planetf1.com

It's nothing like Brexit. Because Covid isn't a debate. It's here it's killed millions and those turning it in to a debate are half the problem.

IDFD wrote: ↑

Fri Sep 03, 2021 4:39 pm

Because Covid isn't a debate. It's here it's killed millions and those turning it in to a debate are half the problem.

What a terrible position to take.

Including both world wars, this is arguably the single most profound event in human existence. It has directly & significantly impacted almost every single person on the planet & a lot of people are asking some quite legitimate questions regarding certain areas of this pandemic.

When discussing topics regarding peoples health, both physical & mental, on a scale such as this, open & honest debate is critical if people are to understand the reasons certain actions are being taken. Some people will, no matter what evidence is presented to them, believe in some kooky theory. Those people are lost to the debate but that mustn't be allowed to be used as an excuse to stifle debate altogether. It's human nature to think that if others want to suppress discussion on a topic then they must have something to hide. They think "If they've got nothing to hide then they've got nothing to fear by talking about it", & those people have a point.

We're talking about a virus of highly questionable origin being combatted by vaccines that were permitted to circumvent the usual rigorous testing & approval phases of a drugs development, a phase that can take up to a decade to complete, and some are saying people have no right to question what's happening, but when it especially involves an individuals physical & psychological wellbeing, I feel they've every right to ask as many questions as they like.

What's not up for debate is if it exist or if it's killed many people. I've given a list of topics on the subject that I think should be discussed and need to be in the near future on a wide level but discussions surrounding the idea that it doesn't exist or that many people haven't died isn't a worthy discussion. Because it does exist and it has killed many people.

I mean come on claiming lockdown has killed more people than Covid is ridiculous it isn't a discussion point.

Discussions need to be had to make sure we are better prepared next time round and that the government don't make similar mistakes.

But it in no way similar to Brexit. Because Brexit there were two legitimate sides with good arguments. I don't see a good argument from Covid deniers regarding its existence. I understand the need for discussion regarding the governments powers in place and is it a dangerous precedent set with how easily people gave up their freedoms.

Jezza13 wrote: ↑

Sat Sep 04, 2021 11:40 am

IDFD wrote: ↑

Fri Sep 03, 2021 4:39 pm

Because Covid isn't a debate. It's here it's killed millions and those turning it in to a debate are half the problem.

We're talking about a virus of highly questionable origin being combatted by vaccines that were permitted to circumvent the usual rigorous testing & approval phases of a drugs development, a phase that can take up to a decade to complete, and some are saying people have no right to question what's happening, but when it especially involves an individuals physical & psychological wellbeing, I feel they've every right to ask as many questions as they like.

They take years to test and approve because the funding for tests takes forever to acquire. COVID was very well funded by many countries, which cut the lead time dramatically.

Tufty wrote: ↑

Wed Sep 08, 2021 9:51 pm

https://www.immunology.org/coronavirus/ ... loped-fast

Thanks for the link Tufty.

While I remain quite skeptical about the vaccine, i'll be booking in to start the vaccination process soon. This isn't due to any reassurance regarding the safety of the vaccine however, I mean if the only reason it was developed so quick was because of enormous funding & everyone working together, why have the pharmaceutical companies been granted blanket indemnity against prosecution if something goes wrong ? This level indemnity isn't normally granted so why is it with this vaccine if it's just as safe as any other medication? Doesn't make sense to me. No, the reason i'll be getting it is simply that the government of the state I live in is making it quite clear that while they won't be forcing us to get vaccinated, they'll be making it next to impossible to have any sense of a normal, functioning life without it.

We're already being told there'll be special privilege's allowed to those who've been vaccinated over non vaccinated people. For example vaccinated people will soon be able to go to pubs & clubs, a luxury that will be denied to the unvaccinated "others". Police will also have the powers to demand your vaccine passport on request, as if we need to give the cops any more powers.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-09-07/ ... /100439846
"NSW residents have been warned police will be checking the vaccination records of anyone enjoying new freedoms next week"
"You need to be able to prove you have been vaccinated. That's part of the conditions of having those freedoms that you've got to be able to prove if you're pulled up by police," Mr Barilaro said

The Federal Government has also effectively told employers they have the right to insist their employees either get vaccinated or face termination. One of our country's biggest employers has even stated that the only way an employee can avoid getting a jab is through a medical exemption. If that's the case, then incredibly, the company will then insist the individual see an "independent physician" to review their exemption, If the exemption is upheld, then it'll be highly likely the individual will be retired on medical grounds. If it's overturned, then they'll be sacked if they don't get the needle. So there you go. So basically our governments are effectively saying "You either get vaccinated or we'll take everything from you. You wont be able to go anywhere, do anything & you'll effectively be unemployable". Naturally i'm finding all this stripping of rights extremely concerning.
Our country's governments are turning us into a country of us & them. Day in, day out we're hearing the same tune," If you want to go out & play you'll get your needle", & already people are beginning to against one another.

I'm now feeling like i'll be given no option other than to get the vaccine if I want to maintain what remains of what was once a normal life, & i'm not happy about it. Ideally i'm one who'd rather take my chances with the virus. I'm fit & healthy & have a very, very good chance of beating it but ultimately, if I get it & it takes me down then so be it. You play the game you live with the result. Given a reasonable choice, I'd rather do that than, like I am now, be practically forced into getting a vaccine i'm not convinced is totally safe.

And now this
https://www.msn.com/en-au/news/australi ... entnewsntp
"Businesses which allow unvaccinated customers through their doors or hire staff who are not fully vaccinated against Covid-19 will face 'significant fines,' the NSW government has warned"
'If you want to go and buy something which is regarded as a non-essential shop, you will put up the QR code and if it is not a green light saying you have been vaccinated, you won't be welcome inside.'

Notice the coronavirus graph in the article that shows despite a 2 1/2 mth lockdown the curves only steepening.

This is all just crazy. Not sure about what your governments are doing but if you're not this bad just hope they're not looking towards Australia as a litmus test for your country.

Jezza13 wrote: ↑

Thu Sep 09, 2021 11:50 pm

And now this
https://www.msn.com/en-au/news/australi ... entnewsntp
"Businesses which allow unvaccinated customers through their doors or hire staff who are not fully vaccinated against Covid-19 will face 'significant fines,' the NSW government has warned"
'If you want to go and buy something which is regarded as a non-essential shop, you will put up the QR code and if it is not a green light saying you have been vaccinated, you won't be welcome inside.'

Notice the coronavirus graph in the article that shows despite a 2 1/2 mth lockdown the curves only steepening.

This is all just crazy. Not sure about what your governments are doing but if you're not this bad just hope they're not looking towards Australia as a litmus test for your country.

Australia's case fatality rate had halved since the start of July, from 3% (which it had been sinnce October 2020) down to 1.6% at the moment. That suggests the testing has gone up considerably, although cases will still have been rising a lot.

Australia's response to Delta has definitely left a lot to be desired - I think there was a false sense of security with the success of the response to the initial COVID outbreak that led to complacency. Certainly the countries which did manage 2020 quite well (New Zealand, Vietnam, SIngapore, Japan, Australia, for instance) found their measures to be far less successful against Delta, as it's about 5-10 times more contagious.

