UKC

Food shortages

Please Register as a New User in order to reply to this topic.
 henwardian 20 Jul 2021

So, my local (and only) supermarket seems to be having a lot of problems with food shortages these days. Most fruit, veg, bread, eggs and other fresh produce is gone by about midday and there isn't really any point in trying to shop at all past about 4pm.

Is this an issue across the UK/Scotland? Or is it just a local thing?

In reply to henwardian:

pingdemic?

Lots of people contacted by track and trace, so lots self isolating. Shortages of staff all over.

 jkarran 20 Jul 2021
In reply to henwardian:

Quite a few shelves running low of late around me (York). I assume it's a mix of covid isolation orders and brexit.

jk

 Lankyman 20 Jul 2021
In reply to henwardian:

Where I work has had a few issues with some products. It would be a miracle if it wasn't so given the situation. One of the bakeries had a covid  problem (infection or pinging?) and so buns were bulk ordered from other suppliers to compensate. It would be disastrous not to be bunned up to the max at peak barbie time. Frozen peas seem to be down in quantity. I think we need to give peas a chance before we decide it's due to covid though.

In reply to dread-i:

Massive under-supply of freight drivers. Due to self isolation, and EU drivers having gone home.

Been building for weeks.

https://www.google.com/search?q=haulage+driver+shortage

Post edited at 14:49
 Andy Gamisou 20 Jul 2021
In reply to henwardian:

> So, my local (and only) supermarket seems to be having a lot of problems with food shortages these days. Most fruit, veg, bread, eggs and other fresh produce is gone by about midday and there isn't really any point in trying to shop at all past about 4pm.

> Is this an issue across the UK/Scotland? Or is it just a local thing?

Oddly enough we seem to be having the same problems in Cyprus.  Bleeding tricky to be vegetarian without vegetables.

Post edited at 15:01
 Forest Dump 20 Jul 2021
In reply to captain paranoia:

Plus on farm labour shortages and food processing places being ideal covid breading grounds, so infection or pings being v.likely 

 henwardian 20 Jul 2021
In reply to dread-i:

Yeah, I mean, I know there is pingdemic, covid and brexit all conspiring to mess things up and I've read a few articles with dire predictions of shortages right and left.

But these kind of doom and gloom predictions are pretty standard news fare and I was wondering whether in real shops, on the ground, there was actually much of an impact being noticed (it's tourist season up here so could just have been the shop just can't keep up).

From what everyone else has said though, it does seem to be genuinely affecting shop shelves across the nation. Interesting.

 hokkyokusei 20 Jul 2021
In reply to henwardian:

Not a lot of variety in our supermarket today. Particularly fresh stuff.

 nathan79 20 Jul 2021
In reply to henwardian:

Haven't noticed anything, I split my food shopping between Edinburgh and Livingston. Even pleasantly surprised how much was still there for the taking on Saturday evening.

 Rawn1962 20 Jul 2021
In reply to henwardian:

> So, my local (and only) supermarket seems to be having a lot of problems with food shortages these days. Most fruit, veg, bread, eggs and other fresh produce is gone by about midday and there isn't really any point in trying to shop at all past about 4pm.

> Is this an issue across the UK/Scotland? Or is it just a local thing?

The fruits and vegetable shelf is systematically empty in my local convenience Scotmid. Margiottas are usually OK (if you don't mind paying for your lettuce its price in gold). Been like that for a few months. It's very variable between shops.

There seems to be an endless supply of junk food though.

Post edited at 20:36
 Rawn1962 20 Jul 2021
In reply to Andy Gamisou:

> Oddly enough we seem to be having the same problems in Cyprus.  Bleeding tricky to be vegetarian without vegetables.

Vegetarian in Cyprus ? I admire your bravery

Post edited at 20:44
 henwardian 20 Jul 2021
In reply to nathan79 and others:

Hmm, actually good to know that at least some shops are keeping up with demand, that suggests that while there are problems with supply chains and things are getting patchy, there isn't an overall shortage and we are probably not yet at the point where fresh food would need to be rationed.

In reply to henwardian:

I don't remember food shortages being mentioned on the side of the bus... Obviously Project Fear? 

 MG 20 Jul 2021
In reply to henwardian:

Lots of blaeberries in the woods just now if you are short of fruit!

 afx22 20 Jul 2021
In reply to henwardian:

I just popped into my local Tesco Express, on the way back from climbing, and noticed just how poor the stock availability was in the fridges and freezers.  It’s must have been 30% empty with some sections less than half full.

In reply to henwardian:

Interesting - I’ve struggled to get various bits of fresh veg recently in north Wales. Mostly salad stuff that I’ve noticed not being able to get. I had put it down to it being prime BBQ season/week, but perhaps there’s more to it than that

In reply to Rawn1962:

> The fruits and vegetable shelf is systematically empty in my local convenience Scotmid

That's normal, isn't it...?

In reply to afx22:

> I just popped into my local Tesco Express, on the way back from climbing, and noticed just how poor the stock availability was in the fridges and freezers.  It’s must have been 30% empty with some sections less than half full.

On the plus side that's still 70% full. Winner winner chicken dinner (if that's in the 70%)

 Jamie Wakeham 20 Jul 2021
In reply to henwardian:

I've noticed a decline in the range available in my Sainsbury's (a big superstore on the edge of Oxford).  Seems to be withdrawal of lines, not just a temporary inability to stock them; there aren't empty spaces, just that a particular product disappears and the ones surrounding it expand a little to fill the gap.  Generally it's the higher end options that seem to be going.

Haven't been able to buy flageolet beans for a year or more, for example.  Almost all of the free range pork has gone, including their rather good chorizo, and most of their free range chicken.  Quite a few spices missing.  I'm getting quite used to standing in the queue, ebaying for whatever the thing I couldn't get today was.

 Sealwife 20 Jul 2021
In reply to henwardian:

Much less selection in salad section of my local supermarket (Tesco) in past 6 months or so.  Last couple of months there’s usually just whole lettuces and very little of the more interesting leaves.

Recently there have been shortages of most other fruit and veg too, large empty spaces in the fresh meat shelves and fairly empty looking freezers.

In reply to henwardian:

> But these kind of doom and gloom predictions are pretty standard news fare 

It's probably just 'Project Fear'. Nothing to see here. Move along.

Of course, it could be a move to get back to our glorious WW2 past, and the reintroduction of rationing.

 Andy Gamisou 21 Jul 2021
In reply to Rawn1962:

> Vegetarian in Cyprus ? I admire your bravery

Doesn't seem to be any pork shortages, oddly enough.

 Lankyman 21 Jul 2021
In reply to Andy Gamisou:

I'm always surprised that Cyprus hasn't disappeared under the waves yet. Cyprus potatoes always seem to have half a fields worth of soil on them.

In reply to henwardian:

My Tesco was quite poor for a month or two after Brexit completed (odd things like bacon not being available in the cut I wanted) but has been relatively normal of late...

 LastBoyScout 21 Jul 2021
In reply to Lankyman:

> Where I work has had a few issues with some products. It would be a miracle if it wasn't so given the situation. One of the bakeries had a covid problem (infection or pinging?) and so buns were bulk ordered from other suppliers to compensate. It would be disastrous not to be bunned up to the max at peak barbie time.

There's a knock-on from the pubs re-opening with limited menus - so burger buns are in massive demand and it has been difficult to forecast demand and, as you say, covid issues affecting workforce in the factories. I wouldn't be at all surprised if there is a bun shortage this summer.

 LastBoyScout 21 Jul 2021
In reply to henwardian:

Haven't noticed any major issues in the supermarkets, a few things out of stock, but nothing dramatic.

 Duncan Bourne 21 Jul 2021
In reply to henwardian:

In no particular order shortages I have noticed over the past 3 months at my local Tesco:

Pitta bread, particularly the wholemeal variety (made in Ireland according to the packaging on some I have in my freezer), Sainsbury's seems to have them though.

Garden Peas (tinned), Olives (small tins), Sardines (tins), Machego (though had some for the first time this week), odd bits of fruit and veg (you never can tell what will be in or what missing).

There are probably other things too but these are the ones I've been looking for

 Rob Parsons 21 Jul 2021
In reply to Rawn1962:

> The fruits and vegetable shelf is systematically empty in my local convenience Scotmid.

Scotmid has a fruit and vegetable shelf?! F*ck me. Where do they find room for the square sausage and Buckfast?

 gravy 21 Jul 2021
In reply to Rob Parsons:

Square sausage, hmm, those where the days, no attempt to turn the mechanically reclaimed hoof into any shape vaguely resembling food...

In reply to LastBoyScout:

> I wouldn't be at all surprised if there is a bun shortage this summer.

That could be dangerous; it could turn into a bunfight...

 jimtitt 21 Jul 2021
In reply to Duncan Bourne:

> In no particular order shortages I have noticed over the past 3 months at my local Tesco:

> Pitta bread, particularly the wholemeal variety (made in Ireland according to the packaging on some I have in my freezer), Sainsbury's seems to have them though.

> Garden Peas (tinned), Olives (small tins), Sardines (tins), Machego (though had some for the first time this week), odd bits of fruit and veg (you never can tell what will be in or what missing).

> There are probably other things too but these are the ones I've been looking for

Interestingly (or not) Sharwood of mango chutney fame made his first big deal by noticing a drought in France was going to affect tinned peas so bought 500,000 tins from Holland and cornered the UK market.

The general shortages in the UK are from Brexit, it keeps giving. Less mangetout, more turnips is the future!

In reply to jimtitt:

> Less mangetout, more turnips is the future!

You missed an opportunity:

"Less mangetout, more mangelwurzel is the future!"

 jimtitt 21 Jul 2021
In reply to captain paranoia:

Mangolds are foriegn muck from the Mediteranean, turnips are at least probably N European.

 johncook 21 Jul 2021
In reply to henwardian:

Some of the big (cheaper?) supermarket chains are having 'shortages' and then suddenly finding stock which is appearing on the shelf at a higher price. I have left it there. The prices will return to normal eventually. It is mostly happening on UK foodstuffs, and the EU produced stuff is in plentiful supply. 

