"Covid rising in England" - let's stop the fear mongering

[nw1]

Just on the subject of boosters surely the right answer is to treat it the same as the flu vaccine? Looking at the NHS website it's offered for free to the following:

Flu vaccine

Find out about the flu vaccine, including who should have it, how to get it and side effects.

www.nhs.uk

That seems a fairly sensible group of people to have booster shots of the Covid vaccine covered by the NHS (though perhaps it makes sense to increase the age? Then again keeping it simple by having one age for both has a certain attraction!) anyone else who wants should just be able to purchase it from Boots (other pharmacies are available) for £15 or whatever the flu jab costs. I don't see any reason for there to be a mass rollout beyond those group that get the flu jab for free.

I would say that 50 is too young, IMO. It suggests people of around that age are generally unfit and vulnerable to serious illness, which maybe they were several generations ago, but this was not even the case in the 1990s (based on the people I know born in the 1940s), let alone now.

 

[ainsworth74]

50 is too young, IMO. It suggests people of around that age are generally unfit and vulnerable to serious illness, which maybe they were several generations ago, but not now.

Yes I was surprised it was 50 for the flu jab to be honest but for Covid I would think 60 would probably a fairly reasonable place to put the marker. In that ballpark at least.

 

[nw1]

I don't feel guilty either especially after the various acts of hypocrisy from Boris, Cummings, Hancock etc. Covid was the ideal opportunity to promote healthy living and instead we got people basically encouraged to get takeaways with them staying open, being told we were guilty of murder if we dared to go out of our houses etc, then there was the disgusting look them in the eyes adverts, whoever sanctioned those should hang their head in shame.

I agree completely. The "look them in the eyes" adverts were truly disgusting.

"Don't dare go to the supermarket twice a day otherwise you are an evil monster, and you deserve to be socially ostracised for life".

Were there other ones too about that heinous crime of sitting in a park with a takeaway coffee? I forget. The one that I do remember is the one about multiple visits to the supermarket.

Who on earth sanctioned these? To be fair on Johnson I doubt he did personally, not really his style - the one good thing about him (perhaps the only one) is he wasn't known for sanctimonious moralising. Hancock? Not saying he did, but given his sanctimonious hypocritical use of the word "Covidiot" on at least one occasion, it wouldn't surprise me.

I don't understand what you mean by "guilt". How can anyone have a sense of guilt, intense or otherwise, about a virus?

What I meant is, guilt about letting Covid spread and lead to perhaps more deaths if harsh restrictions are relaxed - even if those harsh restrictions lead to more problems in the long run than they solve.

I also literally had people close to me saying, in early July 2020, words to the effect of "there's no way I will go to a pub, and spread Covid around" as if going to the pub was a morally-bankrupt, albeit (at that time) legal, act after July 4th in 2020. Again spoken by someone left-wing, but not hard-left - and a lot of people were coming out with this sort of thing. Sadly, often, from people who otherwise I would consider myself close to pollitically.

I am not saying I agree with such views, it's just an observation that I have noted in a number of people.

 

[greyman42]

Its so head-shakingly frustrating to see little effort from the government, medical professionals & scientists in promoting better diets & more exercise.

I think that all the major political parties find this too much of a sensitive subject to tackle and a possible vote looser should they try and do so. We have an obesity epidemic and no one will touch it with a barge pole. Boris made noises about doing something about it after he had covid but nothing more has been heard.

 

[MikeWM]

What I meant is, guilt about letting Covid spread and lead to perhaps more deaths if harsh restrictions are relaxed - even if those harsh restrictions lead to more problems in the long run than they solve.

There is certainly *even now* an attitude in some corners of social media that catching Covid is some sort of moral failure. Fortunately such posts increasingly get ripped apart in the replies.

But that doesn't seem to be an attitude in the real world. People still mention having had Covid rather more frequently than they would say about other diseases, but it tends to be a passing reference rather than a litany of woe.

 

[greyman42]

I myself took it upon myself this year to put in an effort & started walking most days, getting up to an average of around 6 miles a day. Added to this I made changes in my diet, and in just 6 months I've dropped well over a stone in lard, increased my stamina by multiples & I feel so much better. Even my hay fever that I've suffered since I was 15 seems to have disappeared!!

That's great. You are reaping the rewards that your self-discipline deserves.

