[Will Hunt]

Newsflash - germs found in mound of turds shock. Anal hygiene essential to stop the spread.

What’s the thing with the Guardian links?

It’s called a “Newspaper”. They’re something that grownups read, a bit like a meme for people who can think.
You don’t need to worry about it.

Ah, guardianista’s a cult in its own right.  Get yer tinfoil out....

https://off-guardian.org/2020/10/19/this-week-in-the-guardian-15/

Can I borrow some of your tin foil? Sure you have plenty...

I suspect that Muscle Coach's antagonistic use of the forum will wane when people stop taking the bait...
The sooner the better.

Oh yes don’t engage with the idiot loon, we’ve got to get back to our sensible insular partisan debate on how everyone else should live their lives. 😆

If you actually read the forum you'll see that lots of people do disagree on here (see almost any thread that Pete posts on). They just manage to do it in a civil and respectful manner (most of the time). If you act like a cunt you have to expect to be answered like a cunt 

 

[Oldmanmatt]

Do we perhaps think Mr Coach may be a previous forum member who burned through several aliases, each one ending with a flounce off?

Doubt it. Most of those characters, as I recall, were more intelligent and engaging.
More likely the “turned up to sell ‘roids/Herbalife/magic shakes” and a bit too thick to realise he/she/it is in the wrong place, or some common, but inept, troll.

[Anti]

But I can understand why we end up with broad brush measures and how a minority interest like ours can get lost in clamour. I also think we have an inflated idea of the BMC’s influence on the powers-that-be.

I think it's fair to say the BMC has repeatedly punched above it's weight in such areas but, as you say, there is a clamour of voices wanting to be heard currently and my impression is that those with the simplest job structure - say a health club chain employing 000's - get taken more seriously than the possible larger but rather more nebulous economy associated with the outdoors.

The irony of course is that Pete has repeatedly called for the BMC to be reduced in size and remit while now bemoaning it's lack of influence.

I suppose I'm more on the side that the BMC shouldn't need to be involved at all. Last time they scolded us for thinking about being outside. That we were selfish and dangerous and incapable of judging risk. I'm happy with them sticking to access issues

Is this not the biggest access issue since Foot-and-mouth? You'll need to link to where they scolded people as I was actively involved in ensuring communications carried no such message.

The BMC sought and passed on expert legal advice on what we were allowed to do during the first lockdown. In some cases I thought that they erred on the side of caution but I am not a lawyer and they went with the experts. The way in which the government clearly lifted these restrictions rather suggested that unsurprisingly I had been wrong and the experts right.

Such restrictions have returned to Wales, and the BMC fought hard against them. That they lost is not evidence, as Pete put it, of them 'bending over' or embracing the restrictions. But once extant in law you have to concede the BMC have a duty to inform people of what the legal situation is. I suspect this time the BMC's dismay at the government's treatment may be more public, but we may equally find kicking back too hard is a stance that does not age well.

My issue was with last lockdown the government stance is that we shouldn't be driving places and travelling to do things in groups. My interpretation (memory may be fuzzy) is that the BMC stance made it be that even if you lived in the middle of Stanage Plantation you shouldn't dare touch the rock lest you end up in A&E or requiring MRT to risk their lives to pick you up. Welsh government made things easier, as they closed the national parks forcing any attempt at climbing an issue of access, however this time the national parks remain open so I can go bouldering on public land (well, you know not really public...) without pissing off a farmer.

Obviously COVID isn't spread in the same way as foot and mouth and poses no risk to livestock, so the issue becomes that of what we should and shouldn't be doing for the public good. The Welsh government haven't explicitly said anything on the issue, so if for example the BMC were to tell us we shouldn't be climbing it sort of pens us into a corner. I guess in a poorly, long winded way I'm saying its best if no-one says anything and we keep doing what we think is acceptable. I won't drive to Ysgo but I think Ogwen is okay.

[petejh]

But I can understand why we end up with broad brush measures and how a minority interest like ours can get lost in clamour. I also think we have an inflated idea of the BMC’s influence on the powers-that-be.

I think it's fair to say the BMC has repeatedly punched above it's weight in such areas but, as you say, there is a clamour of voices wanting to be heard currently and my impression is that those with the simplest job structure - say a health club chain employing 000's - get taken more seriously than the possible larger but rather more nebulous economy associated with the outdoors.

The irony of course is that Pete has repeatedly called for the BMC to be reduced in size and remit while now bemoaning it's lack of influence.