I may be a cynic, but it looks to me like exploiting the situation!

 Cobra_Head 21 Jul 2021
In reply to henwardian:

There's a shortage of delivery drivers.

If we'd trained ALL the refugees crossing the channel to be lorry drivers, we STILL be 50,000 short!

In reply to Cobra_Head:

I was thinking maybe the asylum seekers could be given jobs picking fruit and veg... You know, now that we've sent all the EU migrants home...

In reply to henwardian:

For weeks and weeks now here in leafy Surrey there have been gaps on the shelves. it seems to be getting worse in the last couple of weeks, predominantly fresh veg, salad, fruit. Some random "Dry" goods - Coke, some cereals, some biscuits, generally less choice e.g. Iceberg lettuce or mini gems, sod all else. 

For the last few months it's been noticable that best before dates are much shorter than before too. I used to be able to shop once a week for everything, now I have to buy 2-3 days of veg and top up

Annoyingly less choice means less loose stuff available, so for instance I haven't been able to buy any Jacket potatoes for Weeks at sainsbury because they are all in bags of 6+ with a BB date of 2-3days and there is only one of me.

 FactorXXX 21 Jul 2021
In reply to the thread:

Can't you eat cake?

In reply to balmybaldwin:

> Jacket potatoes for Weeks at sainsbury because they are all in bags of 6+ with a BB date of 2-3days and there is only one of me

Potatoes will last weeks beyond the BBE date, kept properly.

 aksys 22 Jul 2021
In reply to captain paranoia:

> I was thinking maybe the asylum seekers could be given jobs picking fruit and veg... You know, now that we've sent all the EU migrants home...

What a silly idea!

Priti’s plan to put them in jail for 4 years is much better. 

In 2019/20, the average cost of a prison place in England and Wales was £44.6 thousand pounds/year. So the cost of imprisoning just the 8000+ asylum seekers who have already crossed the Channel this year would be over £350 million pounds/year, or over £1.4 billion pounds total by the end of their term, not counting the cost of building all the extra prisons needed.

Yet more evidence of the clear sighted thinking of our great leaders!

In reply to henwardian:

It seems to be a Nationwide problem, lack of staff due to various problems. Furlough seems to be a big reason why people are not available for work. I was in a service station the other day and a haulage company was as offering 60k plus a new Mercedes truck with all the mod cons. 
 

I run a business myself and am finding it virtually impossible to find staff , despite spending a shed load of cash on advertising. 
Brexit/Covid. We are screwed ! 


 

 Rawn1962 06:48 Thu
In reply to Plasynant:

> Brexit/Covid. We are screwed ! 

All those who supported Brexit on here have gone very quiet about it. Odd isn't it.

 veteye 07:53 Thu
In reply to Plasynant:

The answer is for all the pseudo-philosophers on here to turn back to being working class! So get them to go back to work, and get their hands dirty.

 TomD89 08:02 Thu
In reply to Plasynant:

> I run a business myself and am finding it virtually impossible to find staff , despite spending a shed load of cash on advertising. 

Please remember to support no jab no job and vaccine passport policies so we can reduce the available recruitment pool even more.

 wintertree 08:06 Thu
In reply to Rawn1962:

> All those who supported Brexit on here have gone very quiet about it. Odd isn't it.

Perhaps the all left and came back under new accounts and are now playing silly buggers over covid instead.

In reply to johncook:

> Some of the big (cheaper?) supermarket chains are having 'shortages' and then suddenly finding stock

Isn't that how deliveries work?

In reply to Plasynant:

Is that such a bad thingthat their pay is improving?

Hauliers have been poorly paid for a long time and are undervlaued.Its a viewed crappy job as their customers tend to treat them at the bottom of the pile.Its also a competitive business with margins been driven to the floor.Big business generally treats them with contempt and I know plenty of people who hunt round for penny savings on shipping goods around.

Although a small business we always treat any  lorry drivers doing pickups/drops off with respect and courtesy. If stuck outside waiting they get offered a cup of tea ( which always shocks them). I am always amazed about how nervous most drivers look when they ask you if they can use the toilets ( ita almost as thought they expect a load of verbal abuse).

There has been a shortage of drivers for years.

Chickens coming home to roost is my view on the current situation.

Post edited at 09:42
 David Riley 09:49 Thu
In reply to Rawn1962:

> All those who supported Brexit on here have gone very quiet about it. Odd isn't it.


No. They are happily getting on with their lives instead of whinging on endless, desperate, remainer nonsense threads.

 Rawn1962 10:06 Thu
In reply to David Riley:

> No. They are happily getting on with their lives instead of whinging on endless, desperate, remainer nonsense threads.

As your intervention clearly demonstrates...

Message Removed 10:07 Thu
Reason: inappropriate content
 Rawn1962 10:13 Thu

In reply to Maggot:

> Quote removed

> Quote removed

I wish you were more polite.

Post edited at 10:14
In reply to johncook:

Supermakets have very sophisticated pricing strategies and their profit margins are not large, after all its a competitive business with considerable  competition.

If there was only 1 in town I would agree with you. Exploiting is not really commercially viable.

 fred99 11:15 Thu
In reply to captain paranoia:

> Massive under-supply of freight drivers. Due to self isolation, and EU drivers having gone home.

Brexit - the gift that keeps giving.

In reply to captain paranoia:

> I was thinking maybe the asylum seekers could be given jobs picking fruit and veg... You know, now that we've sent all the EU migrants home...

I've been part of a campaign lobbying for asylum seekers being given the right to work, and said ages ago that the gov't will agree tot this once they realise brexit = loss of farm labour.  Watch this space.

In reply to henwardian:

The local Co-Op here in south Manchester has had shortages for over a week, complete with signs apologising for it. There were big gaps in the shelves yesterday evening. There seemed to be the usual number of staff in the shop though.

 Ian W 12:23 Thu
In reply to TomD89:

> Please remember to support no jab no job and vaccine passport policies so we can persuade more people to get vaccinated so we reduce the number of deaths, and reduce the severity and hence risk oh hospitalisation and long term effects amongst those who catch covid 19, hence increasing the recruitment pool so society doesnt suffer more shortages than are necessary.

There, FTFY.

In reply to fred99:

> Brexit - the gift that keeps giving.

I pretty much used that line word for word on a YouTube comment this morning.

 TomD89 12:43 Thu
In reply to Ian W:

Use the correct word coerce please, don't delude yourself that those actions are persuasion. 

In reply to TomD89:

Nothing wrong with coercion or nudging.

 Maggot 12:58 Thu
In reply to henwardian:

My local Morrisways has stopped selling YR brown sauce,  I'm not a happy man

Nothing to do with Ireland not accepting dodgy English sausages?

 Tringa 13:19 Thu
In reply to henwardian:

I was in Gairloch earlier this month and the local shop was having problems too for a few days. This was a delivery problem as all the usual people working in the shop were there, just the shelves were low. It sorted itself out after a few days but I can imagine it happening again.

Dave

In reply to aksys:

> or over £1.4 billion pounds total by the end of their term

Nice business opportunity for their mates when they decide to privatise asylum detention services...

 TomD89 13:24 Thu
In reply to neilh:

You could equate coercion to nudging someone off a cliff if they don't agree, that'd be a fair comparison. Maybe I'll start nudging people out of the way when I'm in a hurry in future since it's so morally acceptable.

Post edited at 13:25
In reply to Plasynant:

> a haulage company was as offering 60k plus a new Mercedes truck with all the mod cons.

Seems to be attracting dustbin lorry drivers, so some councils cannot run rubbish collections...

 Ian W 13:28 Thu
In reply to TomD89:

> Please remember to support no jab no job and vaccine passport policies so we can persuade / nudge / coerce / cajole / force / convince* more people to get vaccinated so we reduce the number of deaths, and reduce the severity and hence risk oh hospitalisation and long term effects amongst those who catch covid 19, hence increasing the recruitment pool so society doesn't suffer more shortages than are necessary.

* other words are available; use whichever you think is appropriate. As long as it means more people get vaccinated, i really don't care.

There, FTFY even more! 

Post edited at 13:28
 Ian W 13:30 Thu
In reply to captain paranoia:

> Nice business opportunity for their mates when they decide to privatise asylum detention services...

They already have, haven't they? This is just a decent business expansion proposal, designed to help the privatised prison service.

In reply to TomD89:

Well it depends and there is the moral dilemma.  If I nudge you out of the way to save more  people lives than who is right.  
 

If you want to understand this at the basic level then I highly recommend Michael Sandels excellent lectures on this subject.

Post edited at 13:38
 wintertree 13:38 Thu
In reply to TomD89:

> You could equate coercion to nudging someone off a cliff if they don't agree, that'd be a fair comparison

Seems to me that you're taking a few liberties there.

In reply to wintertree:

> > You could equate coercion to nudging someone off a cliff if they don't agree, that'd be a fair comparison

> Seems to me that you're taking a few liberties there.

More like nudging someone away from the cliff edge because they've read on Facebook that jumping is good for you.

Still, I don't think coercion is the best way to tackle vaccine hesitancy.

 wintertree 13:58 Thu
In reply to George Ormerod:

> Still, I don't think coercion is the best way to tackle vaccine hesitancy.

No, genuine coercion could backfire and puts other vaccination programs at risk of the deliberate anti-vaccination agitation that will capitalise on the coercion.

Expecting businesses operating with some of the highest risk environments, such as nightclubs, to take reasonable measures to protect their staff and customers doesn't feel like coercion to me.

 TomD89 14:11 Thu
In reply to wintertree:

> > You could equate coercion to nudging someone off a cliff if they don't agree, that'd be a fair comparison

> Seems to me that you're taking a few liberties there.

