiding away and being victimised by younger people who are having parties and spreading the virus and prolonging things, while also being the demographic that (accoding to voting stats and photo evidence) makes up the rightwing pushback against restrictions, masks and the anti-5G brigade.

 

There's an element of Emperor's New Clothes to it.

 

Of course, ironically enough, I also think that the 'leftwingers and young people are completely pro lockdowns' is also a media invention that handily skips over the trends that make lockdowns comparatively harder on people who are living in less secure accommodation, who havelost income and a much greater social life than for people who are more established and materially wealthy.

 

But I should make clear that when I comment in these threads I am doing so based on stats and trends, not generally my personal opinion, and that when I talk about something affecting older people or younger people, that's a generalisation based on demographics, rather than a personal attack on individuals. I don't think, personally, that that constitutes a prejudice - but I am happy to agree to disagree if you do.

 

I personally don’t think that that agenda has been pushed at all. I’m certainly no fan of the media, I’ve criticised them enough but I can’t say I’ve seen things the way you’re suggesting them.

 

As for your stats about who has or hasn’t been following the rules. To me it seems that it’s people older than you who may have been less likely to follow the rules. This doesn’t mean those who are most vulnerable. I haven’t see any evidence of people 75 plus doing just whatever they like and setting bad examples. Most of them have been stuck in their homes, at least from what I have observed in my own community. They’re not the ones I hear of flying on holidays and spending whole days on the beach. Captain Tom seems to literally be the exception.

 

They’ve had to put up themselves with the media reporting things like ‘only the elderly and vulnerable are likely to die’ and people saying ‘all these old people were going to die anyway’ like they don’t matter. I really don’t think the stance you’re putting forward, based on your own opinion or studies or whatever, is helping the situation at all. The government and the media get to us by dividing us and you certainly seem to have fallen into an ‘us and them’ stance. You’ve posted about vulnerable people not being grateful for the sacrifices of the young-based on what? How many of these people do you speak to on a regular basis to make that kind of a judgement? I apologise if I’ve taken things you’ve said in the wrong way but this is something I have noticed from your posts even long before the pandemic came about.

 

What we need to remember is that we are on the same side-all of us. We want this virus to disappear and we are all making sacrifices whether we are young or old. People break the rules no matter what age they are too. I personally don’t see anything constructive complaining about one old person going on holiday at a time it was perfectly within the rules to go.

 

And I’m not sure it really is setting a bad example for others. He misguidedly went on holiday and died a month later. Hardly a ringing endorsement. Even though it’s pretty much certain he didn’t catch Covid there, the fact that people seem to be ignoring that fact will make it act more like a deterrent.

 

Not that I even expect any vulnerable person to have done so either way.