Eurozone Sovereign Debt Crisis part 2 - Ireland

g0nz0

Superior Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Mar 3, 2018
Posts
2,157
Media
40
Likes
7,135
Points
333
Location
Dublin (Leinster, Ireland)
Verification
View
Sexuality
99% Straight, 1% Gay
Gender
Male
We have breaking a UK-EU story. Boris hails AstraZeneca as EU told it has 'blood on hands' after bitter attacks on vaccine

There’s a prestigious study just out which shows the AstraZeneca vaccine is safe. No surprises here, and of course it’s all good news. However an “official” of the UK government has spoken about the political aspect. This official has not been corrected so it seems this must be the UK government’s view. SIT DOWN!!! TAKE SOME DEEP BREATHS!!!


"The European leaders who trashed the AstraZeneca vaccine have blood on their hands. We now know what we all suspected is true, that they did it out of spite for Britain because of Brexit. When the history books are written, they’ll say these people were directly responsible for the deaths of thousands in developing countries who won’t take AZ because of their anti-vaxx scare stories.”

This language beggars belief. I’m struggling to think of a precedent.

Then we have the NI Protocol. The UK has put to the EU what are maximalist suggestions of what the UK would like. In effect the EU must throw these out. Now I know it could be a case of start high then compromise, but this really looks like no basis for discussion.

is it possible that we are seeing a ratcheting up of the anti-EU rhetoric with a view to the UK triggering Article 16?

The Express is definitely the place to find a "prestigious study" alright...

They love winding up Brexiteers to the last with outrage... I think it is actually their business model... :joy:
 

g0nz0

Superior Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Mar 3, 2018
Posts
2,157
Media
40
Likes
7,135
Points
333
Location
Dublin (Leinster, Ireland)
Verification
View
Sexuality
99% Straight, 1% Gay
Gender
Male
Actually some of the other anti-EU headlines linked from that story are hilarious. It's like a Brexiteer version of the Onion...

Daily Express

The Daily Express is a British right-wing tabloid newspaper that routinely utilizes sensational headlines such as this: NATO TERRIFIED: Trump may ‘seriously undermine’ alliance in Putin meeting – world on ALERT. Articles are typically written by journalists or correspondents and are reasonably sourced to credible information. However, like many tabloids, the Daily Express also publishes conspiracy and pseudoscience articles such as these: ‘Portal OPENS’ above New Jersey with some fearing it’s a sign of PLANET X and Could this strange corpse be the world’s first proof aliens have visited Earth?

The paper’s editorial stances have often been seen as aligned to the UK Independence Party (UKIP), Euroscepticism, and many other right-wing factions, including the Conservative Party’s right-wing.
It is almost as if Fox News became a newspaper :joy:. Does anywhere else on the planet have a gutter press as rich and bountiful as the English tabloids? :p
 

dandelion

Superior Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Sep 25, 2009
Posts
13,297
Media
21
Likes
2,705
Points
358
Location
UK
Verification
View
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
They don't commandeer host cells to replicate. The vaccine mRNA is translated by muscle cells but it used up in doing so.
Since these cells are replicating virus, will they not flag they are doing so to killer cells, which will kill them?

i recall reports the virus stimulates the creation of killer t cells which attack infected cells. just how can it do that if there arent any targets to identify? If what you are saying is that no defence against infected cells is created by the vaccine, then duh, of course it isnt going to stop repeat infections, because antibody alone is incapable of preventing covid infections.

Human cells dont die because their normal operation has been interrupted by a virus, but because our immune system recognises they are operating abnormally and kills them. It doesnt make any difference if they would have recovered when the vaccine wore off.

This is not necessarily the case.
So you agree, sometimes it is.

Using the whole-virion vaccines can ensure the presence of all potential immunogenic epitopes. However, this neglect the importance of ensuring the the safety and efficacy of the vaccines.
I do not neglect it, and have in the past mentioned the problems either if you fail to inactivate the virus, or presumably inactivate it so thoroughly it is unrecogniseable. presumably this is precisely why medics have tried to create a vaccine based only on parts of virus. What i am pointing out is these have a recognised problem too.

it is possible the whole principle of these vaccines concentrating on the spike will be abandoned because in effect it has gone to the opposite extreme of so deconstructing the virus that what is left is inadequate to generate enough protection.
 