I can't tell how many liberties I'm being accused of taking in that case.

 TomD89 14:16 Thu
In reply to wintertree:

> > Still, I don't think coercion is the best way to tackle vaccine hesitancy.

> No, genuine coercion could backfire and puts other vaccination programs at risk of the deliberate anti-vaccination agitation that will capitalise on the coercion.

> Expecting businesses operating with some of the highest risk environments, such as nightclubs, to take reasonable measures to protect their staff and customers doesn't feel like coercion to me.

It is coercion whether you decide to feel it or not.

Hopefully your threshold requirement to admit coercion is somewhere lower than imprisonment, it'd be good to know where you and others stand on that.

In reply to TomD89:

I am quite relaxed over it on the simple basis other peoples lives/hospitalisations come into play. In public health situations like this then the rights of the individual are often- unfortuantley- pushed down the list of priorities.

You are not an antivaxer per se as i read it, but you personnaly struggle with this coercion/nudging issue. I get that

Its really not a new issue but the principle has been around for a long time- ..like the game of who do you push out of the hot air ballon if its falling to the ground.

 TomD89 14:53 Thu
In reply to neilh:

To an extent I understand, but I feel we need a delineated redline to say beyond a certain point this is unacceptable. Unfortunately we've had so much U-turning and indecision I think for many it still would be met with mistrust. I definitely have great fear about people accepting more of these little steps towards a coercive and repressive state and only realising when it's too late, or perhaps never realising at all.

For me forcing people to be economically unable to provide for themselves is wrong. This is what we'd effectively be doing if we extend such requirements beyond just nightclubs and larger venues (temporarily, allegedly). I assume we're all happy to pay benefits to all the unvaccinated who could theoretically be out of work? Or are we happy to let individuals and families become homeless? I'm comfortable with neither.

Post edited at 15:04
In reply to TomD89:

Its a virus and it spreads to other people thats the issue. Are you a smoker/non smoker..do you wear a seat belt...motor bike helmet...its no different to those other dilemmas.

We all accept you do not smoke in certain area--like nightclubs---where is the real difference?

As I said earlier watch Michael Sandels lectures on this, he poses the questions starting simply and then builds up to complex areas of public health etc. It gets you thinking.

In reply to thread:

Usefully the press have all gone with carefully cropped pictures on the one empty shelf they could find in the supermarket today (I notice more than one publication has even used the very same shelf - Sun & Mail, and the other empty shelf has been used in the Star, Mirror & Express).

Helpful, as ever. F'kin thanks, the press. That'll help the situation. Still, I guess if they incite panic buying they'll get an easy story on panic buying, because they can just cut and paste last year's copy. Tw*ts.

In reply to TomD89:

> Please remember to support no jab no job and vaccine passport policies so we can reduce the available recruitment pool even more.

Do you want pro-diseasers working for you?

 mondite 15:51 Thu
In reply to Longsufferingropeholder:

> Usefully the press have all gone with carefully cropped pictures on the one empty shelf they could find in the supermarket today

And has the photographer carefully emptied it first. I recall one of those "panic buying" photos from last year which was widely shared was reported in Private Eye as having slightly suspicious origins eg the person being photographed working for the same bureau as the photographer.

 mondite 15:51 Thu
In reply to Longsufferingropeholder:

> Do you want pro-diseasers working for you?


Yes but then I work for a biowarfare lab.

In reply to Cobra_Head:

> There's a shortage of delivery drivers.

> If we'd trained ALL the refugees crossing the channel to be lorry drivers, we STILL be 50,000 short!

They've probably seen enough of lorries TBH.

In reply to mondite:

> And has the photographer carefully emptied it first. I recall one of those "panic buying" photos from last year which was widely shared was reported in Private Eye as having slightly suspicious origins eg the person being photographed working for the same bureau as the photographer.

Wouldn't be surprised.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-the-papers-57923803 

What's clear to me, from the fact that those are all the photos all the papers between them could scrape together, is that two things have sold out in two locations in the whole UK. The mirror haven't even been arsed to crop out the full shelves in the background.

They should have gone with the OP of this thread "Vegetables sell out in Scotland!" That's a headline that would get my attention. If that's happened it truly is end of days.

 jimtitt 18:10 Thu
In reply to Longsufferingropeholder:

They could have headlined that Spanish fruit and vegetable exports to the UK dropped by 6% in volume (weight) and increased by 6% in value for the first quarter 2021. Brexit.

In reply to jimtitt:

But that's a much less interesting and more irritating headline. They could have gone with "9 out of 10 people wish you'd stfu about brexit". Yes, brexit was a shit idea. WE KNOW! Ffs. We'd just stopped talking about it.

not sure you can pin the empty banana shelf photo on it though, unless you're going to tell me brexit induced climate change means brexiteers can now grow bananas in Spain because brexit.

Post edited at 18:34
 Lankyman 18:36 Thu
In reply to Longsufferingropeholder:

> not sure you can pin the empty banana shelf photo on it though, unless you're going to tell me brexit induced climate change means brexiteers can now grow bananas in Spain because brexit.

They do grow bananas on the Canaries

In reply to Longsufferingropeholder:

> Usefully the press have all gone with carefully cropped pictures on the one empty shelf they could find in the supermarket today

Now I guess it is possible that people are panic buying, but tonight's trip to my local mini Tesco showed an empty freezer section, and other empty shelves.

They did have a lot of buns on discount, so maybe that's ringing in the bun supply chain. No bunfights here.

 bruxist 20:50 Thu
In reply to henwardian:

I have three mini-supermarkets within a mile and a half (i.e. in this and the adjacent village). Beef has been unavailable for a month, though minced beef is still plentiful. Fresh veg has similarly been patchy for about a month. There has been no leaf available this week except bags of kale. No bread shortage, though.

I'm viewing all of this as a good thing, as the issue seems mainly to be supply-chain driven. Hence the butcher is doing roaring trade; the farm shops are too; the local flower shop has diversified into fresh local veg; and the village square market, once moribund and reduced to a couple of stalls selling batteries and lightbulbs, is now thriving again.

 ptrickey 22:39 Thu
In reply to captain paranoia:

> I was thinking maybe the asylum seekers could be given jobs picking fruit and veg... You know, now that we've sent all the EU migrants home...

I was thinking maybe they could be afforded their dignity.

In reply to ptrickey:

I was thinking people would recognise the irony.

But are you suggesting fruit and veg picking is a job with no dignity? No wonder we can't find pickers in the UK. It's a perfectly honourable, paid job.

In reply to LastBoyScout:

Speaking of burger buns, does anyone else think that a brioche bun is totally unsuited to wrap round bits of  a dead cow and is far preferable to eat with cream cheese and blackcurrant or blueberry jam?

In reply to Tom Valentine:

Apart from the fact that they seem to lack the required structural integrity, no.

 wintertree 00:45 Fri
In reply to Tom Valentine:

Brioche for burgers is right up there on my “signs of the apocalypse” list.  The only way to make it worse is to serve the damned thing on a slate or a wooden plate.  

In reply to Lankyman:

> I'm always surprised that Cyprus hasn't disappeared under the waves yet. Cyprus potatoes always seem to have half a fields worth of soil on them.

Geologically speaking, it's still rising from them!  

 Billhook 06:45 Fri
In reply to henwardian:

Things are terrible around here.  

We only have one choice of mustard now.  And they've not had the quail eggs in stock for a couple of days now.  

There's hardly any lavatory paper left either- only that cheap 'recycled', stuff, and I'm certainly not letting my valet wipe my arse with that.

(ps, I'd suggest you make the chauffeur do your shopping in the morning)

 GrahamD 06:48 Fri
In reply to henwardian:

The answer is obvious.  Just ignore the warnings:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-57937342

In reply to wintertree:

> Brioche for burgers is right up there on my “signs of the apocalypse” list.  The only way to make it worse is to serve the damned thing on a slate or a wooden plate.  

There's a garden centre/cafe/fish seller place half way between ripon and Harrogate where I was once served fish and chips on a floor tile, complete with pattern on the back to enhance suction.

In reply to Longsufferingropeholder:

> Usefully the press have all gone with carefully cropped pictures on the one empty shelf they could find in the supermarket today (I notice more than one publication has even used the very same shelf - Sun & Mail, and the other empty shelf has been used in the Star, Mirror & Express).

Seems more likely that they all buy photos from the same agencies rather than those being the only two shelves in the country.  

In reply to Stuart Williams:

> Seems more likely that they all buy photos from the same agencies and those are the only two shelves in the country.  

Ftfy

 Doug 07:17 Fri
In reply to Lankyman:

> They do grow bananas on the Canaries


Most of the bananas in our local supermarket are grown in France (Martinique).

ps no shortages of food in our local shops here in the Alps

 TomD89 08:01 Fri
In reply to Longsufferingropeholder:

> Do you want pro-diseasers working for you?

About 10% of our workforce is unvaccinated and I would not support forcing them to have it under threat of unemployment or worse.

 TomD89 08:19 Fri
In reply to neilh:

> We all accept you do not smoke in certain area--like nightclubs---where is the real difference?

Making people unable to legally earn a living unless they have 2 or more (theoretically endless with boosters) medical interventions is fundamentally different to the examples you provide. It'd perhaps be equivalent to creating an injection that stops all recipients from wanting to smoke, then mandating that you must have it or you will be outcast from society. 

If you and others can state a redline for severity of imposition or time limits to be held accountable to perhaps I can move towards your point of view, however I don't expect many will. People seem to want to reserve the right to support any level of authoritarianism now, and of course it's impossible for that to come back and bite us.

In reply to TomD89:

> It'd perhaps be equivalent to creating an injection that stops all recipients from wanting to smoke, then mandating that you must have it or you will be outcast from society. 