So instead of all this "you must prepare for a frightening new strain", or you'll need "forever boosters" in order to have a chance of survival, the government should be promoting small, yet effective changes in lifestyle that will benefit so many people's immune systems and provide even more protection from serious illness. Instead of banging pots, we should have been cooking healthier meals and going for nice walks.

Absolutely spot on.

What I meant is, guilt about letting Covid spread and lead to perhaps more deaths if harsh restrictions are relaxed - even if those harsh restrictions lead to more problems in the long run than they solve.

Do these people have the same guilt regarding flu? And i notice the use of the word "perhaps". That goes with might, could possibly and maybe.

 

[Bikeman78]

No Millennium Lockdown, certainly, or mandatory 10-day self-isolation (even if you felt better before the 10 days were up).

On a lighter note, the loco haulage sounds about right for that era.

With hindsight I should have gone straight home from Crewe to Cardiff at 1600. The train to Holyhead had no heat so I was shivering for two hours. I think there was some problem with the ETH cable because it was fine on the way back. Then the Virgin HST from Birmingham to Bristol was late as always and missed the last Swansea so we had the usual hour wait in the cold at Bristol Parkway whilst they found a bus. It missed every week. I never understood why they didn't just have the bus ready.

As I said, I only felt rotton for two or three days max.

I very rarely get ill. I've never had Covid. Felt like crap last Christmas but it wasn't Covid. So other diseases do still exist.

As i've said before, this is not really about politics and opinions, it's about the number if ITU beds and how the NHS copes with an influx of patients.

The vast majority of people in ITU do not have Covid. As a society, are we striving to reduce the other causes of people going to ITU to the same extent that we did for Covid?

The NHS is stuffed anyway. Multiple hour waits for an ambulance seems to be common now. I wonder how many people die waiting?

I don't feel guilty either especially after the various acts of hypocrisy from Boris, Cummings, Hancock etc. Covid was the ideal opportunity to promote healthy living and instead we got people basically encouraged to get takeaways with them staying open, being told we were guilty of murder if we dared to go out of our houses etc, then there was the disgusting look them in the eyes adverts, whoever sanctioned those should hang their head in shame.

Exactly. They weren't scared of it so why should we be? They don't care if we live or die anyway. As Mikw points out, it's all about stopping the NHS falling over and being worried about the public backlash that would result.

There is certainly *even now* an attitude in some corners of social media that catching Covid is some sort of moral failure. Fortunately such posts increasingly get ripped apart in the replies.

Yet it's amazing how many of the people "doing the right thing" still catch Covid. They usually feel the need to tell the world via Facebook. It's almost as if all the rules and restrictions don't make any difference...

 

[duncanp]

Regarding the "look them in the eye" posters, i was surprised anyone took them seriously.

There's a special place in hell for whoever thought they were a good idea.

Especially given the misery that the pointless lockdown restrictions caused.

 

[Mikw]

There's a special place in hell for whoever thought they were a good idea.

Especially given the misery that the pointless lockdown restrictions caused.

View attachment 117502

Designed by the "nudge" unit.

I would take issue with it being "pointless" though, ITU bed shortages can be disastorous. Again, this is why lockdowns have happened.

Long term, i would like to see the policy of scaling back changed to increasing capacity.

In principle the "more day treatment/treatment at home" policy isn't a bad one, but you need to keep more capacity for medical "events" - i hope that's been learnt now by the powers that be.

 

[duncanp]

I see the COVID Bedwetter Daily Mail is at it again.

I think you can safely ignore this one.

Firstly, the current politicial situation means that Boris Johnson isn't going to make any major policy decisions during his remaining time in office, and none of the Conservative leadership candidates will get very far if they advocate new COVID restrictions.

Secondly, any new measures take several weeks to have any effect, by which time cases will start to decline naturally, as they have done in all previous wanes during this pandemic. (Cases are already plateauing)

So if the government was going to introduce any new measures, it would have done so by now.

Thirdly - I think people have had enough of COVID restrictions, and are far more concerned about the cost of living crisis. If there were any new COVID restrictions, they would be ignored by a large proportion of the population.

