Jump to content

IOM Covid removing restrictions


Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, Happier diner said:

Yes but remember. I was just saying that it's still antibodies that attack the virus. Something that you have not managed to disprove. You have only managed to make a very poor effort at humour and cut and paste some complex scientific text. I don't claim to be an expert at all, merely question your comment that the vaccine won't contribute to reducing the impact of this virus. Something I disagree with you on.

This is like pulling teeth so I'll make this my last response.

The vaccine will have an impact on the virus, only a fool would dispute otherwise. We as yet do not know the extent of that impact and whether it will deliver long term on it's apparent promise short term. This has been widely acknowledged. Those are the current facts and as with any new technology the results will emerge over time. It's a reasonable view to take whether it be a vaccine, statin or a vitamin supplement.  

Regardless of your A level biology qualification the industry still needs data to support it's assumptions, which is why they are conducting ongoing trials and surveillance once it gets rolled out. To monitor efficacy and safety. 

Good luck with your job search. The industry needs great minds at this time. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 33.5k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Banker

    2545

  • TheTeapot

    1384

  • Gladys

    1280

  • horatiotheturd

    1015

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

OK. For what it's worth I'm going to try and explain why genomics is important in a ssRNA virus epidemic. No doubt it will end up being recited badly at a briefing, but, well, whatever. You read it he

Rachel has tried every which way to re-offer her services. This last tweet wasn't the first time she's reached out. Government has made it very clear they do not want her to be involved. I want h

I think you'll find most so called anti-government rhetoric is focused on government-stupidity and government-selfishness. In recent times - under Brown, Bell and now Quayle - all too many govern

Posted Images

16 hours ago, Roger Mexico said:

Just like TB and polio did, without a vaccine, then?   There's no guarantee that viruses will gradually fade away over time - polio never did.

And SARS was (hopefully) eliminated by the sort of measures being used against Covid-19 now, not because it became less dangerous.  MERS still gives rise to clusters of cases occasionally and is even more deadly than SARS.  It hasn't been eliminated because of there being a non-human reservoir in camels.

 

22 hours ago, Roxanne said:

But, with respect, you don’t know that. Like the rest of us you’re only guessing. We’ve never seen this virus before. No-one knows how it’s going to evolve or how things are going to end up. 
 

 

Damn Roger Mexico: You are the most mischievous of posters. You deleted one piece of what I had written, to make my own posting demonstrably false. I did not say that it would have faded away in the sense of actually disappearing; I meant that it would have faded away as a serious illness; or as an illness at all. There are four human coronaviruses that infect us all time and cause no more than a cold. They are called 229E, NL63, OC43 and HKU1 and if you want to read more, just google on the topic.

It is true that it is a new virus and that a margin of safety had to be built in our response to it. But to assume that it would have stuck around as a serious illness you have to assume that it is fundamentally different from the other respirator illnesses that we have seen before and the way they evolve over time.

Polio and TB are so much more awful for the simple reason that our body is unable to clear them on its own. Over time, they can and will wreck the strongest of men; if he has been infected. Covid-19 has a completely different pathological profile. 80-90% of people who have it, don’t even realise having it unless they are tested for it! I had Polio and TB vaccinations when I was a kid and would not hesitate to repeat them again if needed. I don't think I am going to have a Covid vaccine.

 

236093254__MFspoiledbratoframseyp_606.jpg.17b7fd036de3af31407d315964957b46.jpg

122853176__MFRogerMexicop_707.jpg.eba575b15c23ca2532df4449729c5869.jpg

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, spoiledbratoframsey said:

 

Damn Roger Mexico: You are the most mischievous of posters. You deleted one piece of what I had written, to make my own posting demonstrably false. I did not say that it would have faded away in the sense of actually disappearing; I meant that it would have faded away as a serious illness; or as an illness at all. There are four human coronaviruses that infect us all time and cause no more than a cold. They are called 229E, NL63, OC43 and HKU1 and if you want to read more, just google on the topic.

