- This topic has 123 replies, 1 voice, and was last updated 2 years, 10 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
I’m fed up with the pandemic too, and I’d rather not be vilified for wanting to avoid infection.
If you want to avoid infection then you get vaccinated if you think it will help. You wear a mask while walking down the street if you think it will help. You stay home, avoid pubs, don’t go to parties, shop on line, wear a hazmat suit while opening your mail if that’s what you want to do. It’s people being forced to do things they don’t want to do that concerns me. If anyone was trying to prevent you from taking whatever steps you feel necessary to prevent infection I’d argue against that as well. I oppose tyranny as what the excuse.
UK deaths in January were 5,000 down on the 5 year average yet children in Scotland are still being muzzled 8 hours a day. That is what I call state sponsored child abuse.
– “It’s people being forced to do things they don’t want to do that concerns me.”
Yeah, like everyone being forced to catch a serious infection with long term effects of unknown consequences, by forcing the schoolkids to spread it. I’m angry about that. It isn’t necessary; other countries have been doing tens or even hundreds of times better, and been less authoritarian.
What about we form groups that blame each other and fight? Will that help?
You seem very angry fred, as if you want to make repeated infection inevitable, and blaming people who want to avoid it. And you seem disparaging of getting vaccinated against it. It seems to serve the interests of the virus rather than the people.
Fred, please stop conflating interpersonal respect with government authoritarianism. People can protect each other in soft ways, but not if one party insists on pretending that there is no risk.
“UK deaths in January were 5,000 down on the 5 year average ………..”
A note of statistical caution. From the ONS website Deaths registered weekly in England and Wales, provisional: week ending 28 January 2022:
“Deaths registered in 2022 will be compared with the 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019 and 2021 five-year average. As 2021 is also a coronavirus pandemic year and does increase some of the expected deaths in a week, other comparisons are also used including week-by-week and 2021 only.”
This is the first set of stats where they have included deaths from 2021 (but not 2020) in their five year rolling average. There were very significant increases in deaths in Jan 2021 over the previous 5 year rolling average as can be seen in the Excess Deaths in England and Wales analysis I posted in another thread. That will skew the data somewhat and you can see the figures on page 1 of the relevant year’s ONS data in the first link of this post. I am not quite sure why the ONS has included Jan 2021 where there were large excess deaths from covid and not Jan 2020 where there were as yet no covid deaths at all. To my mind they should exclude March 2020 to March 2021 or even later in 2021 from the 5 year averages.
So it’s technically correct to say that there were approx 5000 fewer deaths in England and Wales than the previous 5 year average on reviewing the ONS data BUT, and it’s a big BUT, from Jan 1 this year they are including in that 5 year rolling average months in which there was a large excess death rate from covid.
So due to the pandemic, the five year average was already high?
But I don’t see why “deaths are below the five year average” is an argument against “we should help each other avoid this virus” anyway.
It seems a bit disingenuous of the ONS to exclude 2020 in it’s entirety from the 5 year rolling average because it was the pandemic year but then include figures from the worst month of the whole pandemic in the UK in terms of excess deaths. Jan and Feb of 2020 should be used and exclude March 2020 through March 2021. It’s not like it would be difficult to do nor explain.
The ONS state “The further we move away from the five years in question, the less robust the measure is because of changes in population numbers, age and structure.” I rather doubt the population has hugely changed in numbers, age or structure between Jan 2020 and Jan 2021. My suspicion is that they will revise this as I am sure I am not the only person to have noted this. I am surprised that it got out the door to be honest as the ONS is probably the best at stats gathering and interpretation of any country in the world, far better than the USA, Ireland or European counterparts. The USA and Irish figures for deaths (from all causes) run 18 months to 2 years behind. The USA I can somewhat understand because of the 50 states etc but Ireland? C’mon lads, get it together. Population of Republic of Ireland being about that of Birmingham.
“But I don’t see why “deaths are below the five year average” is an argument against “we should help each other avoid this virus” anyway.”
If the risk from covid begins to equate with that of other infectious disease such as flu, and I am not saying I agree that that is currently the case, then it is reasonable to question the deployment of measures, particularly restrictive ones, to contain covid and the non-deployment of similar measures to contain flu.
Before you have a go at me I recognise that many of the measures would be the same and measures to contain covid will also work to contain flu and other infectious disease. Also, I am very aware that we do not know the longer term sequalae of covid infection but we have a reasonable idea of the longer term sequalae of flu (and other infectious disease) because we have long term experience of them.
