Definitely tempted to do a VoV on this.
4 Likes
It is amazing the when you go to the NYA website, the first thing you see, in bright yellow is:
From 20th January 2022, face coverings are no longer compulsory in the youth sector for any ages, in any setting. Masks can, of course, still be worn by choice and all practice should remain Covid secure.
I can however still see where the boss is coming from though, even if I don’t agree with it.
Given how anti anything our leadership is, I cannot see anything changing in our guidance. I would be very surprised if they did bring any changes in yet.
1 Like
Again.
Masks I can deal with.
BUT.
Please for the love of God, get rid of 1m+…
It’s not law.
It’s not NYA.
It’s not even MOD as the ACF got rid over 3 months ago.
Or follow the science, which is important show or effect?
My question is why so “anti-everything” - on a VGS chat I had about ACTO35, I found out that any decision made at certain levels leaves those who made it accountable for life, which may apply?
While that is true, as with AT where we work to the NGB guidance we would here be working to the NYA guidance which is the same sort of situation.
I don’t understand - are you coming back to me directly or commenting more generally?
Not at your comment. More commenting at Leadership and also offering that which might be the case.
It depends where the “science” is coming from. The “science” coming from South Africa was, yes it’s contagious, but all of their findings were people were showing less serious symptoms, hospital admissions were down as were deaths, but this was largely ignored by many, as it didn’t fit the narrative and the conjecture was because it was from Africa, they weren’t as robust as we were “in the West”. Also the Harries woman suggested the time from infection to hospitalisation for omicron was 17 days (around double any other sort) the source of which was not disclosed and delayed decisions in the run up to Christmas. I think if they’d stuck to the 9/10 days of previous variants decisions would have been made sooner. I just hope now the “experts” have got their “gongs” they’ll go quietly.
The science was also coming from UK advisers who funny enough know what they are doing
I’m not sure whether the misogyny implied by your use of language helps your case.
2 Likes
@WellIbedammed South Africa, were having first hand large scale experience before it got here, so who would I go with in terms of its impact … let me see? I think our experts have dithered and dallied over this for too long and going with the SA findings as say didn’t fit the narrative we’ve been brainwashed into.
@WestlandScout Doesn’t alter the facts however you word it. IRRC she was under fire and touted to be replaced earlier on.
You would go to ever gives you the answer you want, it wasn’t our scientist dithering that was the govt who just goes with whoever shouts the loudest
The scientists don’t and haven’t dithered as they have zero concern and are unaffected by the broader effects of their recommendations. They weren’t in danger of being furloughed or losing their jobs.
They would have seen the reports from SA and with that amount of data emanating from outside the UK, seemingly ignored it, rather than saying the evidence in SA strongly suggests we don’t need to be as cautious. As I recall they were quick to jump on the data from elsewhere in early 2020 without corresponding UK data and have made all manner of predictions between then and now, which have been much worse than reality, even in 2021.
If you saw something that effectively contradicted what you were being told, doubts would be raised in your mind. Perhaps this is why the PM didn’t panic and jump on restrictions like the devolved nations and much of Europe did.
So you are an expert on what our scientist do or just guessing that they only do it as a job and the money.
Leave it please. Teflon is a troll of the highest magnitude, he is baiting you in to replying.
You can take it to PM if you want to, but keep on topic here.
5 Likes
OK, thank you for intervention.
What is everyone’s predictions as to when we will hear from the ivory tower in regards to the probable keeping of restrictions?
I know it takes time for them to open the document, and then either to add or cut 
…but just a “we acknowledge the recent changes, and will be publishing a revision in due course” would be appreciated. Not just keeping us in limbo!
First week of March, imo.