It is true that it is a new virus and that a margin of safety had to be built in our response to it. But to assume that it would have stuck around as a serious illness you have to assume that it is fundamentally different from the other respirator illnesses that we have seen before and the way they evolve over time.

Polio and TB are so much more awful for the simple reason that our body is unable to clear them on its own. Over time, they can and will wreck the strongest of men; if he has been infected. Covid-19 has a completely different pathological profile. 80-90% of people who have it, don’t even realise having it unless they are tested for it! I had Polio and TB vaccinations when I was a kid and would not hesitate to repeat them again if needed. I don't think I am going to have a Covid vaccine.

There may be other coronaviruses, but that doesn't mean they're remotely similar in impact or sickness. Take a look at various chemicals for example. H2O is water, drinking H2O2 will kill you. The difference is a single oxygen molecule. But they're both hydrogen oxides so they simply must be safe.

For a lot of people, COVID can make you significantly unwell, even more so than the flu say, and whilst it's mostly polishing off people who are in fragile health, that doesn't mean it's not making people who are otherwise alright seriously ill, with the impacts that has.

All viruses have selective pressure to become less deadly over time. Does that mean we accept a lot of excess deaths to get to that point, for the sake of a quick poke of a needle?

Look at hemorrhagic fevers, the most deadly ones don't spread as far. The big Ebola outbreak in 2014 had an approx 50% fatality rate, versus previous ones that could go as high as 95%. You, as a virus, don't spread as far when you kill your host too quickly. But mutation takes time, and could still lead to nastier strains before nicer ones. See COVID in mink as a worrying example.

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Roxanne said:

It’s because we don’t trust.

We know we’ve been lied to, manipulated, controlled, to by people who are supposed to act in our best interests and we know they are acting to their own agenda. Not always, but at the top, where it really matters.

That’s what holding me back. Hands up.

4 hours ago, Gladys said:

So, we now have some (not 1 but 3, I think) vaccinations and I just cannot understand why so many are trying to find reasons not to have one of them. 

 

 

Forced vaccinations would be deeply corrosive of the fabric of society, in a way that some of you seem unable to understand.

It would lead many young people to understand the true nature of their government and hence despise it.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, AcousticallyChallenged said:

There may be other coronaviruses, but that doesn't mean they're remotely similar in impact or sickness. Take a look at various chemicals for example. H2O is water, drinking H2O2 will kill you. The difference is a single oxygen molecule. But they're both hydrogen oxides so they simply must be safe.

For a lot of people, COVID can make you significantly unwell, even more so than the flu say, and whilst it's mostly polishing off people who are in fragile health, that doesn't mean it's not making people who are otherwise alright seriously ill, with the impacts that has.

All viruses have selective pressure to become less deadly over time. Does that mean we accept a lot of excess deaths to get to that point, for the sake of a quick poke of a needle?

Look at hemorrhagic fevers, the most deadly ones don't spread as far. The big Ebola outbreak in 2014 had an approx 50% fatality rate, versus previous ones that could go as high as 95%. You, as a virus, don't spread as far when you kill your host too quickly. But mutation takes time, and could still lead to nastier strains before nicer ones. See COVID in mink as a worrying example.

 

 

You are absolutely free to live your sick life in the basement of your house.

Just don't try to stop me living my life in the open spaces and fresh air.

Because if you do, you may end up shot in the back of the head. I truly mean it in the most literal sense.

There have been 150 police arrests today in London among those protesting the Covid dictatorship. If the repression does not end soon, it is only the beginning and it will evolve into a more serious type of violence.

Those pretending to control us, don't seem to have an idea of the kind of anger they are unleashing.

It happened in Britain in the post WWII era, following the command economy and society brought by that war. This time, could be worse, because trying to control the population through fear of a virus is far more absurd than fighting Hitler.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, spoiledbratoframsey said:

 

Forced vaccinations would be deeply corrosive of the fabric of society, in a way that some of you seem unable to understand.