Freddie53

Superior Member
Gold
Joined
Nov 19, 2004
Posts
5,842
Media
0
Likes
2,609
Points
333
Location
Memphis (Tennessee, United States)
Gender
Male
We have breaking a UK-EU story. Boris hails AstraZeneca as EU told it has 'blood on hands' after bitter attacks on vaccine

There’s a prestigious study just out which shows the AstraZeneca vaccine is safe. No surprises here, and of course it’s all good news. However an “official” of the UK government has spoken about the political aspect. This official has not been corrected so it seems this must be the UK government’s view. SIT DOWN!!! TAKE SOME DEEP BREATHS!!!


"The European leaders who trashed the AstraZeneca vaccine have blood on their hands. We now know what we all suspected is true, that they did it out of spite for Britain because of Brexit. When the history books are written, they’ll say these people were directly responsible for the deaths of thousands in developing countries who won’t take AZ because of their anti-vaxx scare stories.”

This language beggars belief. I’m struggling to think of a precedent.

Then we have the NI Protocol. The UK has put to the EU what are maximalist suggestions of what the UK would like. In effect the EU must throw these out. Now I know it could be a case of start high then compromise, but this really looks like no basis for discussion.

is it possible that we are seeing a ratcheting up of the anti-EU rhetoric with a view to the UK triggering Article 16?
What is this "Article 16" that you mention? I am not familiar with Article 16.
 

g0nz0

Superior Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Mar 3, 2018
Posts
2,157
Media
40
Likes
7,135
Points
333
Location
Dublin (Leinster, Ireland)
Verification
View
Sexuality
99% Straight, 1% Gay
Gender
Male
Since these cells are replicating virus, will they not flag they are doing so to killer cells, which will kill them?

i recall reports the virus stimulates the creation of killer t cells which attack infected cells. just how can it do that if there arent any targets to identify? If what you are saying is that no defence against infected cells is created by the vaccine, then duh, of course it isnt going to stop repeat infections, because antibody alone is incapable of preventing covid infections.

??

There is no virus involved.

When you are injected with mRNA or viral vector vaccine, the cells are translating a vaccine, not replicating a virus.

The T-cells recognise foreign antigens on the surfaces of the body's own cells, in this case the spike proteins that have bound with ACE2.

There is no replication though - cells are not commandeered, and do not start producing new virus proteins in their cytoplasms.

Human cells dont die because their normal operation has been interrupted by a virus, but because our immune system recognises they are operating abnormally and kills them. It doesnt make any difference if they would have recovered when the vaccine wore off.

You're ignoring cellular dysfunction. Cell death is a normal activity of the immune system.

So you agree, sometimes it is.

No, I said it is not necessarily the case. I would like to see (and asked for) the study you vaguely alluded to. You also didn't define "works better".

I have seen little evidence anywhere to suggest natural infection is as good as double vaccination. In fact, I have seen evidence suggesting double vaccination post natural infection leads to very robust response, as does apparently a third booster shot of vaccine - which is why Israel is now offering this +5 month booster to over 60 year olds.

I do not neglect it, and have in the past mentioned the problems either if you fail to inactivate the virus, or presumably inactivate it so thoroughly it is unrecogniseable. presumably this is precisely why medics have tried to create a vaccine based only on parts of virus. What i am pointing out is these have a recognised problem too.

What is the recognised problem? Where is it documented in the scientific literature? Please provide a valid study.

it is possible the whole principle of these vaccines concentrating on the spike will be abandoned because in effect it has gone to the opposite extreme of so deconstructing the virus that what is left is inadequate to generate enough protection.

This doesn't make any sense scientifically. We know how the spike binds to ACE2, and by disrupting that the virus cannot infect cells and cannot replicate. The vaccines specifically target portions of the spike that mediate this binding.
 

dandelion

Superior Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Sep 25, 2009
Posts
13,297
Media
21
Likes
2,705
Points
358
Location
UK
Verification
View
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male

Jason

Superior Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Aug 26, 2004
Posts
15,620
Media
51
Likes
4,802
Points
433
Location
London (Greater London, England)
Verification
View
Sexuality
90% Gay, 10% Straight
Gender
Male
I linked to Daily Express because they got the story out fast and not behind a pay wall. I really don’t think Daily Express is part of the story. Rather a government official who hasn’t been corrected is the source. This is code for Boris. Ministers leak through their ministry’s officials. This is Boris. Boris has said the EU has blood on its hands. The emotive phrase is the key.