Long-term cardiovascular outcomes of COVID-19 shows a large increase in cardiovascular events in the 12 months post covid infection even amongst those who were not hospitalised.
Most of my own family members now equate omnicron with the common cold and consider it inconsequential. The perception of risk and the actual risk are not the same. I suspect that goes for most of the public.
Most of my own family members now equate omnicron with the common cold and consider it inconsequential. The perception of risk and the actual risk are not the same. I suspect that goes for most of the public.
Yet in December Prof. Ferguson was predicting 5,000 deaths per day and calling for lockdowns over Christmas and New Year. Pressure was being put on doctors in South Africa to exaggerate the severity of Omicron.
Covid 19 Omicron: South African GP who raised alarm about Omicron says she was pressured not to call it ‘mild’ – (NZ Herald, 10 Feb 2022)
Nonetheless, lockdowns didn’t happen and the media was full of the fact that omnicron was causing fewer hospitalisations.
Fred – “Pressure was being put on doctors“ [plural] “in South Africa…”
Is that normal? How often do governments directly pressure doctors?
NZ Herald – “The South African GP” [singular] “…says she was pressured by governments ‘not to publicly state that it was a mild illness’.
– Dr Angelique Coetzee told Germany’s Die Welt newspaper this week that European governments asked her to portray the new strain as just as serious as previous Covid-19 variants, including Delta. […] Coetzee made similar comments in an interview with the Daily Telegraph yesterday.”
European governments pressuring doctors in Africa? What; did they send out bulk letters or something, or pressure the South African GPs professional associations? Or just Angelique Coetzee? In which case, how come?
– “According to Coetzee, chairwoman of the South African Medical Association, she came under pressure from scientists in the UK and the Netherlands…”
Ah, that’s how we can say it was “doctors“, plural. But the paper seems to be citing her in a personal capacity; has SAMA put out a statement? And it’s “scientists in the UK and the Netherlands” now rather than “European governments”, is it? One and the same, I suppose. “‘How can you explain that it’s a mild disease?'” What? Scientists dared question her; ask her to substantiate her claim? And all in conspiracy with “governments”. Very sinister.
Yes, very vague and hinty, this article. It’s all this lone, frustrated doctor versus some powerful, ill-defined scientist-government “them” – a hallmark of conspiracy theory. Poor Dr Coetzee, all isolated and de-platformed – apart from the Establishment’s own media, of course; a powerful international collaboration of leading right-wing newspapers officially recognised by governments:
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Die_Welt&oldid=1067139227
– Die Welt (“The World”) is a German national daily newspaper, published as a broadsheet by Axel Springer SE. Die Welt is the flagship newspaper of the Axel Springer publishing group. […] The modern paper takes a self-described “liberal cosmopolitan” position in editing, but it is generally considered to be conservative.
– Die Welt was a founding member of the European Dailies Alliance, and has a longstanding co-operation with comparable daily newspapers from other countries, including The Daily Telegraph (UK), Le Figaro (France), and ABC (Spain).
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=European_Dailies_Alliance&oldid=1021287338
– European Dailies Alliance (EDA) is an alliance formed by like-minded Conservative newspapers in Europe, namely ABC in Spain, The Daily Telegraph in United Kingdom, Le Figaro in France and Die Welt in Germany.
– In 2001, the four newspapers, each of which is a newspaper of record in their country, agreed to form an alliance to enhance the co-operation between them and their respective websites. The agreement of the alliance included:
- to extend the international coverage of individual newspaper through editorial co-operation
- to have renowned foreign writers in the newspaper
- to offer privileged access to the database of other newspapers in the alliance
- to have links to other newspaper in the alliance on their own website
- to have exchange of editors
- to be benefited from the enhanced co-operation in the area of journalistic education and advertising business
– The chairperson of the alliance is rotated among the chief editor of the member newspapers.
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Newspaper_of_record&oldid=1068418846
– A “newspaper of public record”, sometimes referred to as a government gazette, refers to a publicly available newspaper that has been authorized by a government to publish public or legal notices. It is often established by statute or official action and publication of notices within it, whether by the government or a private party, is usually considered sufficient to comply with legal requirements for public notice.
Why covering anti-evolution laws has me worried about the future of vaccines.
The author makes a comparison between anti-vax activists and the anti teaching of evolution nutters in USA.