It would lead many young people to understand the true nature of their government and hence despise it.

I am not advocating forced vaccination, but for everyone to think seriously about their contribution to managing this virus. 

However, I was reminded a few days ago about how your child would not be accepted into school without the MMR.  It wasn't forced, but your child couldn't start state education without it.  I am not sure what the position on that is now, but it was the case when my children were starting their education. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Gladys said:

I am not advocating forced vaccination, but for everyone to think seriously about their contribution to managing this virus.

However, I was reminded a few days ago about how your child would not be accepted into school without the MMR.  It wasn't forced, but your child couldn't start state education without it.  I am not sure what the position on that is now, but it was the case when my children were starting their education.

Gladys: If I had children, I would not hesitate a moment signing up to the MMR. And I had all the vaccines that made sense to have myself. MMR is beneficial to children all things considered. And it is mostly a public health issue, rather than a political issue. Covid has been used by the left as a mean to a different kind of society; one that fits their ideology of state control. That is the reason why I won't have a Covid vaccine. Or offer any other type of cooperation as concerns Covid. They should have thought twice re-purposing the virus.

A number of European states have MMR requirements for children; but they have struggled to enforce them. Because, they can't force a parent to sign the MMR form. Nor they can really stop children having an education. Thus, antivax parents can just bide their time. I am not antivax; I am pro-freedom; and I understand well the nature of human government.

Any attempt to restrict the freedoms of those who refuse the Covid vaccine; for instance to stop them from travelling, will meet the same legal hurdles. For instance, they can't stop me leaving the British Isles, because I have a non-British passport and always have the right to leave and return to my stupid country of origin. Nor they can't stop me coming back to the British Isles, because I also have a British passport. And I am determined to put up as much resistance as I can. I will trek through borders on foot if I have. You will need the methods of a dictatorial state to stop me; including trashing legality and civil society; and be VERY CAREFUL if you go along that. The lefties aren't the only ones capable to exploit an accidental crisis for a political end that suits them.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, spoiledbratoframsey said:

Damn Roger Mexico: You are the most mischievous of posters. You deleted one piece of what I had written, to make my own posting demonstrably false. I did not say that it would have faded away in the sense of actually disappearing; I meant that it would have faded away as a serious illness; or as an illness at all. There are four human coronaviruses that infect us all time and cause no more than a cold. They are called 229E, NL63, OC43 and HKU1 and if you want to read more, just google on the topic.

I tend to edit down to emphasise the particular point that someone has made and make the quote shorter (the new layout where you only see the first few lines doesn't help).   I understood your point though and  meant fade in the same way you did.  That's why I referred to two other coronaviruses, those causing SARS and MERS, the later of which, unlike the common cold ones, doesn't seem to have faded in that sense.

We simply don't know how SARS-CoV-2 will behave over the years, it's been around for less than one after all.  Unlike the the common cold viruses it seems to be fairly stable over that short period, but that can't lend any real security.   There seems to be a vague hope that evolutionary pressure will make it less deadly (if more infectious) but it may not be deadly enough in the first place for that mechanism to come into effect.

2 hours ago, spoiledbratoframsey said:

Covid-19 has a completely different pathological profile. 80-90% of people who have it, don’t even realise having it unless they are tested for it!

Technically no one knows they have it until they are tested for it.  As I keep on pointing out, the definition of having it is testing positive in a lab test and this is true of absolutely every other infectious disease.  At best you can suspect that someone has/had it from symptoms, but a lot that do turn out not to have it  - which is why most tests are negative.

For what it's worth, rather than 80-90% of verified cases being asymptomatic, the true figure seems to be in the range 15-30% looking at various studies that have been done.  Presumably the variation is due to different studies defining symptoms (and their severity levels) slightly differently.  Which explains why you have to define the infectious diseases with lab tests.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...