Of those countries, Singapore has been the most successful at getting back on top, and Japan (where I live) is showing signs of turning the tide as well. This is likely due to the fact that both have ramped up vaccine deployment (despite starting 4 months after America, Japan has now caught up with USA's first dose percentage, and should catch up with double dosed within the next two weeks) - but also the overwhelming majority of people in both countries wear masks everywhere.

Where the Diamond Princess was quarantined in Japan at the start of the epidemic, Japanese virologists and epidemiologists did a very thorough study of the virus and found it was predominantly spread through the air, as despite following strict quarantine guidelines for surface based transmission, several of the quarantine staff and medical professionals got ill. Japan's virus response has been based upon this, leading to a philosophy based on "3Cs" - avoiding Crowded areas, Closed spaces and Close contact.

Source: https://www.economist.com/asia/2020/12/ ... -than-most

This also meant that even when Japan had little to no vaccinated people, the virus was far more under control than countries like the UK which had widescale vaccination and stricter (although not very well enforced) lockdowns.

Just comparing notes with my friends and family back in the UK, as well as seeing the photos and videos of public spaces, it's clear that while the UK has has very strict lockdowns in law, it's not really been very well implemented or enforced, largely due to the attitude of the government and the kickback from certain people. This has led to very mixed and confusing messages, that are always in conflict.

However, what is also apparent is that the European and American countries totally ignored the findings of the Japanese researchers who studied the Diamond princess because the advice from those governments was "Wash your hands, don't touch your face" - they continued to follow a surface transmission protocol despite the fact that it was know at the start of February 2020 that the disease was predominantly spread through airborne transmission.

The research from Japan also determined that total containment was impossible due to the high asymptomatic rate and the latency in symptoms arising. However, it should be noted that this is not the same as saying 'let it rip' - quite the opposite. The Japanese response was about targeting clusters, and limiting the spread. As well as mask wearing, there was also a huge emphasis on ventilation.

Japan did also introduce all the surface transmission protocols because the virus still can spread this way. Every Japanese shop quickly erects plastic sheets between the cashiers (which have now been replaced by permanent plastic shields) and hand sanitiser on entrance. Large shops and government buildings installed temperature checking cameras on entrance as well, where you can check your temperature before entering (these are not as accurate as a proper thermometer, so are not fool proof - but the policy isn't about 100% prevention, it's about reducing the spread)

Here is probably where the major difference between the UK and Japan - in the UK as soon as any measures were introduced, the discussion was 'when can we get rid of them' - whereas in Japan they've been accepted as the things people will do until things change.

You now wear a mask when you go outside, sanitise your hands every time you enter a building and there are plastic screens reducing the exchange of gases between the cashiers (potential super spreaders, if one got infected) and the public. Yes - we didn't have to do these things before the pandemic, but we are still getting to do the things we actually want to do (go to the shops, see people) - obviously people would rather not have to wear masks, we'd also rather not wear seatbelts, or sun screen.

The point is, the virus is spread airborne, has a high asymptomatic rate. While masks only far less individual protection than a vaccination - they provide a far more effective community protection when it comes to COVID. This is because many people are potentially unknowingly carrying the virus, so if everyone wears a mask then they significantly reduce the water particles they put in the air. It ensures all the asymptomatic people, or people who got false negatives on the tests, don't slip through the cracks. Combined with vaccination it's about the only way possible to live an open life.

Having said that (and this has to add the personal opinion disclaimer, as per the thread rules), I do find myself personally at odds with compulsory vaccination - not because I don't think that vaccination is a good idea, it most certainly is. But I feel that too much emphasis is put on vaccines they give the impression they are a silver bullet, or that people are invincible. This is not the case. People with vaccine can still get sick from the virus, and even if they don't, after they come into contact with an infected person they can still transmit it to others.

Vaccines are the most effective form of personal protection against the virus, and proper mask wearing in the presence of people outside of your household is the most effective form of a community reducing transmission. Vaccines can be effective at protecting the community, but not while the virus is so widespread - the traditional model of vaccines help protect the vulnerable who are unable to get vaccinates only works effectively when a virus outbreak occurs in an otherwise virus free environment (eg, if someone comes back from holiday with a virus and spread it to a few people in their townn. At present, COVID is everywhere, so this model is fundamentally different. The vaccine will impact the spread a little - but the most effective way is to reduce the probability of coming into contact / reduce the viral load that you take in if you do.

Forcing people to get the vaccine is a bad move, no question. Peer pressure would like take care of a good chunk of those not wanting the vaccine, and a natural herd immunity would most likely take care of the rest. But beyond the medical argument, there's the social ones.

Taking away civil liberties has NEVER been a wise move politically. Most developed nations are founded on the principles of freedom of choice, privacy and ostensibly treating the electorate like adults. This is undermined massively when you start curtailing people's whole lives, including their right to work, because of it. That sort of action, if enough people are opposed to the vaccine, could lead to serious civil unrest. The intentions may be good, but if one really must pave a road to Hell, there's no better place to start.

Most of us enjoy confidentiality regarding our medical records. Obviously there are exceptions, for example with insurance for traveling abroad to where certain diseases are still rife. But while this requirement might affect whether one can go on that holiday, preventing it because of a lack of jabs doesn't make one's life any worse, really. But forcing someone out of a job because of it? And having to reveal not only one's vaccine status, but also any medical conditions that might prevent one getting the vaccine? That's an invasion of privacy, and again something I can absolutely understand a lot of people being uncomfortable with. Especially when most countries can point to at least one major lapse in data security over the years.

Also, and this is where it turns into personal experience rather than verifiable fact, I can say with a high degree of certainty that getting the vaccine has had no major impact on my life. I got it while the UK was still locked down, and thus getting jabbed didn't immediately open a load of doors for me. I still have to wear a mask every time I get on a bus or go into a shop. I still laugh derisively at the sticker someone put on my nearest post box telling everyone who still wears masks to "grow some balls". And the only negative impact on my life from anything vaccine-related came while queueing outside the vaccination centre, when a taxi driver decided to swerve onto the pavement and nearly knock half a dozen of us down. And I don't think the vaccine can be blamed for that one.

Tufty wrote: ↑

Fri Sep 10, 2021 8:18 am

Forcing people to get the vaccine is a bad move, no question. Peer pressure would like take care of a good chunk of those not wanting the vaccine, and a natural herd immunity would most likely take care of the rest. But beyond the medical argument, there's the social ones.

Taking away civil liberties has NEVER been a wise move politically. Most developed nations are founded on the principles of freedom of choice, privacy and ostensibly treating the electorate like adults. This is undermined massively when you start curtailing people's whole lives, including their right to work, because of it. That sort of action, if enough people are opposed to the vaccine, could lead to serious civil unrest. The intentions may be good, but if one really must pave a road to Hell, there's no better place to start.

I don’t see anything which has been implemented or suggested, at least by anyone of any sense, as taking away civil liberties. Going on holidays, into nightclubs and other venues is not a human right, it’s a privilege.

