• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Coronavirus

Lilbaz said:
Lol. You realise how much of a hypocrite you are. Criticising covid death numbers because they might have had covid but died from something else. Yet saying that people dying after being vaccinated is because of the vaccine?
Click to expand...

I'm saying that the overhype/inflation/focus of one thing has led to a push towards all and sundry (and not just the elderly/vulnerable) taking the (relatively untested) vaccine and that the side-effects/deaths are not getting the same focus. I don't think that is hypocritical at all.

Lilbaz said:
Yes you are correct the people dying from covid within 28 days of a positive test is crap. It's what number the government switched to because it was smaller after the first wave, as they didn't want to look bad compared to other countries. But they are not the only numbers produced. The original number was based on people dying with covid listed on the death certificate as a contributing factor. The third was excess deaths, how many more people died than the 5 year average. At the beginning this was the highest. Many people were dying without having been tested. Some stayed at home with their families rather than dying alone in hospital. This is now the lowest number at roughly 97,000 according to the ons. Why is it the lowest? Because many people that died were very old and very sick and would have died within a month or so anyway even if they hadn't got covid.

People have died from taking the vaccines. These are public knowledge. Many countries restricted giving az to certain age groups. I believe denmark stopped giving it at all. We know moderna has a risk of causing myocarditis. With all medicine there are risks. They are not covered up, they were reported in the media. The yellow card and vaers are available online.
Click to expand...

Right, people have indeed died from having had it. Yet we see the rise of mandates across many contries to get it despite this. The swine flu vaccine rollout was stopped after far less deaths as a result of taking it, yet in some countries it looks like vaccine-related deaths might actually outstrip covid deaths. They all have known risks yet are continually being pushed; in Australia, Israel and USA politicians are even threatening to have people unable to work, shop etc without having taken it! Does this even make sense, especially for people who are far less susceptible to suffering it in a bad way, i.e. those not elderly or already with underlying conditions?
With all medicines there are indeed risks but you don't mandate ones which on the actual packaging say "sudden death" is a possible side-effect!


Lilbaz said:
There is not some great conspiracy. There are people taking advantage of the situation ofcourse. Churchill said never let a good crisis go to waste. People won't, they'll manipulate it to their advantage.

If you think there is a condpiracy then be honest and answer this:

What is the conspiracy?
Who is in on it?
Who benefits?
Who loses out?
How was it organised?
How do you know?
Click to expand...

I've outlined some of this above in my reply to @thfcsteff ...
 
glorygloryeze said:
I'm saying that the overhype/inflation/focus of one thing has led to a push towards all and sundry (and not just the elderly/vulnerable) taking the (relatively untested) vaccine and that the side-effects/deaths are not getting the same focus. I don't think that is hypocritical at all.



Right, people have indeed died from having had it. Yet we see the rise of mandates across many contries to get it despite this. The swine flu vaccine rollout was stopped after far less deaths as a result of taking it, yet in some countries it looks like vaccine-related deaths might actually outstrip covid deaths. They all have known risks yet are continually being pushed; in Australia, Israel and USA politicians are even threatening to have people unable to work, shop etc without having taken it! Does this even make sense, especially for people who are far less susceptible to suffering it in a bad way, i.e. those not elderly or already with underlying conditions?
With all medicines there are indeed risks but you don't mandate ones which on the actual packaging say "sudden death" is a possible side-effect!




I've outlined some of this above in my reply to @thfcsteff ...
Click to expand...

To your first point. There are more than one vaccine. Each has gone through three stages of trials. Billions of people have taken them.

As for deaths, yes the number of deaths after having the vaccines is higher than for swine flu. More people have had the covid vaccine. There are more deaths from covid than swine flu. The ons has the number of people dying after having the vaccine in the uk as 1645 (again this is not to say their deaths were caused by the vaccine) from 100 million doses administered to roughly 50 million people. The number given for being caused by the vaccine is 9 in the uk. While people dying with covid as a contributing factor of death in the uk is around 150,000. Far more people have had the vaccine than have had the virus. Now i'm sure you are pretty good at maths and can realise that 150k is more than 1645? That you are 100 times (at least) better off getting the vaccine than covid? Or 15,000 times more if you take the official figure.
https://blog.ons.gov.uk/2021/10/04/how-many-people-have-died-as-a-result-of-a-covid-19-vaccine/

Which country has mandated vaccines?
 
Last edited:
glorygloryeze said:
I'm saying that the overhype/inflation/focus of one thing has led to a push towards all and sundry (and not just the elderly/vulnerable) taking the (relatively untested) vaccine and that the side-effects/deaths are not getting the same focus. I don't think that is hypocritical at all.
Click to expand...

