End of all remaining Covid restrictions in England

[AlterEgo]

It panders to pointless fears, we should be helping people overcome this, if there was a point then would support it but some people need a bit of tough love at the moment otherwise they'll be snowflakes for the rest of their lives.

I still don't see what actual harm it does. I don't have to think about whether or not the kids in the autistic-friendly screening at the cinema should be there or try to learn to act in a way more conducive to a "normal" screening, it's a facility provided for them to be more comfortable and I equally don't see why you or I should be concerned about whether some people are timid about masks or not.

Pick your battles.

 

[nedchester]

We did not all adhere to them despite what we were told to do.
I certainly did not.

So what? THEY were the ones making the rules and telling us we had to adhere to them.

That is the difference. They are also proven liars.

But Labour…….as a few on here are saying…..

 

[Freightmaster]

It is strange to read that so many folk don't listen to experts, scientists, doctors, etc.

In what respect?






MARK

 

[Richard Scott]

I still don't see what actual harm it does. I don't have to think about whether or not the kids in the autistic-friendly screening at the cinema should be there or try to learn to act in a way more conducive to a "normal" screening, it's a facility provided for them to be more comfortable and I equally don't see why you or I should be concerned about whether some people are timid about masks or not.

Pick your battles.

Ok, afraid need to think what harm it is doing. Someone who is autistic can't change that, someone who's afraid of going out due to a virus can change. Doing things like this encourages abnormal behaviour, it isn't helping them so, in reality, it is doing harm.

 

[ainsworth74]

Ok, afraid need to think what harm it is doing. Someone who is autistic can't change that, someone who's afraid of going out due to a virus can change. Doing things like this encourages abnormal behaviour, it isn't helping them so, in reality, it is doing harm.

So what? Why do you care? It doesn't really seem like anyone's business but their own and that of the venue that decides to cater to them on a limited basis. If the suggestion was that all or most performances or screenings should made thus then I'd agree that's a big issue. But that doesn't seem to be what's suggested here.

 

[Richard Scott]

So what? Why do you care? It doesn't really seem like anyone's business but their own and that of the venue that decides to cater to them on a limited basis. If the suggestion was that all or most performances or screenings should made thus then I'd agree that's a big issue. But that doesn't seem to be what's suggested here.

Bit harsh and politely request you take that comment back, I do actually care that people are not being helped and that this perpetuation of this is potentially causing harm to a number of people.

 

[ainsworth74]

Bit harsh and politely request you take that comment back

Apologies but I won't be.

I do actually care that people are not being helped and that this perpetuation of this is potentially causing harm to a number of people.

I care about people too but if they think that this is what's best for them then in my view by all means crack on. I don't see that it's any business of ours to interfere when they're not causing any problems to anyone but it seems a number of people on here who are upset by the idea for some reason? Surely that's one of the big asks of the last 18 months or so? Allow people to get on with things as they see fit rather than having it imposed on us from on high what we can and cannot do?

 

[Richard Scott]

Apologies but I won't be.

I care about people too but if they think that this is what's best for them then in my view by all means crack on. I don't see that it's any business of ours to interfere when they're not causing any problems to anyone but it seems a number of people on here who are upset by the idea for some reason? Surely that's one of the big asks of the last 18 months or so? Allow people to get on with things as they see fit rather than having it imposed on us from on high what we can and cannot do?

Then if it's not our business to interfere we don't need mask only theatre or cinema screenings. Likewise if they choose to wear them they have to accept that normal life has resumed. I find it appalling that people are scared not to wear masks due to people perpetuating non science. If it were scientific I'd not have a problem with it.

 

[ainsworth74]

Then if it's not our business to interfere we don't need mask only theatre or cinema screenings. Likewise if they choose to wear them they have to accept that normal life has resumed.

If a private company wishes to make such arrangements to cater to people like that then that's their business at the end of the day. It doesn't harm me or you or anyone else. Again if there was a suggestion that most or all performances/screenings would be subject to such requirements then I quite agree that is wholly unacceptable. But there doesn't appear to such a suggestion mooted. I do think it's sad that some people appear to be worried, for whatever reason, that they need to take steps to protect themselves which may or may not depending on exactly what they do make little or no difference to their risk but at the end of the day if they wish to be that way and can find a private business willing to cater to them then crack on.