My proposal would be that come the end of September, anybody who hasn’t been vaccinated through choice, I.e. not people with medical exemptions, should be unable to seek Covid treatment on the NHS. If you’re that confident that it’s not a real virus or it won’t affect you because you’re 35 and once ran the Portsmouth 10k, then this shouldn’t be an issue.

Banana Man wrote: ↑

Fri Sep 10, 2021 9:51 am

Tufty wrote: ↑

Fri Sep 10, 2021 8:18 am

Forcing people to get the vaccine is a bad move, no question. Peer pressure would like take care of a good chunk of those not wanting the vaccine, and a natural herd immunity would most likely take care of the rest. But beyond the medical argument, there's the social ones.

Taking away civil liberties has NEVER been a wise move politically. Most developed nations are founded on the principles of freedom of choice, privacy and ostensibly treating the electorate like adults. This is undermined massively when you start curtailing people's whole lives, including their right to work, because of it. That sort of action, if enough people are opposed to the vaccine, could lead to serious civil unrest. The intentions may be good, but if one really must pave a road to Hell, there's no better place to start.

I don’t see anything which has been implemented or suggested, at least by anyone of any sense, as taking away civil liberties. Going on holidays, into nightclubs and other venues is not a human right, it’s a privilege.

My proposal would be that come the end of September, anybody who hasn’t been vaccinated through choice, I.e. not people with medical exemptions, should be unable to seek Covid treatment on the NHS. If you’re that confident that it’s not a real virus or it won’t affect you because you’re 35 and once ran the Portsmouth 10k, then this shouldn’t be an issue.

Interested to know would you do the same for smokers, excessive consumers of alcohol or overweight people? Would you deny them medical attention due to the negative effects of their life choices? What about injuries to those who choose risky pursuits? Would they be turned away from medical care too ?

I would argue the right to bodily integrity, the right to equal treatment under the law & the right to privacy regarding your medical information would, by anyone with any sense, be called human rights or civil liberties wouldn't you? Currently these rights / liberties are being stripped away in Australia.
Our government is now effectively saying we no longer have any right to control what's put into our bodies. The government now has the right to determine that.
Our medical information is no longer a matter between doctor & patient. It's now public information. Unvaccinated people will no longer share the same freedoms as vaccinated people. They will no longer have the right to simply earn a living & provide for themselves & their families. They will no longer have the right to enter the same establishments as vaccinated people.

This is turning into a form of medical apartheid. Medical segregation.

Where does it end? Mandatory vaccine scanning to everyone who attends a family BBQ or birthday party or a wedding or funeral? What about religious gatherings? Police raids of houses where families & friends are simply gathering to celebrate old nannas 86th birthday? I mean if things are so bad the we can't risk sharing a workspace or shop with the unclean, surely we can't be allowed to socialise with them either.

Medical apartheid? These aren’t people from a certain tribe or religion. They’re people denying public health issues, putting a huge strain on the NHS and a danger to themselves. If there was a carcinogenic chemical leak in a venue of any description, you wouldn’t be allowe in for your own safety, so why should you now be allowed into a nightclub or other crowded indoor area, without a Covid jab?

This isn’t some issue which may or may not arise through poor diet or lifestyle, although I’d agree that is also a massive strain on the health service. This is people who flat out refuse to spend 10 minutes getting a free vaccine on the NHS, then a week later turn up demanding much more prolonged and expensive equipment, to the detriment of exhausted and mentally drained doctors and nurses, not to mention the outpatients who’ve had treatments postponed for several weeks or months.

Banana Man wrote: ↑

Fri Sep 10, 2021 4:34 pm

Medical apartheid? These aren’t people from a certain tribe or religion. They’re people denying public health issues, putting a huge strain on the NHS and a danger to themselves. If there was a carcinogenic chemical leak in a venue of any description, you wouldn’t be allowe in for your own safety, so why should you now be allowed into a nightclub or other crowded indoor area, without a Covid jab?

This isn’t some issue which may or may not arise through poor diet or lifestyle, although I’d agree that is also a massive strain on the health service. This is people who flat out refuse to spend 10 minutes getting a free vaccine on the NHS, then a week later turn up demanding much more prolonged and expensive equipment, to the detriment of exhausted and mentally drained doctors and nurses, not to mention the outpatients who’ve had treatments postponed for several weeks or months.

I used a more figurative rather than a literal interpretation of the term simply because everything seems to be tribal these days. Everything seems to be an us & them issue with little will on both sides to entertain the views of the other.

No matter if it's refusal to get a covid jab or spending your life abusing your body through known unhealthy habits or risky practices, the principle of your argument is the same. You're basically advocating for people to be denied medical treatment based on a lifestyle choice. The questionable legality of such a practice aside, can you imagine the Pandora's box this would open as to what should be determined as worthy of medical treatment? Should medical staff stand by & watch a 19 yr old kid bleed out because he crashed a stolen car at high speed? After all it was his choice to commit a crime. What about the 21 yr old woman who took a dodgy ecstacy tablet at a music festival? Should she be dragged into a tent & left to die because it was her choice to take the tablet? As I said, the principle is the same.

We allow people to legally introduce carcinogenic chemicals into their bodies through cigarettes. We allow people to drink poisonous chemicals in the form of alcohol. Both these habits, which are legal yet have not one single health benefit, put incredible strains on our health system, yet we wouldn't dream of denying these people medical treatment for self inflicted wounds or illnesses.

I'll ask this question again. If you believe it's reasonable to deny non vaccinated access to certain establishments, or even allow them the right to work, then where do you draw the line? Should they be allowed to attend children's sporting events? Family gatherings? Should they be allowed to go out to local parks or beaches? Should they even be allowed to remain at home with their families? After all, if they're a risk in one place they're a risk everywhere aren't they? Or should we just bite the bullet, round them all up & ship them off to purpose built quarantine camps, which coincidentally, are currently being built in Australia to house covid risk people returning from overseas.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-08-27/ ... /100410932

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-06-25/ ... /100243456

https://www.mediastatements.wa.gov.au/P ... in-WA.aspx

Maybe thats where they need to go.

They aren’t comparable situations. Yes, there is a big ethical question over peoples lifestyle choices and the impact they have on the NHS but this is a different, more straightforward, binary issue. There is a huge grey area surround how much is ‘too fat’, how much of it is lifestyle, genetics, unfortunate circumstances etc. There is also no ‘smokers party’ where a group of people get together, smoke a packet of cigarettes between them and a week later are all in hospital with lung cancer.


To me it’s quite simple; are you vaccinated?
Yes - no problem. If you become ill, we will help you.
No, I’m medically exempt - As above
No, I’ve seen these pictures on Facebook. I don’t want to get vaccinated, I am in fact refusing NHS care.

I’m sure it’s not legal and some would consider it unethical but how ethical really is the alternative which we’re faced with at the moment? In other words: screw doctors and nurses, they can all work 70 hour weeks indefinitely, without leave until they have a mental breakdown or succumb to the physical effects of continuous exposure to Covid and all its variants. Not to mention all the patients struggling to walk because their knee/hip/ankle operation or whatever has been put back.