I’m not clear which audience he is speaking to. Brussels will have picked up on this and will have boffins analysing what it means and how the EU should respond, and I doubt they will make any public statement. The statement also flies a kite in UK. First issue is whether papers will run with it tomorrow. I guessing they won’t as there’s just not enough meat. Rather I think Boris is just testing the idea. Will there be a backlash? If not then does it mean the public is with him?

We have a group of issues which are going to be linked:
* Article 16
* Migrants from France
* the EU’s vilification of AZ.
 

Jason

Superior Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Aug 26, 2004
Posts
15,620
Media
51
Likes
4,802
Points
433
Location
London (Greater London, England)
Verification
View
Sexuality
90% Gay, 10% Straight
Gender
Male
What is this "Article 16" that you mention? I am not familiar with Article 16.

Article 16 is the fuse that if lit could see NI, UK, Ireland and EU tear themselves to bits.

Part of the UK-EU Brexit deal is the Protocol for Northern Ireland. This seeks to address the issue of NI being an integral part of the UK and also having a completely open border with the Republic of Ireland. It does this by imposing some checks between GB and NI, the so-called Irish Sea Border. It is therefore an internal border within the UK. It’s a pretty whacky concept. I’m struggling to think of parallels. Maybe HK and mainland China is as near as we’re going to get.

The Protocol contains a mechanism for suspending the Protocol, Article 16.This can be done unilaterally on either side. The justification is if it causes “serious economic, societal or environmental difficulties that are liable to persist, or to diversion of trade.”

It is supposed to be an “in extremis” provision, something no one actually expects to be activated. However:
* At the height of the vaccine row EU activated it to prevent AZ vaccines for NI being transported via Republic of Ireland. The EU backed down quickly. However it caused a lot of upset including quite how it fitted with the terms of Article 16. It wasn’t a genuine diversion of trade as they were vaccines bought by UK and which were being transported EU to NI.
* The EU has been heavy handed in application.
* The UK government has announced that the threshold for invoking Article 16 has been reached but is trying to talk before doing this. I don’t think there is any reasonable doubt that the societal (and economic) difficulties pass the threshold.
* The UK is proposing solutions. The EU is rejecting any discussion whatsoever.

So where do we go from here? The trajectory seems to be that Article 16 will be invoked maybe September. It may well be that Stormont will collapse which will take any matter of subjective judgment out of the issue. I think we are therefore looking at the Protocol suspended.

And no one knows what happens then. Maybe it has to be a crisis before the EU will discuss anything.

in theory Article 16 provides a discussion period. However if discussion doesn’t happen, or there is no compromise, or discussion takes a few decades (preferred by UK) do we have a Brexit agreement? And this is where it really gets interesting. Does it suit Boris to scrap the agreement? We had a pretty hard Brexit. Do we now go for hard as steel Brexit? Politically this may suit Boris.

If we do have an ultra-hard Brexit and given that it is impossible to enforce a border between NI and Republic of Ireland either
a) the EU accepts this. It has porous borders elsewhere. OR
b) the EU stabs Ireland in the back and imposes a border between Ireland and rest of EU.
 

dandelion

Superior Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Sep 25, 2009
Posts
13,297
Media
21
Likes
2,705
Points
358
Location
UK
Verification
View
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
There is no replication though - cells are not commandeered, and do not start producing new virus proteins in their cytoplasms.
So now you are saying the vaccine doent work at all? It doesnt use body cells to create anything?

I have seen little evidence anywhere to suggest natural infection is as good as double vaccination. In fact, I have seen evidence suggesting double vaccination post natural infection leads to very robust response, as does apparently a third booster shot of vaccine - which is why Israel is now offering this +5 month booster to over 60 year olds.
as i said before, if you enter a fruit into an apple competition, if it isnt an apple it probably will not win. The tests performed to assess vaccine performance are whether the vaccine has created large amounts of antibodies against spike. Yes, results show it does this better than natural infection. but this really doesnt tell us if it is more protective. Its an assumption creating this form of protection is better than what the body would do naturally, which is create much lower level antibody response against multiple targets, and for that matter every person concentrating on slightly different targets, so that community wide there is a variety of response. There is no single point of attack for the virus with natural immunity, but the reliance on single point is a clear weakness in the vaccination program. We have already seen that.