I suppose I'm more on the side that the BMC shouldn't need to be involved at all. Last time they scolded us for thinking about being outside. That we were selfish and dangerous and incapable of judging risk. I'm happy with them sticking to access issues

Is this not the biggest access issue since Foot-and-mouth? You'll need to link to where they scolded people as I was actively involved in ensuring communications carried no such message.

The BMC sought and passed on expert legal advice on what we were allowed to do during the first lockdown. In some cases I thought that they erred on the side of caution but I am not a lawyer and they went with the experts. The way in which the government clearly lifted these restrictions rather suggested that unsurprisingly I had been wrong and the experts right.

Such restrictions have returned to Wales, and the BMC fought hard against them. That they lost is not evidence, as Pete put it, of them 'bending over' or embracing the restrictions. But once extant in law you have to concede the BMC have a duty to inform people of what the legal situation is. I suspect this time the BMC's dismay at the government's treatment may be more public, but we may equally find kicking back too hard is a stance that does not age well.

rant..

JB, not wanting to turn this into BMC Wars III, but the BMC aren't obligated to take government funding for overseeing an Olympic sport or being an 'official NGB'. I assume they do so because at root they want to be more powerful and more important. From memory the funding stream accounts for around 15% of total BMC funding.

I think they'd do a better job of representing the interests of those members who enjoy the freedom of the great outdoors if they didn't need to worry about losing government funding for saying or doing 'the wrong thing'. So yeah I think BMC should be smaller and less interested in trying to be all things to all people.
 
They could do this by shifting competition climbing's governing body into a separate organisation. Let comp climbing have an effective body that focusses on its own interests, because it's a completely separate 'thing' now that it's an Olympic sport which, due to its funding structure coming from government Sports funding and commercial sponsorship, conflicts with the idea of freedom to access the great outdoors - something that has a long history of conflicting with powerful vested interests and public misunderstanding.

Yes there needs to be dialogue and respectful discussion with powerful bodies. But there also needs to be backbone and independence from conflicting interest. Other countries have outdoors-users access rights groups that are independent from sporting governing bodies.

The COVID crisis has brought home how conflicted and hamstrung the BMC have become.
It can't even bring itself to publicly fight for our access if that goes against anything government say in this crisis, presumably for fear of upsetting its sporting governing body funding. First lockdown I could at least understand their diplomacy as we didn't really understand the big picture. This time around the evidence is clear - there'll be zero harm done by accessing the mountains, hills, cliffs or boulders. If anyone tries to use 'accidents' as another stick to beat us with then it needs demonstrating clearly that road cycling sends more unfortunate people to hospital in one week than climbing or hillwalking does in one year.

It's time the BMC publicly stood up for its members in Wales, not hid behind the Welsh government's ridiculous regressive rules denying freedom to access the outdoors. You know - actually served its purported reason for existing.

/rant

[teestub]

Obviously COVID isn't spread in the same way as foot and mouth and poses no risk to livestock, so the issue becomes that of what we should and shouldn't be doing for the public good. The Welsh government haven't explicitly said anything on the issue, so if for example the BMC were to tell us we shouldn't be climbing it sort of pens us into a corner. I guess in a poorly, long winded way I'm saying its best if no-one says anything and we keep doing what we think is acceptable. I won't drive to Ysgo but I think Ogwen is okay.

I don’t think JB was trying to make a direct comparison to F&M except for the scale, what we saw last time was farmers ‘closing’ footpaths on their land and restricting access in other ways. If we are heading in a similar direction again towards a full lockdown, then there’s a lot the BMC could do on a local level to discuss any potential concerns with land owners.

Out of internet why wouldn’t you drive to the Lleyn? It seems you’re less likely to interact with people there than you would be in the  valley.

[Anti]

Obviously COVID isn't spread in the same way as foot and mouth and poses no risk to livestock, so the issue becomes that of what we should and shouldn't be doing for the public good. The Welsh government haven't explicitly said anything on the issue, so if for example the BMC were to tell us we shouldn't be climbing it sort of pens us into a corner. I guess in a poorly, long winded way I'm saying its best if no-one says anything and we keep doing what we think is acceptable. I won't drive to Ysgo but I think Ogwen is okay.

I don’t think JB was trying to make a direct comparison to F&M except for the scale, what we saw last time was farmers ‘closing’ footpaths on their land and restricting access in other ways. If we are heading in a similar direction again towards a full lockdown, then there’s a lot the BMC could do on a local level to discuss any potential concerns with land owners.

