Fair point. I'm not sure what I think about that (now I've long since given up buying drugs, etc.)
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
Main Coronavirus / Covid-19 Discussion Thread
- Thread starter GingerBeerMan
- Start date
Fair point. I'm not sure what I think about that (now I've long since given up buying drugs, etc.)
Fair point. I'm not sure what I think about that (now I've long since given up buying drugs, etc.)
You dont need drugs to see the issues with mass surveillance.
Well, maybe you do, but plenty of others dont.
WRT mass surveillance, could that be why 'Asian Women are looking for Faversham Male'? I get this across the top of NSC regularly.
Personally....I'm not sure if I care. Do I care? Mmmmmm.......yyyyyyyyyy....no
Silly me thinking you might care about something that doesnt affect you personally.
And just think, we could all avoid unwanted restrictions if we'd all just behave differently. Put we didn't. All led by our glorious leaders.
Avoiding restrictions with behaviours enforced by the law doesn’t seem to be stopping restrictions in Europe.
That's like comparing apples and pears. Much has been made of the different trajectories we are on. Still doesn't stop the simple fact that mask wearing does reduce transmission.
Germany next (Telegraph extract)
Germany may impose curbs on the unvaccinated
GERMANY could introduce lockdown measures for unvaccinated people within days amid rapidly rising coronavirus infections.
Those who refuse the jab could be limited to meeting just one person from outside their household and barred from non-essential travel from as soon as Friday in the region of Saxony.
Under existing rules, the measures will come into force automatically if more than 1,300 hospital beds in the region are occupied by Covid patients for three consecutive days. Bed occupancy crossed this threshold on Monday.
The rules will come into force on Friday if numbers do not drop by today.
Saxony and Bavaria are among a number of German regions that already require proof of vaccination for people to enter restaurants, bars, nightclubs, cinemas and leisure centres. The Bavarian regional government is pressing for the same restrictions to be imposed nationwide.
Germany and Austria have vocal anti-vaxxer movements and have lagged behind their European neighbours on jabs. Austria has seen public protests after it became the first European country to impose a lockdown on the unvaccinated on Monday.
“It comes down to this: a kind of lockdown for the unvaccinated. It cannot be otherwise,” Markus Söder, the Bavarian regional leader, said.
“The intensive care units are full of people who could have protected themselves ... If we had vaccinated faster, like Spain and Portugal, we wouldn’t have this situation in the hospitals. Politicians can’t help it if people won’t get vaccinated.”
Germany may impose curbs on the unvaccinated
GERMANY could introduce lockdown measures for unvaccinated people within days amid rapidly rising coronavirus infections.
Those who refuse the jab could be limited to meeting just one person from outside their household and barred from non-essential travel from as soon as Friday in the region of Saxony.
Under existing rules, the measures will come into force automatically if more than 1,300 hospital beds in the region are occupied by Covid patients for three consecutive days. Bed occupancy crossed this threshold on Monday.
The rules will come into force on Friday if numbers do not drop by today.
Saxony and Bavaria are among a number of German regions that already require proof of vaccination for people to enter restaurants, bars, nightclubs, cinemas and leisure centres. The Bavarian regional government is pressing for the same restrictions to be imposed nationwide.
Germany and Austria have vocal anti-vaxxer movements and have lagged behind their European neighbours on jabs. Austria has seen public protests after it became the first European country to impose a lockdown on the unvaccinated on Monday.
“It comes down to this: a kind of lockdown for the unvaccinated. It cannot be otherwise,” Markus Söder, the Bavarian regional leader, said.
“The intensive care units are full of people who could have protected themselves ... If we had vaccinated faster, like Spain and Portugal, we wouldn’t have this situation in the hospitals. Politicians can’t help it if people won’t get vaccinated.”
LamieRobertson
Not awoke
Wonder if they will start on people who maybe drink more than a certain number of units of alcohol …don’t exercise to a certain metric…don’t eat the ‘right’ food…..etc etc
That sort of data is freely available already. If you own a phone, a laptop or have walked somewhere with CCTV or had your photo posted on a friend's Insta or Facebook you are already in the system. The ship has sailed.
Just from interacting on here you know who I am and what I do and I know the same about you.
Vaccines have absolutely nothing to do with it, other than being something you ought to do, because society exists.
Agree with all of this.
Billy the Fish
Technocrat
What restrictions are you talking about?
Are you saying we could avoid unwanted restrictions by imposing unwanted restrictions?
crodonilson
He/Him
dsr-burnley
Well-known member
- Aug 15, 2014
- 2,205
Impressive. So mask wearing cuts transmission by 53%, hand washing cuts it by 53%, physical distancing by 25%. Cumulatively, that's a 83.5% reduction if we do all three. I think we've cracked it.
How long does it take to see the results? Surely Scotland and Wales must be seeing the benefits by now?
You seem to be a bright enough chap, so I'm sure you're not going to be saying the thing that some really quite stupid people keep repeating...
"Look at country X, they have masks and their cases are high / higher than ours"
...with a strong implication that masks do not work.
We legislate the seating of seat belts in cars, but people still die in road accidents. We don't say "That bloke wore a seat belt and died, therefore seat belts don't work", we say "That bloke wore a seat belt and died, but we know that without seat belts more people will die in road accidents."
As someone who has read enough to be convinced on the merits of mask-wearing as a tool to suppress (but NOT stop) viral spread, I say:
"Look at country X, they have masks and their cases are high / higher than ours. They would be higher still if they didn't wear masks at all."
But I know mask denialists won't consider this alternative so I'll post this and piss off again.
Just under 70k cases yesterday and a test positivity rate of 15%
I am a fan of vaccine passports, but it seems they need to be tougher than being seen to work properly
dsr-burnley
Well-known member
- Aug 15, 2014
- 2,205
Correct. I'm not going to say that.
But the figures quoted seem far too good to be true. OK, they say that the handwashing part is too small to be statistically significant. But 53% reduction from mask wearing, and only from mask wearing? That means if two identical countries with identical levels of coronavirus have identical policies apart from wearing a mask, then after three R number cycles, the mask wearers will have only 10% of the coronavirus levels as the non-mask wearers. That's so impressive as to be unbelievable. Either the 53% figure is bound with loads of caveats, or else it means something different from the obvious.
The other thing the survey doesn't quote is the long term effects. Does mask wearing suppress coronavirus only in the short term, or for ever? It may be that it just holds it back until a big surge later. I don't know. Does mask wearing affect the long term health of the wearer, in that it prevents small doses getting in but means that when the big does comes, the wearer is less prepared? I don't know.
Billy the Fish
Technocrat
Hmmmmmm, University of Edinburgh sounds like it's got Devi Shrdar's fingerprints over it.
53%, 5.3% or 0.53% - I don't care. Wearing a mask reduces the risk of you passing on an infection to others to some degree.
As it happens at the end of last week I was walking around, infected with COVID, and didn't know. As ever when I went into shops I put my mask on. There's a chance by doing this I may have saved someone else from being infected. I may have saved someone highly vulnerable becoming infected, either directly from me, or from someone in between us.
If I didn't bother wearing a mask because "they don't work" or because "not many other people are" or "everyone else only wears them as chin warmers" or any other spurious reason I may cling to in order to try and justify my lack of empathy for others, then there would have been a higher chance of me passing it on.