Politics Coronavirus

[Job]

Birth defects arent much of a problem for the people who will get it first and its vanishingly unlikely given vaccine history.
Though it HAS been rushed through and these ARE emergency measures that have been used to pass it as safe.
The single most important thing is to get the nhs working properly again and all the health charities.
I wouldnt give a fuk if it was a placebo, we need to believe it works and get back to normal.

Ive noticed the press are changing their story already, bbc and itv are running crying stories of people not getting mental health treatment or cancer treatment, no covid relatives.
The fickle lying, chancer, cunts they are.


Itv now us talking about the mass testing that brought down Liverpools rate and how it wont happen again.

Well guess what, its fucking bullshit because the entire region was under tier 3 and only the city was offered testing, we all dropped because of the lockdown not testing.
Theres 1.5m people in merseyside and it was only offered to the 490K in liverpool city.

 

[Gwadien]

The vaccine might be fucked, I guess that's another reason why it's wise to prioritise the elderly. Brutal, but true?

 

[Scouse]

look at thalidomide for example.

A few people have mentioned that to me. I was kind of expecting it.

It was 60-70 years ago, and we've made massive strides in safety an knowledge since then and in many ways because of it. (And thalidomide was a drug (a sedative) rather than something that provoked an immune resposne). I think the Oxford vaccine is based on vaccines that we are already widely using - we're not reinventing the wheel with that one, we're just tweaking an already safe thing.

Risk. We've shut down our economy, our families, our friends, people losing jobs, 200 a day dying.

The three front runners are likely to be perfectly safe. But even if they're not 100% perfect, how unsafe would they have to be before you go "nah, I'll chance covid".

 

[Job]

Something that no one is talking about is the highly unlikely figures from world infections, do you believe there are only 130k deaths in India?
Data for Africa is mostly non existent, but certainly it gets zero attention as usual from the british press, are they just dying quietly, if you look at the official world death toll of 1.4m then 90% of Africa hasnt had a single death.

 

[Scouse]

Something that no one is talking about is the highly unlikely figures from world infections, do you believe there are only 130k deaths in India?

It's been discussed a lot by all of the mainstream media outlets. India specifically.

In blighty, the focus is on us though. As it should be.

 

[Moriath]

A few people have mentioned that to me. I was kind of expecting it.

It was 60-70 years ago, and we've made massive strides in safety an knowledge since then and in many ways because of it. (And thalidomide was a drug (a sedative) rather than something that provoked an immune resposne). I think the Oxford vaccine is based on vaccines that we are already widely using - we're not reinventing the wheel with that one, we're just tweaking an already safe thing.

Risk. We've shut down our economy, our families, our friends, people losing jobs, 200 a day dying.

The three front runners are likely to be perfectly safe. But even if they're not 100% perfect, how unsafe would they have to be before you go "nah, I'll chance covid".

You didnt answer how they can have tested on pregnant women. Just went off on thalidomide which was just an example of what could go wrong. Not that it will or that a vaccine is anything like that drug.

just one question how can they be sure theres no effects on unborn kids with less than 9 months testing. Assuming they found any woman wanting to have a vaccine in the testing stage.

i was expecting some grand reasoning about how you can extrapolate from the tested people. Etc etc. I am assuming cause you didnt go there it kay be a riskto those as its an unknown. And yes i know about weighhing uprisks and lesser oftwo evils and such and what we are in right now.

 

[Job]

So the new minister puts his foot in it...or reveals first step towards our chinese overlords...by suggesting you might need vaccine proof, then starts talking about Q codes and new technologies that will make it easier to put the mark of satan on you digitally.

Pubs and venues may turn away people not Covid-vaccinated, says minister

Nadhim Zahawi, in charge of UK rollout, says technology could help track who has had jab

www.theguardian.com

 

[Raven]

And so they should, if thick people don't want to be vaccinated then fine, let them get on with it but keep them away from everyone else.

 

[Scouse]

And so they should, if thick people don't want to be vaccinated then fine, let them get on with it but keep them away from everyone else.

Disagree. Job is right to be worried about the chinese model - and our governments would find it mightily attractive.

Be careful what you wish for.

 

[Job]

Luckily Goves stepped in to squash it.
Though it will be interesting to see what employers and insurance companies say

Minister should be shown the door asap.

Gove denies Covid vaccines will be compulsory for pubs and entertainment venues

Asked if someone would ‘need to have a vaccine passport in order to go to the pub’, Cabinet Office minister insists ‘No’

www.independent.co.uk

 

[Gwadien]

Luckily Goves stepped in to squash it.
Though it wul be interesting to see what employers and insurance companies say

Minister should be shown the door asap.

Gove denies Covid vaccines will be compulsory for pubs and entertainment venues

Asked if someone would ‘need to have a vaccine passport in order to go to the pub’, Cabinet Office minister insists ‘No’

www.independent.co.uk

lol, like Gove is trustworthy.