Banana Man wrote: ↑

Fri Sep 10, 2021 10:08 pm

They aren’t comparable situations. Yes, there is a big ethical question over peoples lifestyle choices and the impact they have on the NHS but this is a different, more straightforward, binary issue. There is a huge grey area surround how much is ‘too fat’, how much of it is lifestyle, genetics, unfortunate circumstances etc. There is also no ‘smokers party’ where a group of people get together, smoke a packet of cigarettes between them and a week later are all in hospital with lung cancer.


To me it’s quite simple; are you vaccinated?
Yes - no problem. If you become ill, we will help you.
No, I’m medically exempt - As above
No, I’ve seen these pictures on Facebook. I don’t want to get vaccinated, I am in fact refusing NHS care.

I’m sure it’s not legal and some would consider it unethical but how ethical really is the alternative which we’re faced with at the moment? In other words: screw doctors and nurses, they can all work 70 hour weeks indefinitely, without leave until they have a mental breakdown or succumb to the physical effects of continuous exposure to Covid and all its variants. Not to mention all the patients struggling to walk because their knee/hip/ankle operation or whatever has been put back.

In the cases of the covid jab, smoking & alcohol consumption, the situations are entirely the same.

We are talking about an individual who consciously chooses a course of action that, in the case of the covid jab & alcohol could & in the case of smoking will, have a detrimental effect on their health & well being. There is no grey area here. They are exactly the same, yet you're saying it's only the covid people who should be denied medical treatment should their lifestyle choice cause them to have a medical issue.

As for the medical personnel, i'm 100% with you there. They are overworked, underpaid & under appreciated but lets not kid ourselves that all was rosy prior to the pandemic. The Covid outbreak was the straw that broke an already struggling camels back. Hospital systems in Australia, & i'm guessing the UK as well, have been underfunded & under resourced for years & successive governments have done nothing to ease this burden. You can't blame the pandemic for this. I'm happy to assume that if medical staff's time wasn't taken up providing care for people suffering cigarette, alcohol or other lifestyle choice related injuries & illnesses, there'd be more than enough capacity to provide adequate care to covid patient's as well as other medical issues. You can't put the blame for the collapse of a house of cards entirely on the last card to be put on.

I'm going to ask this question for the 3rd time BM & I hope you can answer it.

If you believe, as you've implied, it's reasonable to deny non vaccinated access to certain establishments, or even allow them the right to work or access to medical assistance, as they pose an unacceptable health risk to the general population, then where do you draw the line?
Do you advocate their removal from society altogether? If not, can you explain your rationale?

O

Jezza13 wrote: ↑

Fri Sep 10, 2021 11:18 pm

I'm going to ask this question for the 3rd time BM & I hope you can answer it.

If you believe, as you've implied, it's reasonable to deny non vaccinated access to certain establishments, or even allow them the right to work or access to medical assistance, as they pose an unacceptable health risk to the general population, then where do you draw the line?
Do you advocate their removal from society altogether? If not, can you explain your rationale?

I draw the line here. We aren't removing them from society, we're simply stipulating one very basic requirement for people in order to access certain privileges.

If you go to a nightclub there is already an 'apartheid' against under 18s. To get in you have to show your drivers license, or other I.D., showing your full name, photo, D.O.B. postal address, city of birth and nationality. Nobody bats an eyelid over that but a QR code showing that you're in the 90% of the population who's been vaccinated has people up in arms.

We do this all the time for the safety and security of our society. Want to drive a car? Well there's an 'apartheid' against people who can't/wont pass the driving test. Want to go on holiday? You have to show the nice people at Gatwick your passport, with all your personal details, and let them thoroughly examine all the contents of your bags and about your person.

I don't buy the whole 'forced to disclose private medical information' argument either. Asking if someone has been vaccinated is NOT private medical information. Asking if you're colour blind, have a kidney missing and a floppy willy is private medical information. All the vaccine does is lump you in with 90% of the population. To put that into perspective, I can gain more personal information from a complete stranger walking past in the street. I can take one look at you and decipher (99% of the time) your gender and categorise you with 50% of the population. Knowing you're a man/woman is far more personal than knowing you've been vaccinated.

I'm sorry, I just don't agree with people who try to claim this is some sort of Orwellian nightmare and another step towards a big brother state. It's a public health issue, if everyone gets their jabs this'll all be over.

Banana Man wrote: ↑

Sat Sep 11, 2021 8:19 am

O

Jezza13 wrote: ↑

Fri Sep 10, 2021 11:18 pm

I'm going to ask this question for the 3rd time BM & I hope you can answer it.

If you believe, as you've implied, it's reasonable to deny non vaccinated access to certain establishments, or even allow them the right to work or access to medical assistance, as they pose an unacceptable health risk to the general population, then where do you draw the line?
Do you advocate their removal from society altogether? If not, can you explain your rationale?

I draw the line here. We aren't removing them from society, we're simply stipulating one very basic requirement for people in order to access certain privileges.

If you go to a nightclub there is already an 'apartheid' against under 18s. To get in you have to show your drivers license, or other I.D., showing your full name, photo, D.O.B. postal address, city of birth and nationality. Nobody bats an eyelid over that but a QR code showing that you're in the 90% of the population who's been vaccinated has people up in arms.

We do this all the time for the safety and security of our society. Want to drive a car? Well there's an 'apartheid' against people who can't/wont pass the driving test. Want to go on holiday? You have to show the nice people at Gatwick your passport, with all your personal details, and let them thoroughly examine all the contents of your bags and about your person.

I don't buy the whole 'forced to disclose private medical information' argument either. Asking if someone has been vaccinated is NOT private medical information. Asking if you're colour blind, have a kidney missing and a floppy willy is private medical information. All the vaccine does is lump you in with 90% of the population. To put that into perspective, I can gain more personal information from a complete stranger walking past in the street. I can take one look at you and decipher (99% of the time) your gender and categorise you with 50% of the population. Knowing you're a man/woman is far more personal than knowing you've been vaccinated.

I'm sorry, I just don't agree with people who try to claim this is some sort of Orwellian nightmare and another step towards a big brother state. It's a public health issue, if everyone gets their jabs this'll all be over.

Nah, no comparison with smoking and drinking, they are not contagious to other people. The only common thing is the toll to the NHS (or the equivalent in each country).

I generally align with your opinion BM. We already need to vaccinate and get certification to travel to half the continents in the world for yellow fever, what's the difference now?

This is something that is necessary because of the nature of this virus, it is not out of badness from the governments to punish us or control us. It is super selfish to think that they invade your rights, when you yourself could be passing the virus to others right now, effectively doing the same thing. We have the best solution out there and there are still people that don't want to do it. "A person's freedom ends where another man's freedom begins" seems to be long gone...

I agree the way that this is being enforced is not the nicest, but this wouldn't be the case if people had the common sense to actually do their duty. The reasons I've heard for not having the vaccine are incredible, someone I know thought that because of the thalidomide disaster, there should be some unvaccinated people to save the world! Literally like the handmaid's tale... Absolutely crazy.

We have the best solution out there and still people that don't want to do it.

Siao7 wrote: ↑

Thu Sep 16, 2021 9:02 am

Banana Man wrote: ↑

Sat Sep 11, 2021 8:19 am

O

Jezza13 wrote: ↑

Fri Sep 10, 2021 11:18 pm

I'm going to ask this question for the 3rd time BM & I hope you can answer it.