Covid curbs could come back if virus impacts backlog, says minister

Health minister Lord Kamall said if 'it gets to a point where it is affecting the backlog then clearly measures may well have to be introduced'. It comes as England's daily Covid admissions near 2,000.

www.dailymail.co.uk

Covid restrictions could RETURN to 'protect the NHS': Free tests and mask wearing could be reintroduced if rising number of cases has impact on the healthcare backlog – as hospital admissions are on brink of hitting 18-MONTH high​

• Lord Syed Kamall said extortionate free lateral flow testing scheme could return and hinted at other curbs
• Data shows hospital admissions on sharp incline amid rise of mild but highly infectious Omicron sub-strains
• But only a fraction of patients (36%) are primarily ill with Covid, suggesting rise is result of high infection rates
• Fears mounting swathes of economy could be paralysed by staff absence as mild variants continue to rise

Britain could swing back to its 'protect the NHS' Covid policy if the latest spike in cases and hospital admissions impedes on the health service's ability to treat other conditions, a health minister has suggested.

Lord Syed Kamall said the extortionate free lateral flow testing scheme could return as he raised the prospect of face masks also making a comeback, both of which were axed in April as part of No10's 'living with Covid' plan.

He told the House of Lords today: 'They [health officials] are still focusing on the backlog. If it gets to a point where it is affecting the backlog then clearly measures may well have to be introduced.'

Individual hospitals have already started to reintroduce face masks and social distancing in corridors and waiting rooms as Covid hospital admissions near an 18-month high, in the first sign of curbs creeping back in to normal life.

There were 1,911 Covid admissions in England on July 4 – the latest date with data – and at current pace they are due to rise further in the coming days. If average daily admissions rise above 2,100 it will mark the highest number since the peak of the second wave in January 2021 – when there were more than 4,000.

But only a third of patients are primarily sick with Covid, which suggests rising admissions are a symptom of high infection rates rather than severe disease.

The majority (64 per cent) are known as 'incidental' cases — patients who went to hospital for a different reason but happened to test positive.

With more than 2.7million Britons estimated to have been infected with Covid — one in 24 people — at the end of June. Trusts have warned they face rising staff absences caused by high levels of transmission in the community, combined with additional admission pressure.

In the House of Lords, peers questioned what the Government was prepared to do in the face of rising cases.

Labour peer Lord Hunt of Kings Heath said: 'Can I ask him this, he said earlier that the incident rise is now leading to increased hospitalisations. What impact is that now having on the backlog?'

Health minister Lord Kamall replied: 'I asked this very same question when I had the meeting with the UKHSA (UK Health Security Agency) officials earlier on.

'They are still focusing on the backlog. If it gets to a point where it is affecting the backlog then clearly measures may well have to be introduced.'

The minister had earlier told peers: 'We continue to see Covid case rates and hospitalisations rising in all age groups, with the largest increases in hospitalisations and ICU admissions in those aged 75 and older.

'The largest proportion of those hospitalised are for reasons other than Covid, however Covid is identified due to the increasing case rates in the community and the high rate of testing in hospital, including among those with no respiratory systems. Current data does not point to cases becoming more severe.'

Opening the debate, Labour health spokeswoman Baroness Merron said there had been a 'stark rise' in infections, but the Government had 'been noticeably silent, perhaps being somewhat distracted'.

She asked if ministers were planning to run a campaign highlighting rising cases and the benefits of getting a Covid vaccine, as well as whether the Government would consider reintroducing mandatory mask-wearing in hospitals.

'We might be through the worst of Covid but it evidently hasn't gone away,' Lady Merron added.

Lord Kamall responded: 'We are always ready to stand up measures should the case rates rise so much that our health system was under pressure, but also what we have managed to do is break the link between infections and hospitalisations, and hospitalisations and death.

'If that gets out of control then of course we will stand up the measures that we have previously.'

Liberal Democrat peer Lord Paddick asked: 'Why does the Government not reintroduce free Covid tests for everyone in England and financial support for those who do the right thing and self-isolate, especially in the face of the cost-of-living crisis?'

Lord Kamall replied that some in the health system believed future Covid cash would be 'better spent elsewhere given the backlog due to lockdown' rather than on free tests for all, adding: 'It is always a difficult trade off between where you spend this money.'

He went on: 'All this will continue to be monitored. Should the number of cases spiral out of control then clearly we would look to reintroduce free testing at some stage if it needed that.'

The spike has caused hospitals in Derbyshire, Lancashire and Cambridgeshire to reintroduce mandatory face masks, just a month after they were dropped from official guidance.