It's more like creating an injection that stops most recipients from breathing out deadly smoke. In fact it is exactly that.

In reply to Tom Valentine:

> Speaking of burger buns, does anyone else think that a brioche bun is totally unsuited to wrap round bits of  a dead cow ...

Yes!! Finally, the key issue is being acknowledged in all this bun talk.  I do like an occasional burger and the trend for sweet bread as part of it is just so wrong. Don't get me started on burgers in ciabatta.

 TomD89 08:51 Fri
In reply to Longsufferingropeholder:

Except of course that most aren't breathing out deadly smoke in the first place and everyone who wants to be protected from deadly smoke can be. Oh and the deadly smoke isn't deadly to everyone and can still be transmitted by those protected from said deadly smoke.

Still hearing crickets on theoretical limits to restrictions. What's your redline LSRH? 

In reply to TomD89:

> Except of course that most aren't breathing out deadly smoke in the first place

Enough are

> and everyone who wants to be protected from deadly smoke can be. [1]

No, they really can't. It's not 100% and not everyone can have it.

> Oh and the deadly smoke isn't deadly to everyone 

Not heard of it giving anyone superpowers yet

> and can still be transmitted by those protected from said deadly smoke.

Yep. So... you're asking for cake and eaten cake? [1]

> Still hearing crickets on theoretical limits to restrictions. What's your redline LSRH? 

Don't understand the question. What are you asking?

Post edited at 09:15
In reply to TomD89:

It is is an old and tired argument.

Its a rehash of every individual liberty argument put forward in such cases as banning smoking in public spaces, motor cycyle helmets, wearing seatbelts, drink driving , flouride in water and so on.You can even push it on to things like safety boots in work shops( you use to get that from employees who wanted to wear trainers in workshops), safety helemts on building sites and so on.

Do you wear a seat belt? Perhaps do some research about some of the liberty arguments that were around every time the law on this was changed.It moved form compulsory wearing seatbelts in the front of the car, then to passengers in the rear, then to children in child seats.Every time there was this- its a liberty issue rissue, people will lose jobs and so on.

 TomD89 09:38 Fri
In reply to Longsufferingropeholder:

I'm asking at what point you would say a measure or restriction was disproportionate and speak out against it? At the moment we may have certificates required for entry to nightclubs. Would banning entry to all indoor establishments for the unvaccinated be too far for example? If not where is your redline?

I ask because I get a sense from some that they say things like 'oh it's only nightclubs no big deal' but then when the next imposition comes around it'll be 'oh it's only X no big deal' and repeat. I certainly have no personal stake in nightclubs specifically, but I still don't like this idea or where it could logically lead if it goes ahead.

In reply to Andy Gamisou:

Probably due to BREXIT. Everything else I’d.

 mondite 10:09 Fri
In reply to TomD89:

> I ask because I get a sense from some that they say things like 'oh it's only nightclubs no big deal' but then when the next imposition comes around it'll be 'oh it's only X no big deal' and repeat. I certainly have no personal stake in nightclubs specifically, but I still don't like this idea or where it could logically lead if it goes ahead.


Where could it logically lead? Personally my only real concern about "vaccine passports" is ensuring that all groups have been given the opportunity to get vaccinated first to ensure that those who are last in the queue due to being young and fit arent disadvantaged.

 TomD89 10:09 Fri
In reply to neilh:

Can you attempt to state any subtle differences between seatbelts and medical injectables or is that beyond you and you genuinely can't detect any difference? 

 TomD89 10:22 Fri
In reply to mondite:

> Where could it logically lead? 

Are you suggesting there is no logical next step and it stops at nightclubs and large gatherings until cases drop and then back to normal? That would be comforting. However I've not heard that yet from anyone here, and no-one is willing to confirm a point at which they'd be uncomfortable with the level of restrictions being placed on people. 

 mondite 10:29 Fri
In reply to TomD89:

> Are you suggesting there is no logical next step and it stops at nightclubs and large gatherings until cases drop and then back to normal? 

No I am asking you what you think the next logical step is. So what is it?

 TomD89 10:32 Fri
In reply to mondite:

Pubs and restaurants. Are you able to presume following steps or do you want me to spell it out?

Any hint of committal to a point we'd reach that you would speak out against?

In reply to TomD89:

I think its you who struggles not me that  its the same old argument..quite repettive and nothing groundbreaking in respect of public health v individual liberty.Sikhs had an exemption on motor cycle helmets at first as it infringed their religious  liberty on turbans.Its the same thing, just happens to be that vaccines are the proven medical solution this time for a public health crises.

Fortunately we have vaccines, would have been better with a pill, but you cannot have everything.Do not tell me you are anti pill as it infringes your liberty.

Post edited at 10:59
 TomD89 11:08 Fri
In reply to neilh:

So you can't state any differences between medical injectables and seatbelts, noted.

Yes I'd also be against be against being mandated or coerced into taking medications, but as it's all seatbelts to you we need go no further.

 wintertree 11:13 Fri
In reply to TomD89:

> Any hint of committal to a point we'd reach that you would speak out against?

We are currently in something of an emergency situation - lest you hadn't noticed - and one that has killed around 150,000 people, hospitalised four times that number, seen hospitals overloaded to the point other non-Covid life saving procedures are at risk and less urgent but highly important to QOL procedures are increasingly delayed.  Staff burn out seems to be approaching an existential crisis for universal healthcare, and it's all been really shit for most of us for a long time. 

I have no problem with proportionate control measures for the emergency situation.  

If the vaccine passport requirement remains on venues once the threat of healthcare overload has been eliminated and we have figured out how to operate with this virus in endemic circulation, then I will take umbrage and support those seeking its removal.

But right now I see the same new, agenda driven posters arguing against whatever control measures are on the cards right now in the middle of said emergency situation.

For the record, right now I would close nightclubs and vertical drinking in pubs for  another two weeks at least, more pending how the data develops, and I would support vaccine passports for indoor dining now.  I would want a clearly defined roadmap and data driven criteria by which these would be re-evaluated and either escalated to closures or dropped as the situation progresses.

We have no choice but to learn to live with the virus.  At every juncture where there's been a choice between caution, data driven responses and charging full steam ahead regardless, we've taken the later approach and as a result way more people have died and - this is the clincher for me given your apparent belief in the ultimate importance of personal liberty - our net total personal liberty has been reduced more because of the horrors created by being incautious in the face of a global pandemic.

More haste, less speed.

I would almost start to think that what some advocates in this crisis are working to achieve is actually furthering the staff burnout crisis in healthcare, burn it down in an endless war of attrition to replace it with something more profitable.

 jimtitt 12:01 Fri
In reply to wintertree:

In Italy you aren't getting into bars, restaurants, concerts, sports events etc without a EU vaccination pass. Their incidence is 39.8.

In reply to TomD89:

I can quite comfortably see that my life and yours has been improved over the last couple of hundred years by improvements in public health which embrace a whole range of issues ranging from basic water sanitation ( cholera) and so on.

That you cannot open your eyes just a wee bit and see the link I find absurd.

Next you will be trying to convince yourself that drinking treated water is corecion on a massive scale as its mandated that they make it safe and it goes in your body.

In reply to willgriggsonfire:

> I've been part of a campaign lobbying for asylum seekers being given the right to work, and said ages ago that the gov't will agree tot this once they realise brexit = loss of farm labour.  Watch this space.


Replacing low paid EU migrants working in the UK because it's good money compared to home with ones from Africa whose home wages are even lower and thus will put up with bad conditions for even longer is all part of the government game plan.

In reply to Toerag:

It might appear that way, but they actually removed various rights for asylum seekers to work a while back (thinking about it, this may have been just before those countries were ‘allowed’ to come and work.....it’s always fair to assume there’s some dodgey motive behind their thinking). 

 TomD89 12:53 Fri
In reply to wintertree: 

> If the vaccine passport requirement remains on venues once the threat of healthcare overload has been eliminated and we have figured out how to operate with this virus in endemic circulation, then I will take umbrage and support those seeking its removal.

Kudos for stating some form of boundary, that's more than most are likely to do. Still a bit vague and open to interpretation. Would be good to agree on what endemic levels not threatening healthcare overload would actually look like to save the rage from both extremes as we approach that point.

> For the record, right now I would close nightclubs and vertical drinking in pubs for  another two weeks at least, more pending how the data develops, and I would support vaccine passports for indoor dining now.  I would want a clearly defined roadmap and data driven criteria by which these would be re-evaluated and either escalated to closures or dropped as the situation progresses.

I would begrudgingly compromise and close nightclubs and disallow 'vertical drinking' but not touch indoor dining. If we'd have been given the choice between keeping domestic passports off the table and remaining closed for additional weeks I may well have chosen the latter. Such a choice was never posed though.

In reply to TomD89:

What if instead of "vaccine passports" for the immunised, we gave out an allocation of a "covid spreading license" that you could apply for if you're pro-illness? Would you be happier with that?

 TomD89 13:25 Fri
In reply to Longsufferingropeholder:

An extremely loaded way of saying a non-medical exemption?

In reply to TomD89:

> Kudos for stating some form of boundary, that's more than most are likely to do.

Dont be ridiculous; I doubt anyone here wants to keep restrictions and measures beyond necessity. When we finally get to a point where covid is either eliminated or endemic at a level similar to other infectious conditions, and is no longer causing disruption of healthcare, I'm sure everyone would want those measures to be removed; they would be pointless and unnecessary cost.

> If we'd have been given the choice 

We weren't given the choice on any aspects of dealing with this pandemic; they were all imposed on us by government. Many of us would have made very different choices, probably with much better outcomes. Most of those choices would have been to take action/impose measures earlier.

Actually, many of us did make different choices; we (or our companies) locked down earlier, have maintained social distancing beyond that mandated, and are still WFH, despite 'Freedom Day'.