Out of internet why wouldn’t you drive to the Lleyn? It seems you’re less likely to interact with people there than you would be in the  valley.

Ah sorry, what I mean is for the most part farmers probably don't much care when people are well behaved and don't make arses of themselves. In my experience most farmers I've met are actually quite relaxed re: COVID, so unless there was already a tenuous access issue I'd say I don't see the opinion of the BMC / Welsh Govt making a significant impact. Foot and mouth had a very direct issue with access.

Interesting question about driving down the Peninsula and makes me examine my morals. Ogwen is only a few miles away from my house and easier for me to define to myself as staying local. It's also a lot closer should some grumpy police officer decide to turn me away. If I did twist an ankle, I could hobble from Milestone and ask my wife to give me a lift.

[Muscle.Coach]

I suspect that Muscle Coach's antagonistic use of the forum will wane when people stop taking the bait...
The sooner the better.

Can't someone with admin privileges just get rid of them unless they start to write posts more than 1 line long?

Oh yes don’t engage with the idiot loon

Very ironic. I'm waiting for an articulate (or even coherent) response to my points on the other thread. See also the other thread RE logistics of herd-immunity. If you want a discussion then plenty of people here are open to it, but you'll have to actually put in a modicum of effort to think about the points raised and respond to them.

Do we perhaps think Mr Coach may be a previous forum member who burned through several aliases, each one ending with a flounce off?

Seems quite possible.

Why do I need to write an essay mate? Masks n social distancing = poor health and welfare. Now join the dots.

[abarro81]

Why do I need to write an essay mate? Masks n social distancing = poor health and welfare. Now join the dots.

Because you say things like they're fact while abjectly failing to back them up with either reasoning or evidence. For example by providing links to evidence on masks leading to worse health outcomes at a rate that's likely to justify stopping their use... or just a vaguely well argued rationale for thinking that that might be the case. Fancy giving it a shot?

[tomtom]

Now join the dots.

The only dots I’m joining here pal, is that either you’re trolling or not got a clue what you’re on about.

If you want to join in - make some sensible arguments and back them up with some sources.

Or go away.

[Muscle.Coach]

What sort of evidence would be suitable to you buddy?

The Guardian or some other toilet paper of choice?

[mrjonathanr]

Now join the dots.

The only dots I’m joining here pal, is that either you’re trolling or not got a clue what you’re on about.

I don't think it's either/or TT; I wouldn't waste your time.

[abarro81]

Let's be honest, we set the bar pretty low here - you don't even really need to provide evidence (digging through stuff can be time consuming and we should all be working anyway), just a moderately well-reasoned argument that people can explore/critique (as per the discussion with Bradders on the other thread).

This is getting boring now, it's like talking to a 5 year old.

[spidermonkey09]

we should all be working anyway

 

[JamieG]

If I was going to make an argument against social distancing, I would say that some of the mental health concerns that have been brought up are worrying. Isolation and loneliness are all likely to increase mental health problems in an already stressful time. However, I think they've tried to mitigate this with things like family bubbles etc. But it is a difficult balance.

An argument against masks is much harder to see. They've been worn by the medical professional for years to reduce infections and protect patients and staff, so I can't see what the big fuss is about.

But as tomtom says I think Muscle.Coach is mostly just trolling at the moment. And seems more interested in the scrap than putting forward some discussion points.

[Will Hunt]

https://twitter.com/blaireerskine/status/1301854923445989376

[Anti]

So if you wanted to get all nerdy about it, you could argue against social distancing because there have been some studies (https://www.pnas.org/content/pnas/112/49/15142.full.pdf) showing that loneliness can change gene expression in leukocytes and they start to down-regulate their anti-viral response. Tho it's not a real issue, it'd be a fun way to baffle people with your anti-distancing argument.

[Oldmanmatt]

So if you wanted to get all nerdy about it, you could argue against social distancing because there have been some studies (https://www.pnas.org/content/pnas/112/49/15142.full.pdf) showing that loneliness can change gene expression in leukocytes and they start to down-regulate their anti-viral response. Tho it's not a real issue, it'd be a fun way to baffle people with your anti-distancing argument.

Probably a more valid argument, is that humans already take up too much room and if we spread out even more, the people at the edges are going to fall into the sea...

Flat Earth 101, innit.

[tomtom]

Or turning the conversation back to shit again, the re-configuration of the workforce (city centre >> suburbs) has led to changes in demand for sewage processing.