Britain's fifth wave is being driven by the sub-strains BA.4 and BA.5, with the latter regarded as the most infectious variant of the virus yet.

But they are both as mild as their parent strain, which has meant ICU admissions and deaths have remained steady despite cases rising for weeks.

Latest dashboard data on Covid deaths shows that on average there are just 35 fatalities per day across the UK — less than half the tolls seen this time last month.

For comparison, when admissions rose to their peak in January 2021, there were 1,300 deaths per day from the virus.

Another promising sign is that Covid ICU inpatient numbers have remained broadly flat.

There are currently just 218 patients with the virus on mechanical ventilators, on average, each day in England.

That's about 100 more than a month ago. For comparison, there were 3,600 patients on ventilators at the height of the second wave in January 2021.

Professor Paul Hunter, an expert in medicine at the University of East Anglia, told MailOnline he was confident Covid deaths would never rise to levels in previous waves again.

 

[DustyBin]

The hard left is harder to explain though: a wish to disrupt the economy so radically to bring about a new world order?

Whilst it may sound a little “tinfoil hatty” I believe that in some cases this was indeed the motivation. It’s worth remembering that we had members of Independent SAGE (and actual SAGE for that matter) openly stating that this was their aim.

I'm not sure your point is quite right about the hard-left, or at least it's subtler than that. A large part of the hard left leans towards state-skepticism or even anarchism, and has been against restrictions which increase police power.

People such as Dianne Abbott, Rebecaa Long-Bailey, Clive Lewis, Dawn Butler, Jeremy Corbyn, Caroline Lucas all voted against the Covid-19 vaccine pass for example, for that reason. What I think you have there are a bunch who are probably more in favour than the population at large for the 'middling' restrictions (masks, testing, some rules on large social gatherings) but probably prefer keeping these as 'guidance' rather than backing it up with punishments, and who have been quite consistently against the 'harsh' restrictions (vaccine passes/mandates, restrictions on smaller gatherings or political protest). I think they're a group of people for whom the 'slippery slope' arguemnt against restrictions is demonstrably wrong.

By contrast, I think that the 'soft left' which Starmer or Sturgeon represent is more dangerous in terms of restrictions because they share with the hard left a belief in the power of collective action which translates into favouring some restrictions, but not the skepticism of state and authority which means they lack the hard-left's fears about increasing state and police power.

This is all perfectly logical but see my response to @nw1 above.

 

[VauxhallandI]

There's a special place in hell for whoever thought they were a good idea.

Especially given the misery that the pointless lockdown restrictions caused.

View attachment 117502

I look at those posters and I see the cause to issues stated to be restrictions

 

[kez19]

I see the COVID Bedwetter Daily Mail is at it again.

I think you can safely ignore this one.

Firstly, the current politicial situation means that Boris Johnson isn't going to make any major policy decisions during his remaining time in office, and none of the Conservative leadership candidates will get very far if they advocate new COVID restrictions.

Secondly, any new measures take several weeks to have any effect, by which time cases will start to decline naturally, as they have done in all previous wanes during this pandemic. (Cases are already plateauing)

So if the government was going to introduce any new measures, it would have done so by now.

Thirdly - I think people have had enough of COVID restrictions, and are far more concerned about the cost of living crisis. If there were any new COVID restrictions, they would be ignored by a large proportion of the population.

Covid curbs could come back if virus impacts backlog, says minister

Health minister Lord Kamall said if 'it gets to a point where it is affecting the backlog then clearly measures may well have to be introduced'. It comes as England's daily Covid admissions near 2,000.

www.dailymail.co.uk

So in short let’s bring back restrictions so the NHS can get through the backlog? (If I read that in summary), yet here I am in Scotland 2 years on still nowhere near getting seen to into ADHD/Asperger’s but COVID is still priority? Rather than digging their heads in the sand, they could speed up and deal with everything than COVID, the NHS has had 2 years now to get sorted, they need to stop pleading poverty and get on.

I didn’t realise the media were deciding on restrictions and the NHS? The media is full of ifs and buts but why not bring facts to the table than twisting with the truth/half truths or just lies?

 

[Lampshade]

Exactly, and some of those who were screaming loudest for restrictions now seem to be shouting loudest about the harm those restrictions have caused

No no - they're the ones accusing people of 'using' those things to push an anti-lockdown agenda.