Natural immunity is absolutely not designed to eradicate virus or prevent future infections. We must have future infections to continue to update our immunity. Thats the only way we can update our immunity, by being infected. and we have to do that before a pathogen gets strong enough to win in the eventual battle. So we allow immunity to wane deliberately and infection to begin, but while we have a reserve to bring to bear fast.
 

Jason

Superior Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Aug 26, 2004
Posts
15,620
Media
51
Likes
4,802
Points
433
Location
London (Greater London, England)
Verification
View
Sexuality
90% Gay, 10% Straight
Gender
Male
I’m a signed up member of the cult of the amateur. I actually believe that having a Classics degree is not only no disadvantage for a UK PM but might even be an advantage. And I’m approaching the @g0nz0 @dandelion debate from this perspective.

It seems to me that @g0nz0 probably knows his stuff. I don’t want to insult him, but he may even be an expert!

By contrast @dandelion is not an expert, and it seems to me he is getting trounced in debate on technical points.

Curiously I would still tend to support what I think is the border @dandelion unease around all things lockdown.
* what is the increase in cases of domestic violence attributable to lockdown?
* how severe is the language impairment of young children who have inter-acted with adults wearing masks?
* what is the impact of average weight gain during lockdown on life expectancy?
* what is the economic hit of lockdown and therefore the future hit to healthcare budgets?
* what has happened to the human happiness index during lockdown?

There are dozens of questions like this. My personal view is that lockdown has been wrong. We just haven’t saved enough lives to justify lockdown. I’m not quite saying let rip, but we have to move far faster out of lockdown and accept the increase in cases. I’m not advocating herd immunity but accepting that this may be the inevitable result. - or perhaps some sort of hybrid of infections and vaccinations. And we have to look seriously at the example of Sweden.
 

g0nz0

Superior Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Mar 3, 2018
Posts
2,157
Media
40
Likes
7,135
Points
333
Location
Dublin (Leinster, Ireland)
Verification
View
Sexuality
99% Straight, 1% Gay
Gender
Male
I linked to Daily Express because they got the story out fast and not behind a pay wall. I really don’t think Daily Express is part of the story. Rather a government official who hasn’t been corrected is the source. This is code for Boris. Ministers leak through their ministry’s officials. This is Boris. Boris has said the EU has blood on its hands. The emotive phrase is the key.

Boris lies just as much as the Express ...

Just one more thing to add to his list of porkies, along with the Great British sausage... Good thing someone is keeping track... The Cost of Boris Johnson
 
  • Like
Reactions: Drifterwood

g0nz0

Superior Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Mar 3, 2018
Posts
2,157
Media
40
Likes
7,135
Points
333
Location
Dublin (Leinster, Ireland)
Verification
View
Sexuality
99% Straight, 1% Gay
Gender
Male
So now you are saying the vaccine doent work at all? It doesnt use body cells to create anything?

Again... *sigh* I didn't say that.

I said it doesn't replicate.

In the case of the mRNA platforms, the mRNA is *translated* into proteins in the cytoplasm.

Viral vector vaccines like AZ and J&J are similar. Viral vectors cannot cause infection with COVID-19 or with the virus used as the vaccine vector.

However, you cannot end up with a larger dose than you were injected with... it does not replicate!!!
 

Jason

Superior Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Aug 26, 2004
Posts
15,620
Media
51
Likes
4,802
Points
433
Location
London (Greater London, England)
Verification
View
Sexuality
90% Gay, 10% Straight
Gender
Male
Boris lies just as much as the Express ...

Just one more thing to add to his list of porkies, along with the Great British sausage... Good thing someone is keeping track... The Cost of Boris Johnson

The “Boris lies” issue is not relevant here. Rather we have what amounts to Boris flying a kite on this approach. He’s got the idea out there. The right wing press (and no doubt many on Conservative Associations) seem broadly supportive. There’s been no howl of anguish from the left. If Boris does in a few weeks go for this approach the background will be that the idea is not new.

