This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum.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
 Wisbech Eagle  Truro Cornwall 07 Mar 23 10.25pm |
  |
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Forest Hillbilly
I think it's the impinging on people's individual choices. What I found worrying, was the number of maskless groups of people wandering around supermarkets, encroaching on people's personal space restrictions and clearly putting those who felt more vulnerable (and had to do essential shopping) at increased risk of infection. Just one example. It just isn't, unless they live alone on an island. Our lives all touch other lives. Not being vaccinated, even if as time passed that had less impact on the spreading potential, it does on the higher likelihood of severe illness and the need for more NHS resources. Using NHS resources, that could have been kept free, impinges on others. It's selfish and irresponsible to think only about yourself.
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 |
  |
| Stirlingsays 07 Mar 23 10.27pm |
 |
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle
Novel viruses have indeed been turning up since time began. They have also been decimating populations since time began. I think we will recover from this one, despite the negative impacts, faster than we did in the past. "The Great Barrington Declaration", as you well know, has been comprehensively debunked and its authors shown to not be all they claimed to be. No-one who looks at this objectively takes this seriously. I suppose it's little surprise that you do. You are another who values personal liberty above public duty. Personal liberty is as worthless a commodity as is personal pride. It is meaningless unless it exists within a functioning society. It's just ideology for its own sake, and it must, when necessary take second place to the need for us all, without exceptions, to pull together. Those who insist on having personal liberty at all costs need to isolate themselves from the rest of us. Hermits can achieve it, but not those who live amongst us. The Great Barrington declaration is fronted by some of the highest qualified people in medicine. Dr. Martin Kulldorff, professor of medicine at Harvard University, a biostatistician, and epidemiologist with expertise in detecting and monitoring infectious disease outbreaks and vaccine safety evaluations. Dr. Sunetra Gupta, professor at Oxford University, an epidemiologist with expertise in immunology, vaccine development, and mathematical modeling of infectious diseases. Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, professor at Stanford University Medical School, a physician, epidemiologist, health economist, and public health policy expert focusing on infectious diseases and vulnerable populations. The suggestion that it's been 'debunked' is thoroughly dishonest. Their is a huge amount of funding by drug companies that are invested in combating anything that might result in lower profit margins. These companies are funding both media and even more worryingly medical institutions and projects all over the western world. When looking at criticism it's important that the funding of those making those criticisms is itself looked at. It's precisely because the top names in the declaration are unsackable that they don't fear the power these companies enact. Edited by Stirlingsays (07 Mar 2023 10.29pm)
'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen) |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Tim Gypsy Hill '64 Stoke sub normal 07 Mar 23 10.27pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by footythoughts
N95 masks have repeatedly shown to be very effective in hospital settings. In multiple studies very few staff wearing them got covid despite being surrounded by it during that period. So it of course has it's uses and is more effective than some wish to paint. The other side of the coin is that during a pandemic, all you can hope with masks is to slow infection. As has been said where something is everywhere, realistically it's unavoidable in the long run. That about sums it up. As I stated FFP3 (N95) are personal protection equipment (PPE). Of course, if you wear one, you will have some protection, but you will not be protecting anyone else. And once they get damp from the moisture you exhale, they are then no longer protecting you, due to physics.
Systematically dragged down by the lawmakers |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Stirlingsays 07 Mar 23 10.31pm |
|
|---|---|
|
People only need to look at the statistics. Masks resulted in no slowing of infection rates. In fact the rapid increases probably came from the fact that people suddenly had a false confidence from them. It was purely about social compliance. Anyone who looks at the lockdown files sees that this was by far the overiding concern of the government. They weren't interested in providing the population with the truth but only in 'nudging' them into behaviours that they wanted. That's lying and it's when lying in public life is accepted and not punished or pushed back on that trust reduces and thus the decline accelerates. Edited by Stirlingsays (07 Mar 2023 10.34pm)
'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen) |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Tim Gypsy Hill '64 Stoke sub normal 07 Mar 23 10.33pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Forest Hillbilly
I think it's the impinging on people's individual choices. What I found worrying, was the number of maskless groups of people wandering around supermarkets, encroaching on people's personal space restrictions and clearly putting those who felt more vulnerable (and had to do essential shopping) at increased risk of infection. Just one example. This is the real issue. How so many people were driven to fear everyone else in such a short space of time was a phenomenon to behold. The problem now is that some (many?) are still paralysed by that fear.