 

[MikeWM]

Personally I think it rather more critical that we investigate why we *continue* to have a large amount of (non-Covid) excess deaths. This is absolutely not normal in the aftermath of a pandemic - deaths should be *lower* than average, not higher. Here's John Campbell on that issue:

(Alt : youtube video of John Campbell discussing excess death figures with suggested explanations)

The comments to that video are... well, let's say 'interesting'.

Combine that with what appears to be an entirely unprecedented fall in the number of births across many countries starting around January of this year, which also appears to demand urgent investigation.

If these trends don't reverse, and soon, we're going to have considerably bigger problems than wearing useless pieces of cloth and testing ourselves for diseases we probably don't have in the first place.

 

[yorkie]

Going back to boosters, this is a very informative podcast:

24:18
...we can't keep boosting forever and so i i suspect you it would keep you up at

24:25
night as well so why many people ask me what's wrong with boosting every six

24:30
months what's wrong with getting this vaccine so tell please explain why it's not a good idea

24:37
right it's um when this vaccine came out um as a two dose vaccine in december of 2020 there

24:44
were people like tony fountain or stanley plaquemines you know leading lights in the world of vaccines who who

24:51
said early on this is a three dose vaccine you really need to have four to six months between doses in order to get

24:57
the kind of frequencies of memory b and t cells that would offer you long-lived protection against serious illness

25:03
um because they likened it to the inactivated vaccines like the inactivated polio vaccine or the hepatitis a vax into the purified

25:09
protein vaccines like hepatitis b or human papilloma virus vaccine so so

25:14
i had discussions with both of them actually around december and january then this is a three dose vaccine even though it's launching a cetus vaccine so

25:21
i kept waiting for that to be true so so six months later there were a number of studies done june july now of 2021 that

25:29
showed that protection against serious illness was continuing to hold up well i mean protection against mild illness

25:34
wasn't um as you would expect because those original studies were done over a three-month period those participants

25:39
had just gotten their second dose so they had high neutralizing antibiotics we had 95 protection against mild on

25:45
this that had to fade i wish we'd explained that to people at the beginning because they got disappointed

25:50
six months later and then you look a year later okay so this mark tenford study which daniel griffin definitely

25:56
reviewed at one of your uh clinical updates...

Well worth a listen.

It's a long one; 1 hr 45 mins* but if you just listen from around the 24 minute mark for about 10 minutes, it would give you a good idea.

Now, if anyone wants to disagree with Paul Offit, they are welcome to do so, but I think you'd struggle to find anyone in the world who is more qualified than he on the subject of vaccinations.

(* During lockdown times I would go for long walks and listen to podcasts such as these, which is how I gained much of my understanding on the topic; some people can be keen to disagree with me, and that's absolutely fine as they are welcome to do so, but my opinions are formed by listening to actual experts in great detail on these subjects and believe me experts on that channel are far more expert than the sort of "experts" who provide hyperbolic soundbites who the BBC/Sky etc. typically quote!)

 

[gabrielhj07]

There's a special place in hell for whoever thought they were a good idea.

Especially given the misery that the pointless lockdown restrictions caused.

View attachment 117502

I always thought to myself ‘no’, when looking at a ‘tell him you never bend the rules’ poster. Makes life so much simpler to pretend they’re not there.

 

[Eyersey468]

I always thought to myself ‘no’, when looking at a ‘tell him you never bend the rules’ poster. Makes life so much simpler to pretend they’re not there.

I just turned the TV/radio etc off when they came on

Personally I think it rather more critical that we investigate why we *continue* to have a large amount of (non-Covid) excess deaths. This is absolutely not normal in the aftermath of a pandemic - deaths should be *lower* than average, not higher. Here's John Campbell on that issue:

(Alt : youtube video of John Campbell discussing excess death figures with suggested explanations)

The comments to that video are... well, let's say 'interesting'.

Combine that with what appears to be an entirely unprecedented fall in the number of births across many countries starting around January of this year, which also appears to demand urgent investigation.

If these trends don't reverse, and soon, we're going to have considerably bigger problems than wearing useless pieces of cloth and testing ourselves for diseases we probably don't have in the first place.