 

[AlterEgo]

Ok, afraid need to think what harm it is doing. Someone who is autistic can't change that, someone who's afraid of going out due to a virus can change. Doing things like this encourages abnormal behaviour, it isn't helping them so, in reality, it is doing harm.

Who cares if their behaviour is abnormal? If other people want to wear masks and segregate themselves that’s up to them. I prefer not to, and prefer not to have the law tell me to wear a mask, but I won’t denounce people who still believe mask wearing helps them. That’s their business and I’m okay with that.

 

[yorkie]

I live in Sweden and have been in England for a few days.

The notable difference in my observation is that while in Sweden things have returned to normal, in England it has only gone back to "near normal", with a lot of encouragement/pressure in specific settings for people to wear masks, and still a lot of signage on public transport. It feels very odd to me, as in some settings it is encouraged and in others it isn't mentioned at all, seemingly with no rhyme or reason.

Yes it is very weird; some people aren't capable of effective risk management and are believing misinformation and we have more than our fair share in this country.

I've been to Hungary and that's absolutely normal. Back in February I was in Switzerland and that was normal except for masks on trains; virtually no-one wore them in shops.

Wandered into a bakery today in a Town near me, but was asked to leave an wait outside ! ( I didn't bother ) seems it was still a MAXIMUM of 2 people at any one time in the shop, another one down the road had the same sign on the window.

I hope you didn't buy anything; there is no way I'd buy from such a shop out of principle

That's very much how my sister is behaving. She won't go into any crowded places and is still avoiding large shops and wearing a mask when going into her small village Co op. She used to go out for meals regularly but not eaten out for over 2 years now. Before she retired about 5 years ago, she was in charge of a very busy Accident and Emergency department at her local hospital, so I find her current attitude very difficult to understand with her medical knowledge and years of experience.

Some people in the medical world are calling for such measures for political point scoring purposes and she is probably going along with what they are asking. I'm glad I no longer work for the NHS and I have a lot less respect for the NHS than I used to.

I'd defer to your sister's experience of the front lines. Those who are medically aware (as opposed to the characters in Whitehall/Downing St) are rightly remaining cautious.

Not true; those who are most medically aware know that everyone is going to be exposed to Sars-CoV-2, multiple times, throughout our lifetimes.

If you disagree with Dr John Campbell (see my previous post in the Scotland thread), I'd be interested to hear your evidence and/or reasoning?

Strangely the same people who think they're too strong to be affected by covid are the same ones who are scared of wearing a mask. Watch the effect it had on Sebastian Vettel at last weekend's F1 race... Lewis Hamilton too. Both raised concerns about the lack of mask wearing.

Mask wearing does not prevent the spread of viruses, unless you are constantly wearing a correctly fitted FFP3 mask and that you store/handle such masks in accordance with instructions. You'd have to wear such a mask at all times in the presence of others, which means being alone for many activities including eating and drinking.

There are now upwards of 1000 deaths per week where covid is a cause of death on the death certificate. Not to be confused with 'deaths within 28 days of a positive test'.

How many are there in a bad 'flu year?

That doesn't include non-covid patients who die because ambulances aren't available to respond to 999 calls as quickly as they should.

Are there more 999 calls due to Covid than there are due to 'flu in a bad flu year?

Glad to have your opinion and even more glad that I can ignore it if I want to.

And I am more than happy to ignore yours

I see the echo chamber is still going pretty strong!

I see yours is; it's unfortunately a factually incorrect echo chamber. If I am going to be in an echo chamber, I'd at least like to be in one that was stating correct information

However, unlike what you say on the subject, @Freightmaster is factually correct.

 

[Enthusiast]

Restrictions are, I think, a busted flush with most of the population now,...

The problem is (or was) that one of the biggest impacts that the restrictions had on most of the population was the forced closure of businesses (particularly hospitality, entertainment, etc.). This required no compliance from the masses, only from businesses who depended on licencing and the like from local authorities. They could not afford to defy the law and if similar restrictions were to be reintroduced their effect would be the same.

It is strange to read that so many folk don't listen to experts, scientists, doctors, etc.....

What's a "doctor"?

