terrible, as soon as they can get everybody inoculated (most vulnerable first obviously) the better it will be for everybody.
Coronavirus - A pale horse,4 men and ....beer
I only shout at the people who created the guidelines and don't follow them, or people (Rita Ora for example) who act irresponsibly - not because they broke the guidelines.jamesg46 wrote: ↑Tue Dec 29, 2020 10:58 amYes it does, it certainly does by the standards of judgement. It's convenient that you're at 1 point, it's a little bit of wiggle room, I should of aksed where between 0 & 10. By the standards of judgement, if you don't follow the guidelines you're a "Granny Killer" (obviously I know you aren't) - but on one hand you shout at people who question Covid & on the other you deliberately break the guidelines, Why? Is it not as serious in your mind as it is being portrayed? Seems to me you want the best of both worlds, it wasn't too long back we had a conversation where you were 100% pro lockdown!
You could say my own guidelines are even stricter than the official guidelines! My sister invited me down to London for Christmas and at the time London wasn't in tier 4 but I decided it wasn't sensible and unnecessary. As I alluded to earlier, there's less wrong with 7 people who don't often see each other getting together than there is with 5 people who are neighbours and don't really have a necessity to get together.
Yeah, I think you make a good/fair point there.Derek27 wrote: ↑Tue Dec 29, 2020 5:12 pmI only shout at the people who created the guidelines and don't follow them, or people (Rita Ora for example) who act irresponsibly - not because they broke the guidelines.jamesg46 wrote: ↑Tue Dec 29, 2020 10:58 amYes it does, it certainly does by the standards of judgement. It's convenient that you're at 1 point, it's a little bit of wiggle room, I should of aksed where between 0 & 10. By the standards of judgement, if you don't follow the guidelines you're a "Granny Killer" (obviously I know you aren't) - but on one hand you shout at people who question Covid & on the other you deliberately break the guidelines, Why? Is it not as serious in your mind as it is being portrayed? Seems to me you want the best of both worlds, it wasn't too long back we had a conversation where you were 100% pro lockdown!
You could say my own guidelines are even stricter than the official guidelines! My sister invited me down to London for Christmas and at the time London wasn't in tier 4 but I decided it wasn't sensible and unnecessary. As I alluded to earlier, there's less wrong with 7 people who don't often see each other getting together than there is with 5 people who are neighbours and don't really have a necessity to get together.
If the Oxford vaccine gets approved in the next few days I can see a national month long lockdown coming
Seems to me that, firstly masks have changed people's behaviour. Everyone thinks a flimsy face covering is now a covid-proof shield. It allows you to get within 1 metre and shout and blather, willy nilly. It also allows you to wear your mask on your chin while you blow your snotty nose into a hanky and then continue round the supermarket without sanitising your mucusy hands.
But worst of all, all hail 'the vaccine'. Now we can can go out and party. How dumb. I swear after covid is over I will have probably 90% less opportunities to rail against human stupidity.
But worst of all, all hail 'the vaccine'. Now we can can go out and party. How dumb. I swear after covid is over I will have probably 90% less opportunities to rail against human stupidity.
Doses to be given 12 weeks apart not 3 weeks to help get it into more people faster
In light of that and hospital prrssures in the south I suspect we could be heading for a month long national tier 4 announcement later today and maybe even school closures
My opinion based on:
40+ historical and new scientific papers on restrictions have zero correlation with deaths and causing more harm than good
Refusal to discuss these papers by mainstream media/government + zero evidence to back up their claims that "lockdowns and masks save lives"
Sweden and many other countries showing zero excess deaths after minimal restrictions throughout 2020
Logic of UK never having true lockdown with trillions of social interactions still taking place throughout 2020
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
In the UK 388 out of 67,000,000 people under the age of 60 with no known health issues have died WITH (within 28 days of a test from any cause) Covid. I imagine that with such a large sample size, that 1 in 200,000 figure would be similar for previous flu viruses
388/67,000,000 = 99.9995% chance of survival if you are under 60 and have no relevant health conditions
What are the chances that the speedily created, long-term untested vaccine made by a profit-orientated company with zero legal liability will cause side-effects I wonder?
For me this vaccine is a value lay bet
Sweden zero excess deaths? Where are you getting this data?alexmr2 wrote: ↑Wed Dec 30, 2020 2:43 pmMy opinion based on:
40+ historical and new scientific papers on restrictions have zero correlation with deaths and causing more harm than good
Refusal to discuss these papers by mainstream media/government + zero evidence to back up their claims that "lockdowns and masks save lives"
Sweden and many other countries showing zero excess deaths after minimal restrictions throughout 2020
Logic of UK never having true lockdown with trillions of social interactions still taking place throughout 2020
papers.jpg
https://www.euromomo.eu/graphs-and-maps
Whilst your chart does show Covid to have different characteristics than previous flus (sharper spike), I believe the most solid representation of the bigger picture is to look at all cause mortality totals at the end of the year vs previous years. That removes the noise of variations such as higher shorter spike vs longer more rounded wave, as well as flu deaths being relabelled as Covid.
The upcurve of Covid deaths we see on the news means nothing without comparisons to previous years
https://www.statista.com/statistics/525 ... of-deaths/
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
-
firlandsfarm
- Posts: 3317
- Joined: Sat May 03, 2014 8:20 am
Agreed, how often is it a necessity to meet? Hardly ever. But the mental attitude of many is clearly displayed in their motivation to have a last party night before the lockdown that starts the next day ... they just don't seem to get it.Derek27 wrote: ↑Tue Dec 29, 2020 5:12 pmI only shout at the people who created the guidelines and don't follow them, or people (Rita Ora for example) who act irresponsibly - not because they broke the guidelines.
You could say my own guidelines are even stricter than the official guidelines! My sister invited me down to London for Christmas and at the time London wasn't in tier 4 but I decided it wasn't sensible and unnecessary. As I alluded to earlier, there's less wrong with 7 people who don't often see each other getting together than there is with 5 people who are neighbours and don't really have a necessity to get together.