https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...Echobox&utm_source=Twitter#Echobox=1613917991 Can someone explain to me how the BBC have the brass neck to describe an approach which removes the policies that have led to these issues at glacial speed as ‘cautious’??? The maintenance of any form of lockdown beyond the current date is the exact opposite of cautious - it’s reckless and dangerous.
Not 100% sure I do. If I misunderstood my apologies I just don't like the narrative of blaming other people for the spread of a respiratory disease.
They me be allowed sooner in theory but subject to quarantine measures at both sides. I'm wondering when UK overnight stays will be allowed, be happy just to get away in the UK.
Interesting and hopefully a positve that infection levels themselves aren't one of the 4 criteria, more crucially if its believed infection levels will lead to a rise in hospital admissions.
There will always be new variants though, which forever gives them the right to lockdown whenever they want. Sword of Damocles.
Imagine the demand? Be like trying to find a hens tooth. Imagine the number of people in Whitby on Easter Monday? Would rather kill myself.
Bingo. It really is setting us up for permanent restrictionsand not one of the lockdown fanatics has acknowledged that even when they've been asked directly about it.
Which is why opening back up hospitality and allowing UK vacations as soon as possible is the best course of action. Force everyone to take a holiday in the space of a few short weeks before the whether turns means rammed coasts. Allowing them to all spring and summer spreads it out.
Cannot believe the political and scientific experts on this board have not seen it in their crystal balls.Barnsley v Brentford playoff final.
Full school attendance from March 8th then but outdoor sports like golf can't return until 29th March. Makes loads of sense does that. Our daughter is expected to teach a class full of 30 kids but there's no plans for her to get a vaccine. Thanks Boris, you utter tool......
They say that but all of the clinical trials were done on the basis of 2 doses 3 weeks apart. I'd like to know where the evidence is. I'm not saying that I'm against the current policy but it is risky and it could go badly wrong.
This Lockdown Fanatics term that is banded about puzzles me. Nobody wants a lockdown. Nobody is punching the air in delight that we've had to sit in our living rooms for the past 2 months or whatever it's been. It's just that seeing as the Government have made an absolute balls of the whole thing (especially around Christmas), that the only realistic option was to limit the contact of people to try to minimise risk during the likeliest worse month for infection and death. That's it. None of the 'Lockdown Fanatics' want what is happening. None of them want was is proposed to be happening in the near and medium term future. You've just resorted to name calling in the same way as you rightly get pissed off when people acuse you of wanting the virus to kill everyone.