The reason many people are increasingly disinclined to believe "experts" and the like is because they have demonstrated, over the past couple of years, to make predictions offer scenarios which have proved to be so spectacularly wrong. They have proffered advice on the basis of these scenarios and the government took that advice and imposed Draconian restrictions which criminalised normal, everyday behaviour.

 

[yorkie]

What's a "doctor"?

I wonder if @OldandRambling is referring to people who don't listen to doctors like John Campbell, ie. deluded people who want restrictions to be put in place, who distrust vaccines, and don't understand that we will all be exposed to Omicron and that we are heading for endemic equilibrium. Or maybe @OldandRambling is referring to people who don't listen to doctors like Eric Ding, i.e. sensible people.

Given that there are doctors at very different sides of the debate, it's impossible to heed the advice of all doctors.

 

[bramling]

I wonder if @OldandRambling is referring to people who don't listen to doctors like John Campbell, ie. deluded people who want restrictions to be put in place, who distrust vaccines, and don't understand that we will all be exposed to Omicron and that we are heading for endemic equilibrium. Or maybe @OldandRambling is referring to people who don't listen to doctors like Eric Ding, i.e. sensible people.

Given that there are doctors at very different sides of the debate, it's impossible to heed the advice of all doctors.

The GP element of the doctor profession hasn’t exactly covered itself in glory over the last two years.

 

[Eyersey468]

I would have more sympathy with the calls for mask only performances if we hadn't had them rammed down our throat for the last 2 years and if those who want masks had been more considerate to those who don't want to or can't wear them

 

[duncanp]

I would have more sympathy with the calls for mask only performances if we hadn't had them rammed down our throat for the last 2 years and if those who want masks had been more considerate to those who don't want to or can't wear them

The problem with mask only performances at the theatre is that it normalises mask wearing on a long term basis.

If mask only performances became widespread, how long do you think it would be before there were calls for mask only sessions at the supermarket, public library, restaurant, pub or countless other indoor public settings?

There would also be endless arguments about exactly which performances at the theatre, or opening hours at the supermarket etc, should be mask only.

Whilst I can appreciate the fears and concerns of those who would like mask only performances, one of the reasons they give for wanting them is so that they "...feel safe...".

It cannot be emphasised often enough that feeling safe and being safe are not necessarily the same thing.

Someone who does have concerns though, however misplaced their concerns are, can protect themselves by wearing a close fitting FFP3 mask.

There would then be no need for them to worry about whether anyone else was wearing a mask.

 

[Eyersey468]

The problem with mask only performances at the theatre is that it normalises mask wearing on a long term basis.

If mask only performances became widespread, how long do you think it would be before there were calls for mask only sessions at the supermarket, public library, restaurant, pub or countless other indoor public settings?

There would also be endless arguments about exactly which performances at the theatre, or opening hours at the supermarket etc, should be mask only.

Whilst I can appreciate the fears and concerns of those who would like mask only performances, one of the reasons they give for wanting them is so that they "...feel safe...".

It cannot be emphasised often enough that feeling safe and being safe are not necessarily the same thing.

Someone who does have concerns though, however misplaced their concerns are, can protect themselves by wearing a close fitting FFP3 mask.

There would then be no need for them to worry about whether anyone else was wearing a mask.

I agree with what you are saying, I for one do not wish mask wearing to become normalised on a long term basis

 

[OldandRambling]

I can tell from the "wisdom" handed out here that I am not going to change anyone's stance on Covid.

We are all members of society, and my wish is simply to do the best for the well being of all.

Folk who have Covid and choose not to wear masks are not just "exercising their own choice" but putting others with health weaknesses in increased danger. It's not that hard to understand. Folk who don't consider others needs are simply being selfish, no matter how they dress it up in fine words about "personal choice".

Did anyone here get the Covid vaccinations? If you are all so sure catching Covid is a safe event, why did you get vaccinated?

Choosing to have the vaccine but not otherwise follow guidance is simply cherry picking, a non scientific choice.

I can't discuss logic with anyone who thinks " I am not going to shop there if I have to lower the chance of getting or spreading Covid by reducing the number of customers inside, I must be allowed to cram inside to my own satisfaction"

 

[Eyersey468]

I can tell from the "wisdom" handed out here that I am not going to change anyone's stance on Covid.

