Jump to content

Recommended Posts

KidKruger Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> lindylou - it's easy (and lazy) for people to call

> grave insults on people over the internet as I'm

> sure you know (seeing as you're experiencing it

> !).

> I'm also concerned that some groups of the

> population are experiencing higher than average

> infection (not sure about deaths, but assume it's

> same proportion for all group ?). Reasons are

> surely attitude, awareness, social pressure and

> cultural.


Thank you kid. It's my point exactly. I'm not being racist, merely pointing out that some cultures are exactly that. But in the present climate it's not helping themselves or others they come into contact with.

Some communities are more disadvantaged. That means poorer living conditions, less space etc. Also people with less money are more likely to have to go to work, travel on public transport plus do jobs that are more "frontline".


The disadvantages that the BAME community face remain widespread........I would have thought this hardly needs to be stated.


I personally haven't observed any substantial difference in social distancing between the two high streets of Peckham or East Dulwich recently. Both are busy.

binkylilyput Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Some communities are more disadvantaged. That

> means poorer living conditions, less space etc.

> Also people with less money are more likely to

> have to go to work, travel on public transport

> plus do jobs that are more "frontline".

>

> The disadvantages that the BAME community face

> remain widespread........I would have thought this

> hardly needs to be stated.

>

> I personally haven't observed any substantial

> difference in social distancing between the two

> high streets of Peckham or East Dulwich recently.

> Both are busy.


Yes, both areas have become busy, I totally agree. But some areas have become busy with no social distancing.

lindylou Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> binkylilyput Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > Some communities are more disadvantaged. That

> > means poorer living conditions, less space etc.

> > Also people with less money are more likely to

> > have to go to work, travel on public transport

> > plus do jobs that are more "frontline".

> >

> > The disadvantages that the BAME community face

> > remain widespread........I would have thought

> this

> > hardly needs to be stated.

> >

> > I personally haven't observed any substantial

> > difference in social distancing between the two

> > high streets of Peckham or East Dulwich

> recently.

> > Both are busy.

>

> Yes, both areas have become busy, I totally agree.

> But some areas have become busy with no social

> distancing.


Do you not think children from any ethnicity have a hard time?

lindylou Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> lindylou Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > binkylilyput Wrote:

> >

> --------------------------------------------------

>

> > -----

> > > Some communities are more disadvantaged. That

> > > means poorer living conditions, less space

> etc.

> > > Also people with less money are more likely

> to

> > > have to go to work, travel on public

> transport

> > > plus do jobs that are more "frontline".

> > >

> > > The disadvantages that the BAME community

> face

> > > remain widespread........I would have thought

> > this

> > > hardly needs to be stated.

> > >

> > > I personally haven't observed any substantial

> > > difference in social distancing between the

> two

> > > high streets of Peckham or East Dulwich

> > recently.

> > > Both are busy.

> >

> > Yes, both areas have become busy, I totally

> agree.

> > But some areas have become busy with no social

> > distancing.

>

> Do you not think children from any ethnicity have

> a hard time?



Whose she, the cat's mother? And I think it's more of a class thing lately. Send the kids from the government school back, shield the others. All kids from working class families have no hope. Be that black, white or yellow.

KidKruger Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> lindylou - it's easy (and lazy) for people to call

> grave insults on people over the internet as I'm

> sure you know (seeing as you're experiencing it

> !).


who's 'calling grave insults on people'?


and why is it important to know that 8 put of 10 people playing football were BAME (maybe)? because that's where this started

I'm not sure lindylou was expressly making a point about one area being more supreme than another area, though I guess it's possible to construe anything if you want.


I think it's important in discussions like this to read the words people write, rather than making-up a back story to what they write in order to create a Gotcha moment.




alice Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> This Peckham v Dulwich thing has been on this

> forum for years. It?s always been very thinly

> veiled racism. But to use it now, with this

> pandemic, is obscene.

>

> I would shut the thread down. It serves absolutely

> no purpose.

So there you have it lindylou people calling you racist !

So easy for people to do when not stood in front of you. So lazy.

"Oooh, but I never actually SAID the word 'racist', so you can't accuse me of calling you that - are you paranoid ?!".


Just like lindylou never said anything racist (or even implying that he/she were in any way racist).


This has been on this forum for years, always been very thinly veiled accusations of racism. But to use it now, with this pandemic, is obscene.

Lindylou you seem to have responded to my post twice......and neither responses particularly make sense in reference to my post!


Of course there are children from all ethnic backgrounds who struggle. That wasn?t my point.


And I don?t know who the cat?s mother is- I didn?t use the word she at all?!