I suspect the answer is partly because since many other treatments were suspended for so long and partly because people were frightened into not getting things checked out

 

[Class 33]

I see the COVID Bedwetter Daily Mail is at it again.

I think you can safely ignore this one.

Firstly, the current politicial situation means that Boris Johnson isn't going to make any major policy decisions during his remaining time in office, and none of the Conservative leadership candidates will get very far if they advocate new COVID restrictions.

Secondly, any new measures take several weeks to have any effect, by which time cases will start to decline naturally, as they have done in all previous wanes during this pandemic. (Cases are already plateauing)

So if the government was going to introduce any new measures, it would have done so by now.

Thirdly - I think people have had enough of COVID restrictions, and are far more concerned about the cost of living crisis. If there were any new COVID restrictions, they would be ignored by a large proportion of the population.

Covid curbs could come back if virus impacts backlog, says minister

Health minister Lord Kamall said if 'it gets to a point where it is affecting the backlog then clearly measures may well have to be introduced'. It comes as England's daily Covid admissions near 2,000.

www.dailymail.co.uk

I see The Sun, The Mirror and Sky News have jumped on the bandwagon and now got very similar worded(so don't feel it necessary to post quotes from those articles in this instance) articles on their websites. Trust them! It really does seem as they WANT restrictions to return!

Wouldn't be atall surprised if Susanna Reid goes on about this on Good Morning Britain tomorrow too!

I certainly don't think social distancing nuisancing restrictions will ever return. As not only are those restrictions a dam nuisance, hassly and restrictive, they are also very damaging and wreckless to thousands of business and millions of people's mental health. It certainly drove me mad and effected my mental health having to put up with those stupid restrictions for 16 months! Never EVER again must we endure that nonsense again. But like I said, I don't think that nonsense will return anyway. Those restrictions were scrapped a year ago now, and not been brought back since, even during the panic and hysteria of the Omicron variant/wave back in November last year.

Mandatory face masks on public transport and in shops again. It's sadly not impossible I think. But I think probably only about a 10% chance this nonsense will be brought back again. IF this nonsense is brought back again though, I really do hope that very very few people comply with it this time.

The return of free testing is a concern though. As if they decide to bring free testing back again, then the number of cases will rise again. And that will then give the locktivists/Covid restrictions fans(whatever you call them) fuel to call for Covid restrictions to return!

I agree that cases are already platueing, despite the press and media still going on about "As cases continue to rise"!! And within the next 3 to 4 weeks hopefully cases will be "continuing to fall". So the loctivists/Covid restrictions fans can shut the **** up about rising cases and the need for Covid restrictions to return!!

 

[43301]

I see The Sun, The Mirror and Sky News have jumped on the bandwagon and now got very similar worded(so don't feel it necessary to post quotes from those articles in this instance) articles on their websites. Trust them! It really does seem as they WANT restrictions to return!

The Guardian is the worst of all - shrill prognostications of doom and demanding restrictions is their stock-in-trade these days.

Hardly any of the media has cottoned on to the fact that all the rituals - face nappies, lockdowns, antisocial distancing, gallons of sanitiser, etc - are utterly pointless as they don't work, but cause massive social issues. You only need to look at the stats from around the world:
Do mandates for these things alter the trajectory of any infection graphs. No.
Do places without restrictions fare worse than those with. No.

And so on - there's enough data over a long enough time period now to clearly demonstrate this, but those wedded to the rituals refuse to look.

And that's before considering the clotshots and the increase in illnesses and deaths which follows in their wake.

 

[102 fan]

I think 'Partygate' was the death knell for any sort of restrictions and mask use.

 

[kez19]

I think 'Partygate' was the death knell for any sort of restrictions and mask use.

I do agree with you completely, but why the media obsessed by it? You think they move on but seems clear they haven’t and seem content on trying another round!

Cynical: so since Boris is possibly pushed the media are wanting to do it all again? I’m all for freedom of press/media but as I say they need to wind their necks in or will the media be happy putting people on furlough? Media suggest or throws ideas or basic crap stir but walk away from it, it needs stopped.

 

[Mikw]

The Guardian is the worst of all - shrill prognostications of doom and demanding restrictions is their stock-in-trade these days.

Hardly any of the media has cottoned on to the fact that all the rituals - face nappies, lockdowns, antisocial distancing, gallons of sanitiser, etc - are utterly pointless as they don't work, but cause massive social issues. You only need to look at the stats from around the world:
Do mandates for these things alter the trajectory of any infection graphs. No.
Do places without restrictions fare worse than those with. No.