 TomD89 13:44 Fri
In reply to captain paranoia:

> I doubt anyone here wants to keep restrictions and measures beyond necessity. When we finally get to a point where covid is either eliminated or endemic at a level similar to other infectious conditions, and is no longer causing disruption of healthcare, I'm sure everyone would want those measures to be removed; they would be pointless and unnecessary cost.

Music to my ears. Elimination is probably off the cards though no?

> We weren't given the choice on any aspects of dealing with this pandemic; they were all imposed on us by government. Many of us would have made very different choices, probably with much better outcomes. Most of those choices would have been to take action/impose measures earlier.

I've always agreed the border control failure early on was a massive and unforgivable error. It should have been closed early and with stricter controls.

> Actually, many of us did make different choices; we (or our companies) locked down earlier, have maintained social distancing beyond that mandated, and are still WFH, despite 'Freedom Day'.

Making decisions contrary to our wise government? Shocking. I could never support such a concept.

In reply to TomD89:

So on the border controls, you are ok with a vaccine passport?

In reply to TomD89:

> I've always agreed the border control failure early on was a massive and unforgivable error. It should have been closed early and with stricter controls.

Surely, that would have been the 'slippery slope' to the totalitarianism you seem to fear?

https://www.ukclimbing.com/forums/off_belay/is_it_just_me_or-737152

"I understand that risk has to be balanced with many other factors and on a local scale it seems that things are settling, meanwhile it's been great to explore local esoterica over the past year. Yet I wonder if I will ever be able to leave the mainland UK again."

https://www.ukclimbing.com/forums/off_belay/is_it_just_me_or_pt2-737259

 Seocan 18:07 Fri
In reply to gravy:

How do you know what goes into square sausage ... I thought nobody knew that.

Are you merely speculating?

Also, It is shaped like a slice of loaf. Square.

 TomD89 09:14 Mon
In reply to neilh and captain paranoia:

> So on the border controls, you are ok with a vaccine passport?

More so than domestic passports, but still averse. At least there is some precedent for them. I do have to accept that other countries could introduce passes for entry, though I'd rather they didn't. The fact the virus is basically ubiquitous and vaccines don't stop transmission makes them somewhat redundant, as opposed to infectious diseases that are unique to certain parts of the world where you either want to prevent those viruses jumping to other countries or infecting visitors to said country.

> Surely, that would have been the 'slippery slope' to the totalitarianism you seem to fear?

No, actual testing and/or preventing entry at the border; including quality quarantine protocols early or even totally preventing travel from high risk countries (China, Italy, India at various different stages) made sense when the virus wasn't present in many places (as far as we knew) and prior to understanding the virus (or new variant) and having access to protections. What was the potential concern in those cases? That we'd permanently be unable to travel to Italy or allow any Italian nationals within our boarders?

This is quite different to trying to introducing unprecedented measures at this late stage; that do have ethical, moral and privacy concerns surrounding them (whether you are willing to admit that or not) and have more potential for becoming misused and abused in future. Creating a restricted underclass, forcing people out of work, limiting free movement of your own citizens within their own borders etc. All this with a majority of adults vaccinated. 

Would you both expect domestic vaccine passports to only apply to large venues and nightclubs in the short term until cases stabilise or are you quite happy for such measures to exist in perpetuity, and in a larger variety of settings? 

Post edited at 09:16
 wintertree 09:50 Mon
In reply to TomD89:

There’s something pretty twisted about taking one of the weakest and most ineffectual responses from a western government against covid, that has caused untold horror and cost, and that the government are dropping as fast as they possibly can, and misrepresenting it as the creeping edge of totalitarianism.

Still, it does a good job of deflecting conversation away from the clusterf**k of a Brexit, the clusterf*ck of the weak covid response with massive unvetted spending in to private hands, and the actual threats to our liberty emerging from other parts of the current government’s ongoing changes and from the realities of climate change coming down the line - climate change where a lot of denialism has been used from the same playbook and organisations as tied up with covid denialism.

To use a phrase you’re keen on when someone refused to answer your barking and inane questions: “Noted”.

 TomD89 10:02 Mon
In reply to wintertree:

You accuse me of deflecting from a bunch of unrelated topics in a post deflecting/ignoring entirely the points made above, plus you've thrown in some insults. You're the one barking wintertree.

If you wish to discuss Brexit more (most seem sick of it) no-one, least of all me, is stopping you. Nor am I anymore in favour of this current government than you are, albeit for different reasons.

Post edited at 10:03
 wintertree 10:06 Mon
In reply to TomD89:

> You're the one barking wintertree.

I was talking about barking questions - the way you reduce the argument to a question so abstract as to be pointless, repeated demanding the other poster answers it, and then say "noted" when they don't.

>  deflecting/ignoring

I've answered them before.  You're clearly keen on repeating them ad-nauseam in the hopes someone will read them and skew their thinking to the point they resist some of the mildest covid control measures out of various comparator nations whilst simultaneously ignoring the more credible threats to their longer term freedom - such as being unable to safety move on from a global health crisis because of resistance to control measures, and wider and actually credible assaults on our freedom from the government.

I'm afraid you've redlined my credibility meter and I just don't think you're here in good faith, at all.

 TomD89 10:33 Mon
In reply to wintertree:

> > You're the one barking wintertree.

> I was talking about barking questions - the way you reduce the argument to a question so abstract as to be pointless, repeated demanding the other poster answers it, and then say "noted" when they don't.

Pointless in your view. Since I'm worried about the "creeping edge of totalitarianism", determining where peoples limit to restrictions is is quite important IMO. I'm asking questions not barking them, however it's obvious you are barking insults and attempting to belittle others that hold differing views. 

> I've answered them before.  You're clearly keen on repeating them ad-nauseam in the hopes someone will read them and skew their thinking to the point they resist some of the mildest covid control measures out of various comparator nations whilst simultaneously ignoring the more credible threats to their longer term freedom - such as being unable to safety move on from a global health crisis because of resistance to control measures, and wider and actually credible assaults on our freedom from the government.

I know you have, and I thanked you for that. Note that my response was to two other posters not directly aimed at you. If I'm asked a question I'll respond, if you have a differing view you are quite welcome to give it. The news is already mentioning potential 'no jab no education' policies in universities so there's evidence of creep only days after the initial announcement, so I don't feel unjustified in my concerns. 

> I'm afraid you've redlined my credibility meter and I just don't think you're here in good faith, at all.

You're entitled to your opinion. Apologies for the broken credibility and good faith meters, perhaps invest in better equipment.

Post edited at 10:34
In reply to dread-i:

> pingdemic?

> Lots of people contacted by track and trace, so lots self isolating. Shortages of staff all over.


No it's not the "pingdemic", it's brexit

 wintertree 10:42 Mon
In reply to TomD89:

I think if you were genuinely motivated by the threat of totalitarianism, you would be discussing other changes the government wish to make.  

However, shock horror, you are piling on the anti-side of Covid control measures, something you've been quite consistent in for the last year.  The current topic of the week across several new and new-ish posters who have consistently been against control measures  is to link creeping totalitarianism to Covid control measures.  Coincidence?

> Apologies for the broken credibility and good faith meters, perhaps invest in better equipment.

Oh, I think they're working just fine thank you very much.

> however it's obvious you are barking insults and attempting to belittle others that hold differing views. 

I'm not belittling you for having another view, I'm accusing you of being here in bad faith.  I have been quite clear, so there's no need to misrepresent that.

 jimtitt 11:04 Mon
In reply to TomD89:

> Pointless in your view. Since I'm worried about the "creeping edge of totalitarianism", determining where peoples limit to restrictions is is quite important IMO.

The limit to restrictions is quite clear unless the government change the Public Health (Control of Disease) Act 1984.

The authorities can do almost anything including compulsory isolation, preventing travel, preventing one from working, compulsory wearing protective equipment and effectively anything they like as long as a JP agrees.

The only restriction is on forcible treatment and vaccination.

 TomD89 11:11 Mon
In reply to wintertree:

> I think if you were genuinely motivated by the threat of totalitarianism, you would be discussing other changes the government wish to make.  

Such as? Are any you are going to mention more severe than domestic passports, closing businesses and locking people down?

> However, shock horror, you are piling on the anti-side of Covid control measures, something you've been quite consistent in for the last year.  The current topic of the week across several new and new-ish posters who have consistently been against control measures  is to link creeping totalitarianism to Covid control measures.  Coincidence?

My feeling is you're transitioning from genuinely spotting obvious alt accounts to accusing anyone who disagrees with you of being an alt. What could one even do to refute such claim? Stick to the topic and points made therein rather than hashing this pattern out ad-nauseum. It detracts from your otherwise fair points.

 fred99 11:16 Mon
In reply to Seocan:

> How do you know what goes into square sausage ... I thought nobody knew that.

I used to work at a Pork Pie and Sausage factory.

I DO know what goes into them.

I nowadays buy all my pies and sausages from a small butcher who makes his own.

 TomD89 11:24 Mon
In reply to jimtitt:

I get what powers and limits (or lack thereof) the government authorities have, that's what worries me. I'm more interested in individuals personal limits and sensibilities and what point they would have to reach before speaking up.

If the consensus is 'definitely temporary passports for large venues only for a short time' I can be less concerned than 'write off all unvaccinated people and banish them from society' which I think is terribly disproportionate and damaging to us in myriad other aspects.

 wintertree 11:29 Mon
In reply to TomD89:

> My feeling is you're transitioning from genuinely spotting obvious alt accounts to accusing anyone who disagrees with you of being an alt. 

If you look at the recent “Is it just me” threads, it’s clear your feeling goes against the evidence.

> Stick to the topic and points made therein

That’s like feeding a mogwai after midnight.  It is only worthwhile if everyone is here in good faith.

 jimtitt 11:39 Mon
In reply to TomD89:

People who can't be vaccinated get an exemption, people who don't want to be vaccinated banished. 