If you believe, as you've implied, it's reasonable to deny non vaccinated access to certain establishments, or even allow them the right to work or access to medical assistance, as they pose an unacceptable health risk to the general population, then where do you draw the line?
Do you advocate their removal from society altogether? If not, can you explain your rationale?

I draw the line here. We aren't removing them from society, we're simply stipulating one very basic requirement for people in order to access certain privileges.

If you go to a nightclub there is already an 'apartheid' against under 18s. To get in you have to show your drivers license, or other I.D., showing your full name, photo, D.O.B. postal address, city of birth and nationality. Nobody bats an eyelid over that but a QR code showing that you're in the 90% of the population who's been vaccinated has people up in arms.

We do this all the time for the safety and security of our society. Want to drive a car? Well there's an 'apartheid' against people who can't/wont pass the driving test. Want to go on holiday? You have to show the nice people at Gatwick your passport, with all your personal details, and let them thoroughly examine all the contents of your bags and about your person.

I don't buy the whole 'forced to disclose private medical information' argument either. Asking if someone has been vaccinated is NOT private medical information. Asking if you're colour blind, have a kidney missing and a floppy willy is private medical information. All the vaccine does is lump you in with 90% of the population. To put that into perspective, I can gain more personal information from a complete stranger walking past in the street. I can take one look at you and decipher (99% of the time) your gender and categorise you with 50% of the population. Knowing you're a man/woman is far more personal than knowing you've been vaccinated.

I'm sorry, I just don't agree with people who try to claim this is some sort of Orwellian nightmare and another step towards a big brother state. It's a public health issue, if everyone gets their jabs this'll all be over.

Nah, no comparison with smoking and drinking, they are not contagious to other people. The only common thing is the toll to the NHS (or the equivalent in each country).

I generally align with your opinion BM. We already need to vaccinate and get certification to travel to half the continents in the world for yellow fever, what's the difference now?

This is something that is necessary because of the nature of this virus, it is not out of badness from the governments to punish us or control us. It is super selfish to think that they invade your rights, when you yourself could be passing the virus to others right now, effectively doing the same thing. We have the best solution out there and there are still people that don't want to do it. "A person's freedom ends where another man's freedom begins" seems to be long gone...

I agree the way that this is being enforced is not the nicest, but this wouldn't be the case if people had the common sense to actually do their duty. The reasons I've heard for not having the vaccine are incredible, someone I know thought that because of the thalidomide disaster, there should be some unvaccinated people to save the world! Literally like the handmaid's tale... Absolutely crazy.

We have the best solution out there and still people that don't want to do it.

Passive smoking?

JN23 wrote: ↑

Thu Sep 16, 2021 3:24 pm

Siao7 wrote: ↑

Thu Sep 16, 2021 9:02 am

Banana Man wrote: ↑

Sat Sep 11, 2021 8:19 am

O

Jezza13 wrote: ↑

Fri Sep 10, 2021 11:18 pm

I'm going to ask this question for the 3rd time BM & I hope you can answer it.

If you believe, as you've implied, it's reasonable to deny non vaccinated access to certain establishments, or even allow them the right to work or access to medical assistance, as they pose an unacceptable health risk to the general population, then where do you draw the line?
Do you advocate their removal from society altogether? If not, can you explain your rationale?

I draw the line here. We aren't removing them from society, we're simply stipulating one very basic requirement for people in order to access certain privileges.

If you go to a nightclub there is already an 'apartheid' against under 18s. To get in you have to show your drivers license, or other I.D., showing your full name, photo, D.O.B. postal address, city of birth and nationality. Nobody bats an eyelid over that but a QR code showing that you're in the 90% of the population who's been vaccinated has people up in arms.

We do this all the time for the safety and security of our society. Want to drive a car? Well there's an 'apartheid' against people who can't/wont pass the driving test. Want to go on holiday? You have to show the nice people at Gatwick your passport, with all your personal details, and let them thoroughly examine all the contents of your bags and about your person.

I don't buy the whole 'forced to disclose private medical information' argument either. Asking if someone has been vaccinated is NOT private medical information. Asking if you're colour blind, have a kidney missing and a floppy willy is private medical information. All the vaccine does is lump you in with 90% of the population. To put that into perspective, I can gain more personal information from a complete stranger walking past in the street. I can take one look at you and decipher (99% of the time) your gender and categorise you with 50% of the population. Knowing you're a man/woman is far more personal than knowing you've been vaccinated.

I'm sorry, I just don't agree with people who try to claim this is some sort of Orwellian nightmare and another step towards a big brother state. It's a public health issue, if everyone gets their jabs this'll all be over.

Nah, no comparison with smoking and drinking, they are not contagious to other people. The only common thing is the toll to the NHS (or the equivalent in each country).

I generally align with your opinion BM. We already need to vaccinate and get certification to travel to half the continents in the world for yellow fever, what's the difference now?

This is something that is necessary because of the nature of this virus, it is not out of badness from the governments to punish us or control us. It is super selfish to think that they invade your rights, when you yourself could be passing the virus to others right now, effectively doing the same thing. We have the best solution out there and there are still people that don't want to do it. "A person's freedom ends where another man's freedom begins" seems to be long gone...

I agree the way that this is being enforced is not the nicest, but this wouldn't be the case if people had the common sense to actually do their duty. The reasons I've heard for not having the vaccine are incredible, someone I know thought that because of the thalidomide disaster, there should be some unvaccinated people to save the world! Literally like the handmaid's tale... Absolutely crazy.

We have the best solution out there and still people that don't want to do it.

Passive smoking?

Is it the same?

Siao7 wrote: ↑

Thu Sep 16, 2021 3:31 pm

JN23 wrote: ↑

Thu Sep 16, 2021 3:24 pm

Siao7 wrote: ↑

Thu Sep 16, 2021 9:02 am

Banana Man wrote: ↑

Sat Sep 11, 2021 8:19 am

O

Jezza13 wrote: ↑

Fri Sep 10, 2021 11:18 pm

I'm going to ask this question for the 3rd time BM & I hope you can answer it.

If you believe, as you've implied, it's reasonable to deny non vaccinated access to certain establishments, or even allow them the right to work or access to medical assistance, as they pose an unacceptable health risk to the general population, then where do you draw the line?
Do you advocate their removal from society altogether? If not, can you explain your rationale?

I draw the line here. We aren't removing them from society, we're simply stipulating one very basic requirement for people in order to access certain privileges.

If you go to a nightclub there is already an 'apartheid' against under 18s. To get in you have to show your drivers license, or other I.D., showing your full name, photo, D.O.B. postal address, city of birth and nationality. Nobody bats an eyelid over that but a QR code showing that you're in the 90% of the population who's been vaccinated has people up in arms.

We do this all the time for the safety and security of our society. Want to drive a car? Well there's an 'apartheid' against people who can't/wont pass the driving test. Want to go on holiday? You have to show the nice people at Gatwick your passport, with all your personal details, and let them thoroughly examine all the contents of your bags and about your person.