We are all members of society, and my wish is simply to do the best for the well being of all.

Folk who have Covid and choose not to wear masks are not just "exercising their own choice" but putting others with health weaknesses in increased danger. It's not that hard to understand. Folk who don't consider others needs are simply being selfish, no matter how they dress it up in fine words about "personal choice".

Did anyone here get the Covid vaccinations? If you are all so sure catching Covid is a safe event, why did you get vaccinated?

Choosing to have the vaccine but not otherwise follow guidance is simply cherry picking, a non scientific choice.

I can't discuss logic with anyone who thinks " I am not going to shop there if I have to lower the chance of getting or spreading Covid by reducing the number of customers inside, I must be allowed to cram inside to my own satisfaction"

May I ask what wisdom is that? I agree that folk who don't consider others needs are selfish, however that works both ways and those who want to wear masks or feel they need to should consider the needs of those who can't wear them. A lot of sectors simply cannot operate profitably at reduced capacity

 

[Crossover]

Did anyone here get the Covid vaccinations? If you are all so sure catching Covid is a safe event, why did you get vaccinated?

Some of us also got Covid pre-vaccination. It was but an irritation in the most part

 

[Darandio]

Did anyone here get the Covid vaccinations? If you are all so sure catching Covid is a safe event, why did you get vaccinated?

I am vaccinated but I didn't do so because I was scared of catching Covid or because I wanted an extra level of protection over what my immune system would provide. I did so because I was told if I didn't then I would be potentially excluded from society. Millions of other people were coerced in the same way.

In terms of how the discussion is now taking place on masks. I don't wear one but couldn't give a toss if others wish to do so. At periods during the last two years I did think like some others on here, i'd have been opposed to such things as mask only screenings at cinemas. But i'm way past that point now, i'm getting on with life.

 

[yorkie]

I can tell from the "wisdom" handed out here that I am not going to change anyone's stance on Covid.

I can tell from the "wisdom" contained in your posts that you are not prepared to listen to sensible medical experts, such as Dr John Campbell.

We are all members of society, and my wish is simply to do the best for the well being of all.

Really? Sadly it doesn't sound like it.

Folk who have Covid and choose not to wear masks are not just "exercising their own choice" but putting others with health weaknesses in increased danger.

If you have a viral infection and are infectious, wearing a flimsy mask is absolutely NOT going to prevent anyone else being exposed to the virus.

Wearing a flimsy mask does not mean that someone who is infected with a virus and is couging and sneezing everywhere can magically avoid being infectious.

But, at the end of the day, everyone is going to be exposed to Sars-CoV-2; just as is already the case with similar viruses such as OC43.

It's not that hard to understand.

Indeed but you don't seem to be able to understand for some reason.

Folk who don't consider others needs are simply being selfish, no matter how they dress it up in fine words about "personal choice".

What "needs" are you referring to?

Did anyone here get the Covid vaccinations? If you are all so sure catching Covid is a safe event, why did you get vaccinated?

This question makes no sense; did you mean to say that catching Sars-CoV-2 is absolutely guaranteed, so why wouldn't you get vaccinated?

Either you have worded the question incorrectly by mistake or you fundamentally misunderstand the purpose of vaccines.

Choosing to have the vaccine but not otherwise follow guidance is simply cherry picking, a non scientific choice.

No; you are the one who is not making a scientific choice. Have you seen my posts linking to videos by Dr John Campbell? If you disagree with anything he says I would be interested to hear your reasoning and justification.

The scientific choice is to get vaccinated because it is inevitable we are going to get exposed to this virus; this gives our immune system prior knowledge of the virus meaning we are going to be better at fighting it when we catch it. Once we've had a few exposures to the vaccine and the live virus we will have the sort of immunity we already have against similar viruses such as OC43.

It really isn't that difficult to understand.

Those who get vaccinated and yet still wear flimsy, loose fitting masks are not only misunderstanding the effectiveness of masks (flimsy masks do nothing; you need an FFP2/3 to actually be effective) but are also signalling their denial of the effectiveness of vaccines, which is very irrational behaviour indeed. This sort of irrational behaviour which is exhibited by a signifcant minority in England doesn't tend to occur in other countries I've been to recently, such as Switzerland or Hungary.