[Will Hunt]

Or turning the conversation back to shit again, the re-configuration of the workforce (city centre >> suburbs) has led to changes in demand for sewage processing.

Ok, you got us. It's an UKWIR conspiracy to try and alleviate pressure on major works and dodge the monumental phosphate reduction programme we have this AMP. We woulda gotten away with it too if it wasn't for that meddlin' Muscle Coach.

[Muscle.Coach]

At the height of the pandemic back in days of yore, pre covidian medieval psychotic states. Sheffield teaching hospitals made 240 beds ready for the covid tsunami, I understand 34 were used. Now I believe that is a similar figure despite lockdown, distancing, muzzling and self isolating and general bollocks. Seems to paint a pretty clear picture, while you pally matey buddy boys chat on and on

[Muscle.Coach]

Just to add I believe all theatres and non essential services were closed for months and anyone who could be discharged to a nursing home was packed of to die. Leaving a shit load of people worse of than if they caught covid 

[Bonjoy]

Seems to paint a pretty clear picture, while you pally matey buddy boys chat on and on

You forgot 'chum'.

[tomtom]

@muscules https://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/hundreds-unexpected-hospital-deaths-greater-19148399

So do some research and get back to us. Here’s an article from today’s MEN with ‘excess’ non Covid deaths from June 2019- end May 20 (ie covering a chunk of the peak period). These show people who died in these hospitals (or within 28 days of discharge) not from Covid. So if you can find the number that died from Covid at the same hospitals in the same period - you’ll get some sort of idea as to whether the effect you describe happened.

I suspect more people than ‘usual’ have died due to CV19 admissions to hospital - and how many that is in relation to those who died from Covid will come out in the wash.

Of course - if we didn’t let Covid spread so easily - by all following social distancing, wearing masks, washing hands, being careful - or by forcing this by locking down (etc..) then we wouldn’t have had to make such choices at hospitals.

[abarro81]

At the height of the pandemic back in days of yore, pre covidian medieval psychotic states. Sheffield teaching hospitals made 240 beds ready for the covid tsunami, I understand 34 were used. Now I believe that is a similar figure despite lockdown, distancing, muzzling and self isolating and general bollocks. Seems to paint a pretty clear picture, while you pally matey buddy boys chat on and on

You realise that what you've written is barely legible and wholly incomprehensible, right? E.g. "I believe that is a similar figure" - what is a similar figure to what? Do you mean that current COVID-related bed occupancy is similar to its peak in lockdown? If so, then try saying that. If that is what you mean, then given that COVID-related bed occupancy is currently rising, this should be concerning not a reason for thinking it's all hunky dory. It also doesn't really support any of your argument - we locked the whole country down, and got to 34. Then we were less locked down but had various other measures in place, things got better, then got worse again as mixing increased, and we got back to 34. This doesn't mean that you can unlock those measures and stay at 34, and it doesn't tell you anything about mask efficacy.

Just to add I believe all theatres and non essential services were closed for months and anyone who could be discharged to a nursing home was packed of to die. Leaving a shit load of people worse of than if they caught covid 

Yes, I think it's broadly acknowledged that the impact on non-COVID care has been pretty terrible. I'm well aware of this given my dad being in-and-out of hospital multiple times over Spring/Summer. I could certainly believe that the health service response could have been better managed, and hopefully it is currently being better managed. But these arguments all weigh on why minor inconveniences like masks are well worthwhile - because reducing COVID-related pressure on the health system is important for a myriad of non-COVID health treatments. I'd love to hear about how not wearing masks in the shops or at work would reduce the pandemic-related challenges for the NHS...

There are interesting questions around how much restriction, and what restrictions, strike the best balance between keeping the economy going, giving people "freedom", and reducing direct damage from COVID. There are no doubt interesting questions around how to run the NHS in this scenario, though they probably require too much starting knowledge to be worth having for most of us on here. But having this conversation with you is tedious, frustrating, and very little fun. Still, a valiant effort and an improvement on your previous posts. We're up to it being like talking to a 10 year old, so keep on trucking...

P.s. this is why you want fewer COVID cases if you want "normal" NHS services to work - if you run out of staff and beds then someone doesn't get treated...  https://www.nottinghampost.com/news/nottingham-news/hospital-trust-postpones-non-urgent-4632908

[Muscle.Coach]

I haven’t got a fucking clue what you’re on about chum. You and that TT fellah seem pretty genned up to me so I’ll take your word for it. Ever feel like a a bloke with one bollock in a 2 bollock race, well I do now.