I don't buy the whole 'forced to disclose private medical information' argument either. Asking if someone has been vaccinated is NOT private medical information. Asking if you're colour blind, have a kidney missing and a floppy willy is private medical information. All the vaccine does is lump you in with 90% of the population. To put that into perspective, I can gain more personal information from a complete stranger walking past in the street. I can take one look at you and decipher (99% of the time) your gender and categorise you with 50% of the population. Knowing you're a man/woman is far more personal than knowing you've been vaccinated.

I'm sorry, I just don't agree with people who try to claim this is some sort of Orwellian nightmare and another step towards a big brother state. It's a public health issue, if everyone gets their jabs this'll all be over.

Nah, no comparison with smoking and drinking, they are not contagious to other people. The only common thing is the toll to the NHS (or the equivalent in each country).

I generally align with your opinion BM. We already need to vaccinate and get certification to travel to half the continents in the world for yellow fever, what's the difference now?

This is something that is necessary because of the nature of this virus, it is not out of badness from the governments to punish us or control us. It is super selfish to think that they invade your rights, when you yourself could be passing the virus to others right now, effectively doing the same thing. We have the best solution out there and there are still people that don't want to do it. "A person's freedom ends where another man's freedom begins" seems to be long gone...

I agree the way that this is being enforced is not the nicest, but this wouldn't be the case if people had the common sense to actually do their duty. The reasons I've heard for not having the vaccine are incredible, someone I know thought that because of the thalidomide disaster, there should be some unvaccinated people to save the world! Literally like the handmaid's tale... Absolutely crazy.

We have the best solution out there and still people that don't want to do it.

Passive smoking?

Is it the same?

It's not the same, but there's a similarity in that people should consider others both if they have/suspect they have COVID or if they are smoking near other people.

And because of the dangers of passive smoking we don't let people smoke in indoor areas.

Tufty wrote: ↑

Thu Sep 16, 2021 5:36 pm

Siao7 wrote: ↑

Thu Sep 16, 2021 3:31 pm

JN23 wrote: ↑

Thu Sep 16, 2021 3:24 pm

Siao7 wrote: ↑

Thu Sep 16, 2021 9:02 am

Banana Man wrote: ↑

Sat Sep 11, 2021 8:19 am

O

I draw the line here. We aren't removing them from society, we're simply stipulating one very basic requirement for people in order to access certain privileges.

If you go to a nightclub there is already an 'apartheid' against under 18s. To get in you have to show your drivers license, or other I.D., showing your full name, photo, D.O.B. postal address, city of birth and nationality. Nobody bats an eyelid over that but a QR code showing that you're in the 90% of the population who's been vaccinated has people up in arms.

We do this all the time for the safety and security of our society. Want to drive a car? Well there's an 'apartheid' against people who can't/wont pass the driving test. Want to go on holiday? You have to show the nice people at Gatwick your passport, with all your personal details, and let them thoroughly examine all the contents of your bags and about your person.

I don't buy the whole 'forced to disclose private medical information' argument either. Asking if someone has been vaccinated is NOT private medical information. Asking if you're colour blind, have a kidney missing and a floppy willy is private medical information. All the vaccine does is lump you in with 90% of the population. To put that into perspective, I can gain more personal information from a complete stranger walking past in the street. I can take one look at you and decipher (99% of the time) your gender and categorise you with 50% of the population. Knowing you're a man/woman is far more personal than knowing you've been vaccinated.

I'm sorry, I just don't agree with people who try to claim this is some sort of Orwellian nightmare and another step towards a big brother state. It's a public health issue, if everyone gets their jabs this'll all be over.

Nah, no comparison with smoking and drinking, they are not contagious to other people. The only common thing is the toll to the NHS (or the equivalent in each country).

I generally align with your opinion BM. We already need to vaccinate and get certification to travel to half the continents in the world for yellow fever, what's the difference now?

This is something that is necessary because of the nature of this virus, it is not out of badness from the governments to punish us or control us. It is super selfish to think that they invade your rights, when you yourself could be passing the virus to others right now, effectively doing the same thing. We have the best solution out there and there are still people that don't want to do it. "A person's freedom ends where another man's freedom begins" seems to be long gone...

I agree the way that this is being enforced is not the nicest, but this wouldn't be the case if people had the common sense to actually do their duty. The reasons I've heard for not having the vaccine are incredible, someone I know thought that because of the thalidomide disaster, there should be some unvaccinated people to save the world! Literally like the handmaid's tale... Absolutely crazy.

We have the best solution out there and still people that don't want to do it.

Passive smoking?

Is it the same?

It's not the same, but there's a similarity in that people should consider others both if they have/suspect they have COVID or if they are smoking near other people.

I agree with that, but it is not a transmittable disease. Especially the alcohol.

IDFD wrote: ↑

Thu Sep 16, 2021 5:38 pm

And because of the dangers of passive smoking we don't let people smoke in indoor areas.

So what you are agreeing is that we took measures and people are following them. Why can't people do the same with Covid?

Siao7 wrote: ↑

Fri Sep 17, 2021 7:24 am

Tufty wrote: ↑

Thu Sep 16, 2021 5:36 pm

Siao7 wrote: ↑

Thu Sep 16, 2021 3:31 pm

JN23 wrote: ↑

Thu Sep 16, 2021 3:24 pm

Siao7 wrote: ↑

Thu Sep 16, 2021 9:02 am

Nah, no comparison with smoking and drinking, they are not contagious to other people. The only common thing is the toll to the NHS (or the equivalent in each country).

I generally align with your opinion BM. We already need to vaccinate and get certification to travel to half the continents in the world for yellow fever, what's the difference now?

This is something that is necessary because of the nature of this virus, it is not out of badness from the governments to punish us or control us. It is super selfish to think that they invade your rights, when you yourself could be passing the virus to others right now, effectively doing the same thing. We have the best solution out there and there are still people that don't want to do it. "A person's freedom ends where another man's freedom begins" seems to be long gone...

I agree the way that this is being enforced is not the nicest, but this wouldn't be the case if people had the common sense to actually do their duty. The reasons I've heard for not having the vaccine are incredible, someone I know thought that because of the thalidomide disaster, there should be some unvaccinated people to save the world! Literally like the handmaid's tale... Absolutely crazy.

We have the best solution out there and still people that don't want to do it.

Passive smoking?

Is it the same?

It's not the same, but there's a similarity in that people should consider others both if they have/suspect they have COVID or if they are smoking near other people.

I agree with that, but it is not a transmittable disease. Especially the alcohol.

Lung cancer from second-hand smoke is similarly functional to a transmissable disease, although obviously in a much slower way. Or indeed the effect it has on someone with asthma or other breathing problems. I do broadly agree with your point, but as you said to IDFD, if everyone can obey the smoking laws, why not the COVID ones?

Tufty wrote: ↑

Fri Sep 17, 2021 8:32 am

Siao7 wrote: ↑

Fri Sep 17, 2021 7:24 am

Tufty wrote: ↑

Thu Sep 16, 2021 5:36 pm

Siao7 wrote: ↑

Thu Sep 16, 2021 3:31 pm

JN23 wrote: ↑

Thu Sep 16, 2021 3:24 pm

Passive smoking?

Is it the same?

It's not the same, but there's a similarity in that people should consider others both if they have/suspect they have COVID or if they are smoking near other people.

