Day 56 - Thursday 14th May
Another night disturbed by the pain in my leg. I get a lot of muscle and joint pain, but this is more like toothache in my leg - relentless and unresponsive to stretching or massage. I start calling the surgery at 8am and finally get through close to 9 - I'm offered a telephone consultation this afternoon. My respiratory symptoms are much better though, so seems like that was either hay fever or a flare up of my dodgy sinuses.
I spend the morning at my desk, catching up on admin and preparing for my panel session at lunchtime. I review the sample questions, set up my video camera and find my headphones. Then shower and dress in something semi-professional - I even apply minimal makeup. It's almost like going out. I join the crowdcast session and meet one of the other panellists - the other is still trying to get online. But once we go live I can't hear the chair and so I take my lead from the other panellist and we bat back and forth with ideas … then the final panellist comes on line and the sound immediately goes weird. I can no longer hear the chair but now I realise I may be the only one who can't. I see a message asking me to log off and log on again, which I decide to do via a different browser in case it makes a difference to the sound. That takes a while, but eventually we are all online with both sound and video; we get into our stride and I enjoy the rest of the session. I really admire what the organiser has achieved with this event, it's a packed schedule of varied and useful content.
Son is late up again. We started trying to wake him at 12 but he's not really ready and we're not making much headway. After a chat with hubby we decide to leave it for a bit as he seems to need more sleep and all we're doing is disturbing him when he could be catching up by sleeping uninterrupted. He finally emerges in response to a call at about 5pm, with no recollection of any of our earlier interventions. We have a brief chat about how best to move forward and agree that we'll move wake-up time forward in 60-90 minute increments from here; tomorrow is set for 3.30pm.
I'm butting horns with hubby a lot now. He goes out late afternoon to meet a friend for a chat on a bench in the park, one he usually plays cards with at the pub. He returns with an "amusing" anecdote about his friend being asked at Lidl whether he was having a party when he was buying a dozen bottles of wine, and telling the cashier that they were all for him and that he'd be back next week. This is about the same amount hubby drinks, which is way too much and therefore not amusing at all. I don't think he has even made the connection. While he's out I have my call with the doctor who is dismissive and makes me feel I have wasted his time, but finally we agree that a low dose of amitriptyline might help my quality of sleep and any muscle tension that might be causing the problem. My friend drops some tins of soup off for Mum which she added to her online shop. My PC reminds me that we were due to go on a yoga retreat together tomorrow.
Later hubby has another rant about how the media are hyper-critical of the government, while I am trying to photograph the kingfisher that he has pointed out in our garden - so at least I don't feel I have to engage too much. I find it strange that he is so strongly supportive of everything they do when his nature is normally more questioning and analytical. Later, he complains that commentary on the government's performance depends on whether it is viewed through red or blue glasses, rather than according to its merits and tells me that he is disappointed by my point of view since he "normally values my opinion". I find this odd - if he values my opinion surely that shouldn't mean he dismisses it just because he thinks it's coming from a different place to his (which implies a labour bias that actually I refute).
He's still hung up on the "herd immunity" argument and implies that my sources aren't reliable. I continue to assert that the government's original strategy was to allow the virus to move through the population so as to establish herd immunity. He argues that these words came from the government's chief medical officer, not the PM, which in some way invalidates them. I think it's ironic that the policy was reversed after being challenged by Imperial College, his old alma mater who he normally champions for its achievements. Normally politics is fairly safe ground for us - even when we disagree we can debate in a constructive way - but I'm finding it a source of conflict now.
The Great British Banquet is a perfect piece of escapism to finish our day - a series of fabulous desserts on the theme of children's literature. Today I am grateful for escapist TV.
I spend the morning at my desk, catching up on admin and preparing for my panel session at lunchtime. I review the sample questions, set up my video camera and find my headphones. Then shower and dress in something semi-professional - I even apply minimal makeup. It's almost like going out. I join the crowdcast session and meet one of the other panellists - the other is still trying to get online. But once we go live I can't hear the chair and so I take my lead from the other panellist and we bat back and forth with ideas … then the final panellist comes on line and the sound immediately goes weird. I can no longer hear the chair but now I realise I may be the only one who can't. I see a message asking me to log off and log on again, which I decide to do via a different browser in case it makes a difference to the sound. That takes a while, but eventually we are all online with both sound and video; we get into our stride and I enjoy the rest of the session. I really admire what the organiser has achieved with this event, it's a packed schedule of varied and useful content.
Son is late up again. We started trying to wake him at 12 but he's not really ready and we're not making much headway. After a chat with hubby we decide to leave it for a bit as he seems to need more sleep and all we're doing is disturbing him when he could be catching up by sleeping uninterrupted. He finally emerges in response to a call at about 5pm, with no recollection of any of our earlier interventions. We have a brief chat about how best to move forward and agree that we'll move wake-up time forward in 60-90 minute increments from here; tomorrow is set for 3.30pm.
I'm butting horns with hubby a lot now. He goes out late afternoon to meet a friend for a chat on a bench in the park, one he usually plays cards with at the pub. He returns with an "amusing" anecdote about his friend being asked at Lidl whether he was having a party when he was buying a dozen bottles of wine, and telling the cashier that they were all for him and that he'd be back next week. This is about the same amount hubby drinks, which is way too much and therefore not amusing at all. I don't think he has even made the connection. While he's out I have my call with the doctor who is dismissive and makes me feel I have wasted his time, but finally we agree that a low dose of amitriptyline might help my quality of sleep and any muscle tension that might be causing the problem. My friend drops some tins of soup off for Mum which she added to her online shop. My PC reminds me that we were due to go on a yoga retreat together tomorrow.
Later hubby has another rant about how the media are hyper-critical of the government, while I am trying to photograph the kingfisher that he has pointed out in our garden - so at least I don't feel I have to engage too much. I find it strange that he is so strongly supportive of everything they do when his nature is normally more questioning and analytical. Later, he complains that commentary on the government's performance depends on whether it is viewed through red or blue glasses, rather than according to its merits and tells me that he is disappointed by my point of view since he "normally values my opinion". I find this odd - if he values my opinion surely that shouldn't mean he dismisses it just because he thinks it's coming from a different place to his (which implies a labour bias that actually I refute).
He's still hung up on the "herd immunity" argument and implies that my sources aren't reliable. I continue to assert that the government's original strategy was to allow the virus to move through the population so as to establish herd immunity. He argues that these words came from the government's chief medical officer, not the PM, which in some way invalidates them. I think it's ironic that the policy was reversed after being challenged by Imperial College, his old alma mater who he normally champions for its achievements. Normally politics is fairly safe ground for us - even when we disagree we can debate in a constructive way - but I'm finding it a source of conflict now.
The Great British Banquet is a perfect piece of escapism to finish our day - a series of fabulous desserts on the theme of children's literature. Today I am grateful for escapist TV.
Comments
Post a Comment