TBF you make a fair point here, earlier in the year and last year there was alot of discussion on where the line was drawn between died because of and died with after 28 days or whenever and alot was said about it not mattering, they still died which is a fair comment. However you cant have that view and then totally play down people who die of a vaccine, it does not make you an anti vaxxer or a tin hat wearer to show concern. I am double vaxxed and I still carry some concerns because what we actually know about any of it is so fluid and changes nearly daily, an example is that originally it was announced you cant mix and match vaccines, now AZ in many areas is being chucked out and you are told now you can, I was told when I had mine in strong terms you could not match so naturally that carries nervousness, you only have to be human to feel that way. Then when you look at original statements from the CDC who said "Our data from the CDC today suggests that vaccinated people do not carry the virus, don't get sick, and that it's not just in the clinical trials, but it's also in real-world data.", that's proven not to be the case so people have a right to act with caution of everything.
 
Grays_1890 said:
TBF you make a fair point here, earlier in the year and last year there was alot of discussion on where the line was drawn between died because of and died with after 28 days or whenever and alot was said about it not mattering, they still died which is a fair comment. However you cant have that view and then totally play down people who die of a vaccine, it does not make you an anti vaxxer or a tin hat wearer to show concern. I am double vaxxed and I still carry some concerns because what we actually know about any of it is so fluid and changes nearly daily, an example is that originally it was announced you cant mix and match vaccines, now AZ in many areas is being chucked out and you are told now you can, I was told when I had mine in strong terms you could not match so naturally that carries nervousness, you only have to be human to feel that way. Then when you look at original statements from the CDC who said "Our data from the CDC today suggests that vaccinated people do not carry the virus, don't get sick, and that it's not just in the clinical trials, but it's also in real-world data.", that's proven not to be the case so people have a right to act with caution of everything.
Click to expand...

They just didn't know what would happen if you mixed and matched vaccines. Would they work? Would their be side effects? So they did trials.

Also have you got a link to where the cdc said that?
 
Lilbaz said:
They just didn't know what would happen if you mixed and matched vaccines. Would they work? Would their be side effects? So they did trials.

Also have you got a link to where the cdc said that?
Click to expand...

Yeh but thats my point, the situation changes the guidelines change and its a natural reaction for people to be nervous, I have an empathy towards it because in many cases the strength of the original message you followed is so strong only to be contradicted further down the line so people step back and say "hang on".

The CDC statement is on loads of news outlets, I think the original statement was back in March
 
markysimmo said:
https://twitter.com/x/status/1452573757541863426
Click to expand...

This is the crucial bit for where we are, especially as we are pretty much at the end of this phase now:

“If you implement non-pharmacutical interventions temporarily and then lift them, then their main effect is to delay any outbreak,” he said. “You can see this most clearly in the scenario when we implement all of the measures.”

Experts said if the models were correct, then it would do little good to bring in restrictions at this stage, and would be better for long-term immunity to allow the virus to spread.

Paul Hunter, Professor in Medicine, at the University of East Anglia, said: “There are times when delaying is really valuable, but there comes a point when restrictions have no value because you’ve got as much protection as you’re going to get, so you end up putting it off to a point where you lose immunity.
 
Grays_1890 said:
Yeh but thats my point, the situation changes the guidelines change and its a natural reaction for people to be nervous, I have an empathy towards it because in many cases the strength of the original message you followed is so strong only to be contradicted further down the line so people step back and say "hang on".

The CDC statement is on loads of news outlets, I think the original statement was back in March
Click to expand...

It's not a contradiction. It's common sense.

If it's on loads of outlets you should be able to provide a link. Because none of the vaccines claimed 100% efficacy. If you don't have 100% efficacy (which no vaccine in history has had). You will have breakthrough cases.
 
Gutter Boy said:
This is the crucial bit for where we are, especially as we are pretty much at the end of this phase now:

“If you implement non-pharmacutical interventions temporarily and then lift them, then their main effect is to delay any outbreak,” he said. “You can see this most clearly in the scenario when we implement all of the measures.”

Experts said if the models were correct, then it would do little good to bring in restrictions at this stage, and would be better for long-term immunity to allow the virus to spread.

Paul Hunter, Professor in Medicine, at the University of East Anglia, said: “There are times when delaying is really valuable, but there comes a point when restrictions have no value because you’ve got as much protection as you’re going to get, so you end up putting it off to a point where you lose immunity.
Click to expand...

The only point you should bring in measures is if the hospitals are being overwhelmed. If they are then they can't treat other things like heart attacks/stokes/car accidents etc... Then you enter the triage phase. Where you pick and choose who gets treatment and who's left to die.
Even though it just delays it. It would be to a time when hospitals are less under stress.

At the moment you don't want restrictions. December/january is traditionally the busiest time for hospitals. Any restrictions would have to last until afterwards.
There is also not that many in hospital with covid (compared to previous waves).
 
Lilbaz said:
It's not a contradiction. It's common sense.