I agree with that, but it is not a transmittable disease. Especially the alcohol.

Lung cancer from second-hand smoke is similarly functional to a transmissable disease, although obviously in a much slower way. Or indeed the effect it has on someone with asthma or other breathing problems. I do broadly agree with your point, but as you said to IDFD, if everyone can obey the smoking laws, why not the COVID ones?

Yeah that's true, but that only holds for smoking. Anyway, that was me being pedantic I guess, the point is that Covid is a highly transmittable disease and it seems that some people do not take it seriously enough

Siao7 wrote: ↑

Fri Sep 17, 2021 7:31 am

IDFD wrote: ↑

Thu Sep 16, 2021 5:38 pm

And because of the dangers of passive smoking we don't let people smoke in indoor areas.

So what you are agreeing is that we took measures and people are following them. Why can't people do the same with Covid?

Yeah. I was highlighting that we do have measures in place to protect people from the dangers of passive smoking and why is it wrong to do the same to protect them from Covid.

IDFD wrote: ↑

Fri Sep 17, 2021 10:09 am

Siao7 wrote: ↑

Fri Sep 17, 2021 7:31 am

IDFD wrote: ↑

Thu Sep 16, 2021 5:38 pm

And because of the dangers of passive smoking we don't let people smoke in indoor areas.

So what you are agreeing is that we took measures and people are following them. Why can't people do the same with Covid?

Yeah. I was highlighting that we do have measures in place to protect people from the dangers of passive smoking and why is it wrong to do the same to protect them from Covid.

I think sometimes that people are behaving like 3-year olds; if you tell them not to press the red button, well guess what they will do? Some people inherently do not like to do what they are told to, no matter who is telling them or what are the consequences.

Siao7 wrote: "A person's freedom ends where another man's freedom begins"

This is something we all need reminding of, around the world.

myattitude wrote: ↑

Wed Sep 01, 2021 9:16 am

Interesting figures, but scientific data suggests lockdowns themselves have increased the excess deaths:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7952324/

Which is correct and why? Explain your conclusion.

Yes, lockdowns themselves have increased excess deaths.

Also, in similar news, the occurrence of fire when firefighters are in attendance is greater than when there are no firefighters around.

What are the 5g = covid lunatics these days? Have they seen the errors of their ways or moved onto other ridiculous stuff without acknowledging they were wrong? Did they learn anything.

Tufty wrote: ↑

Fri Sep 17, 2021 11:20 am

Siao7 wrote: "A person's freedom ends where another man's freedom begins"

This is something we all need reminding of, around the world.

The obvious problem with this is that freedom is a subjective term. My idea of freedom may be vastly different & at loggerheads with your idea of freedom. So who's right?

f1madman wrote: ↑

Wed Oct 06, 2021 7:08 pm

What are the 5g = covid lunatics these days? Have they seen the errors of their ways or moved onto other ridiculous stuff without acknowledging they were wrong? Did they learn anything.

There's never a shortage of loopy conspiracy theories to latch on to, especially these days.

f1madman wrote: ↑

Wed Oct 06, 2021 7:08 pm

What are the 5g = covid lunatics these days? Have they seen the errors of their ways or moved onto other ridiculous stuff without acknowledging they were wrong? Did they learn anything.

I just got a 5G phone last week and haven't contracted Covid yet, nor am I being excessively controlled (that I know of).

I may have a broken phone though, I need to check that.

Siao7 wrote: ↑

Thu Oct 07, 2021 9:30 am

f1madman wrote: ↑

Wed Oct 06, 2021 7:08 pm

What are the 5g = covid lunatics these days? Have they seen the errors of their ways or moved onto other ridiculous stuff without acknowledging they were wrong? Did they learn anything.

I just got a 5G phone last week and haven't contracted Covid yet, nor am I being excessively controlled (that I know of).

I may have a broken phone though, I need to check that.

I only got a 5G capable phone after being vaccinated but I've had great signal whenever I hold it near my upper left arm

Tufty wrote: ↑

Fri Oct 08, 2021 11:30 am

Siao7 wrote: ↑

Thu Oct 07, 2021 9:30 am

f1madman wrote: ↑

Wed Oct 06, 2021 7:08 pm

What are the 5g = covid lunatics these days? Have they seen the errors of their ways or moved onto other ridiculous stuff without acknowledging they were wrong? Did they learn anything.

I just got a 5G phone last week and haven't contracted Covid yet, nor am I being excessively controlled (that I know of).

I may have a broken phone though, I need to check that.

I only got a 5G capable phone after being vaccinated but I've had great signal whenever I hold it near my upper left arm

Ooooh, haven't tried that one yet. Thanks for the tip!

So I got it last week, thank you Boris for opening everything and now no one is taking any measures what-so-ever.

It wasn't pleasant, started like a normal flu, but then I started having difficulty breathing at nights, like someone left a stack of books on my chest. God knows how it would have been if I wasn't double-vaccinated.

Luckily it is ok now, apart from the persisting coughing and the inability to smell properly (which was a blessing as we had a bin strike recently so the place stinks!)

Siao7 wrote: ↑

Tue Oct 26, 2021 9:17 am

So I got it last week, thank you Boris for opening everything and now no one is taking any measures what-so-ever.

It wasn't pleasant, started like a normal flu, but then I started having difficulty breathing at nights, like someone left a stack of books on my chest. God knows how it would have been if I wasn't double-vaccinated.

Luckily it is ok now, apart from the persisting coughing and the inability to smell properly (which was a blessing as we had a bin strike recently so the place stinks!)

I hope that you get well soon. And hopefully the vaccine does its job in helping your body fight the virus.

I'll try not to post any pedantic arguments in the next couple of weeks to do my part in not contributing to your stress levels

Alienturnedhuman wrote: ↑

Tue Oct 26, 2021 10:10 am

Siao7 wrote: ↑

Tue Oct 26, 2021 9:17 am

So I got it last week, thank you Boris for opening everything and now no one is taking any measures what-so-ever.

It wasn't pleasant, started like a normal flu, but then I started having difficulty breathing at nights, like someone left a stack of books on my chest. God knows how it would have been if I wasn't double-vaccinated.

Luckily it is ok now, apart from the persisting coughing and the inability to smell properly (which was a blessing as we had a bin strike recently so the place stinks!)

I hope that you get well soon. And hopefully the vaccine does its job in helping your body fight the virus.

I'll try not to post any pedantic arguments in the next couple of weeks to do my part in not contributing to your stress levels

Haha, thank you, feeling quite good now, finally went out of the house. I was mostly writing this to express my disbelief, how can people claim that this is just another flu and dismiss it so easily. I bet they haven't experienced it or they were the lucky ones that got off easily.

Arguments are welcome, I'm not easily stressed and I'm pretty sure I've been quite harsh in the past as well! But appreciated, thank you.

Siao7 wrote: ↑

Tue Oct 26, 2021 11:07 am

Alienturnedhuman wrote: ↑

Tue Oct 26, 2021 10:10 am

Siao7 wrote: ↑

Tue Oct 26, 2021 9:17 am

So I got it last week, thank you Boris for opening everything and now no one is taking any measures what-so-ever.

