Does anyone know an Anti Covid vaxxer?
Discussion
67Dino said:
bad company said:
I still haven’t heard a good motive for why the government would want lockdown to continue for as long as possible. There’s vague suggestions they just like removing civil liberties, but to what end? Or that lockdown helps billionaires, but not the hotel, transport or oil ones presumably, or even that doing so would benefit the government. 
Genuinely curious as seems to me lockdown is hugely challenging for a government to do, and therefore only used whilst no feasible alternative to killing thousands and overwhelming the NHS. Enlighten me.
% of Covid tests that are positive :
UK 0.6%
Germany 2.7%
France 2.3%
Daily Covid tests per 1,000 people
UK 13.74
Germany 1.4
France 4.1
Mrs BC and I stayed in London for 3 nights next week. I can tell you that the hotel, shop, restaurant and pub staff are getting thoroughly peed off with the rules and in particular mask wearing.
parakitaMol. said:
Patronising.
I’ve had my vax / I not an anti vaxxer.
I’m married to a consultant who specialises in drug development whose been involved in several Covid trials. I have some understanding.
It’s the gvts ‘strategy’ (for want of a better description) that is utterly mindless, has bred nothing but fear, panic, confusion and defies logic.
This. Many times over. I’ve had my vax / I not an anti vaxxer.
I’m married to a consultant who specialises in drug development whose been involved in several Covid trials. I have some understanding.
It’s the gvts ‘strategy’ (for want of a better description) that is utterly mindless, has bred nothing but fear, panic, confusion and defies logic.
bad company said:
I wish I could enlighten you but I really don’t know why. These figures came from another PH thread:-
% of Covid tests that are positive :
UK 0.6%
Germany 2.7%
France 2.3%
Daily Covid tests per 1,000 people
UK 13.74
Germany 1.4
France 4.1
Mrs BC and I stayed in London for 3 nights next week. I can tell you that the hotel, shop, restaurant and pub staff are getting thoroughly peed off with the rules and in particular mask wearing.
Firstly, well done for inventing time travel. % of Covid tests that are positive :
UK 0.6%
Germany 2.7%
France 2.3%
Daily Covid tests per 1,000 people
UK 13.74
Germany 1.4
France 4.1
Mrs BC and I stayed in London for 3 nights next week. I can tell you that the hotel, shop, restaurant and pub staff are getting thoroughly peed off with the rules and in particular mask wearing.
You went to London for three nights with your wife and spent your time talking with the staff of at least 4 different establishments about how "peed off" with mask wearing they were? Of course you did.
In the unlikely event of this being true, don't you think you're a little obsessed and maybe dragging people down to your level of grouchiness?
I spent two nights in central London with my wife two weekends ago (no time travel for me!) and the subject of mask wearing never cropped up with people at any venue. Staff busy, cheerful and pleasant - wearing masks and just getting on with their jobs. Pretty much 100% compliance from customers too.
67Dino said:
bad company said:
I still haven’t heard a good motive for why the government would want lockdown to continue for as long as possible. There’s vague suggestions they just like removing civil liberties, but to what end? Or that lockdown helps billionaires, but not the hotel, transport or oil ones presumably, or even that doing so would benefit the government. Genuinely curious as seems to me lockdown is hugely challenging for a government to do, and therefore only used whilst no feasible alternative to killing thousands and overwhelming the NHS. Enlighten me.
Amazing how Boris got the rest of the world to go along with it.
98elise said:
67Dino said:
bad company said:
I still haven’t heard a good motive for why the government would want lockdown to continue for as long as possible. There’s vague suggestions they just like removing civil liberties, but to what end? Or that lockdown helps billionaires, but not the hotel, transport or oil ones presumably, or even that doing so would benefit the government. Genuinely curious as seems to me lockdown is hugely challenging for a government to do, and therefore only used whilst no feasible alternative to killing thousands and overwhelming the NHS. Enlighten me.
Amazing how Boris got the rest of the world to go along with it.
Money? Easier ways to make that.
Like 9/11 was was inside job. Why, to start a war? America has been starting wars for centuries when they feel like it. No need to orchestrate the biggest terrorist attack in history to get people on side. Iraq was invaded on the back of a couple of dodgy intelligence reports.