Systematically dragged down by the lawmakers |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 07 Mar 23 10.34pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Stirlingsays
Again, this idea that by wearing a mask you were at decreased risk of infection is just unrealistic. By wearing the mask you were the person changing the normal dynamic. You can choose to believe whatever you wish to believe. However, the only people 'impinging' anyone's rights were the advocates for restricting the civil liberties of those not wearing masks or taking jabs. I was forced to wear a mask to shop at Tesco's, are you concerned about my 'rights'? Something never done before in this country and from the experience it seems the government are not keen to repeat it. Edited by Stirlingsays (07 Mar 2023 4.00pm) I wasn't and nor should you, or anyone else be! What damage is done to you by wearing a mask? Except, of course, to some valueless and invisible possession called pride. It didn't hurt you. It didn't even cost you. They were given at the door. Rights are only right if they mean something. Pride doesn't feature. No civil liberties were impacted in any way at all. This attitude lies at the base of a lot of your thinking, which is something I would not be proud of.
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 |
|
| Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 07 Mar 23 10.40pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by eaglesdare
Absolutely ridiculous statements as per usual! Completely out of touch with reality and the real science. Science says that infection last longer and offers much better protection than the vax. You barely get 3-4 weeks protection from the vax if any at all! Why would I chance an unsafe vaccine with numerous dangerous side effects over a flu that has a 99.9 percent recovery rate if I catch it? All I see in your replies is a sheep going bah bah bah and only does as they are told. If the government told you it was safe to jump of a cliff I am sure you would have no hesitation in jumping! I mean it's completely safe! The fall won't kill you! Science is built on questions and Challenging ideas! Any question or challenge to this science people are now cancelled! All anyone needs to do is read the highlighted passage to know that, once again, you are spouting complete bs. I don't need to rip it apart. There's no need. It's already in tatters.
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 |
|
| eaglesdare 07 Mar 23 10.42pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle
All anyone needs to do is read the highlighted passage to know that, once again, you are spouting complete bs. I don't need to rip it apart. There's no need. It's already in tatters. Yet again you can't come up with an answer to the science
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
Teddy Eagle  07 Mar 23 10.49pm |
|
|---|---|
|
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 07 Mar 23 10.53pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Stirlingsays
The Great Barrington declaration is fronted by some of the highest qualified people in medicine. Dr. Martin Kulldorff, professor of medicine at Harvard University, a biostatistician, and epidemiologist with expertise in detecting and monitoring infectious disease outbreaks and vaccine safety evaluations. Dr. Sunetra Gupta, professor at Oxford University, an epidemiologist with expertise in immunology, vaccine development, and mathematical modeling of infectious diseases. Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, professor at Stanford University Medical School, a physician, epidemiologist, health economist, and public health policy expert focusing on infectious diseases and vulnerable populations. The suggestion that it's been 'debunked' is thoroughly dishonest. Their is a huge amount of funding by drug companies that are invested in combating anything that might result in lower profit margins. These companies are funding both media and even more worryingly medical institutions and projects all over the western world. When looking at criticism it's important that the funding of those making those criticisms is itself looked at. It's precisely because the top names in the declaration are unsackable that they don't fear the power these companies enact. Edited by Stirlingsays (07 Mar 2023 10.29pm) All of whom were shown to have been funded by sources with a predetermined agenda and having been given their conclusions before they started their "work". Read the links. Not only have the recommendations been shown to be seriously flawed, the authors themselves have been taken to task for writing them. Others promoted the concept of "herd immunity" and they too, were shown to be wrong. The GBD is old hat. Part of an attempt to throw doubt on the direction the world was taking, which failed because it was wrong. So yes, it's debunked and completely discredited. That you think that's "dishonest" is just par for your course, which only ever turns to the right and now so full of deep holes has become unplayable.
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 |
|
| Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 07 Mar 23 10.57pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by eaglesdare
Yet again you can't come up with an answer to the science Unless there's some to answer all I can do is respond to bs, which you trot out repeatedly without any evidence at all. You don't even read your own references.
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 |
|
| eaglesdare 07 Mar 23 10.59pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle
Unless there's some to answer all I can do is respond to bs, which you trot out repeatedly without any evidence at all. You don't even read your own references. Unfortunately for you you are the one with all the BS. All I have stated are facts
|
|
| 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.