This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.
Coronavirus and the impact of Lockdown policy
Register | Edit Profile | Subscriptions | Forum Rules | Log In
 the silurian  The garden of England.(not really) 06 Aug 23 8.57pm |
  |
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle
You must be a super quick reader! yep, so what?
|
|
 Alert a moderator to this post |
  |
Teddy Eagle  06 Aug 23 8.59pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle
That they have been doesn’t mean they will again. A referendum in the UK has no force in law. Law making is vested solely in our Parliament, and the ascent of the Monarch. Doesn't mean they won't be either. If those in office decide to offer and abide by a referendum then that's it. We have no say in what they say or do, remember?
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
 SW19 CPFC Addiscombe West 06 Aug 23 9.12pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by eaglesdare
Ultimately if you are sick vaxxed or not you should not be going into the office. Sure, but human nature, morons etc. So, again, it's selfish either way.
Did you know? 98.0000001% of people are morons. |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| SW19 CPFC Addiscombe West 06 Aug 23 9.15pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle
There are many though who don't just regret you and your kind taking this decision. They regard it as totally irresponsible and selfish and are appalled at the continuous circulation of misinformation on the internet. Those who point to "friends" with unfortunate sudden illnesses and then make the leap of assuming they are vaccine-related are just adding fuel to the fire. People get sick. A friend of mine was rushed to hospital with suspected meningitis yesterday. Was that because they had a booster recently? I have never encountered anyone as less informed than you who claims to be making informed decisions. You make decisions based on deeply held prejudices. Fair point re. sudden illness etc A great chance to wheel out the old stats classic. Correlation does not imply causation
Did you know? 98.0000001% of people are morons. |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| SW19 CPFC Addiscombe West 06 Aug 23 9.17pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Mattconrov
Personally I can see the bar was not set very high for these "vaccines with regards to safety. Maybe that was the government's fault. I understand your points that Pfzier were not asked to make a "vaccine " specifically to stop transmission. Their president stated that the "vaccine is a critical tool on stopping transmission.That was on June 8th. If that were true then the guy at the hearing never backed it up with any proof that it stopped transmission. As you can see I've understood your points. Do you see mine?
The real crime is why anyone under 30 took it. Check the figures out for people dying from covid under 30. Don't bother, there isn't any. So kids were made to take it based on the lie they would protect their gran. These very same kids in some cases are now disabled or dead. Edited by Mattconrov (06 Aug 2023 12.55am) The ‘stops transmission’ claim, essentially implying that it stops ALL transmission made at the time is as noted, false. Plenty of papers out there about that since 2021. Almost like the scientific community doing its job there. However the same papers also show that the impact of the virus is much less as a result of vaccine. Other vaccinated individuals simply wouldn’t have ‘caught’ it in the first place due to responding well to the vaccine, or being at risk of infection at peak vaccine effectiveness ( coming up, so to speak, after two weeks, then declining 20%-30% by 6 months and continuing thereafter). So it’s was absolutely wrong to declare that ‘covid jab stops transmission of the virus’. Also false to claim that it meant ‘you can’t get it’. Even more so as they appear as 100% statements. However, the nuance there is that in some cases people didn’t pass it on because they dealt with it faster, or were at peak immunity/had a strong vaccine response and therefore didn’t catch it at all. But, certainly not everyone. So, it had a significant positive effect, which is shown in the first few waves of data post the first mass adoption of the vaccines. It’s a good thing that the scientific community didn’t just decide that whatever they or some other corporate hack said in 2020 was final, and didn’t continue to revisit, challenge and revise the data, theory and guidance, isn’t it. Edited by SW19 CPFC (06 Aug 2023 9.17pm)
Did you know? 98.0000001% of people are morons. |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 06 Aug 23 9.30pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by SW19 CPFC
The ‘stops transmission’ claim, essentially implying that it stops ALL transmission made at the time is as noted, false. Plenty of papers out there about that since 2021. Almost like the scientific community doing its job there. However the same papers also show that the impact of the virus is much less as a result of vaccine. Other vaccinated individuals simply wouldn’t have ‘caught’ it in the first place due to responding well to the vaccine, or being at risk of infection at peak vaccine effectiveness ( coming up, so to speak, after two weeks, then declining 20%-30% by 6 months and continuing thereafter). So it’s was absolutely wrong to declare that ‘covid jab stops transmission of the virus’. Also false to claim that it meant ‘you can’t get it’. Even more so as they appear as 100% statements. However, the nuance there is that in some cases people didn’t pass it on because they dealt with it faster, or were at peak immunity/had a strong vaccine response and therefore didn’t catch it at all. But, certainly not everyone. So, it had a significant positive effect, which is shown in the first few waves of data post the first mass adoption of the vaccines. It’s a good thing that the scientific community didn’t just decide that whatever they or some other corporate hack said in 2020 was final, and didn’t continue to revisit, challenge and revise the data, theory and guidance, isn’t it. Edited by SW19 CPFC (06 Aug 2023 9.17pm) I think it’s simpler than that. I think it was believed to be true at the time it was said, because it was logical. That politicians in their eagerness to encourage uptake asap over egged the pudding also seems true but it was not done with poor motives behind it. This was done to get a grip on the pandemic so the restrictions could be eased as quickly as could be. Then the variants were found to act differently requiring a new statement. One that has been jumped on by the anti-vax brigade and joyfully used to spread misinformation. Edited by Wisbech Eagle (06 Aug 2023 11.05pm)
For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally. |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Teddy Eagle 06 Aug 23 9.43pm |
|
|---|---|
|
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 06 Aug 23 11.04pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Teddy Eagle
The reluctant groups haven’t changed though. Hopefully it’s now high enough for some reassurance that there is now enough protection against severe disease in the community to enable us, and the NHS, to cope this winter with any kind of Covid or Flu outbreak.
For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally. |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Teddy Eagle 06 Aug 23 11.16pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle
The reluctant groups haven’t changed though. Hopefully it’s now high enough for some reassurance that there is now enough protection against severe disease in the community to enable us, and the NHS, to cope this winter with any kind of Covid or Flu outbreak. Less than 50% of people in the under 40 groups is high enough?
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| SW19 CPFC Addiscombe West 06 Aug 23 11.25pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Teddy Eagle
Does it not make sense to drop off now it’s been in circulation for some time - leaving only the most at risk inc oldies as the main target group?
Did you know? 98.0000001% of people are morons. |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Teddy Eagle 06 Aug 23 11.47pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by SW19 CPFC
Does it not make sense to drop off now it’s been in circulation for some time - leaving only the most at risk inc oldies as the main target group? It does but aren't the totals cumulative?
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| SW19 CPFC Addiscombe West 07 Aug 23 12.05am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Teddy Eagle
It does but aren't the totals cumulative? I was just responding to what I interpreted as surprise that vaccination rates were dropping off To me it makes sense Can’t find uk data for under AND over 60s on the flu jab, but some oldish US data has it as ~30% 18-64 and ~75% 65+ Providing no rage variants appear I’d imagine the trend continues downward for those under 60 and low risk Although much like my view on the flu jab, it would be better if those percentages in the lower age range remained higher.
Did you know? 98.0000001% of people are morons. |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
Login / RegisterNew users
Registration is now on our new message board
Existing users
To login with your existing username you will need to convert your account over to the new message board.
Sponsors
All images and text on this site are copyright © 1999-2024 The Holmesdale Online, unless otherwise stated.
Web Design by Guntrisoft Ltd.