FabSwingers.com > Forums > Virus > Great Barrington Declaration
Great Barrington Declaration
Jump to: Newest in thread
 |
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
Scientists are now breaking ranks about the usefulness of lockdowns as a way to deal with the virus.
Wondered how long it would be before this happened.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-54442386
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Scientists are now breaking ranks about the usefulness of lockdowns as a way to deal with the virus.
Wondered how long it would be before this happened.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-54442386
"
It still seems better than returning to normal and spreading like wildfire! I think local lockdowns are the answer still  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Scientists are now breaking ranks about the usefulness of lockdowns as a way to deal with the virus.
Wondered how long it would be before this happened.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-54442386
"
Hmm something smells fishy and it's no fanny |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Scientists are now breaking ranks about the usefulness of lockdowns as a way to deal with the virus.
Wondered how long it would be before this happened.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-54442386
Hmm something smells fishy and it's no fanny"
Trump is.to tricks ? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Scientists are now breaking ranks about the usefulness of lockdowns as a way to deal with the virus.
Wondered how long it would be before this happened.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-54442386
It still seems better than returning to normal and spreading like wildfire! I think local lockdowns are the answer still "
we will be forgetting what normal is.. the local lockdown thing seems like a lottery.. there are places that have recieved more measures than places with higher numbers.. for example in the prime ministers own constituency.. its all very odd
d |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
6000 reputable and recognised and scientists worldwide apparently.
More signing up all the time.
Not the usual conspiracy-mongers.
Hardly a Trump-style plot to play things down. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"6000 reputable and recognised and scientists worldwide apparently.
More signing up all the time.
Not the usual conspiracy-mongers.
Hardly a Trump-style plot to play things down."
It’s good that they are now speaking out ,Lockdown just delays Covid it’s not a cure and long term will cause more harm to us |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
This has been obvious to anyone who bothered to look for a long time now. It's take a while but finally we're starting to see real scientists backing up what so many of us have instinctively understood for months.
Question is, will anybody actually listen - it doesn't look promising.
Oh.. and it's not just scientists - there's opposition from GP's too. 66+ have signed a letter to the government calling for non-covid harms to be given equal weight. It makes interesting reading - I can't link to it but a google search for Dr_Ellie/status/1312380456147595264 will find it.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ty31Man
over a year ago
NW London |
"Scientists are now breaking ranks about the usefulness of lockdowns as a way to deal with the virus.
Wondered how long it would be before this happened.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-54442386
It still seems better than returning to normal and spreading like wildfire! I think local lockdowns are the answer still "
Except that studies are showing that areas with local lockdowns are still reporting rises in cases.
It's good to see a more credible and sensible alternative being proposed now instead of the destructive, counter productive measures we seem to be adopting currently. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
But it doesn't make sense.
What they are calling for is the vulnerable to shield.
Now I'm not sure that you all realise what shielding actually means. It means that you should not leave your house even for a walk.
If a shielder lives with other people the person who is vulnerable should put themselves in one Room in the house and stay in that Room except to use the bathroom. That is unexceptable and unreasonable to ask people to do for any length of time.
We are not talking small numbers either. There are over 12 million over 65 in the UK, and at least 3 Million Working age people who would have to shield. That is 16 million people that would be shut away from society for an indefinite amount of time. The voluntary sector would grind to a halt because a lot of volunteers are over 65, People would have to give up work who had viable jobs because they wouldn't be able to afford child care and their parents wouldn't be able to help out. Lockdown has worked To flatten the curve, It was never aimed at getting rid of the virus. The shielders where never asked to shield in the 1st place to protect everybody else only themselves at the height of the pandemic.
I don't know what the answer is but it certainly isn't asking a large percentage of the population to put their lives on hold and totally isolate themselves just so the rest of you can carry on with a "normal" life. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"But it doesn't make sense.
What they are calling for is the vulnerable to shield.
Now I'm not sure that you all realise what shielding actually means. It means that you should not leave your house even for a walk.
If a shielder lives with other people the person who is vulnerable should put themselves in one Room in the house and stay in that Room except to use the bathroom. That is unexceptable and unreasonable to ask people to do for any length of time.
We are not talking small numbers either. There are over 12 million over 65 in the UK, and at least 3 Million Working age people who would have to shield. That is 16 million people that would be shut away from society for an indefinite amount of time. The voluntary sector would grind to a halt because a lot of volunteers are over 65, People would have to give up work who had viable jobs because they wouldn't be able to afford child care and their parents wouldn't be able to help out. Lockdown has worked To flatten the curve, It was never aimed at getting rid of the virus. The shielders where never asked to shield in the 1st place to protect everybody else only themselves at the height of the pandemic.
I don't know what the answer is but it certainly isn't asking a large percentage of the population to put their lives on hold and totally isolate themselves just so the rest of you can carry on with a "normal" life. "
I know people are going to say they don't have to shield completely. But actually if you are going to open everything up the only way to protect the most vulnerable is for them to completely shield.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"6000 reputable and recognised and scientists worldwide apparently.
More signing up all the time.
Not the usual conspiracy-mongers.
Hardly a Trump-style plot to play things down. It’s good that they are now speaking out ,Lockdown just delays Covid it’s not a cure and long term will cause more harm to us "
It buys time and prevents overloading hospitals... |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Said it on the other thread there needs to be a plan B. The lockdown type scenario from earlier in the year I don’t think will be repeated for mainly money reasons.
If the sporadic local lockdowns don’t work then what?
My father is still shielding and whilst he lives very comfortably I don’t want to see him at his age locked away for a moment longer. He’s missing the company of his Grandkids now he can’t use the gardens as much. Good job he’s of the old school.
But yes time for a plan B.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"This has been obvious to anyone who bothered to look for a long time now. It's take a while but finally we're starting to see real scientists backing up what so many of us have instinctively understood for months.
Question is, will anybody actually listen - it doesn't look promising.
Oh.. and it's not just scientists - there's opposition from GP's too. 66+ have signed a letter to the government calling for non-covid harms to be given equal weight. It makes interesting reading - I can't link to it but a google search for Dr_Ellie/status/1312380456147595264 will find it.
"
There are 290000 doctors in the uk and God knows how many scientists and you seriously think because 66+ don't agree that the country should rightly or wrongly base it's response on these 66+ ?
All we have to do, as many have mentioned, is follow the Sweden model but people simply don't care enough to follow basic guidance like they do. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"But it doesn't make sense.
What they are calling for is the vulnerable to shield.
Now I'm not sure that you all realise what shielding actually means. It means that you should not leave your house even for a walk.
If a shielder lives with other people the person who is vulnerable should put themselves in one Room in the house and stay in that Room except to use the bathroom. That is unexceptable and unreasonable to ask people to do for any length of time.
We are not talking small numbers either. There are over 12 million over 65 in the UK, and at least 3 Million Working age people who would have to shield. That is 16 million people that would be shut away from society for an indefinite amount of time. The voluntary sector would grind to a halt because a lot of volunteers are over 65, People would have to give up work who had viable jobs because they wouldn't be able to afford child care and their parents wouldn't be able to help out. Lockdown has worked To flatten the curve, It was never aimed at getting rid of the virus. The shielders where never asked to shield in the 1st place to protect everybody else only themselves at the height of the pandemic.
I don't know what the answer is but it certainly isn't asking a large percentage of the population to put their lives on hold and totally isolate themselves just so the rest of you can carry on with a "normal" life.
I know people are going to say they don't have to shield completely. But actually if you are going to open everything up the only way to protect the most vulnerable is for them to completely shield.
"
I literally couldn't agree more!!!
I'm speechless to think that someone thinks asking vulnerable to do this for any length of time is ludicrous. Everything what you have said is 100% true and correct and to add what about the working age group who not only work but live with those vulnerable people and also have to tend to their vulnerability and illnesses, they too would have to shield from the world. Unworkable |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Said it on the other thread there needs to be a plan B. The lockdown type scenario from earlier in the year I don’t think will be repeated for mainly money reasons.