My point is quite clearly that the BAME community is worse off across all socioeconomic markers. The health of these groups is far worse as a result. This is well known and widely documented.


Inequality.


Anyways, back to football?

lindylou Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> lindylou Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > lindylou Wrote:

> >

> --------------------------------------------------

>

> > -----

> > > binkylilyput Wrote:

> > >

> >

> --------------------------------------------------

>

> >

> > > -----

> > > > Some communities are more disadvantaged.

> That

> > > > means poorer living conditions, less space

> > etc.

> > > > Also people with less money are more likely

> > to

> > > > have to go to work, travel on public

> > transport

> > > > plus do jobs that are more "frontline".

> > > >

> > > > The disadvantages that the BAME community

> > face

> > > > remain widespread........I would have

> thought

> > > this

> > > > hardly needs to be stated.

> > > >

> > > > I personally haven't observed any

> substantial

> > > > difference in social distancing between the

> > two

> > > > high streets of Peckham or East Dulwich

> > > recently.

> > > > Both are busy.

> > >

> > > Yes, both areas have become busy, I totally

> > agree.

> > > But some areas have become busy with no

> social

> > > distancing.

> >

> > Do you not think children from any ethnicity

> have

> > a hard time?

>

>

> Whose she, the cat's mother? And I think it's more

> of a class thing lately. Send the kids from the

> government school back, shield the others. All

> kids from working class families have no hope. Be

> that black, white or yellow.


The majority of kids at state schools in SE22 are not underprivileged. But I imagine that many who can be, will be back at school on 1st June because the evidence currently available shows that young children are not at risk from Covid 19.

My point is quite clearly that the BAME community is worse off across all socioeconomic markers. The health of these groups is far worse as a result. This is well known and widely documented.


Inequality.



If you weight for deprivation etc. (i.e. weight to remove this as a variable) then you still find a disproportionate mortality from Covid-19 amongst BAME groups. (A recent Horizon or Panorama, I forget which, published these figures). Mortality goes up with age, with (some) ethnicities, with co-morbidities and with sex - men being almost twice as vulnerable as women. (The chances of infection go up in multiple people households and amongst groups more likely to meet others in a close contact context - which is a social deprivation link as it reflects work-type).


Co-incidentally (or not) Vitamin D deficiency is also a key marker (but correlation does not imply causation) for suffering badly from Covid-19 infection - something frequently seen amongst both the elderly and in BAME populations in Northern climates, though not, I would have thought, within any one group, sex-linked.


For once referring out to race, and specifically to skin colour in a UK context if there is a Vitamin D link, is not wholly unreasonable when discussing violation of the behaviour norms of social distancing urged by HMG. This does not excuse an unthinking and casual reference out to race, of course. Had there been one. Scientific evidence suggests that in the case of Covid-19 'race' is not a lazy shorthand for 'social deprivation' as regards mortality rates.


These figures are all based around serious/ fatal infections. I have no idea whether BAME individuals (once deprivation is weighted out) are more or less likely initially to contract the virus, in any given contact context.

KidKruger Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I'm not sure lindylou was expressly making a point

> about one area being more supreme than another

> area, though I guess it's possible to construe

> anything if you want.

>

> I think it's important in discussions like this to

> read the words people write, rather than making-up

> a back story to what they write in order to create

> a Gotcha moment.

>

>

>


so perhaps you can explain why it's important to identify ratios of white to not white playing football in dulwich?


and what that's got to do with Rye Lane?

KidKruger Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I wouldn't dream of trying to explain why other

> people do things pk, nor what they think is

> important or otherwise.

> You could ask them yourself I reckon.



but you've done this multiple times on this thread already!

KidKruger Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I was saying previously that I didn't think a

> poster was racially motivated.



but in doing that you didnt consider why someone would think that it was important to distinguish white people from the rest when playing football in Dulwich? or how this had anything to do with Peckham?


so what did you consider before reaching your conclusion and calling out others for things they haven't done?

KidKruger Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I was saying previously that I didn't think a

> poster was racially motivated.

> If you disagree tough shit.

>

> If you think someone was being racist report it to

> whoever you think will listen to your claim.

>

> Gotcha moment free zone !


i'm pretty sure that it's only you playing a gotcha game (but you're still probably losing).


i'm just trying to understand what you (and others) are saying about e.g. peckham and what peckham's got to do with alleyns playing fields and to understand why people think it's important to identity footballers at alleyns as white or not white


(i think it isn't and think that to think it is important to classify people playing football as white or not is odd and then to jump from alleyns to 'facts' about peckham is a jump based on stereotypes and anecdotal observations not facts at all)


i can see you've got no coherent thoughts on this so i'll not expect any sensible response - 'tough shit' is the best you can come up with!