And so on - there's enough data over a long enough time period now to clearly demonstrate this, but those wedded to the rituals refuse to look.

And that's before considering the clotshots and the increase in illnesses and deaths which follows in their wake.

Certain masks are actually quite effective.
Clean hands is never a bad idea.

Whilst i don't advocate lockdowns the principle of keeping "infected house away from uninfected house" is a sound one.

But please understand, although these things can work i'm not wanting a return to lockdown. It'll only happen if the NHS can't cope.

And using the word "clotshots" is a bit silly if you don't mind me saying, there are proven to provide decent protection. Yes, like all other things you put in your body, they can affect people negatively, but they the benefit certainly helps in keeping symptoms milder for the most part.

I do agree with you completely, but why the media obsessed by it? You think they move on but seems clear they haven’t and seem content on trying another round!

Cynical: so since Boris is possibly pushed the media are wanting to do it all again? I’m all for freedom of press/media but as I say they need to wind their necks in or will the media be happy putting people on furlough? Media suggest or throws ideas or basic crap stir but walk away from it, it needs stopped.

They seem to asking the new PM candidates the question a lot. I would assume it's to see if they're guided by logic or ideology

 

[yorkie]

Certain masks are actually quite effective.

Tight-fitting FFP2/3 respirator masks are effective if they are worn/handled/stored correctly and regularly replaced. This gets very expensive. If someone does not live with anyone else, never eats with anyone else, etc they may theoretically be able to avoid exposure to viruses by wearing such masks. But that would not be a normal life.

If someone wears such masks in certain settings, then they are really just delaying an inevitable infection. What's the purpose? to delay the onset of endemic equilibrium?

Clean hands is never a bad idea.

Obsessing over constantly cleaning hands can be a bad idea.

Whilst i don't advocate lockdowns the principle of keeping "infected house away from uninfected house" is a sound one.

But it won't stop people being exposed to pathogens; we are all going to be exposed to Sars-CoV-2 multiple times in our lifetimes.

What you propose may delay some infections but will not prevent infections.

But please understand, although these things can work i'm not wanting a return to lockdown. It'll only happen if the NHS can't cope.

If the NHS can't cope then it can't cope; we are not locking down EVER again. No-one is going to be able to force anyone else to stay at home. We can rule that out right now. Many of us would not comply.

And using the word "clotshots" is a bit silly if you don't mind me saying, there are proven to provide decent protection. Yes, like all other things you put in your body, they can affect people negatively, but they the benefit certainly helps in keeping symptoms milder for the most part.

Edit: I see what you were referring to now and I would say that anyone who uses the term "clotshots" doesn't have a credible argument.

 

[kez19]

Certain masks are actually quite effective.
Clean hands is never a bad idea.

Whilst i don't advocate lockdowns the principle of keeping "infected house away from uninfected house" is a sound one.

But please understand, although these things can work i'm not wanting a return to lockdown. It'll only happen if the NHS can't cope.

And using the word "clotshots" is a bit silly if you don't mind me saying, there are proven to provide decent protection. Yes, like all other things you put in your body, they can affect people negatively, but they the benefit certainly helps in keeping symptoms milder for the most part.


They seem to asking the new PM candidates the question a lot. I would assume it's to see if they're guided by logic or ideology

I noticed that too the media asking the PM candidates too, but as I say are the media going to help you or I if they wanted another lockdown (since they keep bringing it up)? Short answer is no but they’ll fall over themselves to make a story out of it once more, the media seem to be creating the news than actually reporting the news - which is it? (not at you)

I’ve never been so much cynical about the UK medias behaviour since COVID but this is pushing it too far.

 

[43301]

And using the word "clotshots" is a bit silly if you don't mind me saying, there are proven to provide decent protection. Yes, like all other things you put in your body, they can affect people negatively, but they the benefit certainly helps in keeping symptoms milder for the most part.

'Proven' if you only read the one-sided views in the mainstream media, maybe! But read that which isn't in the mainstream media, and the writings of experts in the subject who never get published by the MSM because they are off-message, and the view that the injections provide 'decent protection' is questionable at best. The old canard about making symptoms milder is also highly questionable - for most people the symptoms are fairly mild anyway.

