ContinueWe use cookies to ensure that you get the best experience on our website; if you continue without changing your settings - or dismiss this message - we'll assume that you are happy to receive all cookies on

The Conference Forum

Return to front page

Newest article: Re: Ben Bradley by DesCartesToday 09:12Today at 09:12:03view thread

Oldest article: Circuit break by Hughesy7/10 18:37Wed Oct 7 18:37:46 2020view thread


Next thread: when music was just fun by Otto Flick18/10 10:33Sun Oct 18 10:33:36 2020view thread

A touch of the Covids: basic question

By Bullsgold17/10 21:26Sat Oct 17 21:26:54 2020

Views: 521

Good evening pop pickers.

I guess a number of people on here have experience of this so I thought I'd ask rather than sit here on my own, bemused. My Kidderz nursery rang earlier to say that some poor young soul has tested positive and as my child has been in contact with the unfortunate devil they cannot go in next week.

As far as I understand it, this means that our child has to remain at home for 14 days (from initial contact with the zombie-child) but everyone else is free to go about their business (drinking in spoons, high-fiving tramps, chatting to old ladies on public transport with a chin mask etc). Is that correct?

It would appear that if I had been contacted by the Test and Trace people then I would also have to isolate, but because I've been contacted by the nursery I don't have to. Is that right?
It all seems a bit odd/inconsistent to me. I don't wanna break no rules and kill people. Know what I mean?

Anyway, I'm sure many of you northern folk eat this kind of shit for breakfast, so please excuse my stupidity.

Edit: I might as add that I think the thought process behind this isolating business is fundamentally flawed. A person could have no illness but test positive, then a person who has been near them has to self-isolate. However, a person who has been near the person who has been near to the person who tested postive does not have to self-isolate because they have not been near a person who has tested positive. But the person who was near to the person who tested positive may not show signs of the illness either and do not have to have a test... so how is the person who is near to the person who has been near to a person who had a positive test supposed to go about their usual business safe in the knowledge that they are not in the early stages of having it?

It's no real surprise that everyone has it, is it?

Edited by Bullsgold at 21:55:28 on 17th October 2020

reply to this article | return to the front page

Next article in this thread: Re: A touch of the Covids: basic question by Lord M Ox18/10 09:20Sun Oct 18 09:20:26 2020

Previous thread: Brexit by Otto Flick16/10 14:23Fri Oct 16 14:23:52 2020view thread