Jump to content

The Bastard

Regulars
  • Posts

    724
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About The Bastard

Recent Profile Visitors

1,331 profile views

The Bastard's Achievements

Rookie

Rookie (2/14)

  • Dedicated Rare
  • Reacting Well Rare
  • Very Popular Rare
  • First Post Rare
  • Collaborator Rare

Recent Badges

281

Reputation

  1. I guess I'm expecting people to be empowered to be able to make difficult decisions quickly in a global catastrophe based on the information at the time, with lessons being learned, rather than personal blame being apportioned with the benefit of hindsight. The blame culture you're suggesting is one that results in inertia, fear and inaction next time.
  2. *Too many It's a global pandemic, what are you expecting? You don't get positive outcomes from pandemics, or they'd be called fundemics. People suffer, not as a result of decisions, but as a result of the illness. You sound unfamiliar with having to make difficult decisions yourself, but I'd suggest that management of a pandemic isn't a winnable scenario with an easy route to zero impact, and it's about managing competing demands and risks that may be poorly understood at the time.
  3. You're treating a chaotic event like it was a series of planned steps with full understanding of every consequence at every step by everyone involved. It wasn't. Blaming local people for making decisions in a chaotic global event is just pointless. Lessons should be learned, but it's cowardly to sit at the back contributing nothing and demand blame. Nobody on the IOM is accountable for the virus, and the best the island could have done with its limited influence was to vaccinate, which it did effectively. Closing the doors just delays the problem. New Zealand is still locked down, its economy is starting to tank, and it won't prevent coronavirus deaths in the long term - at some point, borders will open and deaths will start after a long delay. It's a lose-lose scenario.
  4. Seems to have the potential to end up as a pointless, expensive inquistion rather than an opportunity to learn lessons for next time. Pandemics kill people. This has been an international catastrophe, not a local bungle, and we can't hide on a locked-down rock forever. People both in power and in the wider community have done their best in trying circumstances. In a massive chaotic event like a disaster or a pandemic, the consequences are not always able to be forseen. I feel like people are really asking for blame to be apportioned when they talk about accountability - I can't see that blame serves any purpose. People were prepared to meet the emergency and make decisions - not always according to the benefit of hindsight, but if we breed a culture of blame and recrimination, who is going to stand up and make those decisions quickly next time? Blame just results in fear and inaction - an isolated prison island that can never reopen. Coronavirus isn't going away, it will be with us forever, and history will tell us this isn't the last pandemic. If the pandemic has taught us anything, it's that decisions need to be made quickly, assumptions challenged, risks taken, uncomfortable decisions made.
  5. Difficult decision. Anne doesn't impress me - when her "20 is plenty" campaign kicked off, she was seemingly unable to explain how a 20mph limit would make a difference to speeding, when her doorstep point seemed to be that a minority of people weren't adhering to the existing 30mph limit. Her proposed 20mph limit seemed only to actively inconvenience the majority of law-abiding people who were already sticking to the 30mph limit, rather than affecting the speeders who were already ignoring it, and would continue to do so without a copper on every corner.
  6. State of town centres is partly cultural. Japan like any country has good and bad things, but you'd be amazed that busy city centres seem litter-free despite a distinct lack of bins, and that there are vending machines and street furniture everywhere that aren't destroyed or broken-into. The machines remain unmolested and the streets are clean because people take responsibility for the state of their community - it's "normal" to take your rubbish home with you, and it's stupid to smash up stuff. Dump your rubbish on the floor, and passers-by will no-doubt have a stern word with you about it. It's just not "normal" to dump rubbish and expect someone else to take care of it. I think we once had that sense of collective responsibility, but as much of the comments on this thread indicate, there's now an abrogation of personal responsibility in favour of the council or the Police instead, to look for for someone else to punish instead of the community acting on it. Same with shop owners - cleaning windows shouldn't be a matter for the local council. Read IOM FB, and you'll see loads of complaints about stuff like litter, but no sense that this is something that a couple of minutes with a litter picker and a bin bag would sort. Beach Buddies are a total contrast to that - people have recognised that instead of a Facebook whinge, a bit of their own time for the good of the community is probably the best way forward. Manx society lacks that awareness that the quality of life in our communities is largely down to us, not some shadowy network of government/council/Police to pick up after us.
  7. I'm surprised to be accused of pseudoscience since I've asked for scientific studies (that you said you'd seen) showing the similar (or increased) level of transmission in a population with a high vaccination rate. In response you've posted me back a news article. It's nothing personal, and I think you make a good point about Viral Load being the same across groups, but I'm genuinely interested to see those studies that would reflect a similar actual transmission rate in a highly-vaccinated population. The majority of studies I've seen seem to indicate that a high level of vaccination leads to a reduced level of transmission. Is there some confusion over load vs transmission perhaps ?
  8. You would expect that viral load may have an effect on transmission, but it's not the only factor involved. If you're citing "conflicting studies" as you mentioned earlier, then ideally you should be citing a study that focuses on transmission in vaccinated patients, rather than just viral load - apples and oranges. As noted, there are a number of studies that cite reduced transmission in populations with a high vaccination rate. Do you have a counter-study that says that the transmission rate is the same or higher ?
  9. That study is referring to viral load, not transmission itself. It doesn't look at the actual effects on transmission, just on the amount of virus contained by both vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals. Any others specifically about transmission ?
  10. What studies are you referring to ? Do you have URLs from a reliable source ?
  11. I doubt that many people got the jab with the sole motivation of protecting others. Falling back on actual research though, there are scientific studies that indicate that the spread of SAR-COV-2 is reduced substantially by vaccination, so it does protect others around us (as we thought at the time). Sample URLs : https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.07.13.21260393v1 https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.07.12.21260377v1
  12. Have you considered some for your symphorophilia ?
  13. Death-related post from LC. Big surprise there. #symphorophilia
  14. I think the "Viking" claims are a bit fanciful - having Depuytren's doesn't necessarily mean a particularly strong link to Viking DNA, and if it's definitively linked to Scandinavian DNA, it can make up significantly less than 5% of your DNA makeup, which is quite some distance from being "a Viking".
×
×
  • Create New...