If the sporadic local lockdowns don’t work then what?
My father is still shielding and whilst he lives very comfortably I don’t want to see him at his age locked away for a moment longer. He’s missing the company of his Grandkids now he can’t use the gardens as much. Good job he’s of the old school.
But yes time for a plan B.
"
Plan A is try to hold back the virus until a vaccine is ready
Plan B would be give up and accept people like your father will have to take their chances |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Said it on the other thread there needs to be a plan B. The lockdown type scenario from earlier in the year I don’t think will be repeated for mainly money reasons.
If the sporadic local lockdowns don’t work then what?
My father is still shielding and whilst he lives very comfortably I don’t want to see him at his age locked away for a moment longer. He’s missing the company of his Grandkids now he can’t use the gardens as much. Good job he’s of the old school.
But yes time for a plan B.
Plan A is try to hold back the virus until a vaccine is ready
Plan B would be give up and accept people like your father will have to take their chances "
Plan B sounds a bit rubbish. Can we move on to Plan C? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
Surely the vulnerable don't have to completely shield themselves.
They just have to be very careful who and where they meet.
They don't have to lock themselves in one room if they don't want to
They can still go for walks and do their shopping
Just keep their distance and wash their hands often and don't let anyone hug them - pretty much they same as everybody is being asked to do now
If they live with others hey have to be extra careful but I cant see why they have to stay in one room
My ex was shielding during the full lockdown and still had our son living with her. She still went out for walks and occasionally did shopping but just was very careful
Sealing yourself in one room is an excessive and unnecessary response and certainly isn't demanded by the government |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"You can put as many lockdowns as you like in place but if people who "know better" ignore them they ain't gonna work. "
So the lockdown goes on for longer.
We really need to control the hotspots strictly, curfews, fines and more |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Couldn't your dad chat to his grandchildren from 2m away ?"
He does usually in his gardens. Now it’s cold and rainy he doesn’t go outdoors.
His health issues means no visitors at home now so I have to talk him through Zoom calls now which is fun. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"This has been obvious to anyone who bothered to look for a long time now. It's take a while but finally we're starting to see real scientists backing up what so many of us have instinctively understood for months.
Question is, will anybody actually listen - it doesn't look promising.
Oh.. and it's not just scientists - there's opposition from GP's too. 66+ have signed a letter to the government calling for non-covid harms to be given equal weight. It makes interesting reading - I can't link to it but a google search for Dr_Ellie/status/1312380456147595264 will find it.
There are 290000 doctors in the uk and God knows how many scientists and you seriously think because 66+ don't agree that the country should rightly or wrongly base it's response on these 66+ ?
All we have to do, as many have mentioned, is follow the Sweden model but people simply don't care enough to follow basic guidance like they do."
I wonder what "science" they are basing this lightbulb moment on.?given that there has been no experimentation and that this is new for everyone, every nation. The opinion is a guess. Perhaps informed but a guess none the less. And when did "scientists" suddenly become elevated to the mighty.? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Now signed by nearly 12,000 doctors and scientists (many very eminent including at least one Nobel prize winner)calling for
"Those who are not vulnerable should immediately be allowed to resume life as normal.
Still what would they know about science? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *dwalu2Couple
over a year ago
Bristol |
"Now signed by nearly 12,000 doctors and scientists (many very eminent including at least one Nobel prize winner)calling for
"Those who are not vulnerable should immediately be allowed to resume life as normal.
Still what would they know about science?"
It’a a good question!
It’s one you should probably also consider asking yourself regarding the many thousands more who don’t agree, as they probably know something about science too. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Surely the vulnerable don't have to completely shield themselves.
They just have to be very careful who and where they meet.
They don't have to lock themselves in one room if they don't want to
They can still go for walks and do their shopping
Just keep their distance and wash their hands often and don't let anyone hug them - pretty much they same as everybody is being asked to do now
If they live with others hey have to be extra careful but I cant see why they have to stay in one room
My ex was shielding during the full lockdown and still had our son living with her. She still went out for walks and occasionally did shopping but just was very careful
Sealing yourself in one room is an excessive and unnecessary response and certainly isn't demanded by the government"
That is exactly what shielding means. That is what the shielding letter said. It would be totally pointless for someone who is shielding to stay indoors if people they live with our go about living their lives or going to work. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Now signed by nearly 12,000 doctors and scientists (many very eminent including at least one Nobel prize winner)calling for
"Those who are not vulnerable should immediately be allowed to resume life as normal.
Still what would they know about science?
It’a a good question!
It’s one you should probably also consider asking yourself regarding the many thousands more who don’t agree, as they probably know something about science too."
It may well be a good solution scientifically but on a human and practical level it just is workable. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Someone posted a large copy and paste quote from/about this a couple of days ago, though I can't see it.
There is no magical divide between the highly vulnerable and the rest of society - it's not just an age thing that shows who will be worse off. Nor do these people live in isolated communities without interaction with others.
A large proportion of the population of all ages, have known health issues that put them at risk. There are others who have unknown vulnerabilities too, so unless everyone is going to have comprehensive health screening tests etc, you won't find most of them. It would be immoral to send those people out to potentially die, as this proposal would have it.
All of the population can suffer from long-term or permanent health damage and disability after tlthis virus infection. Organ damage and failure, in the heart, kidneys, brain, lungs etc is not something to potentially impose on to millions. It would also harm their life prospects, the economy and the health services that would have to treat them.
Very vulnerable people need interaction with the outside world too, they cannot be rounded up into notional camps where they are shielded. They need carers and services from others, who cannot realistically be expected to remain in isolation too.
The real-world practicalities of this proposal would have to be defined, costed and acceptable to everyone. Those who have proposed it don't appear to live in the real world that I do. They are likely comfortably off, healthy people who don't have much, if any, experience of the extremes of poverty, lack of health and social care services that millions already struggle with. I noticed that they don't include these details in their proposal - which says it all really. They aren't the most appropriate people to be dictating such authoritarian measures on to millions, they're a self-selecting group, some with ideological desires that don't match the relevance of the specialists needed to guide our policies and lives. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Someone posted a large copy and paste quote from/about this a couple of days ago, though I can't see it.
There is no magical divide between the highly vulnerable and the rest of society - it's not just an age thing that shows who will be worse off. Nor do these people live in isolated communities without interaction with others.
A large proportion of the population of all ages, have known health issues that put them at risk. There are others who have unknown vulnerabilities too, so unless everyone is going to have comprehensive health screening tests etc, you won't find most of them. It would be immoral to send those people out to potentially die, as this proposal would have it.
All of the population can suffer from long-term or permanent health damage and disability after tlthis virus infection. Organ damage and failure, in the heart, kidneys, brain, lungs etc is not something to potentially impose on to millions. It would also harm their life prospects, the economy and the health services that would have to treat them.
Very vulnerable people need interaction with the outside world too, they cannot be rounded up into notional camps where they are shielded. They need carers and services from others, who cannot realistically be expected to remain in isolation too.
The real-world practicalities of this proposal would have to be defined, costed and acceptable to everyone. Those who have proposed it don't appear to live in the real world that I do. They are likely comfortably off, healthy people who don't have much, if any, experience of the extremes of poverty, lack of health and social care services that millions already struggle with. I noticed that they don't include these details in their proposal - which says it all really. They aren't the most appropriate people to be dictating such authoritarian measures on to millions, they're a self-selecting group, some with ideological desires that don't match the relevance of the specialists needed to guide our policies and lives. "
50,000 deaths and an estimated 5-6 million infections allows us a very very good idea about averages.
Of those deaths the average age was 82 with an average of 2.7 existing comorbidities and only 500 deaths under 50.
There's always outliers but the evidence is over 70 and or 1 or more underlying illnesses of which we know the top five of them so we're not even dealing with all underlying illnesses. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Now signed by nearly 12,000 doctors and scientists (many very eminent including at least one Nobel prize winner)calling for
"Those who are not vulnerable should immediately be allowed to resume life as normal.
Still what would they know about science?"