“The fact that this issue (vaccines) has become politicized and turned state legislatures into battlegrounds has a disturbing air of familiarity to it. For over a decade, I’ve been tracking similar efforts in state legislatures to hamper the teaching of evolution, and there are some clear parallels between the two. If the fight over vaccines ends up going down the same route, we could be in for decades of attempts to pass similar laws and a few very dangerous losses.”
“To start, we can expect the number of people who say they mistrust vaccines to grow dramatically. When it comes to public behavior—answering polls, attending protests, introducing legislation, etc.—people behave in ways that send signals about the cultural group they belong to. If that cultural group—in this case a political party—includes a sizable and vocal group of anti-vaccine activists, then more people are going to adopt an anti-vaccine stance in order to signal their affiliation. (This behavior has been termed cultural cognition.)”
If Dunning-Kruger effect and cultural cognition have a baby together what will we have? Answers on a postcard please 😀
Nonetheless, lockdowns didn’t happen and the media was full of the fact that omicron was causing fewer hospitalisations.
If you live in a country that isn’t ruled by a petty tyrant, lockdowns didn’t happen.
Police storm Glasgow pub, breaking strict Scottish Covid rules on NYE – 6ix News, 2 Jan 2022 – YouTube, 1m 37s
So somebody filmed an incident with the police being heavy handed (albeit provoked). The story appeared in the papers because it was an exceptional case, not a typical one. Here it is in the Daily Mail:
The police gave this response:
A Police Scotland spokesperson said: ‘Officers carried out a routine visit at a licensed premises on King Street, Glasgow around 11.30pm on Friday 31 December 21.
‘No arrests were made in relation to covid guidelines.
‘The 63 year old licence holder refused to provide officers with relevant licence documentation, or assist with any other requests and was charged in relation to this and obstructing police officers.
‘This resulted in people being asked to leave the property.
‘A 60-year-old man and a 64-year-old woman were arrested for physically assaulting and being verbally abusive to police officers, and licensing offences.
‘No complaints have been received so far regarding officers conduct, if any member of the public wishes to make a complaint against an officer they can call 101 or complete a form on our website.
‘Enquiries into the incident remain ongoing.’
Having viewed the video and read the explanation, the overriding question is a big “So what?!” No arrests were made in relation to covid guidelines. A man and woman were arrested for physically assaulting and verbally abusing police officers. The police get aggro from the public in Glasgow every day, and neither side is inclined to back down.
Now, what were we talking about again?
Now, what were we talking about again?
We could talk about the people worldwide out protesting against state oppression and for civil liberties if you like. Canada, Europe, Australia, New Zealand, America – even Scotland has played a small part.
No, Fred, I didn’t say “How can we change the subject quickly to distract attention?”
To recap:
Now, what were we talking about again?
I believe we were talking about the effectiveness of lockdown restrictions and the relative threat from the omicron variant. Are you contending that lockdown restrictions have no effect on the epidemiological spread of viral illness? Or just not enough? Or that omicron is harmless, to all intents and purposes, and you knew it all along? Or that the death statistics are wrong? Or that we shoudn’t implement stringent public health measures in the belief that they will protect the NHS from overload? Or what?
The protestors might believe a range of crazy things, but let’s try to pin the argument down a bit.
– “…let’s try to pin the argument down a bit.”
But that’s against the rules of conspiracy theory.
For instance if it’s “the moon landings were a hoax” and you refute a claim by showing an ordinary photo of objects in sunlight on Earth that appear to have divergent shadows, then suddenly it’s the Van Allen belts would kill everyone, and the LEM doesn’t even look like a proper rocket, and how come no one’s ever been back?
– – – – – – –Fred has made one thing very clear, here. No matter how serious the threat, even if outdoor masking and hazmat suits were appropriate…
– “If you want to avoid infection then you get vaccinated if you think it will help. You wear a mask while walking down the street if you think it will help. You stay home, avoid pubs, don’t go to parties, shop on line, wear a hazmat suit while opening your mail if that’s what you want to do. It’s people being forced to do things they don’t want to do that concerns me.”
…no social responsibilities may ever be called for; the most reckless behaviour must set the level of risk for all. Only personal protective measures can ever be acceptable.
It sounds like things I’ve read about Atlas Shrugged, and I have read that there were no children or old people in that novel, no one vulnerable.
– – – – – – –Fred, I think it’s a shame about the polarisation; it makes matters worse. The police shouldn’t have shut down that gathering, those folk were being careful, and the police action increased the infection risk.
But those are reasons for you not to polarise. You make matters more divided when you hint and imply that Omicron is not dangerous, and that the vaccines are unsafe and do no good. You undermine social responsibility that would make gatherings safer and more inclusive.