67Dino said:
I still haven’t heard a good motive for why the government would want lockdown to continue for as long as possible. There’s vague suggestions they just like removing civil liberties, but to what end? Or that lockdown helps billionaires, but not the hotel, transport or oil ones presumably, or even that doing so would benefit the government.
Genuinely curious as seems to me lockdown is hugely challenging for a government to do, and therefore only used whilst no feasible alternative to killing thousands and overwhelming the NHS. Enlighten me.
The incessant and unnecessary scaremongering the govt has engaged with now leaves them with no easy out to remove the restrictions they have put on proclaiming that they had been necessary to save the country. Focus groups remain firmly pointing the government at keeping restrictions so they do. Genuinely curious as seems to me lockdown is hugely challenging for a government to do, and therefore only used whilst no feasible alternative to killing thousands and overwhelming the NHS. Enlighten me.
I could equally turn your question around - with an extraordinarily high number of people vaccinted (especially those at risk) and with extremely effective vaccines, why do you think there still remains such a major risk to 'killing thousands and overwhelming the NHS' such that restrictions are still required unless the government actually doesn't believe that the vaccines work?
isaldiri said:
67Dino said:
I still haven’t heard a good motive for why the government would want lockdown to continue for as long as possible. There’s vague suggestions they just like removing civil liberties, but to what end? Or that lockdown helps billionaires, but not the hotel, transport or oil ones presumably, or even that doing so would benefit the government.
Genuinely curious as seems to me lockdown is hugely challenging for a government to do, and therefore only used whilst no feasible alternative to killing thousands and overwhelming the NHS. Enlighten me.
The incessant and unnecessary scaremongering the govt has engaged with now leaves them with no easy out to remove the restrictions they have put on proclaiming that they had been necessary to save the country. Focus groups remain firmly pointing the government at keeping restrictions so they do. Genuinely curious as seems to me lockdown is hugely challenging for a government to do, and therefore only used whilst no feasible alternative to killing thousands and overwhelming the NHS. Enlighten me.
I could equally turn your question around - with an extraordinarily high number of people vaccinted (especially those at risk) and with extremely effective vaccines, why do you think there still remains such a major risk to 'killing thousands and overwhelming the NHS' such that restrictions are still required unless the government actually doesn't believe that the vaccines work?
Virus appears, not too bad, don’t panic. Oh s
t, maybe it is bad, panic and lockdown. Things are looking better, let’s open stuff up a bit. Oh dear, looking like it’s going the wrong way in some places, let’s have some more lockdown in them. Oh st, it’s going bad in lots of places, shut it all down again. Hooray, vaccines, let’s have a roadmap out of this. Numbers look good, sticking to roadmap. Oh dear, hearing some bad vibes about variants and rising case numbers, let’s delay the last stage (it was always the earliest, remember?).I think the fundamental thing the Govt wants to avoid is more Hokey Cokey and uncertainty going forward. If this means an “abundance of caution” and a situation where (probably) more restrictions could be dropped sooner then so be it from their point of view.
isaldiri said:
The incessant and unnecessary scaremongering the govt has engaged with now leaves them with no easy out to remove the restrictions they have put on proclaiming that they had been necessary to save the country.
It’s been incessant because it’s been necessary due to morns not being able to realise it applies to them. Notwithstanding that it’s not scaremongering they have had a difficult line to follow to actively avoid scaremongering. There’s also no ‘easy way out’ apart from what they are doing, and yes it is to save the country. Roman Rhodes said:
I think the fundamental thing the Govt wants to avoid is more Hokey Cokey and uncertainty going forward. If this means an “abundance of caution” and a situation where (probably) more restrictions could be dropped sooner then so be it from their point of view.
So in essence, political arse covering irrespective of how much it affects some people. Well i won't disagree with that.isaldiri said:
67Dino said:
I still haven’t heard a good motive for why the government would want lockdown to continue for as long as possible. There’s vague suggestions they just like removing civil liberties, but to what end? Or that lockdown helps billionaires, but not the hotel, transport or oil ones presumably, or even that doing so would benefit the government.
Genuinely curious as seems to me lockdown is hugely challenging for a government to do, and therefore only used whilst no feasible alternative to killing thousands and overwhelming the NHS. Enlighten me.