In reply to wintertree:

> I think if you were genuinely motivated by the threat of totalitarianism, you would be discussing other changes the government wish to make.  

Whether it's in good faith or not, I'd say yeah. To some extent I am worried about the threat of totalitarianism, but that's based on things like restrictions on the right to protest, ramping up of ethno-nationalist rhetoric and the language of "treachery" being used to describe opposition, close cooperation between the party of government and a large part of the press, voter suppression and gerrymandering and so forth.

In almost every country that I can think of, the people who are driving those sorts of things are the ones who are either opposed to or supporting only a bare minimum of restrictions to individual freedom in the name of public health during the pandemic. So yeah, I struggle to see how making everyone wear masks for ever or use a vaccine passport to go to the pub is going to be a particularly key part of Johnson or Trump's evil plans, even if I could see how it would help them in any way.

In reply to Forest Dump:

Meat processing places being ideal covid breeding grounds. Not “food”. Covid clusters related to food production are nearly entirely meat and dairy (because of the cool temperatures  apparently). 

 wintertree 11:44 Mon
In reply to Ramblin dave:

Exactly.  Nail on the head.  

In reply to TomD89:

> Such as? Are any you are going to mention more severe than domestic passports, closing businesses and locking people down?

Current Home Office proposals include the virtual equating of whistle-blowing and journalism with espionage - for example, a journalist reporting an NHS whistle-blower uncovering evidence of systematic failings in a hospital would be forced to reveal their source and both the journalist and whistle-blower subject to criminal sanctions. Also from the Home Office is the current bill to restrict the right to protest. 

We also have a current Government utterly uninterested in accountability or in accepting the consequences of its actions. 

If you are worried about creeping totalitarianism, you are looking in the wrong places. Of course, it may well be that the HO is using Covid as a distraction from the real threats to our democracy and our freedoms. 

In reply to jimtitt:

> People who can't be vaccinated get an exemption, people who don't want to be vaccinated banished. 

It's quite easy for an app to say if you are vaccinated, medically exempt or deliberately not vaccinated. A venue or service provider can them decide if they want your custom. If they don't allow vax dodgers in, it'll be much safer to let in the few medically exempt. 

 TomD89 12:17 Mon
In reply to Harry Jarvis:

I'm 100% with you on all those points, and Ramblin Dave picked up on a point regarding government and corporate press collusion which I've raised multiple times (plus social media censorship which I think is a part of this). I don't think much of this is party exclusive though, which is probably the only place I differ from the perceived majority on here and why I'm rendered politically homeless for the foreseeable. 

That's why I've previously mentioned the need for a more up-to-date direct democracy approach or to massively lessen government powers because I think the time is fast approaching where there is no ability to converse across political lines and each side thinks they're right and the others are shills, Russian agents, communists, fascist, CCP shills bots, hackers, conspiracy theorists etc etc. We don't want either side getting too much power in times like this with such heightened emotion, ideological inflexibility and demagoguery, plus increasing power to silence dissent and manipulate information streams.

Post edited at 12:30
In reply to TomD89:

> I'm 100% with you on all those points, and Ramblin Dave picked up on a point regarding government and corporate press collusion which I've raised multiple times (plus social media censorship which I think is a part of this). I don't think much of this is party exclusive though, which is probably the only place I differ from the perceived majority on here and why I'm rendered politically homeless for the foreseeable. 

The proposals are very much party exclusive, since they are solely the intent of the party in Government. This party is hellbent on increasing the powers of Government to the exclusion of democracy. 

Blathering on about Covid-related restrictions is to miss the point, quite spectacularly. 

 wintertree 12:37 Mon
In reply to TomD89:

>  or to massively lessen government powers because I think the time is fast approaching where there is no ability to converse across political lines and each side thinks they're right and the others are shills, Russian agents, communists, fascist, CCP shills bots, hackers, conspiracy theorists etc etc. We don't want either side getting too much power in times like this with such heightened emotion, ideological inflexibility and demagoguery, plus increasing power to silence dissent and manipulate information streams.

I’m sorry for voicing my concerns and casting aspersions, I apologise.  This position statement dispels any concerns I had that you were far to clearly aligned to the play book used by those working for US backed libertarian small statists.  

What was I thinking?
 

 TomD89 12:38 Mon
In reply to summo:

> A venue or service provider can them decide if they want your custom. If they don't allow vax dodgers in, it'll be much safer to let in the few medically exempt. 

A true Libertarian amongst us. I assume businesses and individuals can refuse service for other, potentially discriminatory or medical reasons, if they wish?

 TomD89 12:41 Mon
In reply to wintertree:

Either them or one of those pesky modernising direct democracists!

I'd be happy to shill for the leave me the hell alone, mind your business and get off my lawn party if one existed.

Apology accepted though.

Curious, do you politically align with anyone ever or do you float crossed legged in orbit pondering at a level beyond that of ordinary mortals? I've risen to such enlightenment briefly before myself, but couldn't sustain it. Any pointers?

Post edited at 12:50
In reply to TomD89:

> A true Libertarian amongst us. I assume businesses and individuals can refuse service for other, potentially discriminatory or medical reasons, if they wish?

Why not? I bet a venue could do better business wise if they advertised as having better covid protection? 

It's not discrimination, the person declining the vaccine has a choice, as much as a service provider has a choice. 

Covid kills, there's no debate on that. If a business knowingly allows unvaccinated people in, unmasked, are they liable? 

 TomD89 12:59 Mon
In reply to summo:

I'm with you in principle, but I assume you want to only allow discrimination for this one thing only rather than actually give businesses real choice or autonomy.

Covid kills, some, sometimes, yes. No debate. I can't claim to know if they are liable as it stands but that would be a reasonable discussion. Transmission can still occur between vaccinated to medically exempt, if they weren't wearing a mask can the business be liable there? Everyone's agreed masks are trivial in terms of nuisance so we'll have to keep them on forever to be safe. Agreed?

You'd also have to prove infection occurred in a given business which might be tricky. Has anyone sued a business since 'freedom day' where masks are no longer legally required? 

In reply to TomD89:

I've been refused entry to a bar because I was wearing the wrong shoes, I don't see you ranting on about your human rights to wear sandals being violated

 TomD89 13:15 Mon
In reply to willworkforfoodjnr:

I was refused entry to a bar once for not taking off my wooly hat, quite happy to not give business to an establishment with petty rules. 

The question is whether you have the right to know peoples medical status and then judge them accordingly. I'm less certain perhaps than others.

Post edited at 13:15
In reply to TomD89:

> The question is whether you have the right to know peoples medical status and then judge them accordingly. I'm less certain perhaps than others.

It's more whether you have the right to know peoples attitude to maintaining public health and judge them accordingly.

You do, by the way. See: smoking.

 TomD89 13:26 Mon
In reply to Longsufferingropeholder:

So we should be able to refuse service to smokers, drinkers, meat eaters, people who don't correctly recycle, litterers, people who drive non-eco cars, politically disfavourables, those who haven't donated to charity recently, criminals who have served their time in prison etc? Many of these effect our day to day public and societal health. Perhaps we could get all this private info in one handy dandy database so we can easily see who to ex-communicate?

Also why not include other communicable diseases? (Flu, STDs, AIDs, hell even foot fungus, verucas, conjuctivits, chickenpox) All would be relevant to public health.

Lets do it!

Post edited at 13:36
 fred99 13:40 Mon
In reply to TomD89:

> So we should be able to refuse service to smokers, drinkers, meat eaters, people who don't correctly recycle, litterers, people who drive non-eco cars, politically disfavourables, those who haven't donated to charity recently, criminals who have served their time in prison etc? Many of these effect our day to day public and societal health. Perhaps we could get all this private info in one handy dandy database so we can easily see who to ex-communicate?

> Also why not include other communicable diseases? (Flu, STDs, AIDs, hell even foot fungus, verucas, conjuctivits, chickenpox) All would be relevant to public health.

> Lets do it!

With the exception of the Flu, I can't see that ANY of the above affect other people directly just by virtue of being in the same room - i.e. for STD's or AID's you would have to partake in unprotected sex with anyone you meet, not likely in any setting I know of - or do you get involved in sex parties ??

In reply to TomD89:

> I'm with you in principle, but I assume you want to only allow discrimination for this one thing only rather than actually give businesses real choice or autonomy.

Any business already has a right to choose its clients. It can't however discriminate against by age, sex, colour, disability etc.. 

> Everyone's agreed masks are trivial in terms of nuisance so we'll have to keep them on forever to be safe. Agreed?

It's quite hard to drink through a mask. So the best a pub can do is ban non vaccinated people? 

In reply to TomD89:

> So we should be able to refuse service to smokers, drinkers, meat eaters, people who don't correctly recycle, litterers, people who drive non-eco cars, politically disfavourables, those who haven't donated to charity recently, criminals who have served their time in prison etc? Many of these effect our day to day public and societal health. Perhaps we could get all this private info in one handy dandy database so we can easily see who to ex-communicate?

Yeah, if only we had some agreed list....
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/section/4

It's pretty simple, this one. Broadly:

things that are a personal choice: allowed to refuse service
characteristics that are not up to the individual: not allowed to discriminate

Really not sure why you're still struggling with this. The reason the smoking ban is a thing is to protect employees (it's banned in workplaces remember, that's the wording). Same thing here - why would it be ok to put bar staff at risk because you think it's your human right to be an infectious virus-spreading bellend?

In reply to TomD89:

> The question is whether you have the right to know peoples medical status and then judge them accordingly. I'm less certain perhaps than others.

They wouldn't know why, only that they were medically exempt. Sometimes having a more open, no secrets society, makes it safer for everyone than having everything hidden. There is no place to hide, if everything's public. 

 TomD89 13:49 Mon
In reply to fred99:

Untrue, all of those can be caught outside of sex. Herpes for example, infected blood etc.

There's no logical reason not to have these included.