The thing is science is only one consideration, what about... I don’t know, people? Pure science is completely objective, logically it would make sense to cull people once their value to society is exceeded by their drain. Yet we don’t because it would be in humane. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Said it on the other thread there needs to be a plan B. The lockdown type scenario from earlier in the year I don’t think will be repeated for mainly money reasons.
If the sporadic local lockdowns don’t work then what?
My father is still shielding and whilst he lives very comfortably I don’t want to see him at his age locked away for a moment longer. He’s missing the company of his Grandkids now he can’t use the gardens as much. Good job he’s of the old school.
But yes time for a plan B.
Plan A is try to hold back the virus until a vaccine is ready
Plan B would be give up and accept people like your father will have to take their chances "
what if there never is a Vaccine ? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Said it on the other thread there needs to be a plan B. The lockdown type scenario from earlier in the year I don’t think will be repeated for mainly money reasons.
If the sporadic local lockdowns don’t work then what?
My father is still shielding and whilst he lives very comfortably I don’t want to see him at his age locked away for a moment longer. He’s missing the company of his Grandkids now he can’t use the gardens as much. Good job he’s of the old school.
But yes time for a plan B.
Plan A is try to hold back the virus until a vaccine is ready
Plan B would be give up and accept people like your father will have to take their chances "
But plan B isn't an option.
It's not about just exepting the risk, If too many vulnerable and elderly people get the virus in a short space of time the NHS will be overwhelmed which means that people that wouldn't normally die from this disease or others will die. People still won't be able to get treatment for going conditions. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Said it on the other thread there needs to be a plan B. The lockdown type scenario from earlier in the year I don’t think will be repeated for mainly money reasons.
If the sporadic local lockdowns don’t work then what?
My father is still shielding and whilst he lives very comfortably I don’t want to see him at his age locked away for a moment longer. He’s missing the company of his Grandkids now he can’t use the gardens as much. Good job he’s of the old school.
But yes time for a plan B.
Plan A is try to hold back the virus until a vaccine is ready
Plan B would be give up and accept people like your father will have to take their chances what if there never is a Vaccine ? "
There will all most certainly be some form of vaccine because trials around the world going well. It may not be full protection but the way I look at it is even if a vaccine only gives 10% immunity its better than we have now and estimated lowest protection is around 60%. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"
We really need to control the hotspots strictly, curfews, fines and more
Come back and say then when you are in one."
We have all been in one.
It was called national lockdown from the end of march until June. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *obka3Couple
over a year ago
bournemouth |
The last figures I saw was 2500 deaths from under 60, at least 25% of those were recorded as having known health issues, I wonder how many others were current or ex smokers or overweight and unfit, no one is suggesting we dont take sensible precautions especially with those that are vulnerable but 2500 out of 50 million is a tiny number in reality and its numbers we must look at not individuals, sad as that is it is reality. Time to let the under 40's run wild for a month and catch it so us oldies then are at less risk and we can join in all the while being very careful with the vulnerable, perhaps that means financial support for those living with them, let people decide on their own circumstances on how best to protect their loved ones. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"The last figures I saw was 2500 deaths from under 60, at least 25% of those were recorded as having known health issues, I wonder how many others were current or ex smokers or overweight and unfit, no one is suggesting we dont take sensible precautions especially with those that are vulnerable but 2500 out of 50 million is a tiny number in reality and its numbers we must look at not individuals, sad as that is it is reality. Time to let the under 40's run wild for a month and catch it so us oldies then are at less risk and we can join in all the while being very careful with the vulnerable, perhaps that means financial support for those living with them, let people decide on their own circumstances on how best to protect their loved ones."
you are missing the point. The reason the death toll has been lower is because we have had locked down to flatten the curve and measures in place to suppress the spread. We have absolutely no idea what will happen and who will be affected if we just let this virus go without tight restrictions. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *obka3Couple
over a year ago
bournemouth |
"
you are missing the point. The reason the death toll has been lower is because we have had locked down to flatten the curve and measures in place to suppress the spread. We have absolutely no idea what will happen and who will be affected if we just let this virus go without tight restrictions. "
Sorry but it's exactly the point under 60's have a tiny risk unless they have the well known factors, they have a choice to isolate or take the risk, in fact everyone has that choice if the government let us, no one should be forced to take the risk if they are in the vulnerable group, plenty of old people are happy to get on with their lives to them its another risk among many.
We all have to either catch it or have the vaccine, letting those under 60 get it reduces the risk to the vulnerable groups as the more that have had it the less it will spread as there will be fewer hosts to carry it, treatments are better now so fewer will need to be in hospital,
Some will die but 650,000 die every year in the UK, it's sad but the longer this goes on the greater number of deaths from other causes. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"
you are missing the point. The reason the death toll has been lower is because we have had locked down to flatten the curve and measures in place to suppress the spread. We have absolutely no idea what will happen and who will be affected if we just let this virus go without tight restrictions.
Sorry but it's exactly the point under 60's have a tiny risk unless they have the well known factors, they have a choice to isolate or take the risk, in fact everyone has that choice if the government let us, no one should be forced to take the risk if they are in the vulnerable group, plenty of old people are happy to get on with their lives to them its another risk among many.
We all have to either catch it or have the vaccine, letting those under 60 get it reduces the risk to the vulnerable groups as the more that have had it the less it will spread as there will be fewer hosts to carry it, treatments are better now so fewer will need to be in hospital,
Some will die but 650,000 die every year in the UK, it's sad but the longer this goes on the greater number of deaths from other causes."
So essentially you want to make the elderly, disabled and chronically ill second class citizens.
You seem nice. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Not quite
The alternative route we are currently taking is ruining various industries, making thousands unemployed and leaving those still working left to pay for it for the rest of their working lives.
Neither option is ideal, but one is better in the long run |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
It’s unlikely a vaccine will be available for another 12 months due to materials (the glass vials and stoppers need to be manufactured for the whole world don’t forget).
Considering just over a week ago the experts claimed that only a mere 8% of the population have had it after 9 months, at this rate we’ve got a long way to go to get to the “herd immunity” point.
At some point enough has to be enough.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"But it doesn't make sense.
What they are calling for is the vulnerable to shield.
Now I'm not sure that you all realise what shielding actually means. It means that you should not leave your house even for a walk.
If a shielder lives with other people the person who is vulnerable should put themselves in one Room in the house and stay in that Room except to use the bathroom. That is unexceptable and unreasonable to ask people to do for any length of time.
We are not talking small numbers either. There are over 12 million over 65 in the UK, and at least 3 Million Working age people who would have to shield. That is 16 million people that would be shut away from society for an indefinite amount of time. The voluntary sector would grind to a halt because a lot of volunteers are over 65, People would have to give up work who had viable jobs because they wouldn't be able to afford child care and their parents wouldn't be able to help out. Lockdown has worked To flatten the curve, It was never aimed at getting rid of the virus. The shielders where never asked to shield in the 1st place to protect everybody else only themselves at the height of the pandemic.
I don't know what the answer is but it certainly isn't asking a large percentage of the population to put their lives on hold and totally isolate themselves just so the rest of you can carry on with a "normal" life. "
Yes there are but you have to remember that a lot of the people who do not have to shield, have no one who lives with them that has to shield don't give a flying fuck as long as they can pretend life is normal for them !
I don't mean everyone, but you only have to look around at the people who are going to parties and raves and advertising meets on here to see that some people dont care.
whilst i hate this government and all they stand for, they have no chance ! People say that policing in this country is policing by consent because most people are law abiding, but mainly becaue the laws we have (in the main) make sense to the majority; there will eb less and less consent to the policing of these pointless and ineffective lockdowns and suggestions of locking away the vulnerable; because and lets be simple about this we are all vulnerable to covid, just some more so that others so where do you draw the line ! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
If you only knew the truth about what’s happening on the very front line, you would be amazed.
Leeds Covid rate is through the roof, they are under local restrictions, staring down the barrel of a lockdown next week - yet there are very few patients in ICU
Go figure
The Government and media are having us believe it’s like it was back in March / April.