He'll say whatever he wants to further his own political career, he doesn't understand the concept of working as a team.

I'm sure that if it was a plan, the Government will go ahead with it and he'll oppose it.

 

[Embattle]

Yet some Vaccinations are required before travel to certain countries.

 

[Job]

Nearly always sub saharan and to protect you from the locals.

But there you go, just say to people, if youre worried to go the pub...get vaccinated.
If not take your chances.

 

[Gwadien]

Nearly always sub saharan and to protect you from the locals.

But there you go, just say to people, if youre worried to go the pub...get vaccinated.
If not take your chances.

This is kind of the entire problem.

People will think about their own safety rather than the safety of others.

 

[Raven]

Disagree. Job is right to be worried about the chinese model - and our governments would find it mightily attractive.

Be careful what you wish for.

You already have an NHS record that shows all treatment and vaccines that you have received in your life.

 

[Gwadien]

You already have an NHS record that shows all treatment and vaccines that you have received in your life.

What?! 4th reich!

 

[Bodhi]

A few people have mentioned that to me. I was kind of expecting it.

It was 60-70 years ago, and we've made massive strides in safety an knowledge since then and in many ways because of it. (And thalidomide was a drug (a sedative) rather than something that provoked an immune resposne). I think the Oxford vaccine is based on vaccines that we are already widely using - we're not reinventing the wheel with that one, we're just tweaking an already safe thing.

Risk. We've shut down our economy, our families, our friends, people losing jobs, 200 a day dying.

The three front runners are likely to be perfectly safe. But even if they're not 100% perfect, how unsafe would they have to be before you go "nah, I'll chance covid".

Your last comment raises an interesting point - if someone has already had COVID and recovered, surely the lowest risk outcome for them would be to not take the vaccine - which is unlikely to be 100% safe (Oxford/AZ have had a couple of adverse reactions already? So if someone's already been through COVID and has the relevant antibodies/T-cells, it's surely the lowest risk option to just leave them be?

I also noticed you picked up on Thalidomide, but seem remarkably quiet about the issues with Pandremix? That was only 10 years ago, and the NHS are still paying out on that one. There were long term side effects which weren't caught in the testing regime of another rapidly developed vaccine - so if people have some reservations about this one it is perfectly understandable. Saying all vaccines are bunk is clearly loony tunes behaviour, but wanting to see more info one of the 3 we might be getting seems entirely sensible.

Unless of course we go down the road of "it's a vaccine so it must be safe" - in which case, I have a small vial with Sputnik written on the side for you

 

[Scouse]

You already have an NHS record that shows all treatment and vaccines that you have received in your life.

And that doesn't prevent me from doing anything.

My vaccination record is *private* health data - only accessible by medical staff.

This is an important principle - if people feel their private data is going to be used against them they'll stop seeking necessary medical help.

I think the implications are quite starkly obvious.

 

[Scouse]

What?! 4th reich!

You're rapidly turning into a parody of a once intelligent thinking being.

You already know the stuff I posted above (well, I assume you do) - so why not use your knowledge to inform your responses?

You're a clever guy but at the moment you seem to just knee-jerk a lot of responses rather than consider different angles like you used to

 

[Ormorof]

And that doesn't prevent me from doing anything.

My vaccination record is *private* health data - only accessible by medical staff.

This is an important principle - if people feel their private data is going to be used against them they'll stop seeking necessary medical help.

I think the implications are quite starkly obvious.

Doesn't the NHS already sell off medical data?

 

[Scouse]

Doesn't the NHS already sell off medical data?

Anonymised.

But yeah - I have concrrns over metadata being used to un-anonymise that data.

 

[Gwadien]

You're rapidly turning into a parody of a once intelligent thinking being.

You already know the stuff I posted above (well, I assume you do) - so why not use your knowledge to inform your responses?

You're a clever guy but at the moment you seem to just knee-jerk a lot of responses rather than consider different angles like you used to

Yeah I get it, anyone that disagrees with you is thick as shit.

I get it!

Plus, all I did was echo a post @Raven made, why aren't you calling him thick?

 

[Scouse]

Yeah I get it, anyone that disagrees with you is thick as shit.

Will address this offline.

But the point about private medical data and the fact that if we start using that to clamp down.

You're aware that idea violates basic medical principles? That in the first instance it'd be the poor and dumb that would be most adversely affected. And further implications and consequences on, and on...


It's like Covid's come along and some sections of society have gone down on their knees to government and gone "Save us!!!!! Pleeeeease!!!! You can do whatever you like from now on. Take whatever freedom you find inconvenient! But saaaaave us!!!!"

 

[Bodhi]

And that doesn't prevent me from doing anything.

My vaccination record is *private* health data - only accessible by medical staff.