 Rawn1962 13:52 Mon
In reply to Ramblin dave:

> Whether it's in good faith or not, I'd say yeah. To some extent I am worried about the threat of totalitarianism, but that's based on things like restrictions on the right to protest, ramping up of ethno-nationalist rhetoric and the language of "treachery" being used to describe opposition, close cooperation between the party of government and a large part of the press, voter suppression and gerrymandering and so forth.

> In almost every country that I can think of, the people who are driving those sorts of things are the ones who are either opposed to or supporting only a bare minimum of restrictions to individual freedom in the name of public health during the pandemic. So yeah, I struggle to see how making everyone wear masks for ever or use a vaccine passport to go to the pub is going to be a particularly key part of Johnson or Trump's evil plans, even if I could see how it would help them in any way.

This works all quite well on paper, but it's quite hard to separate the two issues in practice though. 

Even if the restriction of freedoms used to deal with the pandemic are perfectly justified, it does undeniably run the risk of normalizing authoritarianism, not to mention the risk of politicians using otherwise valid public health arguments in order to push an altogether more sinister agenda.

Once the population got "used to" having ministers taking decision to curb individual rights with not so much scrutiny, it's more likely to be accepted.

To take one of your example, curbing the right to protest got very little political pushback and is going to sail through parliament.
People have been on what is basically state-mandated house arrest for nearly a year, they are unlikely to give that much importance to some freedom they use once in a blue moon and impacts a minority.

Ethno-nationalist rhetoric can also only be reinforced as well by this, travel restriction for example can be very well justified for public health reasons, but they also subliminally imply that foreigners are "bad" and isolationism is good.

Post edited at 13:53
 TomD89 13:54 Mon
In reply to Longsufferingropeholder:

Except you are still infectious when vaccinated. 

In reply to TomD89:

> Except you are still infectious when vaccinated. 

But much less so. 

In reply to Rawn1962:

Park life.

What grade is 3ps?

In reply to TomD89:

> Except you are still infectious when vaccinated. 

I think you might have somehow managed to misunderstand everything about everything.

 TomD89 14:01 Mon
In reply to summo:

Is that quantifiable in any way?

In reply to TomD89:

> Is that quantifiable in any way?

How could you measure it precisely, but if you have milder symptoms, recover faster, it's a logical presumption you are spreading it less for less time. 

 TomD89 14:08 Mon
In reply to summo:

As long as we have established we are implementing this for an unquantifiable benefit. Let's hope it's worth it.

Post edited at 14:11
In reply to TomD89:

> Is that quantifiable in any way?

Yes. Studies from PHE and out of Israel. More coming all the time. I'm going to let you Google it for yourself as a test. If you were rom you'd demand I present it to you on a silver plate before you'd be prepared to inform yourself.

Or just keep believing your made-up bollocks. You're on your own here.

 TomD89 14:15 Mon
In reply to Longsufferingropeholder:

You've somewhat spoilt your own test by giving away the conditions of passing/failing. I asked if it was quantifiable, summo seems to think it's unmeasurable, you should have words.

What have I made up exactly? We're talking hypothetical consequences of future political and legal actions, all related to what others have posted in response to me.

No-ones forcing you to reply.

Post edited at 14:17
In reply to TomD89:

summo's wrong about this. At least two groups have measured it.
And you have still managed to fail the test.

Post edited at 14:28
 Cobra_Head 14:20 Mon
In reply to balmybaldwin:

> I haven't been able to buy any Jacket potatoes for Weeks at sainsbury because they are all in bags of 6+ with a BB date of 2-3days and there is only one of me.

Maybe you should form a collective.

In reply to TomD89:

> As long as we have established we are implementing this for an unquantifiable benefit. Let's hope it's worth it.

So there is a benefit. At least you acknowledge that.  

 Ian W 14:52 Mon
In reply to TomD89:

> Is that quantifiable in any way?

I think it already has been...a double vaccinated person is something like 80% less likely to either catch or spread covid 19 (corrections if my % is out are welcome). The only thing that is still unknown is the decay in that efficacy over time (ie how often we are likely to need boosters.

Post edited at 14:53
 Lankyman 15:16 Mon
In reply to TomD89:

> You've somewhat spoilt your own test by giving away the conditions of passing/failing. I asked if it was quantifiable, summo seems to think it's unmeasurable, you should have words.

> What have I made up exactly? We're talking hypothetical consequences of future political and legal actions, all related to what others have posted in response to me.

> No-ones forcing you to reply.

God, you're boring

 TomD89 15:18 Mon
In reply to summo:

Of course, you won't find anywhere I have said there is no benefit to be had. It's a question of proportionality and the cost of the benefit gained.

In reply to TomD89:

If it means you definitely won't ever be in any pub I visit I'm calling it a win.

 Rawn1962 16:29 Mon
In reply to Longsufferingropeholder:

> Yes. Studies from PHE and out of Israel. More coming all the time. I'm going to let you Google it for yourself as a test. If you were rom you'd demand I present it to you on a silver plate before you'd be prepared to inform yourself.

PHE studies on transmission were done before delta took over AFAIK. And it doesn't tell us how long it lasts.
As for Israeli data, latest report seem to be that transmission wanes pretty fast, with effectiveness against transmission reported as 16% for those vaccinated in January

https://www.timesofisrael.com/liveblog_entry/health-ministry-says-covid-vaccine-is-only-40-effective-at-halting-transmission/

As usual it's not clear cut, and more complex than you thought. It is almost certain that the vaccine do reduce transmission, but how long this lasts or the level of it against newer or future variants is highly uncertain.

I don't agree with TomDB on vaccine passports, or basically anything he said policy-wise, but at least he is asking questions, instead of lashing out and throwing insults...

Post edited at 16:39
 wintertree 16:43 Mon
In reply to Rawn1962:

Hi Rom!

In reply to Rawn1962:

> PHE studies on transmission were done before delta took over. And it doesn't tell us how long it lasts.

It was early 2021. Can't offer anything more recent than that but suspect you won't have to wait long. Not the point anyway. Question was "is that quantifiable?". Answer is "yes".

> As for Israeli data, latest report seem to be that transmission wanes pretty fast, with effectiveness against transmission reported as 16% for those vaccinated in January

That story links to its own rebuttal, right there in the text.
https://www.timesofisrael.com/israeli-study-claims-major-drop-in-vaccine-protection-experts-dont-believe-it/
And that aside, Israel didn't use the same dosing interval strategy as the UK, which has been shown to be more effective (be interesting to take those figures back in time to when you were Alyson30).
And another thing, you're quoting a (debunked) effectiveness figure against infection, which is a complete change of subject from effectiveness against onward transmission.
And another thing, when you do get a figure for onward transmission, you need to multply that by effectiveness against catching it to get to the chance of passing it on. So quoting your cherry-picked and misleading 16% number is right in line with your normal MO; misleading.

> I don't agree with TomDB on vaccine passports, or basically anything he said policy-wise, but at least he is asking relevant questions, instead of lashing out and being entrenched in false certainties.

He's getting them all answered, with verifiable information, and then carrying on to cycle round them again.

 wintertree 16:55 Mon
In reply to Longsufferingropeholder:

Say, do you remember the time a Rom like poster endlessly went on about how vaccines weren’t proven to reduce transmission (going against actual expert opinion and first order thinking), and then their account was gone by the time reality proved them conclusively wrong?

Say, do you remember the time a Rom like poster endlessly went on about how bad the UK’s decision was to move to a 12-week gap between doses was. (Going against expert opinion and first order thinking on how desperate our situation was), and then their account was gone by the time reality proved them conclusively wrong?

Now, here we are again with a Rom-like poster casting aspersions without I suspect consulting any immunologists.  Funny thing is, I know a couple of immunologists and I’ve not been concerned about any of the things the Rom-like posters have been - partly because we’re doing the best we can over vaccination, and we just have to find out where it takes us, and partly because of what the actual experts I’ve spoken with have to say.

It’s almost as if this Rom-like poster is following a pattern.

In reply to wintertree:

> Say, do you remember the time a Rom like poster endlessly went on about how vaccines weren’t proven to reduce transmission (going against actual expert opinion and first order thinking), and then their account was gone by the time reality proved them conclusively wrong?

Well yeah, this is the game. He/She/It stands there stomping like a toddler saying "But tHerE IsN'T aNy ProOF" in the face of mounting stacks of evidence.

> Say, do you remember the time a Rom like poster endlessly went on about how bad the UK’s decision was to move to a 12-week gap between doses was. (Going against expert opinion and first order thinking on how desperate our situation was), and then their account was gone by the time reality proved them conclusively wrong?

Yep. The unforgettable "iT's a GaMBle" threads? They're what I was referring to with my time travel comment above.

> Now, here we are again with a Rom-like poster casting aspersions without I suspect consulting any immunologists.  Funny thing is, I know a couple of immunologists and I’ve not been concerned about any of the things the Rom-like posters have been - partly because we’re doing the best we can over vaccination, and we just have to find out where it takes us, and partly because of what the actual experts I’ve spoken with have to say.

> It’s almost as if this Rom-like poster is following a pattern.

Just don't get worked up about it. Kick back and have some fun. Used to be he/she/it knew how to push our buttons. It's been a while since the tables have turned.

 wintertree 17:14 Mon
In reply to Longsufferingropeholder:

> Just don't get worked up about it. Kick back and have some fun. Used to be he/she/it knew how to push our buttons. It's been a while since the tables have turned.

One of their retorts to me is an accusation of absolute certainty in my opinion.  I need to work up a little sketch explaining Gaussian statistics and showing how far some views land the norm.  It’s not absolute certainty, it’s 6-sigma….

 Rawn1962 17:16 Mon
In reply to wintertree:

> Say, do you remember the time a Rom like poster endlessly went on about how vaccines weren’t proven to reduce transmission (going against actual expert opinion and first order thinking), and then their account was gone by the time reality proved them conclusively wrong?