The incessant and unnecessary scaremongering the govt has engaged with now leaves them with no easy out to remove the restrictions they have put on proclaiming that they had been necessary to save the country. Focus groups remain firmly pointing the government at keeping restrictions so they do. Genuinely curious as seems to me lockdown is hugely challenging for a government to do, and therefore only used whilst no feasible alternative to killing thousands and overwhelming the NHS. Enlighten me.
I could equally turn your question around - with an extraordinarily high number of people vaccinted (especially those at risk) and with extremely effective vaccines, why do you think there still remains such a major risk to 'killing thousands and overwhelming the NHS' such that restrictions are still required unless the government actually doesn't believe that the vaccines work?
parakitaMol. said:
isaldiri said:
67Dino said:
I still haven’t heard a good motive for why the government would want lockdown to continue for as long as possible. There’s vague suggestions they just like removing civil liberties, but to what end? Or that lockdown helps billionaires, but not the hotel, transport or oil ones presumably, or even that doing so would benefit the government.
Genuinely curious as seems to me lockdown is hugely challenging for a government to do, and therefore only used whilst no feasible alternative to killing thousands and overwhelming the NHS. Enlighten me.
The incessant and unnecessary scaremongering the govt has engaged with now leaves them with no easy out to remove the restrictions they have put on proclaiming that they had been necessary to save the country. Focus groups remain firmly pointing the government at keeping restrictions so they do. Genuinely curious as seems to me lockdown is hugely challenging for a government to do, and therefore only used whilst no feasible alternative to killing thousands and overwhelming the NHS. Enlighten me.
I could equally turn your question around - with an extraordinarily high number of people vaccinted (especially those at risk) and with extremely effective vaccines, why do you think there still remains such a major risk to 'killing thousands and overwhelming the NHS' such that restrictions are still required unless the government actually doesn't believe that the vaccines work?
I also hear the argument that now ‘everyone at risk has been vaccinated’ but that’s just a guess. From experience your (or my) gut feel is a very poor guide to how a complex situation develops when exponentials are involved. You need to run a proper model, and the models are clear - until we get nearer 70% double vaxed, Covid would grow exponentially until it causes a problem again.
So we’re back to a bizarre conspiracy that believes (a) the government wants us in lockdown, and (b) the models are wrong or deliberately biased to make sure we stay in it. Just seems far more likely to me that the government want us out, but scientific evidence is showing it wouldn’t be intelligent to do that.
67Dino said:
parakitaMol. said:
isaldiri said:
67Dino said:
I still haven’t heard a good motive for why the government would want lockdown to continue for as long as possible. There’s vague suggestions they just like removing civil liberties, but to what end? Or that lockdown helps billionaires, but not the hotel, transport or oil ones presumably, or even that doing so would benefit the government.
Genuinely curious as seems to me lockdown is hugely challenging for a government to do, and therefore only used whilst no feasible alternative to killing thousands and overwhelming the NHS. Enlighten me.
The incessant and unnecessary scaremongering the govt has engaged with now leaves them with no easy out to remove the restrictions they have put on proclaiming that they had been necessary to save the country. Focus groups remain firmly pointing the government at keeping restrictions so they do. Genuinely curious as seems to me lockdown is hugely challenging for a government to do, and therefore only used whilst no feasible alternative to killing thousands and overwhelming the NHS. Enlighten me.
I could equally turn your question around - with an extraordinarily high number of people vaccinted (especially those at risk) and with extremely effective vaccines, why do you think there still remains such a major risk to 'killing thousands and overwhelming the NHS' such that restrictions are still required unless the government actually doesn't believe that the vaccines work?
I also hear the argument that now ‘everyone at risk has been vaccinated’ but that’s just a guess. From experience your (or my) gut feel is a very poor guide to how a complex situation develops when exponentials are involved. You need to run a proper model, and the models are clear - until we get nearer 70% double vaxed, Covid would grow exponentially until it causes a problem again.
So we’re back to a bizarre conspiracy that believes (a) the government wants us in lockdown, and (b) the models are wrong or deliberately biased to make sure we stay in it. Just seems far more likely to me that the government want us out, but scientific evidence is showing it wouldn’t be intelligent to do that.
The scientific evidence has been loaded with forecasts and worst case scenarios. Predominantly conjecture.
I think the Gvt is pandering to internal and oppositional criticism and uk/international political virtue signalling. As soon as they start talking about opening up - the fear believers start screaming in panic.
I do not believe the lockdown works - correlation does not indicate causation. The virus is following seasonal patterns. We will get another 'wave' in late Autumn because that happens every year.