I can't discuss logic with anyone who thinks " I am not going to shop there if I have to lower the chance of getting or spreading Covid by reducing the number of customers inside, I must be allowed to cram inside to my own satisfaction"

It is you whose logic is flawed.

 

[BJames]

I am vaccinated but I didn't do so because I was scared of catching Covid or because I wanted an extra level of protection over what my immune system would provide. I did so because I was told if I didn't then I would be potentially excluded from society. Millions of other people were coerced in the same way.

In terms of how the discussion is now taking place on masks. I don't wear one but couldn't give a toss if others wish to do so. At periods during the last two years I did think like some others on here, i'd have been opposed to such things as mask only screenings at cinemas. But i'm way past that point now, i'm getting on with life.

100% agree and did so for the same reason. I also got a positive covid test in September 2020, months before the vaccine was available to my age group.

Did anyone here get the Covid vaccinations? If you are all so sure catching Covid is a safe event, why did you get vaccinated?

Choosing to have the vaccine but not otherwise follow guidance is simply cherry picking, a non scientific choice.

I can't discuss logic with anyone who thinks " I am not going to shop there if I have to lower the chance of getting or spreading Covid by reducing the number of customers inside, I must be allowed to cram inside to my own satisfaction"

Also - the point of getting the vaccination is to reduce the risk of severe illness if you catch covid. Other measures are claimed to reduce the risk of catching covid in the first place (I personally don't think they do, and given how transmissible it is, any pretences otherwise are incorrect the way I see it - look at Shanghai) - so if you're almost certain to catch covid if you ever leave your house, then taking the vaccination is the most sensible "cherry picking" (as you call it)

Not that that's why I took it. As @Darandio said, I was concerned about being excluded from society and did not wish that to happen. That's not the right reason for taking a vaccination, but that's the way in which it was being pitched, especially for my age group, so that's what we had to work with.

 

[NorthOxonian]

I can't discuss logic with anyone who thinks " I am not going to shop there if I have to lower the chance of getting or spreading Covid by reducing the number of customers inside, I must be allowed to cram inside to my own satisfaction"

I don't think anyone is making that argument. The reasons many of us want to avoid places that have retained Covid regulations is definitely not because we want to increase the amount it's being spread.

For me personally, it's because these restrictions left me in a very dark place mentally. The prospect of them continuing ad infinitum is incredibly distressing - particularly masks because of how visible and obvious they are. You seem to have a lot of sympathy for those who have health weaknesses, but what about those of us who have suffered mentally because of these restrictions?

As for the idea that choosing to be vaccinated but not following other guidance is cherry picking, I completely disagree. Instead it's a case of weighing up the costs and benefits. Getting vaccinated was a relatively easy thing to do with huge benefits, whereas having to wear a mask forever is a massive inconvenience with far more marginal benefits. I don't see how this isn't logical, it's something we do in practically every other sphere of our lives.

 

[43066]

Choosing to have the vaccine but not otherwise follow guidance is simply cherry picking, a non scientific choice.

People might choose to have the vaccine because there is good scientific evidence that it works, whereas it’s now very clear that other measures (masks!) make no discernible difference. Much of the guidance, on the other hand, is purely political theatre.

 

[yorkie]

For me personally, it's because these restrictions left me in a very dark place mentally. The prospect of them continuing ad infinitum is incredibly distressing - particularly masks because of how visible and obvious they are. You seem to have a lot of sympathy for those who have health weaknesses, but what about those of us who have suffered mentally because of these restrictions?

I completely agree.

As for the idea that choosing to be vaccinated but not following other guidance is cherry picking, I completely disagree.

Indeed; vaccinations allow normal life to resume and I do not understand the mindset of those who appear to be so distrusting in the excellent vaccines that they do not wish to return to normal life.

They can choose to restrict themselves but I will not be restricted and anyone trying to restrict me can do one and will be told where to go in no uncertain terms; I've had enough!

Instead it's a case of weighing up the costs and benefits. Getting vaccinated was a relatively easy thing to do with huge benefits, whereas having to wear a mask forever is a massive inconvenience with far more marginal benefits. I don't see how this isn't logical, it's something we do in practically every other sphere of our lives.