You could start by looking at the death stats - in particular the proportion of deaths which are 'vaccinated'. And also the misleading way in which they cateogorise 'vaccinated' which means that those who die soon after getting injected are often counted as 'unvaccinated'.

 

[MikeWM]

I suspect the answer is partly because since many other treatments were suspended for so long and partly because people were frightened into not getting things checked out

I'm sure that is indeed part of it.

I'm currently in a rather bizarre situation where I need to get my doctor to renew my prescriptions, which should be entirely routine, but my surgery has restricted their 'ask the GP' service to only accept a certain amount of requests a day, so by the time I look at it each day it has been 'closed' until 7.30 the next morning. Yes, that's their *internet* service! I suppose at some point I'm going to have to set an alarm and get up significantly earlier than normal in order to use their *internet* service! What stupidity. I'm really at the end of my patience with the NHS at this point. Thank goodness I don't currently need them for anything serious.

However, I suspect there are other things going on here too.

In any event, whatever the specific cause, we need to never do any of it ever again. But I see no acknowlegement of that from those who may well want to do it all to us again.

 

[Gareth]

Getting a face to face appointment with my local GP is still near impossible. Also, not doing the phone thing anymore. They talk to you like you're taking up their free time. He was borderline rude to me last time.

 

[yorkie]

'Proven' if you only read the one-sided views in the mainstream media, maybe! But read that which isn't in the mainstream media, and the writings of experts in the subject who never get published by the MSM because they are off-message, and the view that the injections provide 'decent protection' is questionable at best.

You only have to look at the different outcomes in countries with good vs poor vaccination rates to see how effective vaccines are.

The old canard about making symptoms milder is also highly questionable - for most people the symptoms are fairly mild anyway.

It's true that for most people symptoms are fairly mild, but vaccines have played a very important part in building up our population immunity. The risk benefit analysis is changing over time but that doesn't change the undeniable facts that vaccines have massively lowered the burden on the health services.

You could start by looking at the death stats - in particular the proportion of deaths which are 'vaccinated'. And also the misleading way in which they cateogorise 'vaccinated' which means that those who die soon after getting injected are often counted as 'unvaccinated'.

Vaccines take several weeks to take effect, so it wouldn't make sense for someone who only very recently had a vaccine to be counted as "vaccinated".

Getting a face to face appointment with my local GP is still near impossible. Also, not doing the phone thing anymore. They talk to you like you're taking up their free time. He was borderline rude to me last time.

This really is unacceptable.

Some GPs seem to be among the biggest vaccine effectiveness deniers going, with their extreme reluctance to accept that vaccines enable us to go back to normal. They're almost as bad as the anti-vaxxers.

 

[43301]

You only have to look at the different outcomes in countries with good vs poor vaccination rates to see how effective vaccines are.

There really is no such clear trend. Look at the excess mortality as that's the best gauge, given that what is described as a 'Covid death' is inconsistent to the point of being largely meaningless. Recent stats for Chile being a case in point - high proportion of the population injected, but notable spikes in excess mortality.

It's true that for most people symptoms are fairly mild, but vaccines have played a very important part in building up our population immunity. The risk benefit analysis is changing over time but that doesn't change the undeniable facts that vaccines have massively lowered the burden on the health services.

It's impossible to claim 'it's the vaccine wot dun it' like this. As would happen with any epidemic, immunity builds up in a population over time and viruses evolve to become more infections but causing less severe illness. There is absolutely no reason to think that this isn't the main factor here - if it wasn't, this virus would need to behave in a way completely different to all similar viruses and that's not credible

Vaccines take several weeks to take effect, so it wouldn't make sense for someone who only very recently had a vaccine to be counted as "vaccinated".

But if they 'die suddenly' it's recorded as the death of an 'unvaccinated person'. Handy, that, for those who want to prove how 'safe' it is.

Some GPs seem to be among the biggest vaccine effectiveness deniers going, with their extreme reluctance to accept that vaccines enable us to go back to normal. They're almost as bad as the anti-vaxxers.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with being an 'anti-vaxxer' (specifically as regards this 'vaccine').

GPs just seem to like not seeing any real people if they can possibly avoid it, and want to keep it going forever. The NHS generally seems to want to carry on with the 'siege mentality' of all the pointless theatre.