Those ideas that you spread are easily shown to be false, and I know that you have the ability to do so. However misguidedly, however clumsily, the power structures see their role in this as protecting the public as a whole from behaviours born of misleading ideas. So the more you spread misleading ideas, the more likely you make such incidents.
[ to Fred ] “Are you contending that lockdown restrictions have no effect on the epidemiological spread of viral illness? Or just not enough? Or that omicron is harmless, to all intents and purposes, and you knew it all along? Or that the death statistics are wrong? Or that we shoudn’t implement stringent public health measures in the belief that they will protect the NHS from overload? Or what?”
Oh come on, Fred doesn’t want to be bothered by details!
Fred just wants to maintain an air of superior, detached dismissal. His is the position of utter cowardice, nether taking a position nor defending it.
“The protestors might believe a range of crazy things, but let’s try to pin the argument down a bit”
The protesters believe that our bodies belong to us not to the state. They believe that the individual has inalienable rights and freedoms that the state shouldn’t be able to take away from them, that each one of us has the right to choose for ourselves what is injected into our own bodies.
I don’t think that is crazy at all.
“The protesters believe that our bodies belong to us not to the state. They believe that the individual has inalienable rights and freedoms that the state shouldn’t be able to take away from them, that each one of us has the right to choose for ourselves what is injected into our own bodies.”
Fred you surely realise that nobody proposes to forcibly tie anyone up and vaccinate them against their will. What has been proposed in most cases of ‘vaccine mandates’ is that if you choose not to have the vaccine then you do not have the right to infect others. It is the same sort of argument rehearsed before when smoking was banned in public.
Fred you surely realise that nobody proposes to forcibly tie anyone up and vaccinate them against their will. What has been proposed in most cases of ‘vaccine mandates’ is that if you choose not to have the vaccine then you do not have the right to infect others. It is the same sort of argument rehearsed before when smoking was banned in public.
I don’t think people losing their jobs for refusing to have an unwanted, controversial medical intervention is exactly the same as the smoking ban.
WARNING!! You could die from this fall! Heather McDonald Faints On Stage | OFFICIAL VIDEO (9 Feb 2022) – Juicy Scoop™ w Heather McDonald (YouTube, 1m 7s)
– “people losing their jobs for refusing…”
So how come you never made a fuss about it until the pandemic? NHS staff have been required to be vaccinated for years. You’re objecting to all those requirements? Or just the latest one?
https://www.google.com/search?q=What+Immunisations+do+I+need+to+work+in+the+NHS
I think that the covid vaccination should not be added to the requirements, but I’m not hypocritically banging on about some “principle” I don’t actually give two hoots about.
From Moderation Rules for Commenters:
– “Contribute. Contributions which are primarily just a link to somewhere else will be deleted. You can post links, but give us the benefit of your thoughts upon them.”
You owe readers your thoughts on the link you posted. Mine are: it’s facile.
“I don’t think people losing their jobs for refusing to have an unwanted, controversial medical intervention is exactly the same as the smoking ban.”
Unwanted: Why unwanted? There is sufficient proof to say that vaccination has led to reduction of death from covid and leading to easing of measures whilst being very safe.
Controversial: Why is it controversial, please explain as I personally don’t think it is. Safe, effective and rolled out quickly. The only thing controversial about it is that it is not widely available to developing countries.
Not sure what relevance that video has to anything we have been discussing.
I have stated before in these forums that I do not agree with mandatory vaccinations and I still don’t. You ought to have the vaccination particularly in healthcare settings but persuasion not compulsion should be used. However, covid vaccinations are not the first example of this and I don’t remember seeing any backlash against it before. Any healthcare personnel involved in invasive procedures must have Hep B vaccinations and be tested for HIV and there are a few others depending on what specialty you are involved in. The same happens in the military where they are given a slew of vaccinations. You could argue that the military is a special case and somewhat for healthcare but mandating vaccinations is a rubicon crossed.– “The protesters believe that our bodies belong to us not to the state. They believe that the individual has inalienable rights and freedoms that the state shouldn’t be able to take away from them, that each one of us has the right to choose for ourselves what is injected into our own bodies.”
Oh they do, do they? So seeing as hardly any governments have mandated vaccination of the general public, why are they protesting?
Why are many of them cheering calls for doctors to be hanged? Or gathering outside hospitals and jeering at staff?
– “I don’t think that is crazy at all.”
It’s crazy all right. The question is, why are you promoting it?