This is an important principle - if people feel their private data is going to be used against them they'll stop seeking necessary medical help.

I think the implications are quite starkly obvious.

Yep - I'm more than happy for my medical records to be used by medical professionals to determine the best course of treatment etc. I would NOT be comfortable for them to be used to determine whether I can go to the pub or not. That's a one way ticket to a fully segregated society - those who have had the jab, and those who haven't.

About the furthest I could tolerate is having vaccine status transferred to my passport for entry into other countries - after all vaccines before travel is hardly a new concept. But determining access to society based upon vaccine status - especially when vaccines are in short supply, and there may be some out there who cannot take it fore medical reasons?

Fuck. That.

 

[Gwadien]

and there may be some out there who cannot take it fore medical reasons?

Scenario;

It's the end of 2021, the vaccine has been out for a year but covid is still about, pretty much everyone has taken the vaccine by now, the only people who are refusing to take it are the conspiracy loons.

Nigel goes to a restaurant, and he's vulnerable (ignoring the 'well they shouldn't be out' argument) but also can't take the vaccine for medical reasons.

Dave walks in and believes that the vaccine is used so Bill Gates can steal his dog so refuses to take it, he doesn't know he has covid, but he does.

Nigel catches covid and dies.

Should have Dave been prevented from entering, should he face legal action or is it just an unfortunate fact of life?

I just think that if we don't have mass vaccination then there was little point in creating the vaccine in the first place, you're still going to have lots of people in society shielding at home and there still will be continued economic damage.

 

[Bodhi]

Scenario;

It's the end of 2021, the vaccine has been out for a year but covid is still about, pretty much everyone has taken the vaccine by now, the only people who are refusing to take it are the conspiracy loons.

Nigel goes to a restaurant, and he's vulnerable (ignoring the 'well they shouldn't be out' argument) but also can't take the vaccine for medical reasons.

Dave walks in and believes that the vaccine is used so Bill Gates can steal his dog so refuses to take it, he doesn't know he has covid, but he does.

Nigel catches covid and dies.

Should have Dave been prevented from entering, should he face legal action or is it just an unfortunate fact of life?

I just think that if we don't have mass vaccination then there was little point in creating the vaccine in the first place, you're still going to have lots of people in society shielding at home and there still will be continued economic damage.

Your example falls down at the first hurdle - none of the vaccines anounced so far seem to have much of an effect on onwards transmission. They are not sterilising vaccines, just reduce symptoms.

So your hypothetical situation could happen even WITH everyone vaccinated.

 

[Gumbo]

Something that no one is talking about is the highly unlikely figures from world infections, do you believe there are only 130k deaths in India?
Data for Africa is mostly non existent, but certainly it gets zero attention as usual from the british press, are they just dying quietly, if you look at the official world death toll of 1.4m then 90% of Africa hasnt had a single death.

The life expectancy in India and virtually all of the continent of Africa is waaaay lower than in the West. This disease largely kills the older people. Add that to the poorer infrastructure for recognising and recording deaths due to Covid and you get to the low figures.

 

[Aoami]

I see Farage Junior has decided its time for a bit of publicity again -
View: https://twitter.com/LozzaFox/status/1333098916125040642


He sure seems to hate woke people for the most woke man out there.

 

[Scouse]

Your example falls down at the first hurdle - none of the vaccines anounced so far seem to have much of an effect on onwards transmission. They are not sterilising vaccines, just reduce symptoms.

So your hypothetical situation could happen even WITH everyone vaccinated.

This.

But more importantly - @Gwadien doesn't want to answer the "medical privacy principle" question. I think it's because this:

Should have Dave been prevented from entering, should he face legal action or is it just an unfortunate fact of life?

He wants 1 or 2, not 3.

Now 1 or 2 are potentially options. But this is about a type of mentality within governments and the type of actions government can take. We have multiple historical precedents for the types of governments that take these sort of actions - and they're not very pretty.

So 3, whilst undesireable, is the only outcome in a free society. You cannot force humanity to be perfect. If you agree that one action is proportionate (in the face of covid) then automatically other actions are clearly also proportionate - because if we do A for covid then the argument for B C and D for other reasons becomes not just reasonable, but almost inarguable.

Government needs to be a servant of the people, not a master or overlord of them.

You've already expressed outright admiration for China @Gwadien. And I think that's pretty shocking tbh. Especially given not only their track record, but the current reality of life in China today.

If not being China means we have to put up with idiots - idiots who may even inadvertently cause death through their own stupidity - that's better than living under tyrrany.

 

[Scouse]

The life expectancy in India and virtually all of the continent of Africa is waaaay lower than in the West. This disease largely kills the older people. Add that to the poorer infrastructure for recognising and recording deaths due to Covid and you get to the low figures.

And they've a younger population. And multiple other reasons. But still, they are most likely under-reporting.

But what does it matter? Why does Job care?