Fear brings compliance, which is why the last lockdown worked. We were expecting dead bodies on the street, supply chains breaking down and not being able to wipe your arse on Andrex or have a bolognese.
Not this time, folk have had enough, especially the ones who had to graft on the front-line back in March/April
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Just an idea but if 2 weeks is the isolation period then do it. A complete 2 week shutdown. Not the vague, half arsed way it was done in March but full on. Close the country for 2 weeks apart from hospitals and vital services - national grid etc. During the lockdown you install the infrastructure at airports and sea ports for compulsory testing on arrival and quarantine. The rest of us can then more or less return to normal safely with precautions in place for the vulnerable.
Obviously there are pros and cons to it but with a choice of this for the next year or 2 weeks of staying indoors?
I'm off to Israel now to fix that  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Just an idea but if 2 weeks is the isolation period then do it. A complete 2 week shutdown. Not the vague, half arsed way it was done in March but full on. Close the country for 2 weeks apart from hospitals and vital services - national grid etc. During the lockdown you install the infrastructure at airports and sea ports for compulsory testing on arrival and quarantine. The rest of us can then more or less return to normal safely with precautions in place for the vulnerable.
Obviously there are pros and cons to it but with a choice of this for the next year or 2 weeks of staying indoors?
I'm off to Israel now to fix that "
You can't just close food shops for 2 weeks and a lot of businesses are essential. Also what Precautions for the vulnerable would you suggest?
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
You'd have to give 2 weeks notice, and I would restrict access to the food shops during the 2 weeks.
I don't have all the answers, plenty of people way above my pay grade can fix the details. I'm just suggesting that done properly, we could reopen the economy before Christmas. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"You'd have to give 2 weeks notice, and I would restrict access to the food shops during the 2 weeks.
I don't have all the answers, plenty of people way above my pay grade can fix the details. I'm just suggesting that done properly, we could reopen the economy before Christmas. "
OK but then what do you think is gonna happen after Christmas?
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I'm just floating the idea as a part of the solution. Fixing the details is someone else's problem. "
But it's not a solution,its just making sure that we start the New Year with high infection rates. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I'm just floating the idea as a part of the solution. Fixing the details is someone else's problem.
But it's not a solution,its just making sure that we start the New Year with high infection rates."
It's the exact opposite of that. A full 2 weeks of proper lockdown should remove the infection from most of the population if it needs a 2 week quarantine. It's the details of what you do afterwards to keep the infection under control that are important. That's where my input is over. I don't know what those measures are, that's why I posted on a forum. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Just an idea but if 2 weeks is the isolation period then do it. A complete 2 week shutdown. Not the vague, half arsed way it was done in March but full on. Close the country for 2 weeks apart from hospitals and vital services - national grid etc. During the lockdown you install the infrastructure at airports and sea ports for compulsory testing on arrival and quarantine. The rest of us can then more or less return to normal safely with precautions in place for the vulnerable.
Obviously there are pros and cons to it but with a choice of this for the next year or 2 weeks of staying indoors?
I'm off to Israel now to fix that "
problem is the hospitals and vital services and supermarkets presumably and the national grid and those people needed to install at the borders ... well all of them being out means in your 2 weeks it will still spread, it can’t just be wiped out in 2 weeks and thats not to mention the people that just dont want to follow the rules
it will reduce volume and buy us time (which is why they are suggesting a circuit breaker) but it wont eradicate the disease |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Just an idea but if 2 weeks is the isolation period then do it. A complete 2 week shutdown. Not the vague, half arsed way it was done in March but full on. Close the country for 2 weeks apart from hospitals and vital services - national grid etc. During the lockdown you install the infrastructure at airports and sea ports for compulsory testing on arrival and quarantine. The rest of us can then more or less return to normal safely with precautions in place for the vulnerable.
Obviously there are pros and cons to it but with a choice of this for the next year or 2 weeks of staying indoors?
I'm off to Israel now to fix that
problem is the hospitals and vital services and supermarkets presumably and the national grid and those people needed to install at the borders ... well all of them being out means in your 2 weeks it will still spread, it can’t just be wiped out in 2 weeks and thats not to mention the people that just dont want to follow the rules
it will reduce volume and buy us time (which is why they are suggesting a circuit breaker) but it wont eradicate the disease "
I think that is what the problem is I think people thought that lockdown would make it all go away.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *obka3Couple
over a year ago
bournemouth |
"
you are missing the point. The reason the death toll has been lower is because we have had locked down to flatten the curve and measures in place to suppress the spread. We have absolutely no idea what will happen and who will be affected if we just let this virus go without tight restrictions.
Sorry but it's exactly the point under 60's have a tiny risk unless they have the well known factors, they have a choice to isolate or take the risk, in fact everyone has that choice if the government let us, no one should be forced to take the risk if they are in the vulnerable group, plenty of old people are happy to get on with their lives to them its another risk among many.
We all have to either catch it or have the vaccine, letting those under 60 get it reduces the risk to the vulnerable groups as the more that have had it the less it will spread as there will be fewer hosts to carry it, treatments are better now so fewer will need to be in hospital,
Some will die but 650,000 die every year in the UK, it's sad but the longer this goes on the greater number of deaths from other causes.
So essentially you want to make the elderly, disabled and chronically ill second class citizens.
You seem nice."
Why are they second class ? If they are at risk they have a choice, they isolate until either enough people have had to reduce infection rates, they wait until a vaccine is ready or they take a calculated decision on where they go and who they mix with and when, which is exactly their choice now, the difference would be the rest of the country moves towards normality, the only way to remove the virus is for every household to lock the door for a month, no hospitals, no food, no electric water, police, telly or anything. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *obka3Couple
over a year ago
bournemouth |
"Most of those relevant people could be quarantined before the lockdown. It's not perfect but the problems can be worked around. "
So who does all the essential work during the two weeks of their quarantine? There is only two facts to covid, 1 it's never going away we will have to live with it.
2 every single person in the country will either have to catch it at some point or have the vaccine, do you know a single person that has never had a cold in their entire life ? I dont and that is why my second point is inevitable. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Most of those relevant people could be quarantined before the lockdown. It's not perfect but the problems can be worked around.
So who does all the essential work during the two weeks of their quarantine? There is only two facts to covid, 1 it's never going away we will have to live with it.
2 every single person in the country will either have to catch it at some point or have the vaccine, do you know a single person that has never had a cold in their entire life ? I dont and that is why my second point is inevitable. "
It is inevitable that most if not all the population will get Covid |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
It's just not a workable solution. A huge proportion of the population are vulnerable and the proposers simply couldn't, or forgot to create a valid, ethical real world solution.
It's good to think outside of the box but we should not allow fringe activists to undermine what we're aiming to achieve, by capturing so much attention, when there's already disarray. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *obka3Couple
over a year ago
bournemouth |
"It's just not a workable solution. A huge proportion of the population are vulnerable and the proposers simply couldn't, or forgot to create a valid, ethical real world solution.
It's good to think outside of the box but we should not allow fringe activists to undermine what we're aiming to achieve, by capturing so much attention, when there's already disarray. "
It's not a "huge" proportion. Regardless of whether we return to march style lockdown, carry on as we are with various controls or just go back to how things were the vulnerable are still vulnerable, the longer it goes on the longer the risk to them remains high and the longer they have to isolate, as soon as numbers started to drop we should relaxed thing, got kids back to school and unis open to allow it to spread during the better weather when hospitals arent as busy from other causes. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *dwalu2Couple
over a year ago
Bristol |
"It's just not a workable solution. A huge proportion of the population are vulnerable and the proposers simply couldn't, or forgot to create a valid, ethical real world solution.
It's good to think outside of the box but we should not allow fringe activists to undermine what we're aiming to achieve, by capturing so much attention, when there's already disarray.
It's not a "huge" proportion. Regardless of whether we return to march style lockdown, carry on as we are with various controls or just go back to how things were the vulnerable are still vulnerable, the longer it goes on the longer the risk to them remains high and the longer they have to isolate, as soon as numbers started to drop we should relaxed thing, got kids back to school and unis open to allow it to spread during the better weather when hospitals arent as busy from other causes."