It seems to me that the ground is being readied for a UK-EU row of monumental proportions. Now of course it could all be bluff. It may be that in some closed room somewhere the two sides are working on a solution to the NI Protocol and we will hear in time that the friends have found a wonderful solution. And at this stage we will hear that the nameless official had got it wrong. And of course there is an alternative.
 

dandelion

Superior Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Sep 25, 2009
Posts
13,297
Media
21
Likes
2,705
Points
358
Location
UK
Verification
View
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
I said it doesn't replicate.
Straw man. no one said it did.
However, you cannot end up with a larger dose than you were injected with... it does not replicate!!!
But you just said...
In the case of the mRNA platforms, the mRNA is *translated* into proteins in the cytoplasm.
thats the point, the vaccine uses the machinery of human cells to replicate viral proteins which are released in to the blood. It does take over human cells, and that must make them targets of our immune system. Thats deliberate, we want to create cell killers too. So in the process it will end up with some of our body cells killed.

Perhaps you can reply just how many protein copies are created by one RNA strand which arrives in situ in a cell? I would think it goes on creating viral protein until the cell gets killed?

I presume this is a limiting factor in the dose which is given, too much would certainly make people sick. I'm not saying there is any real harm happening, we replace vast numbers of cells every day. Just observing this IS what is happening and you would die from an overdose of vaccine (of course, thats not unusual with medicines).

Did I also see that vaccine is supposed to be injected into muscle and not the bloodstream? Presumably that causes the vaccine to infect nearby muscle cells, which are fairly expendable. if it enters the bloodstream it could end by killing cells anywhere or doing important tasks.
 

seventiesdemon

Superior Member
Gold
Platinum Gold
Joined
May 25, 2019
Posts
4,980
Media
7
Likes
5,650
Points
383
Location
Australia
Sexuality
69% Straight, 31% Gay
Straw man. no one said it did.
But you just said...
thats the point, the vaccine uses the machinery of human cells to replicate viral proteins which are released in to the blood. It does take over human cells, and that must make them targets of our immune system. Thats deliberate, we want to create cell killers too. So in the process it will end up with some of our body cells killed.

Perhaps you can reply just how many protein copies are created by one RNA strand which arrives in situ in a cell? I would think it goes on creating viral protein until the cell gets killed?

I presume this is a limiting factor in the dose which is given, too much would certainly make people sick. I'm not saying there is any real harm happening, we replace vast numbers of cells every day. Just observing this IS what is happening and you would die from an overdose of vaccine (of course, thats not unusual with medicines).

Did I also see that vaccine is supposed to be injected into muscle and not the bloodstream? Presumably that causes the vaccine to infect nearby muscle cells, which are fairly expendable. if it enters the bloodstream it could end by killing cells anywhere or doing important tasks.
How many died before vaccine. How many after? Here in Australia, the proof is in. What is your proof?

Those in ICU, and on ventilators, no vaccine. Those on vaccine, mild.

Without waffling on..................your proof.

You have an idiot in control there. AND, you still do not count yourself as one of the lucky ones who did not suffer severe symptoms.

But, no worries, you, or your partner probably passed it onto someone who died from it, killed someones parents or grandparents that you are not even related to. Not that you would know, or apparently care.

I'm sorry that you feel little for your own ancestry that it means nothing to you.

Next time, do us a favour and wear a vest saying loudly and proudly ...YOU DON"T CARE.

Then when you do become ill, you can be denied aid at the public's expense. Yet, from all the rallies I've seen...........none do this. Why, because they are chicken shit to do so.

You preach division, and not for the good.
 
Last edited:

Jason

Superior Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Aug 26, 2004
Posts
15,620
Media
51
Likes
4,802
Points
433
Location
London (Greater London, England)
Verification
View
Sexuality
90% Gay, 10% Straight
Gender
Male
How many died before vaccine. How many after? Here in Australia, the proof is in. What is your proof?

Those in ICU, and on ventilators, no vaccine. Those on vaccine, mild.

Without waffling on..................your proof.

You have an idiot in control there. AND, you still do not count yourself as one of the lucky ones who did not suffer severe symptoms.

But, no worries, you, or your partner probably passed it onto someone who died from it, killed someones parents or grandparents that you are not even related to. Not that you would know, or apparently care.

I'm sorry that you feel little for your own ancestry that it means nothing to you.

Next time, do us a favour and wear a vest saying loudly and proudly ...YOU DON"T CARE.

Then when you do become ill, you can be denied aid.

Dude, chill.