It wasn't pleasant, started like a normal flu, but then I started having difficulty breathing at nights, like someone left a stack of books on my chest. God knows how it would have been if I wasn't double-vaccinated.

Luckily it is ok now, apart from the persisting coughing and the inability to smell properly (which was a blessing as we had a bin strike recently so the place stinks!)

I hope that you get well soon. And hopefully the vaccine does its job in helping your body fight the virus.

I'll try not to post any pedantic arguments in the next couple of weeks to do my part in not contributing to your stress levels

Haha, thank you, feeling quite good now, finally went out of the house. I was mostly writing this to express my disbelief, how can people claim that this is just another flu and dismiss it so easily. I bet they haven't experienced it or they were the lucky ones that got off easily.

Arguments are welcome, I'm not easily stressed and I'm pretty sure I've been quite harsh in the past as well! But appreciated, thank you.

To be honest, I think COVID has exposed fundamental problems in attitude towards others within some countries in the world. COVID19 is certainly far more extreme than the flu, both in symptoms and ease of transmission - but severe cases of the flu are also not pleasant either. Indeed - with the U.K. death rate being the equivalent of around 40,000 to 50,000 annually- I have seen people say “that’s only 5 times higher than the flu”

The implication is that being in the same ballpark as the flu, that’s a reason to do nothing. Notwithstanding the fact that average will increase during the peak of the flu season with increased indoors cross bubble socialising - there seems to be no consideration of the question of how many of those 10,000 flu deaths are preventable (and that 10K doesn’t include the far larger number of people who are ill and made economically inactive)

I’ve lived in Japan for over two years now, and one thing that was noticeable before the pandemic was the mask wearing during flu season prior to the pandemic. This was done to stop transmission, primarily by potentially contagious people to stop themselves from passing on their illness.

In the U.K. having a cold or mild flu would likely see you disciplined for taking time off (in reality, I mean, obviously “official” policy is don’t come in if you are sick, but everyone knows that anyone who tries not coming in would receive some form of punishment for it) and this - along with automatic transmission - leads to the viruses being far more saturated in the population. Asian countries, driven partially by their higher population densities, but also with cultures that see a greater consideration for those around them, approach the situation by trying to minimise their impact on others, and distributed exponentially across the billions of daily human to human interactions, even a small reduction in transmission has a huge, huge impact due to the mathematics of exponentials.

Even if the pandemic had not happened, I think I would have had a reverse culture shock returning to the U.K. during winter and seeing people with colds just openly coughing in each other’s faces in enclosed spaces. Post pandemic, just watching the incredibly ego centric, and deliberately uninformed attitudes and discussions around mask wearing and personal hygiene that take place in the Anglo American demographics has been beyond disheartening.

Alienturnedhuman wrote: ↑

Tue Oct 26, 2021 11:40 am

Siao7 wrote: ↑

Tue Oct 26, 2021 11:07 am

Alienturnedhuman wrote: ↑

Tue Oct 26, 2021 10:10 am

Siao7 wrote: ↑

Tue Oct 26, 2021 9:17 am

So I got it last week, thank you Boris for opening everything and now no one is taking any measures what-so-ever.

It wasn't pleasant, started like a normal flu, but then I started having difficulty breathing at nights, like someone left a stack of books on my chest. God knows how it would have been if I wasn't double-vaccinated.

Luckily it is ok now, apart from the persisting coughing and the inability to smell properly (which was a blessing as we had a bin strike recently so the place stinks!)

I hope that you get well soon. And hopefully the vaccine does its job in helping your body fight the virus.

I'll try not to post any pedantic arguments in the next couple of weeks to do my part in not contributing to your stress levels

Haha, thank you, feeling quite good now, finally went out of the house. I was mostly writing this to express my disbelief, how can people claim that this is just another flu and dismiss it so easily. I bet they haven't experienced it or they were the lucky ones that got off easily.

Arguments are welcome, I'm not easily stressed and I'm pretty sure I've been quite harsh in the past as well! But appreciated, thank you.

To be honest, I think COVID has exposed fundamental problems in attitude towards others within some countries in the world. COVID19 is certainly far more extreme than the flu, both in symptoms and ease of transmission - but severe cases of the flu are also not pleasant either. Indeed - with the U.K. death rate being the equivalent of around 40,000 to 50,000 annually- I have seen people say “that’s only 5 times higher than the flu”

The implication is that being in the same ballpark as the flu, that’s a reason to do nothing. Notwithstanding the fact that average will increase during the peak of the flu season with increased indoors cross bubble socialising - there seems to be no consideration of the question of how many of those 10,000 flu deaths are preventable (and that 10K doesn’t include the far larger number of people who are ill and made economically inactive)

I’ve lived in Japan for over two years now, and one thing that was noticeable before the pandemic was the mask wearing during flu season prior to the pandemic. This was done to stop transmission, primarily by potentially contagious people to stop themselves from passing on their illness.

In the U.K. having a cold or mild flu would likely see you disciplined for taking time off (in reality, I mean, obviously “official” policy is don’t come in if you are sick, but everyone knows that anyone who tries not coming in would receive some form of punishment for it) and this - along with automatic transmission - leads to the viruses being far more saturated in the population. Asian countries, driven partially by their higher population densities, but also with cultures that see a greater consideration for those around them, approach the situation by trying to minimise their impact on others, and distributed exponentially across the billions of daily human to human interactions, even a small reduction in transmission has a huge, huge impact due to the mathematics of exponentials.

Even if the pandemic had not happened, I think I would have had a reverse culture shock returning to the U.K. during winter and seeing people with colds just openly coughing in each other’s faces in enclosed spaces. Post pandemic, just watching the incredibly ego centric, and deliberately uninformed attitudes and discussions around mask wearing and personal hygiene that take place in the Anglo American demographics has been beyond disheartening.

I'm lucky to be working in an office that has a good outlook in these things. If you are ill, stay the hell home, don't try to show up like a good soldier and spread it to everyone. We have laptops nowadays, so stay home and work from there if you wish so. You'll only get scolded if you are taking the Mikey and call in "sick" repeatedly on Mondays, which points more to a hangover if nothing else.

It is interesting about the masks in Japan. To think that people used to find it amusing when they spotted someone from an Asian country with a mask at the airport... In the Western world, it seems that you need to be reminded to be considerate for those around you. From talking loud on your phone in a public area to wearing masks. People can be such pr*cks

iano wrote: ↑

Thu Sep 23, 2021 10:50 am

myattitude wrote: ↑

Wed Sep 01, 2021 9:16 am

Interesting figures, but scientific data suggests lockdowns themselves have increased the excess deaths:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7952324/

Which is correct and why? Explain your conclusion.

Yes, lockdowns themselves have increased excess deaths.

Also, in similar news, the occurrence of fire when firefighters are in attendance is greater than when there are no firefighters around.

So what happens? If there were no lockdowns, there would be fewer deaths? That is, there are more infections and fewer deaths. This is an interesting twist. I had to read this interesting article for a while. And you know, I agree with the author that only collective immunity can defeat covids. And I also agree that we will now see annual outbreaks of covid as we do with the flu.
And what I've noticed is that the death rate from the flu is higher than from covid.