We don’t know anywhere near enough about the virus and how it affects people to say what proportion of people are vulnerable, so people who make absolute claims about who is or isn’t vulnerable are simply illustrating their own ignorance, and should refrain from offering an opinion. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Most of those relevant people could be quarantined before the lockdown. It's not perfect but the problems can be worked around.
So who does all the essential work during the two weeks of their quarantine? There is only two facts to covid, 1 it's never going away we will have to live with it.
2 every single person in the country will either have to catch it at some point or have the vaccine, do you know a single person that has never had a cold in their entire life ? I dont and that is why my second point is inevitable. It is inevitable that most if not all the population will get Covid "
You are probably right. We must however ensure not too many have it at the same time that we can not provide care for those who need it |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"It's just not a workable solution. A huge proportion of the population are vulnerable and the proposers simply couldn't, or forgot to create a valid, ethical real world solution.
It's good to think outside of the box but we should not allow fringe activists to undermine what we're aiming to achieve, by capturing so much attention, when there's already disarray.
It's not a "huge" proportion. Regardless of whether we return to march style lockdown, carry on as we are with various controls or just go back to how things were the vulnerable are still vulnerable, the longer it goes on the longer the risk to them remains high and the longer they have to isolate, as soon as numbers started to drop we should relaxed thing, got kids back to school and unis open to allow it to spread during the better weather when hospitals arent as busy from other causes.
We don’t know anywhere near enough about the virus and how it affects people to say what proportion of people are vulnerable, so people who make absolute claims about who is or isn’t vulnerable are simply illustrating their own ignorance, and should refrain from offering an opinion."
We do know from what we learned during the first peak is that BAME people and those over 70 are particularly vulnerable though. Those two groups account for somewhere around 16 million people in the UK, so that’s almost 25% of the population at increased risk. 3 million people are estimated to have COPD, 8 million have asthma and around 4 million have diabetes.
Given that some are likely to fit in more than one category it’s still reasonable to assume that there is between 30 and 40 percent of the population that we know are at increased risk if they catch COVID-19. That does not necessarily mean increased risk of death but we know that COVID-19 can do horrible long term damage to people without killing them. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"
It's good to think outside of the box but we should not allow fringe activists to undermine what we're aiming to achieve, by capturing so much attention, when there's already disarray. "
These are NOT fringe activists or conspiracy theory jokers
These are respectable and reputable scientists and medics |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
It's good to think outside of the box but we should not allow fringe activists to undermine what we're aiming to achieve, by capturing so much attention, when there's already disarray.
These are NOT fringe activists or conspiracy theory jokers
These are respectable and reputable scientists and medics"
Some may be but Gupta, Oxford University and the rest have not provided a workable solution and are not without criticism for their lack of appropriate expertise. 1 signature is Dr Matt Hancock, England, another Dr Mickey Mouse. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
It's good to think outside of the box but we should not allow fringe activists to undermine what we're aiming to achieve, by capturing so much attention, when there's already disarray.
These are NOT fringe activists or conspiracy theory jokers
These are respectable and reputable scientists and medics"
But they are not scientists that are saying what Boris wants us to hear, and so they will be discredited as much as possible by 'government approved scientists'. Why would this government want people who have a different view to them to be correct and they be wrong. Boris is never wrong and even when he is he just changes the law so he is right.
There are no checks and restrictions on what he can do !
His back benchers will 'sabre rattle' but like every vote ever they will fall into line when it comes to yea or ney ! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
If it was really as simple and practical to shut the vulnerable away why do you think no countries have a done it.
It isn't practical and isn't a small portion of the population by any stretch of the imagination.
People don't know the ramifications, The voluntary sector would grind to a halt so a lot of the support that the vulnerable people need they won't be able to get because the majority of people that keep the voluntary sector going are 65 plus.
If the government were to say we are just gonna let this herd immunity happen they will have to increase the people that are in the shielding group.
As someone mentioned earlier That would be nearly half the population and when the people that are calling for the vulnerable to be shut away and they realise that now that includes them or their daughter or there son then they will suddenly will change their mind. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Just read about this and a lot of the scientist that signed it are of so called non scientific areas, some of the holistic sciences and thereputic scientists, as well as 68 fake name scientist, only registered and not practicing any forms of recognised area. The whole thing smells a bit fishy. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Just read about this and a lot of the scientist that signed it are of so called non scientific areas, some of the holistic sciences and thereputic scientists, as well as 68 fake name scientist, only registered and not practicing any forms of recognised area. The whole thing smells a bit fishy. "
The whole thing smells more like bull shit  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I live in a Borough of Greater Manchester.. out of the past 32 weeks, we have had 4 weeks of "normality" ... "
Same where I live, but we have a global pandemic to deal with |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I live in a Borough of Greater Manchester.. out of the past 32 weeks, we have had 4 weeks of "normality" ...
Same where I live, but we have a global pandemic to deal with "
Quite right I never said otherwise. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I live in a Borough of Greater Manchester.. out of the past 32 weeks, we have had 4 weeks of "normality" ...
Same where I live, but we have a global pandemic to deal with
Quite right I never said otherwise. "
I never said you did |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
It's good to think outside of the box but we should not allow fringe activists to undermine what we're aiming to achieve, by capturing so much attention, when there's already disarray.
These are NOT fringe activists or conspiracy theory jokers
These are respectable and reputable scientists and medics
Some may be but Gupta, Oxford University and the rest have not provided a workable solution and are not without criticism for their lack of appropriate expertise. 1 signature is Dr Matt Hancock, England, another Dr Mickey Mouse. "
But "those who seem the truth" will tell you Dr Mickey Mouse is a highly esteemed expert in his field ...
Field mouse ... Gettit |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Just read about this and a lot of the scientist that signed it are of so called non scientific areas, some of the holistic sciences and thereputic scientists, as well as 68 fake name scientist, only registered and not practicing any forms of recognised area. The whole thing smells a bit fishy. "
Well two of my family have signed it one a GP and the other a PhD scientist whose work has involved PCR testing. Both are 1005 in favour of the declaration.
All the criticisms of it are taken from an article on the Science Media Centre site. The Science Media Centre was set up in 2002 “to renew public trust in science”, yet every single “expert” it has quoted on the Great Barrington Declaration condemns it.
All becomes clear when you look at who the most generous sponsors of the Centre are: AstraZeneca, Merck Sharp & Dohme (MSD) Limited, Sanofi and GlaxoSmithKline. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"https://news.sky.com/story/coronvairus-dr-johnny-bananas-and-dr-person-fakename-among-medical-signatories-on-herd-immunity-open-letter-12099947
All is not what is seems.  "
Where's the rotfl emoji |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *atEvolutionCouple
over a year ago
atlantisEVOLUTION Swingers Club. Stoke |
"https://news.sky.com/story/coronvairus-dr-johnny-bananas-and-dr-person-fakename-among-medical-signatories-on-herd-immunity-open-letter-12099947
All is not what is seems.
Where's the rotfl emoji "
It needs a better one than that lol. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Just read about this and a lot of the scientist that signed it are of so called non scientific areas, some of the holistic sciences and thereputic scientists, as well as 68 fake name scientist, only registered and not practicing any forms of recognised area. The whole thing smells a bit fishy.
Well two of my family have signed it one a GP and the other a PhD scientist whose work has involved PCR testing. Both are 1005 in favour of the declaration.
"
They're in quite esteemed company
Dr. I.P. Freely, Dr. Person Fakename and Dr. Johnny Bananas, who listed himself as a "Dr of Hard Sums". |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Just read about this and a lot of the scientist that signed it are of so called non scientific areas, some of the holistic sciences and thereputic scientists, as well as 68 fake name scientist, only registered and not practicing any forms of recognised area. The whole thing smells a bit fishy.
Well two of my family have signed it one a GP and the other a PhD scientist whose work has involved PCR testing. Both are 1005 in favour of the declaration.