@dandelion drives me round the twist. But for goodness sake, he’s a decent guy trying to do his best for himself, his family and community. He doesn’t deserve your message.
 

dandelion

Superior Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Sep 25, 2009
Posts
13,297
Media
21
Likes
2,705
Points
358
Location
UK
Verification
View
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
How many died before vaccine. How many after?
Dont know. no one has ever taken a human population, divided it in half to each group and counted. no one has repeated this experiment after 1 wave of covid, 2 waves of covid, etc, to see how much each wave reduces deaths by natural immunity/depletion.

At the moment deathes seem to be lower compared to previous outbreaks by a factor something like 1/10. We dont know how much of that is due to vaccine, how much to post infection immunity, or simply because many high risk are already dead.

You seem to be missing the point as things stand. Death rate falls something like x1/2 for every 4-5 years younger people are. That means the huge majority of deaths is amongst pensioners, and its generally considered pretty low risk below maybe 50. Especially if you separate out people with medical conditions predisposing them to covid. All that has been done in the Uk and all these people vaccinated.

if you look at the halving rate, assume death rate at top age group is 1, next 5 years 1/2, next 1/4, next 1/8... you get a mathematical series where most deaths are in the oldest age group. Thats true whatever starting point you take. it means vaccinating the oldest is far far more important than vaccinating the youngest in reducing deaths.

The public issue at the moment is only about vaccinating low risk people unlikely to come to harm from covid, most of whom remaining unvaccinated are now at more risk of dying from accidents than covid.

No case has been made that herd immunity is possible which might help protect older people, because all the experts are saying this is rather unlikely however many you vaccinate. Because vaccine does not work well enough at stopping reinfections.

Meanwhile, most covid cases have always been amongst the young, amongst whom few die. They have always been the reservoir of infection pushing cases into the older population. Get rid of that reservoir and deaths immediately fall because the old cease being infected. Many people survive epidemics not because they are immune or vaccinated, but because the disease never reaches them. So the strategy to minimise deaths has always been to get the epidemic over fast amongst the young and it will disappear amongst the old too. We did not do this 14 months ago, but chose instead to deliberately keep it going. That was the critical decision which went wrong.

Government is unwilling to admit we could have ended this long since with a much lower deaths total by letting the youngest segment of the population be infected fast. That wouldnt make the old safe, they would still have needed a vaccine when it arrived, but it would have made them safer until it did.

There seems quite a bit of evidence Hastings in the Uk had covid winter 19/20. Yet deaths must have remained within normal winter levels, because they did not create an alarm. An unrestricted outbreak seems to have been safer than the later ones with restrictions and lockdowns.
 

seventiesdemon

Superior Member
Gold
Platinum Gold
Joined
May 25, 2019
Posts
4,980
Media
7
Likes
5,650
Points
383
Location
Australia
Sexuality
69% Straight, 31% Gay
Dude, chill.

@dandelion drives me round the twist. But for goodness sake, he’s a decent guy trying to do his best for himself, his family and community. He doesn’t deserve your message.


I haven't visited here in a while. You really need to look back on what he said in the past. It was total disregard for human life.

You started this forum thousands of posts ago, all of a sudden you have become a moderator of your own posts?

Jason, I will not ever tolerate a cheapening of human life, nor animal life, nor vegetable.

What are you interested in here Jason? Debate of comment, truth, decisions of government? Or just the 3, 4 or less that wish to kick your thread along to keep it going?

Jason, I call it from over this side for how it is. I'm living the experience of Covid here like the rest of the world. I look at our actions here as compared to yours there.

You guys, your government has failed miserably.

I once supported Dandy's views, opinions, when it came to his beliefs. But when his views to cheapening lives because of age, wisdom and the experience that is learned and passed down from this.

I realised Dandy has missed out on an important function, link in life in his ancestry. He would not have been so disregarding of elderly if he have had a close relationship. It runs deeper than you think in peoples thoughts and actions Jason.

He may be a decent guy, but if he is unwilling to listen to history, facts and truth. Take the time to learn native language, ancient history....but he does not.

You can entertain him all you wish for the popularity of your thread for the remaining few who reply to it.


God Save Your Queen.
 

seventiesdemon

Superior Member
Gold
Platinum Gold
Joined
May 25, 2019
Posts
4,980
Media
7
Likes
5,650
Points
383
Location
Australia
Sexuality
69% Straight, 31% Gay
Dont know. no one has ever taken a human population, divided it in half to each group and counted. no one has repeated this experiment after 1 wave of covid, 2 waves of covid, etc, to see how much each wave reduces deaths by natural immunity/depletion.