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • The is very low water pressure in the middle of Friern Road this morning.
    • I think mostly those are related to the same "issues". In my experience, it's difficult using the pin when reporting problems, especially if you're on a mobile... There's two obvious leaks in that stretch and has been for sometime one of them apparently being sewer flooding 😱  
    • BBC Homepage Skip to content Accessibility Help EFor you Notifications More menu Search BBC                     BBC News Menu   UK England N. Ireland Scotland Alba Wales Cymru Isle of Man Guernsey Jersey Local News Vets under corporate pressure to increase revenue, BBC told   Image source,Getty Images ByRichard Bilton, BBC Panorama and Ben Milne, BBC News Published 2 hours ago Vets have told BBC Panorama they feel under increasing pressure to make money for the big companies that employ them - and worry about the costly financial impact on pet owners. Prices charged by UK vets rose by 63% between 2016 and 2023, external, and the government's competition regulator has questioned whether the pet-care market - as it stands - is giving customers value for money. One anonymous vet, who works for the UK's largest vet care provider, IVC Evidensia, said that the company has introduced a new monitoring system that could encourage vets to offer pet owners costly tests and treatment options. A spokesperson for IVC told Panorama: "The group's vets and vet nurses never prioritise revenue or transaction value over and above the welfare of the animal in their care." More than half of all UK households are thought to own a pet, external. Over the past few months, hundreds of pet owners have contacted BBC Your Voice with concerns about vet bills. One person said they had paid £5,600 for 18 hours of vet-care for their pet: "I would have paid anything to save him but felt afterwards we had been taken advantage of." Another described how their dog had undergone numerous blood tests and scans: "At the end of the treatment we were none the wiser about her illness and we were presented with a bill of £13,000."   Image caption, UK pet owners spent £6.3bn on vet and other pet-care services in 2024, according to the CMA Mounting concerns over whether pet owners are receiving a fair deal prompted a formal investigation by government watchdog, the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA). In a provisional report, external at the end of last year, it identified several issues: Whether vet companies are being transparent about the ownership of individual practices and whether pet owners have enough information about pricing The concentration of vet practices and clinics in the hands of six companies - these now control 60% of the UK's pet-care market Whether this concentration has led to less market competition and allowed some vet care companies to make excess profits 'Hitting targets' A vet, who leads one of IVC's surgeries (and who does not want to be identified because they fear they could lose their job), has shared a new internal document with Panorama. The document uses a colour code to compare the company's UK-wide tests and treatment options and states that it is intended to help staff improve clinical care. It lists key performance indicators in categories that include average sales per patient, X-rays, ultrasound and lab tests. The vet is worried about the new policy: "We will have meetings every month, where one of the area teams will ask you how many blood tests, X-rays and ultrasounds you're doing." If a category is marked in green on the chart, the clinic would be judged to be among the company's top 25% of achievers in the UK. A red mark, on the other hand, would mean the clinic was in the bottom 25%. If this happens, the vet says, it might be asked to come up with a plan of action. The vet says this would create pressure to "upsell" services. Panorama: Why are vet bills so high? Are people being priced out of pet ownership by soaring bills? Watch on BBC iPlayer now or BBC One at 20:00 on Monday 12 January (22:40 in Northern Ireland) Watch on iPlayer For instance, the vet says, under the new model, IVC would prefer any animal with suspected osteoarthritis to potentially be X-rayed. With sedation, that could add £700 to a bill. While X-rays are sometimes necessary, the vet says, the signs of osteoarthritis - the thickening of joints, for instance - could be obvious to an experienced vet, who might prefer to prescribe a less expensive anti-inflammatory treatment. "Vets shouldn't have pressure to do an X-ray because it would play into whether they are getting green on the care framework for their clinic." IVC has told Panorama it is extremely proud of the work its clinical teams do and the data it collects is to "identify and close gaps in care for our patients". It says its vets have "clinical independence", and that prioritising revenue over care would be against the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons' (RCVS) code and IVC policy. Vets say they are under pressure to bring in more money per pet   Published 15 April 2025 Vets should be made to publish prices, watchdog says   Published 15 October 2025 The vet says a drive to increase revenue is undermining his profession. Panorama spoke to more than 30 vets in total who are currently working, or have worked, for some of the large veterinary groups. One recalls being told that not enough blood tests were being taken: "We were pushed to do more. I hated opening emails." Another says that when their small practice was sold to a large company, "it was crazy... It was all about hitting targets". Not all the big companies set targets or monitor staff in this way. The high cost of treatment UK pet owners spent £6.3bn on vet and other pet-care services in 2024 - equal to just over £365 per pet-owning household, according to the CMA. However, most pet owners in the UK do not have insurance, and bills can leave less-well-off families feeling helpless when treatment is needed. Many vets used not to display prices and pet owners often had no clear idea of what treatment would cost, but in the past two years that has improved, according to the CMA. Rob Jones has told Panorama that when his family dog, Betty, fell ill during the autumn of 2024 they took her to an emergency treatment centre, Vets Now, and she underwent an operation that cost almost £5,000. Twelve days later, Betty was still unwell, and Rob says he was advised that she could have a serious infection. He was told a diagnosis - and another operation - would cost between £5,000-£8,000.   