V6 Pushfit said:
parakitaMol. said:
I do not believe the lockdown works
.... despite the opposite experiences of the last year hiding in plain sight.Did we get a sudden bout of seasonal flu in April/May last year then?
parakitaMol. said:
The seasonal trends have followed the same patterns. Many (scientific) people do not believe that lockdowns work. They may reduce spread but they will never stop anything in its tracks - unless we have a permanent lockdown.
You’d better tell them in Sydney as they’ve just started a full 2 week lockdown for 80 cases. V6 Pushfit said:
parakitaMol. said:
The seasonal trends have followed the same patterns. Many (scientific) people do not believe that lockdowns work. They may reduce spread but they will never stop anything in its tracks - unless we have a permanent lockdown.
You’d better tell them in Sydney as they’ve just started a full 2 week lockdown for 80 cases. What then? The vaccine doesn’t stop Covid in its tracks, so it might be one of the countries that will have more covid once they are vaccinated rather than less.
V6 Pushfit said:
parakitaMol. said:
The seasonal trends have followed the same patterns. Many (scientific) people do not believe that lockdowns work. They may reduce spread but they will never stop anything in its tracks - unless we have a permanent lockdown.
You’d better tell them in Sydney as they’ve just started a full 2 week lockdown for 80 cases. Thank GOD for politicians protecting us all from ourselves.
My in laws in Sydney, and we can not travel there for the extreme protectionism really, it has been quite hard.
It is safe to say, Australia has always been quite super-careful about their entry rules, up to extreme levels. On my last visit during christmas, about 3 years ago, they literally delayed my tourist visa (which was online application) for about three months, kept asking loads of documents. (had a solid job, house in U.K. and travelled regularly...)
In general, they are quite scared that more people would come to Australia and not leave, and they would lose their comfortable population
It is safe to say, Australia has always been quite super-careful about their entry rules, up to extreme levels. On my last visit during christmas, about 3 years ago, they literally delayed my tourist visa (which was online application) for about three months, kept asking loads of documents. (had a solid job, house in U.K. and travelled regularly...)
In general, they are quite scared that more people would come to Australia and not leave, and they would lose their comfortable population
ooid said:
My in laws in Sydney, and we can not travel there for the extreme protectionism really, it has been quite hard.
It is safe to say, Australia has always been quite super-careful about their entry rules, up to extreme levels. On my last visit during christmas, about 3 years ago, they literally delayed my tourist visa (which was online application) for about three months, kept asking loads of documents. (had a solid job, house in U.K. and travelled regularly...)
In general, they are quite scared that more people would come to Australia and not leave, and they would lose their comfortable population
That’s why they have a good lifestyle, no imported dross! It is safe to say, Australia has always been quite super-careful about their entry rules, up to extreme levels. On my last visit during christmas, about 3 years ago, they literally delayed my tourist visa (which was online application) for about three months, kept asking loads of documents. (had a solid job, house in U.K. and travelled regularly...)
In general, they are quite scared that more people would come to Australia and not leave, and they would lose their comfortable population
V6 Pushfit said:
ooid said:
My in laws in Sydney, and we can not travel there for the extreme protectionism really, it has been quite hard.
It is safe to say, Australia has always been quite super-careful about their entry rules, up to extreme levels. On my last visit during christmas, about 3 years ago, they literally delayed my tourist visa (which was online application) for about three months, kept asking loads of documents. (had a solid job, house in U.K. and travelled regularly...)
In general, they are quite scared that more people would come to Australia and not leave, and they would lose their comfortable population
That’s why they have a good lifestyle, no imported dross! It is safe to say, Australia has always been quite super-careful about their entry rules, up to extreme levels. On my last visit during christmas, about 3 years ago, they literally delayed my tourist visa (which was online application) for about three months, kept asking loads of documents. (had a solid job, house in U.K. and travelled regularly...)
In general, they are quite scared that more people would come to Australia and not leave, and they would lose their comfortable population
That’s off topic though. The Australian challenge is to convince people that they need to get vaccinated and then get them to accept that even then, people will still die from coronavirus. Possibly in larger numbers than has been the case so far for Australia.
After all, assuming vaccination rates are high, does it really matter if someone dies of covid rather than seasonal flu?
Gassing Station | Health Matters | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff