Coronavirus Pandemic

[Niall_Quinn]

The NHS was the biggest trick ever pulled on the British people. It taught most to equate exorbitant expense to free of charge. If people were made pay for tests like they pay for most other things nobody would want them. But because the cost is extorted by other means it passes unnoticed. I guess they must think Boris is digging in his own pocket. I don't know what the transfer score is now, trillions globally and rising. Given up tracking and tracing that and have started to wonder if they won't stop until they have it all.

[Niall_Quinn]

My niece was telling me that all you have to do is say your test was negative.
So you can take a test, it can light up like a Christmas Tree and all you have to do is say it was negative and off you go. No one checks.
This is the oppressive, authoritarian regime we’re living under, is it?
I think they’re doing it wrong.

You just demonstrated why they are doing it far more effectively than the romper stomper regimes that tried it in the past.

[Letters]

18 months ago you were saying they were priming us for the army on the streets and curfews.
Now you're saying they're too scared to impose any restrictions because people won't go along with it?


Isn't it more plausible that they're basing their decisions on the data rather than some nefarious masterplan?

[Niall_Quinn]

18 months ago you were saying they were priming us for the army on the streets and curfews.
Now you're saying they're too scared to impose any restrictions because people won't go along with it?


Isn't it more plausible that they're basing their decisions on the data rather than some nefarious masterplan?

If you find the "data" in any way plausible, then I suppose you could console yourself with that excuse. You already know how extensively all data has been manipulated since the start of this program, it has been openly admitted by those doing the manipulation. So there's no actual data to go on apart from the snippets of analysis that sometimes break cover an shed some light on the reality rather than the script - such as the findings from Italy, the US and (to a limited extent) the UK that at least tried to estimate to scope and effects of the manipulation, particularly in terms of the "with" vs "from" fraud. However, some people will continue to look at "data" being rolled out by those doing the manipulation and conclude it's just a happy coincidence the "data" justifies the accelerating (2 year long) "emergency" measures. Others twigged at the start, or once the real nature of the virus became obvious, and more are now gradually starting to understand what "data" and "science" actually means in relation to this program.

I've posted up all the bills that breezed through, I've spoken about the relationship between the state and the global corporations, but this self-evident reality doesn't seem to engage those who equate being "allowed" to go to a nightclub is a measure of liberty. Put another way, it has become impossible to discuss liberty with a rather large segment of the population that never understood what it is in the first place.

You live in a place where something is only happening once it is complete. It magically springs into existence, if you like. I live in a place where each brick laid upon the next builds reality. Either way we reach the same place, provided there is enough complacency to fuel the journey.

[The Wengerbabies]

Danish sudy: https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1....27.21268278v1

Vaccinated spread omicron more than unvaxxed, boosted spread more still...

Comparing households infected with the Omicron to Delta VOC, we found an 1.17 (95%-CI: 0.99-1.38) times higher SAR for unvaccinated, 2.61 times (95%-CI: 2.34-2.90) higher for fully vaccinated and 3.66 (95%-CI: 2.65-5.05) times higher for booster-vaccinated individuals

Not this science.

[Letters]

I'm very confused by that paper. The part you "accidentally" left out seems to contradict the part you quoted:

We found an increased transmission for unvaccinated individuals, and a reduced transmission for booster-vaccinated individuals, compared to fully vaccinated individuals. Comparing households infected with the Omicron to Delta VOC, we found an 1.17 (95%-CI: 0.99-1.38) times higher SAR for unvaccinated, 2.61 times (95%-CI: 2.34-2.90) higher for fully vaccinated and 3.66 (95%-CI: 2.65-5.05) times higher for booster-vaccinated individuals, demonstrating strong evidence of immune evasiveness of the Omicron VOC.

My emphasis. I'm obviously not understanding something properly.

[WMUG]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-59902220

The army are here!

[Niall_Quinn]

I'm very confused by that paper. The part you "accidentally" left out seems to contradict the part you quoted:



My emphasis. I'm obviously not understanding something properly.

"Fully vaccinated" still refers to money shot 1 & 2. It doesn't include bonus earnings shot 3 yet. I think that comes in April.

[Niall_Quinn]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-59902220

The army are here!

For the time being. Presumably most of them will soon be isolating too. Then we could maybe send American contract workers in to help?

[Letters]

If you find the "data" in any way plausible

I do. And just to be clear what I mean, I'm talking about this data:
https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/
Yes. I find that plausible.
Because at the times when they were saying cases were high I knew plenty of people who were testing positive, when cases were low I didn't.
Loads of people were testing positive over Christmas, me included - far more than those numbers show actually because they're only counting people who reported their results.
And I've related the conversation I had with an ICU doctor about how things went at his hospital last winter so yes, I can believe numbers were very high then in terms of hospitalisations and deaths.
We get updates from the boy's school which are a good proxy for cases.
I can't recall a time when cases were being reported as high and I didn't know anyone who tested positive.
So overall yes, I find the reported data plausible.

I think there's a sensible debate to be had about deaths and how they've been reported. "of" Covid vs "with" Covid. The government actually reduced their numbers in response to some criticism of that. But when you look at all cause mortality vs the average it seems clear to me that there was "a situation" which demanded a response.

Do you have any evidence that the numbers reported are wrong or being deliberately inflated other than your default distrust of authority?

You already know how extensively all data has been manipulated since the start of this program, it has been openly admitted by those doing the manipulation.

Can you elaborate on this? What findings from Italy and the US?
Why would they manipulate the numbers and then admit it?!

some people will continue to look at "data" being rolled out by those doing the manipulation and conclude it's just a happy coincidence the "data" justifies the accelerating (2 year long) "emergency" measures.

Accelerating? Really? Haven't the measures consistently followed the data? At times when hospitalisations and deaths were high they put in measures, at other times they were lifted.
There has been no clear direction of travel towards authoritarianism. At times they have been implemented measures which would have been unthinkable in normal times, but these aren't normal times. And all those measures have been temporary - almost all have now been lifted.
Again, there are sensible debates to be had about whether they did things at the right time, but accelerating emergency measures? You know that the only measure in place right now is you have to wear masks in certain situations (which isn't being enforced - for schools it is only a recommendation, not a mandate), and they ask for a Covid Pass for certain large events. To get one you have to say you took a test and it was negative. That's basically it, you don't even need to do the test, you just need to say you did and you're fine. The entire system seems to be based on people being honest. Some authoritarians they are.

And if you don't believe the data then...I'm honestly confused about your position here. Are they faking low data at times so they can remove restrictions? Why would they do that?
If they wanted to impose more restrictions this winter there has been plenty of excuse for them to do so, cases were through the roof. But they haven't.
Because, actually, they don't really want to. They have no interest in controlling every aspect of your life.

I've posted up all the bills that breezed through, I've spoken about the relationship between the state and the global corporations, but this self-evident reality doesn't seem to engage those who equate being "allowed" to go to a nightclub is a measure of liberty. Put another way, it has become impossible to discuss liberty with a rather large segment of the population that never understood what it is in the first place.

We've had this discussion. Liberty, as you define it, doesn't exist. I'm not even sure it should exist in the context of a society. There has to be some structure to that or the whole thing breaks down.
And I do believe that the government should be able to impose restrictions in extreme situations which warrant it. Asking people nicely isn't going to work.
But it's extremely rare for them to do that. As these things go, we are basically free in this country to do as we please most of the time.
The last couple of years have been a notable exception but even then most of the restrictions which have been placed on us are now removed. And even when we were in full lockdown you observed people going about their business, it's hardly North Korea or even China.

I do think you have valid concerns about some of the bills you have mentioned, although did you see the protests over Christmas against masks or vaccines or something? Those people were free to do that, are they all in prison now? I seriously doubt it. You may have ideological issues with a government, but if you're going to have one then I'd suggest our lot are better than most in terms of our freedoms.

You live in a place where something is only happening once it is complete.

No. I just want to see some evidence that it is happening. I see none.
There have been some unprecedented measures to deal with an unprecedented (in modern times) situation. But those measures have changed as the situation has.
You thought that the 10pm pub curfew was to soften us up for actual curfews, the army on the street in Birmingham delivering tests was to soften us up for the army being on the streets and checkpoints.
None of that happened and it isn't going to.
The reason you were wrong about that is your underlying assumptions about the government and their intent is wrong. They are incompetent, corrupt and self-serving to varying degrees. But they're not actually interested in controlling the minutiae of our lives.