Image caption, Betty's owners were told an operation on her would cost £12,000 However, on the morning of the operation, Rob was told this price had risen to £12,000. When he complained, he was quoted a new figure - £10,000. "That was the absolute point where I lost faith in them," he says. "It was like, I don't believe that you've got our interests or Betty's interests at heart." The family decided to put Betty to sleep. Rob did not know at the time that both his local vet, and the emergency centre, branded Vets Now, where Betty was treated, were both owned by the same company - IVC. He was happy with the treatment but complained about the sudden price increase and later received an apology from Vets Now. It offered him £3,755.59 as a "goodwill gesture".   Image caption, Rob Jones says he lost faith in the vets treating his pet dog Betty Vets Now told us its staff care passionately for the animals they treat: "In complex cases, prices can vary depending on what the vet discovers during a consultation, during the treatment, and depending on how the patient responds. "We have reviewed our processes and implemented a number of changes to ensure that conversations about pricing are as clear as possible." Value for money? Independent vet practices have been a popular acquisition for corporate investors in recent years, according to Dr David Reader from the University of Glasgow. He has made a detailed study of the industry. Pet care has been seen as attractive, he says, because of the opportunities "to find efficiencies, to consolidate, set up regional hubs, but also to maximise profits". Six large veterinary groups (sometimes referred to as LVGs) now control 60% of the UK pet care market - up from 10% a decade ago, according to the CMA, external. They are: Linnaeus, which owns 180 practices Medivet, which has 363 Vet Partners with 375 practices CVS Group, which has 387 practices Pets at Home, which has 445 practices under the name Vets for Pets IVC Evidensia, which has 900 practices When the CMA announced its provisional findings last autumn, it said there was not enough competition or informed choice in the market. It estimated the combined cost of this to UK pet owners amounted to £900m between 2020-2024. Corporate vets dispute the £900m figure. They say their prices are competitive and made freely available, and reflect their huge investment in the industry, not to mention rising costs, particularly of drugs. The corporate vets also say customers value their services highly and that they comply with the RCVS guidelines.   Image caption, A CMA survey suggests pet owners are happy with the service they receive from vets A CMA survey suggests pet owners are happy with their vets - both corporate and independent - when it comes to quality of service. But, with the exception of Pets at Home, customer satisfaction on cost is much lower for the big companies. "I think that large veterinary corporations, particularly where they're owned by private equity companies, are more concerned about profits than professionals who own veterinary businesses," says Suzy Hudson-Cooke from the British Veterinary Union, which is part of Unite. Proposals for change The CMA's final report on the vet industry is expected by the spring but no date has been set for publication. In its provisional report, it proposed improved transparency on pricing and vet ownership. Companies would have to reveal if vet practices were part of a chain, and whether they had business connections with hospitals, out-of-hours surgeries, online pharmacies and even crematoria. IVC, CVS and Vet Partners all have connected businesses and would have to be more transparent about their services in the future. Pets at Home does not buy practices - it works in partnership with individual vets, as does Medivet. These companies have consistently made clear in their branding who owns their practices. The big companies say they support moves to make the industry more transparent so long as they don't put too high a burden on vets. David Reader says the CMA proposals could have gone further. "There's good reason to think that once this investigation is concluded, some of the larger veterinary groups will continue with their acquisition strategies." The CMA says its proposals would "improve competition by helping pet owners choose the right vet, the right treatment, and the right way to buy medicine - without confusion or unnecessary cost". For Rob Jones, however, it is probably too late. "I honestly wouldn't get another pet," he says. "I think it's so expensive now and the risk financially is so great.             Food Terms of Use About the BBC Privacy Policy Cookies Accessibility Help Parental Guidance Contact the BBC Make an editorial complaint BBC emails for you Copyright © 2026 BBC. The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read about our approach to external linking.
    • What does the area with the blue dotted lines and the crossed out water drop mean? No water in this area? So many leaks in the area.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...