They're in quite esteemed company
Dr. I.P. Freely, Dr. Person Fakename and Dr. Johnny Bananas, who listed himself as a "Dr of Hard Sums"."
At least there's some honesty there and someone to help with the hard maths |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Just read about this and a lot of the scientist that signed it are of so called non scientific areas, some of the holistic sciences and thereputic scientists, as well as 68 fake name scientist, only registered and not practicing any forms of recognised area. The whole thing smells a bit fishy.
Well two of my family have signed it one a GP and the other a PhD scientist whose work has involved PCR testing. Both are 1005 in favour of the declaration.
All the criticisms of it are taken from an article on the Science Media Centre site. The Science Media Centre was set up in 2002 “to renew public trust in science”, yet every single “expert” it has quoted on the Great Barrington Declaration condemns it.
All becomes clear when you look at who the most generous sponsors of the Centre are: AstraZeneca, Merck Sharp & Dohme (MSD) Limited, Sanofi and GlaxoSmithKline."
Well if Dr I P Hard and Dr Johnny Bananas condemn it... |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/oct/09/herd-immunity-letter-signed-fake-experts-dr-johnny-bananas-covid
I won't say anything about this but it does go up as exhibit A. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Just read about this and a lot of the scientist that signed it are of so called non scientific areas, some of the holistic sciences and thereputic scientists, as well as 68 fake name scientist, only registered and not practicing any forms of recognised area. The whole thing smells a bit fishy.
Well two of my family have signed it one a GP and the other a PhD scientist whose work has involved PCR testing. Both are 1005 in favour of the declaration.
They're in quite esteemed company
Dr. I.P. Freely, Dr. Person Fakename and Dr. Johnny Bananas, who listed himself as a "Dr of Hard Sums"."
Didn't IP Freely invent the procedure for stricture of the urethra? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ovelybumCouple
over a year ago
Tunbridge Wells |
"https://news.sky.com/story/coronvairus-dr-johnny-bananas-and-dr-person-fakename-among-medical-signatories-on-herd-immunity-open-letter-12099947
All is not what is seems. "
It says a lot for the mainstream media, that's all. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"At last some sence
Yes but no sense whatsoever.
But someone made cents... 
Do you ever get the scents that you're talking to yourself? "
Nope. Every prayer sent is answered. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ab jamesMan
over a year ago
ribble valley |
"https://news.sky.com/story/coronvairus-dr-johnny-bananas-and-dr-person-fakename-among-medical-signatories-on-herd-immunity-open-letter-12099947
All is not what is seems.
It says a lot for the mainstream media, that's all. "
And the folk who believe this tosh! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"https://news.sky.com/story/coronvairus-dr-johnny-bananas-and-dr-person-fakename-among-medical-signatories-on-herd-immunity-open-letter-12099947
All is not what is seems.
It says a lot for the mainstream media, that's all. "
"All lies and jests
Still a man hears what he wants to hear
And disregards the rest" |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ovelybumCouple
over a year ago
Tunbridge Wells |
"The Great Barringtonofbullshit Declaration... 
And yet they will still deny Covid is a problem.
A sad reflection on their mental state really"
No one is denying Covid is a problem. All petitions will have some fakes. The notable thing here is how scared the media and establishment are of an alternative narrative. The original parties are also world renowned experts, at least as qualified as Ferguson, Whitty and Vallance. Moreover in a few days 160,000 plus members of the public have signed. These aren’t Covid deniers, they are people wanting a proportionate response to a relatively mild virus. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"The Great Barringtonofbullshit Declaration...
And yet they will still deny Covid is a problem.
A sad reflection on their mental state really"
*
Some superior know-all types on here rubbish everyone who has a different opinion to them.
Never say anything positive just ridicule everyone else's posts.
As bad as the conspiracy nuts because they make it hard to have a genuine debate.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ab jamesMan
over a year ago
ribble valley |
"The Great Barringtonofbullshit Declaration...
And yet they will still deny Covid is a problem.
A sad reflection on their mental state really
*
Some superior know-all types on here rubbish everyone who has a different opinion to them.
Never say anything positive just ridicule everyone else's posts.
As bad as the conspiracy nuts because they make it hard to have a genuine debate.
"
I think people only ridicule it because its discredited, so no genuine discussion can be had. Do you still think this is worth a second of anyone's time? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"https://news.sky.com/story/coronvairus-dr-johnny-bananas-and-dr-person-fakename-among-medical-signatories-on-herd-immunity-open-letter-12099947
All is not what is seems.
It says a lot for the mainstream media, that's all. "
What does it say about them? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"There may be some fakes among the public who have signed up
Always get that with any petition.
But there are none among the medics and scientists"
I am afraid your wrong, there was no vetting process carried out therefore anyone could have signed it and claimed to be doctor or scientist. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"There may be some fakes among the public who have signed up
Always get that with any petition.
But there are none among the medics and scientists"
‘Professor Notaf Uckingclue’, Is my favourite signature |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"There may be some fakes among the public who have signed up
Always get that with any petition.
But there are none among the medics and scientists"
Clinging on by your fingertips ...
It's been debunked, it's done. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"The Great Barringtonofbullshit Declaration...
And yet they will still deny Covid is a problem.
A sad reflection on their mental state really
No one is denying Covid is a problem. All petitions will have some fakes. The notable thing here is how scared the media and establishment are of an alternative narrative. The original parties are also world renowned experts, at least as qualified as Ferguson, Whitty and Vallance. Moreover in a few days 160,000 plus members of the public have signed. These aren’t Covid deniers, they are people wanting a proportionate response to a relatively mild virus. "
For nearly 42,000 people it hasn't been mild.
If restrictions are lifted you can triple that figure in about 2 months.
The only reason we haven't seen more deaths is because we have restrictions in place and I think people forget this. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"There may be some fakes among the public who have signed up
Always get that with any petition.
But there are none among the medics and scientists"
Damn straight, Dr I P Hard is definitely not a piss taker. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
A great demonstration ( if one were needed) of the power and danger of social media. And the need to be better informed where people get their information from (as opposed to entertainment) Shame its abused by people so much.
We now have access to more than we have ever had... And are more clueless than ever. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The Great Barringtonofbullshit Declaration...
And yet they will still deny Covid is a problem.
A sad reflection on their mental state really
No one is denying Covid is a problem. All petitions will have some fakes. The notable thing here is how scared the media and establishment are of an alternative narrative. The original parties are also world renowned experts, at least as qualified as Ferguson, Whitty and Vallance. Moreover in a few days 160,000 plus members of the public have signed. These aren’t Covid deniers, they are people wanting a proportionate response to a relatively mild virus. "
Look harder, a fair chunk of signatories are indeed Covid deniers. Care to share the names of the qualified experts? I have seen videos of “qualified experts” talking about completely false science with a straight face!! A proportional response would be to avoid over running the capacity available to provide treatment... it’s why the original response was slow, the government desperately didn’t want to over react but it became clear the course had to change to avoid a catastrophic death toll. We are again heading towards an iceberg and the current rudder isn’t big enough  The daily death toll is still relatively low because of the measures in place not dispute of them! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The Great Barringtonofbullshit Declaration...
And yet they will still deny Covid is a problem.
A sad reflection on their mental state really
No one is denying Covid is a problem. All petitions will have some fakes. The notable thing here is how scared the media and establishment are of an alternative narrative. The original parties are also world renowned experts, at least as qualified as Ferguson, Whitty and Vallance. Moreover in a few days 160,000 plus members of the public have signed. These aren’t Covid deniers, they are people wanting a proportionate response to a relatively mild virus.
Look harder, a fair chunk of signatories are indeed Covid deniers. Care to share the names of the qualified experts? I have seen videos of “qualified experts” talking about completely false science with a straight face!! A proportional response would be to avoid over running the capacity available to provide treatment... it’s why the original response was slow, the government desperately didn’t want to over react but it became clear the course had to change to avoid a catastrophic death toll. We are again heading towards an iceberg and the current rudder isn’t big enough The daily death toll is still relatively low because of the measures in place not dispute of them!"