If it's on loads of outlets you should be able to provide a link. Because none of the vaccines claimed 100% efficacy. If you don't have 100% efficacy (which no vaccine in history has had). You will have breakthrough cases.
Click to expand...

You can't blame the public or not understanding the way the science community works. It's not all common sense

Hahah there are links I'm just not your PA, cut and paste the quotes and you will find the links.
 
Lilbaz said:
The only point you should bring in measures is if the hospitals are being overwhelmed. If they are then they can't treat other things like heart attacks/stokes/car accidents etc... Then you enter the triage phase. Where you pick and choose who gets treatment and who's left to die.
Even though it just delays it. It would be to a time when hospitals are less under stress.

At the moment you don't want restrictions. December/january is traditionally the busiest time for hospitals. Any restrictions would have to last until afterwards.
There is also not that many in hospital with covid (compared to previous waves).
Click to expand...

True, but even then you can flex it by using conference centres and bringing in St John's ambulance, recently retired staff etc.

And as you say, numbers in hospital are low (1/5th of what they were last year) and stable (been 7000-8000 for weeks).

Nothing now, post-vaccine, could justify locking up the whole population again.
 
Grays_1890 said:
You can't blame the public or not understanding the way the science community works. It's not all common sense

Hahah there are links I'm just not your PA, cut and paste the quotes and you will find the links.
Click to expand...

No i blame the media for not reporting it well and letting politics and selling a story get in the way of informing the public.
The government and phe was clear on their strategy from day 1. Flatten the curve, protect the nhs. This meant bring in restrictions when hospitalisations were high. Reduce them when they were low.
Other people wanted different things. Some wanted zero cases, some wanted zero restrictions.

If the cdc did say that they're idiots. Or politically motivated. But that's america for you. It's why we have our own trials and decision makers. Or maybe i'm being unfair and their data did point to that. The vaccine trials showed that people did get sick still. Transmission wasn't tested though. What do you do? Get someone who is vaccinated, but had a breakthrough case then try and get them to infect others? Similar to mask efficacy. How do you test it?
 
Last edited:
Gutter Boy said:
True, but even then you can flex it by using conference centres and bringing in St John's ambulance, recently retired staff etc.

And as you say, numbers in hospital are low (1/5th of what they were last year) and stable (been 7000-8000 for weeks).

Nothing now, post-vaccine, could justify locking up the whole population again.
Click to expand...

I can see them bringing mask wearing in shops back if hospitals get close to capacity. Probably more enforcement of vaccine passports.
But better to have the cases now when vaccine immunity is strong than later.
 
Lilbaz said:
I can see them bringing mask wearing in shops back if hospitals get close to capacity. Probably more enforcement of vaccine passports.
But better to have the cases now when vaccine immunity is strong than later.
Click to expand...

Neither of those work in practice though - they are both principally psychological tools - mask to flag abnormality/danger, passports to coerce vaccines. If you seriously want to curb numbers with an intervention, mass homeschooling is the only way to do it.

Agree with the second point. Completing the taming of it by building population resistance (through exposure, now everyone is vaccinated) is the only path out of this. And the population will never again have such a high level of antibodies as they do at this moment in time (though t-cells will continue to evolve with exposure), so it's kind of now or never. It's why this phase is called the exit wave. But brick the bed now like the twitter plebs are doing and we lose the landing zone and get screwed long-term.
 
Gutter Boy said:
Neither of those work in practice though - they are both principally psychological tools - mask to flag abnormality/danger, passports to coerce vaccines. If you seriously want to curb numbers with an intervention, mass homeschooling is the only way to do it.

Agree with the second point. Completing the taming of it by building population resistance (through exposure, now everyone is vaccinated) is the only path out of this. And the population will never again have such a high level of antibodies as they do at this moment in time (though t-cells will continue to evolve with exposure), so it's kind of now or never. It's why this phase is called the exit wave. But brick the bed now like the twitter plebs are doing and we lose the landing zone and get screwed long-term.
Click to expand...

Masks do give some benefit even if very small. But very small might be the difference. Easy to implement easy to do.
Coercing people to vaccines can make a big difference. You have different types of people that haven't been vaccinated. The anti vaxxers who i doubt ever will. The ones who are worried about side effects and are waiting. Those that can't be arsed, thinking none of it effects them. If you can get some of them to take it. It might be the difference.

We're not going to homeschool kids, we don't want to shut businesses and hardly anyone gives a brick about social distancing now.
 
Lilbaz said:
Todays numbers were sundays numbers so you'd expect a dip. Half term this week so it should drop further.
Click to expand...

Yes, but it's 13,000 down from last sunday

Half term wont effect the numbers for another 2-3 weeks

Things will oscillate a bit, but this does look like schoolkids have now hit saturation/herd immunity (they were up-to between 70-80% by all estimates a week or two ago).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back