At the moment deathes seem to be lower compared to previous outbreaks by a factor something like 1/10. We dont know how much of that is due to vaccine, how much to post infection immunity, or simply because many high risk are already dead.

You seem to be missing the point as things stand. Death rate falls something like x1/2 for every 4-5 years younger people are. That means the huge majority of deaths is amongst pensioners, and its generally considered pretty low risk below maybe 50. Especially if you separate out people with medical conditions predisposing them to covid. All that has been done in the Uk and all these people vaccinated.

if you look at the halving rate, assume death rate at top age group is 1, next 5 years 1/2, next 1/4, next 1/8... you get a mathematical series where most deaths are in the oldest age group. Thats true whatever starting point you take. it means vaccinating the oldest is far far more important than vaccinating the youngest in reducing deaths.

The public issue at the moment is only about vaccinating low risk people unlikely to come to harm from covid, most of whom remaining unvaccinated are now at more risk of dying from accidents than covid.

No case has been made that herd immunity is possible which might help protect older people, because all the experts are saying this is rather unlikely however many you vaccinate. Because vaccine does not work well enough at stopping reinfections.

Meanwhile, most covid cases have always been amongst the young, amongst whom few die. They have always been the reservoir of infection pushing cases into the older population. Get rid of that reservoir and deaths immediately fall because the old cease being infected. Many people survive epidemics not because they are immune or vaccinated, but because the disease never reaches them. So the strategy to minimise deaths has always been to get the epidemic over fast amongst the young and it will disappear amongst the old too. We did not do this 14 months ago, but chose instead to deliberately keep it going. That was the critical decision which went wrong.

Government is unwilling to admit we could have ended this long since with a much lower deaths total by letting the youngest segment of the population be infected fast. That wouldnt make the old safe, they would still have needed a vaccine when it arrived, but it would have made them safer until it did.

There seems quite a bit of evidence Hastings in the Uk had covid winter 19/20. Yet deaths must have remained within normal winter levels, because they did not create an alarm. An unrestricted outbreak seems to have been safer than the later ones with restrictions and lockdowns.
Australia here....UK there. We win. You are an Island, so are we. You still lose.

Sorry you have no elderly you love to lose, or to experience their loss when they are no longer their to pass on their life experiences Dandy. All the best buddy.
 
Last edited:

dandelion

Superior Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Sep 25, 2009
Posts
13,297
Media
21
Likes
2,705
Points
358
Location
UK
Verification
View
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
But, no worries, you, or your partner probably passed it onto someone who died from it, killed someones parents or grandparents that you are not even related to. Not that you would know, or apparently care.
you miss lots of difficulties.

How many people have been saved from covid by all the interventions? All we have is a total of people who all these measures still failed to save. Its a calculus of failure, not success. Tell me how many were saved, not how many died anyway.

What we can say is the the UK and US and similar european countries have numbers x10 worse than other countries have managed, with placesas diverse as india and Japan doing much better. Sweden with a policy of less intervention did better than the UK.

Governments habitually allow people to die who could be kept alive a bit longer but at more expense. This should be obvious to you, that its a choice who we allow to die and how much we are willing to pay per life year saved. Covid has been incredibly expensive in life years saved, way beyond what government would normally agree to spend.

How do you reconcile the much greater money being spent now per life year saved from covid, compared to the normal refusal to spend the same in every other year? Who is the hypocrite here?

Most people dying from covid have rather low life expectancy. low for their age group, that is, but most are of course old anyway. saving a life is much more a short postponement than a victory. We saw this in action in the Uk spring 2020 when the NHS chose not to treat older people, but for example boris Johnson in his 50s but very ill was a good candidate for treatment because if you kept him going now he has a good life expectancy still.

Measured by excess deaths, fatalites attributed to covid have fallen steadily through the epidemic, so that last i looked from May, we were in a negative excess deaths situation. So fewer people than normal were dying during this allegedly fatal epidemic. Since Novemeber some 40% of deaths attributed to covid are below the average deaths rate. There has been much talk about how many people have died as a result of not getting treatment for other diseases during the crisis. This has to be chalked up to mis management, and would reduce the real excess of deaths due to covid illness even further.

So make a case how what has been done has really saved lives, how many lives and at what cost for each.