I think there was about 40-50 false doctors signatures.. even if it was in the hundreds it still wouldn't matter.
The fact is thousands of genuine doctors/scientists signed it and the proposal the declaration is advocating is worth trying because what is happening is not working but the goverment are just going ahead regardless.
Which is going to cause more death, more misery for everyone in the long term.
Lets forget about all the deaths that any further lock downs would cause for a moment, its also going to cause massive job losses, poverty, recession on a scale weve never seen, crime will increase tenfold because of it.
Lockdowns are not the answer, this declaration is another option which should seriously be looked at and considered. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"The Great Barringtonofbullshit Declaration...
And yet they will still deny Covid is a problem.
A sad reflection on their mental state really
No one is denying Covid is a problem. All petitions will have some fakes. The notable thing here is how scared the media and establishment are of an alternative narrative. The original parties are also world renowned experts, at least as qualified as Ferguson, Whitty and Vallance. Moreover in a few days 160,000 plus members of the public have signed. These aren’t Covid deniers, they are people wanting a proportionate response to a relatively mild virus.
For nearly 42,000 people it hasn't been mild.
If restrictions are lifted you can triple that figure in about 2 months.
The only reason we haven't seen more deaths is because we have restrictions in place and I think people forget this."
Again there's literally no scientific data to support this theory, washing hands works, catch and bin your sneezing works, masks not really, lockdowns, the effect is minimal all it's actually doing is turning people against the simple actual measures above that do work.
It's an airborne endemic respiratory virus that's going to do what it likes, it's going to come in the winter and go in the summer and most effects we can do on it will be minimal. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *dwalu2Couple
over a year ago
Bristol |
"The Great Barringtonofbullshit Declaration...
And yet they will still deny Covid is a problem.
A sad reflection on their mental state really
No one is denying Covid is a problem. All petitions will have some fakes. The notable thing here is how scared the media and establishment are of an alternative narrative. The original parties are also world renowned experts, at least as qualified as Ferguson, Whitty and Vallance. Moreover in a few days 160,000 plus members of the public have signed. These aren’t Covid deniers, they are people wanting a proportionate response to a relatively mild virus.
For nearly 42,000 people it hasn't been mild.
If restrictions are lifted you can triple that figure in about 2 months.
The only reason we haven't seen more deaths is because we have restrictions in place and I think people forget this."
It’s not really a matter of forgetting.
The sort of people who think this Great Barrington Declaration is worthy of serious consideration don’t tend to do that much thinking to begin with, let alone keeping the facts of past actions to hand and comparing them with outcomes. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
All this thread proves it that people married to their beliefs will defend them to the death regardless of how definitively they are proven wrong.
I'd have hoped some people would at least be embarrassed... seems I expect too much |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"There may be some fakes among the public who have signed up
Always get that with any petition.
But there are none among the medics and scientists
‘Professor Notaf Uckingclue’, Is my favourite signature "
Prof Notaf Uckingclue has a profile on fab |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"There may be some fakes among the public who have signed up
Always get that with any petition.
But there are none among the medics and scientists
‘Professor Notaf Uckingclue’, Is my favourite signature
Prof Notaf Uckingclue has a profile on fab"
I thought that was an option you could choose on your profile... |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I don't know if this is correct but I've heard a lot of the people on that list didn't know anything about it. If anyone still believes this totally discredited document still, let it go "
Yes there was a doctor on the news yesterday that had said his name was on it and he said he's never signed it.
Can't remember his name though. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I don't know if this is correct but I've heard a lot of the people on that list didn't know anything about it. If anyone still believes this totally discredited document still, let it go
Yes there was a doctor on the news yesterday that had said his name was on it and he said he's never signed it.
Can't remember his name though. "
Dr Hook. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I don't know if this is correct but I've heard a lot of the people on that list didn't know anything about it. If anyone still believes this totally discredited document still, let it go
Yes there was a doctor on the news yesterday that had said his name was on it and he said he's never signed it.
Can't remember his name though.
Dr Hook. "
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I don't know if this is correct but I've heard a lot of the people on that list didn't know anything about it. If anyone still believes this totally discredited document still, let it go
Yes there was a doctor on the news yesterday that had said his name was on it and he said he's never signed it.
Can't remember his name though.
Dr Hook.
"
Jekyll or Hyde? Jekyll and Hyde??? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I don't know if this is correct but I've heard a lot of the people on that list didn't know anything about it. If anyone still believes this totally discredited document still, let it go "
Unfortunately the deluded will remain deluded |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *D835Man
over a year ago
London |
"I don't know if this is correct but I've heard a lot of the people on that list didn't know anything about it. If anyone still believes this totally discredited document still, let it go
Unfortunately the deluded will remain deluded "
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
What are people who need to shield doing at the moment I'm assuming that they are shielding if we go back in to lock down still shielding right lock down lifts but they still have to shield..repeat these steps when needed until vaccine comes out? I think I'm right unless I'm missing something or the people who need to shield do so until vaccine comes out..
or second option the people who need to shield are doing the same as they doing are doing now and shielding and will be doing so until the vaccine comes out and everyone else keep the economy going keep the country going get a proper education stop the massive debt and poverty that is what we are facing for years to come if this carries on cos the government ain't handing out money they ain't planning on getting back
Both options shielding needs to happen but second long term out comes could be better for everyone ..but we are the selfish ones? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"What are people who need to shield doing at the moment I'm assuming that they are shielding if we go back in to lock down still shielding right lock down lifts but they still have to shield..repeat these steps when needed until vaccine comes out? I think I'm right unless I'm missing something or the people who need to shield do so until vaccine comes out..
or second option the people who need to shield are doing the same as they doing are doing now and shielding and will be doing so until the vaccine comes out and everyone else keep the economy going keep the country going get a proper education stop the massive debt and poverty that is what we are facing for years to come if this carries on cos the government ain't handing out money they ain't planning on getting back
Both options shielding needs to happen but second long term out comes could be better for everyone ..but we are the selfish ones?"
Currently people who had needed to shield are able to have some semblance of a normal life due to things like mask wearing, hand sanitising, and social distancing. In some areas of the country, partly due to dreadful communication and mixed messaging by the government, people are not taking this seriously however and consequently we are seeing huge rises in infection rates. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"What are people who need to shield doing at the moment I'm assuming that they are shielding if we go back in to lock down still shielding right lock down lifts but they still have to shield..repeat these steps when needed until vaccine comes out? I think I'm right unless I'm missing something or the people who need to shield do so until vaccine comes out..
or second option the people who need to shield are doing the same as they doing are doing now and shielding and will be doing so until the vaccine comes out and everyone else keep the economy going keep the country going get a proper education stop the massive debt and poverty that is what we are facing for years to come if this carries on cos the government ain't handing out money they ain't planning on getting back
Both options shielding needs to happen but second long term out comes could be better for everyone ..but we are the selfish ones?
Currently people who had needed to shield are able to have some semblance of a normal life due to things like mask wearing, hand sanitising, and social distancing. In some areas of the country, partly due to dreadful communication and mixed messaging by the government, people are not taking this seriously however and consequently we are seeing huge rises in infection rates."
So the vulnerable are not fully shielding at the moment even though there are places going Into localised lock down and but in lock down they have to fully shield ain't even allowed to go for a walk when nobody is about and people living in same house are advised not to work?...it makes no sense does it? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Government had an idea parliamemt made it law seems like its illegal to fight for your freedom any more lol... Stick their face masks up their asses... And when i was in london trafalgar square the other week i stood side by side with another 100.000 folk who think how i feel so my sides chosen for my own personal moral code and for my daughters future...FREEDOM!  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Government had an idea parliamemt made it law seems like its illegal to fight for your freedom any more lol... Stick their face masks up their asses... And when i was in london trafalgar square the other week i stood side by side with another 100.000 folk who think how i feel so my sides chosen for my own personal moral code and for my daughters future...FREEDOM! "
100 hundred people to 3 decimal places. Sounds like one hell of a protest. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Government had an idea parliamemt made it law seems like its illegal to fight for your freedom any more lol... Stick their face masks up their asses... And when i was in london trafalgar square the other week i stood side by side with another 100.000 folk who think how i feel so my sides chosen for my own personal moral code and for my daughters future...FREEDOM! "
Freedom is only Freedom when it does not encroach on the Freedom of others. This is not about the Freedom to choose to wear a mask. It's about your Freedom to choose whether or not spread a disease which will kill.