Except I have never claimed such a thing. But you wouldn't know since you assume the extreme opposite to yours every time someone dares questioning your belief.

I only pointed out that you we shouldn't be so certain that it would stop transmission enough to stop the pandemic, and that we should be cautious until evidence arrives.
Given what we know know about delta it looked like a wise position in hindsight.

 wintertree 17:19 Mon
In reply to Rawn1962:

> Except I have never claimed such a thing. 

Cut me a break, it’s hard to tell what you have or haven’t claimed - as you full well know - because you change your accounts more often than I change my socks, because your posting style is dishonest and deceitful.

Unless you are willing to post a list of all the account names from which you have posted, you’re just making noise when you insist you’ve never claimed something.

Nobody but you knows what you’ve said because you’re engagement with these forums and the many kind, good and honest people here is deceitful.

 Rawn1962 17:24 Mon
In reply to Longsufferingropeholder:

> It was early 2021. Can't offer anything more recent than that but suspect you won't have to wait long. Not the point anyway. Question was "is that quantifiable?". Answer is "yes".

How on earth is it quantifiable ? We don't even know what variant will hit tomorrow and what that will do to transmission, we don't even know how fast it would wane, quantifying something like that is impossible unless you have crystal ball.

The rebuttal only serves my point : there is no consensus.
The picture is more complex that you think it is.

Personally I would much prefer erring on the side of caution and say that we simply don't know enough about transmission, especially as time passes and the effect of vaccination on transmission may wane.
 

 Rawn1962 17:30 Mon
In reply to wintertree:

> > Except I have never claimed such a thing. 

> Cut me a break, it’s hard to tell what you have or haven’t claimed

Just above you claimed with absolute certainty that I said something, now that I put you on the spot you claim you can't tell if I did or not.
Yeah, whatever. Not interested in your petty fights. You can have the last word if you want .

Bye !

Post edited at 17:35
 wintertree 17:34 Mon
In reply to Rawn1962:

> Just above you claimed authoritatively that I said something, now that I put you on the spot you claim you can't tell if I did or not.

Golly Rom, I wish I was as clever as you, I really do.  You bested me *and* completely avoided the issue of your deceitful posting style.  

Or, perhaps I should have been clearer - the Rom-like persona accounts you post from are clearly identifiable by the dunderheaded approach to misleading people with highly repetitive, selective technical truths.

But I have growing suspicions you run another persona across other banned accounts, that is an active Covid denier.

> Yeah, whatever. I'll leave you to play your childish games.  

I don’t think you’re going to find many posters who think I’m the childish one here.  

> You an have the last word if you want 

If you truly can cede the last word, perhaps I am wrong about you being Rom after all.

In reply to TomD89:

> Of course, you won't find anywhere I have said there is no benefit to be had. It's a question of proportionality and the cost of the benefit gained.

Come back in five years*. Then countries can look back and say they did too much, too little etc... when you factor in death rates, more long covid research, variants, increased non covid deaths from treatable illnesses. There is no right solution other than nz style very early shutdown. In Europe it's just a debate about which of the various methods is less bad. 

* 5 years, well within the life time of an average ukc sleeper account. 

In reply to Rawn1962:

> You can have the last word if you want .

Rom, you always have the last word. 

In reply to Rawn1962:

> How on earth is it quantifiable ?

You do a science. Like the ones I pointed you to. That weren't good enough for you because blah blah agenda.

 Rawn1962 18:59 Mon
In reply to Longsufferingropeholder:

> You do a science. Like the ones I pointed you to. That weren't good enough for you because blah blah agenda.


You can do as much science as you want, there is poor and/or insufficient data, known unknowns, unknowns unknowns, you just have to deal with it and be humble, instead of pretending you can quantify something when really you can't.

The current level of certainty around this particular question are certainly not high enough to warrant pontificating and lashing out at someone questioning it.

How effective the vaccines are at stopping transmission with delta, and how long that effect lasts, is very much not clear at all, and we would do well to not bet the house on it.

It doesn't mean I agree with TomDB that we shouldn't use vaccine passport, on the contrary, lack of knowledge is a good reason for us to adopt precautions especially if they have few downsides - like vaccine passports.


 

Post edited at 19:06
In reply to Rawn1962:

> You can do as much science as you want....

I knew you couldn't leave it without one more bite Rom! 

 wintertree 19:18 Mon
In reply to Rawn1962:

> Personally I would much prefer erring on the side of caution and say that we simply don't know enough about transmission, especially as time passes and the effect of vaccination on transmission may wane.

Yes, that caution was clear last week when you were advocating for freer international travel (because it suited you); somehow there this issue of unknown unknowns and so on didn’t apply.  You showed certainty that you were right, that nobody else could know better and so on.

Whoops, forgot to change your account before changing your tune!  Next you’ll be slipping up and posting from your like/dislike sock puppet again on the same thread…

 wintertree 19:19 Mon
In reply to summo:

> I knew you couldn't leave it without one more bite Rom! 

I have charitably left them with another opportunity to leave me with the last word.  Selfless, me.

In reply to Rawn1962:

> You can do as much science as you want, there is poor and/or insufficient data, known unknowns, unknowns unknowns, you just have to deal with it and be humble, instead of pretending you can quantify something when really you can't.

That's how you quantify things; you get the data. You make measurements. This is a parameter that absolutely can be measured. It has been quantified. Your response was to say those measurements are out of date or don't pertain to the delta variant. Sure, you can argue that. But it's been demonstrated that it has been quantified, and therefore is quantifiable.
Now is when you would normally claim you were arguing a different point.

 deepsoup 19:27 Mon
In reply to Rawn1962:

> I don't agree with TomDB on vaccine passports, or basically anything he said policy-wise, but at least he is asking questions, instead of lashing out and throwing insults...

Yes, he's just about as polite as a sea lion can be.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sealioning
http://wondermark.com/1k62/

 Rawn1962 19:28 Mon
In reply to Longsufferingropeholder:

> That's how you quantify things; you get the data. You make measurements.

You can't collect data on things that have not happened yet.

> Your response was to say those measurements are out of date or don't pertain to the delta variant. Sure, you can argue that. But it's been demonstrated that it has been quantified, and therefore is quantifiable.

You are now contradicting yourself int he space of two sentences. Either you have the data and it may be quantifiable, or you don't have it and it's not.

> Now is when you would normally claim you were arguing a different point.

I have been entirely consistent in my point.

Post edited at 19:32
 Rawn1962 19:29 Mon
In reply to summo:

> I knew you couldn't leave it without one more bite Rom!


I wasn't replying to him.

Post edited at 19:29
 Rawn1962 19:31 Mon
In reply to deepsoup:

> Yes, he's just about as polite as a sea lion can be.

Sorry, I have just not seen that behavior from him. Maybe on other threads I have not read but not the case here.

In reply to Rawn1962:

> I wasn't replying to him.

You sure? It must be hard keeping track with multiple log ins. 

In reply to Rawn1962:

> You can't collect data on things that have not happened yet.

Doesn't at all mean that thing is not quantifiable. The amount of rain that falls tomorrow is quantifiable. That hasn't happened yet.
Just like vaccine effectiveness against secondary infection is, absolutely, quantifiable.

> You are now contradicting yourself int he space of two sentences. Either you have the data and it may be quantifiable, or you don't have it and it's not.

Not seeing any contradiction in what I said.
You're trying to pretend you meant "known" when we were talking about "quantifiable".
>> Now is when you would normally claim you were arguing a different point.
Called it.

Post edited at 19:40
 Rawn1962 19:44 Mon
In reply to Longsufferingropeholder:

> Doesn't at all mean that thing not quantifiable. The amount of rain that falls tomorrow is quantifiable. That hasn't happened yet.

Sure sure, but it's totally useless to the farmer to know that'll you'll be able to quantify the rain tomorrow after his field has been flooded.

> Just like vaccine effectiveness against secondary infection is, absolutely, quantifiable.

Bravo, you have backpedaled so much and narrowed your initial point so much that all you have now proven is that something is quantifiable in theory and in the future.

It's not particularly helpful or relevant, but OK.

I sense a lack of good faith here so bye bye, you can also have the last word if you like.

Post edited at 19:52
 Rawn1962 19:47 Mon
In reply to summo:

> You sure? It must be hard keeping track with multiple log ins. 


I have only one login.

In reply to Rawn1962:

> Bravo, you have backpedaled so much and narrowed your initial point so much that all you have now proven is that something is quantifiable in theory and in the future.

I mean, that was exactly and entirely the point you kicked this off over. So, not really.
Let's recap:

Me:

> It was early 2021. Can't offer anything more recent than that but suspect you won't have to wait long. Not the point anyway. Question was "is that quantifiable?". Answer is "yes".

You:
> How on earth is it quantifiable ? We don't even know what variant will hit tomorrow and what that will do to transmission, we don't even know how fast it would wane, quantifying something like that is impossible unless you have crystal ball.

You:
..... [a bunch of sea lion noises]
interspersed with
Me:
[explaining in countless different ways how it clearly *is* quantifiable]

you:
> It doesn't matter anyway, it's stupid, I'm taking my ball and going home.

In reply to Rawn1962:

> I have only one new login per day.

Indeed.

 Rawn1962 20:30 Mon
In reply to summo:

Very funny. But you are wrong.

In reply to henwardian:

There’s clearly trouble in the offing when you hear politicians and supermarket CEOs saying there’s no need to panic buy.

 mondite 21:22 Mon
In reply to Rog Wilko:

> There’s clearly trouble in the offing when you hear politicians and supermarket CEOs saying there’s no need to panic buy.


The problem is even if they are telling the truth there is a significant risk people wont believe them and panic buy with the media doing their best to encourage them by posting some careful photos of empty shelves.


Please Register as a New User in order to reply to this topic.
Loading Notifications...