If a 100 000 of the world's murderers gathered in Trafalgar Square demanding that their Freedom to kill other people not be taken away.... do you think their Freedom should be granted and we should stop oppressing them.
How about speedsters and drivers under the influence? Would you like your family to be killed at an intersection on the way home from the movies by a driver who believed it was "his choice and his choice alone" to get behind the wheel coming home from the pub? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"What are people who need to shield doing at the moment I'm assuming that they are shielding if we go back in to lock down still shielding right lock down lifts but they still have to shield..repeat these steps when needed until vaccine comes out? I think I'm right unless I'm missing something or the people who need to shield do so until vaccine comes out..
or second option the people who need to shield are doing the same as they doing are doing now and shielding and will be doing so until the vaccine comes out and everyone else keep the economy going keep the country going get a proper education stop the massive debt and poverty that is what we are facing for years to come if this carries on cos the government ain't handing out money they ain't planning on getting back
Both options shielding needs to happen but second long term out comes could be better for everyone ..but we are the selfish ones?
Currently people who had needed to shield are able to have some semblance of a normal life due to things like mask wearing, hand sanitising, and social distancing. In some areas of the country, partly due to dreadful communication and mixed messaging by the government, people are not taking this seriously however and consequently we are seeing huge rises in infection rates.
So the vulnerable are not fully shielding at the moment even though there are places going Into localised lock down and but in lock down they have to fully shield ain't even allowed to go for a walk when nobody is about and people living in same house are advised not to work?...it makes no sense does it?"
Somewhere in the region of 30% of the population are classed as vulnerable, 23% of teachers fall into this category. So the answer is no, not everyone who is vulnerable is isolating, a large part of that is because not everyone who is vulnerable can isolate. It would be impractical and immoral to have a third of the population locked up ‘for their own safety’ so we need to accept universal restrictions to ensure it doesn’t happen. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Government had an idea parliamemt made it law seems like its illegal to fight for your freedom any more lol... Stick their face masks up their asses... And when i was in london trafalgar square the other week i stood side by side with another 100.000 folk who think how i feel so my sides chosen for my own personal moral code and for my daughters future...FREEDOM! "
Hopefully someone else is teaching her to count.. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"What are people who need to shield doing at the moment I'm assuming that they are shielding if we go back in to lock down still shielding right lock down lifts but they still have to shield..repeat these steps when needed until vaccine comes out? I think I'm right unless I'm missing something or the people who need to shield do so until vaccine comes out..
or second option the people who need to shield are doing the same as they doing are doing now and shielding and will be doing so until the vaccine comes out and everyone else keep the economy going keep the country going get a proper education stop the massive debt and poverty that is what we are facing for years to come if this carries on cos the government ain't handing out money they ain't planning on getting back
Both options shielding needs to happen but second long term out comes could be better for everyone ..but we are the selfish ones?"
This document published by an organisation funded by the ultra rightwing Koch family, is climate change denying, which should be warning enough about the evidence credentials and the motivation for getting it out there.
Proper science would be peer reviewed but Dr Harold Shipman and the other signatories don't count as that.
They've issued some inane ideas but without the workable details. Those details don't exist because their proposal doesn't stack up. It's not just about the small numbers of people at incredible risk due to chemo for cancer but 25-40% of the population who are vulnerable.
Herd immunity is not a proven concept with this virus either and our hospitals will get overloaded in a few weeks if we try, putting even more at risk. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Government had an idea parliamemt made it law seems like its illegal to fight for your freedom any more lol... Stick their face masks up their asses... And when i was in london trafalgar square the other week i stood side by side with another 100.000 folk who think how i feel so my sides chosen for my own personal moral code and for my daughters future...FREEDOM!
Hopefully someone else is teaching her to count.. "
Everyone can count. Some people just run out of fingers... |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Personally I perceive someone approaching me, without a mask and potentially infected, as assault.
Would it be unreasonable to defend myself? I would like the laws that oppress me by not allowing me to carry a 9mm for these occasions removed, and my freedom restored....
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"6000 reputable and recognised and scientists worldwide apparently.
More signing up all the time.
Not the usual conspiracy-mongers.
Hardly a Trump-style plot to play things down. It’s good that they are now speaking out ,Lockdown just delays Covid it’s not a cure and long term will cause more harm to us "
Please explain how in the long term it will cause more harm?
Do you actually know what harm it will or will not do long term? What are the long term harms it will cause compared to opening up everything?
Genuinely interested in knowing because no one knows imo. That's the biggest problem with anything that's done at the moment. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"6000 reputable and recognised and scientists worldwide apparently.
More signing up all the time.
Not the usual conspiracy-mongers.
Hardly a Trump-style plot to play things down. It’s good that they are now speaking out ,Lockdown just delays Covid it’s not a cure and long term will cause more harm to us
Please explain how in the long term it will cause more harm?
Do you actually know what harm it will or will not do long term? What are the long term harms it will cause compared to opening up everything?
Genuinely interested in knowing because no one knows imo. That's the biggest problem with anything that's done at the moment. "
Data on the harm it does is based on whether it is sucked out of the left thumb or right thumb.
I'm still saying we shouldn't be vaccinating for smallpox because we'll never find a cure!!! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"6000 reputable and recognised and scientists worldwide apparently.
More signing up all the time.
Not the usual conspiracy-mongers.
Hardly a Trump-style plot to play things down. It’s good that they are now speaking out ,Lockdown just delays Covid it’s not a cure and long term will cause more harm to us
Please explain how in the long term it will cause more harm?
Do you actually know what harm it will or will not do long term? What are the long term harms it will cause compared to opening up everything?
Genuinely interested in knowing because no one knows imo. That's the biggest problem with anything that's done at the moment.
Data on the harm it does is based on whether it is sucked out of the left thumb or right thumb.
I'm still saying we shouldn't be vaccinating for smallpox because we'll never find a cure!!!"
Sorry not sure what that has to to do with my question as it wasn't your post I asked about.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Never in the history of public health has herd immunity been used as a strategy for responding to an outbreak, let alone a pandemic.”
https://amp.theguardian.com/world/2020/oct/12/who-chief-says-herd-immunity-approach-to-pandemic-unethical |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Thankfully this legless idea never got the resources that its proponents demanded! "
And yet you've just given it the boost of another life!
Anyway. Don't all scientists agree...? About everything? The earth is flat and the moon is made of cheese and the sun and all planets orbit about the earth. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Thankfully this legless idea never got the resources that its proponents demanded!
And yet you've just given it the boost of another life!
Anyway. Don't all scientists agree...? About everything? The earth is flat and the moon is made of cheese and the sun and all planets orbit about the earth. "
I did . Though only as it had been discussed in a new thread, comparing how initially it was to be anyone deemed vulnerable to more severe illness and the current group, which has a similar prognosis - the unvaccinated. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Thankfully this legless idea never got the resources that its proponents demanded!
And yet you've just given it the boost of another life!
Anyway. Don't all scientists agree...? About everything? The earth is flat and the moon is made of cheese and the sun and all planets orbit about the earth.
I did . Though only as it had been discussed in a new thread, comparing how initially it was to be anyone deemed vulnerable to more severe illness and the current group, which has a similar prognosis - the unvaccinated. "
In a few years Clint Eastwood will make a film called "the unvaccinated" funded by Pfizer and moderna and which in glorious irony can only be watched by "I'm vaccinated" app wearing folks..... A movement will be started #ulm.
John lewis Father Christmas adverts will tell young children... "no presents for you unless you've been jabbed"
It's a brave new world. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
» Add a new message to this topic