Indeed vaccines are part of our normal lives; those who choose to distrust them can wear an effective mask if they wish to delay exposure, or a flimsy mask which does nothing if they wish to virtue signal but either way the rest of us, which is the clear majority of the population, will lead our normal lives.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 13 Apr 2022 ==

People might choose to have the vaccine because there is good scientific evidence that it works, whereas it’s now very clear that other measures (masks!) make no discernible difference. Much of the guidance, on the other hand, is purely political theatre.

Exactly.

It amazes me that some people are so distrusting of vaccines and therefore want to delay the inevitable exposure with masking, and yet are keen for others to wear flimsy loose fitting masks which are not designed to filter virus particles and yet choose not to wear the type of effective mask themselves, which are designed for that purpose.

They then have the cheek to claim that other people are not being logical; it's utterly baffling!

 

[Simon11]

Folk who have Covid and choose not to wear masks are not just "exercising their own choice" but putting others with health weaknesses in increased danger. It's not that hard to understand. Folk who don't consider others needs are simply being selfish, no matter how they dress it up in fine words about "personal choice".

50% of people who have covid, have no idea they have it. Thus, are you saying all these people are selfish? Or are you expecting every living sole to take a test when they leave their door step in the morning and pay between £2 and £5, to protect vulnerable people?

While on the topic, should we also sell and stop using our cars, to protect the vulnerable people with breathing difficulties and not be selfish? "UK combustion emissions cause around 13,000 premature deaths within the UK every year"

How far do we go and what is the break point for having sensible measures which balance the impact of safety measures-v- benefit of them on vulnerable people?

 

[nw1]

I can tell from the "wisdom" handed out here that I am not going to change anyone's stance on Covid.

We are all members of society, and my wish is simply to do the best for the well being of all.

That's true but is it best for the well-being of society long term to continue harsh measures? To be honest I don't have a strong view on the mask debate either way, my attitude is very much "live and let live" on that - but am more concerned about some of the other measures (mostly outside of the UK) such as vaccine passports (which time out after 270 days in many cases, implying you need to be on a lifelong vaccine program; I took the first two vaccines but, having actually had Covid in the autumn, saw little need for the booster) or negative tests to do relatively normal, everyday activities such as visit bars, restaurants or cafes. Such things may restrict the number of customers (and harm the economy, which impacts not just the profit of businesses but also people's livelihoods - any talk of society must remember that) and also perpetuate a general climate of fear which will do no-one any good psychologically.

Should these continue indefinitely? Is Covid so serious that we have to change our way of living long term? What is different about Covid compared to the 1918 flu, which AFAIK was actually more dangerous yet did not lead to harsh measures through much of the 1920s.

Any arguments considering the good of society need to consider the potential harm to society caused by perpetuating measures for many years. It's not just about protecting people from Covid, it's about protecting people's livelihoods, protecting people psychologically, and protecting people from poverty.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 13 Apr 2022 ==

50% of people who have covid, have no idea they have it. Thus, are you saying all these people are selfish? Or are you expecting every living sole to take a test when they leave their door step in the morning and pay between £2 and £5, to protect vulnerable people?

One thing I don't like is the perpetuation of feeling of guilt by some people (which I have observed personally in 'real life'; I'm not implying anyone on this thread necessarily believes this), for example if they currently have minor "Covid" symptoms such as runny nose, headache, slight cough, tiredness etc. Should testing and/or self-isolation be morally required in such cases?

I've said this before but I would really be interested to see the thoughts of those who favour mandatory or 'strongly recommended' tests, vaccine passports, continuing self-isolation even if asymptomatic, etc on what they believe the medium and long-term strategy, over the next 2, 5 or 10 years, should be. I don't think I have seen any discussion on this and this question always seems to be avoided.

 

[Stan_Butler]

I can tell from the "wisdom" contained in your posts that you are not prepared to listen to sensible medical experts, such as Dr John Campbell.


Really? Sadly it doesn't sound like it.

If you have a viral infection and are infectious, wearing a flimsy mask is absolutely NOT going to prevent anyone else being exposed to the virus.

Wearing a flimsy mask does not mean that someone who is infected with a virus and is couging and sneezing everywhere can magically avoid being infectious.

But, at the end of the day, everyone is going to be exposed to Sars-CoV-2; just as is already the case with similar viruses such as OC43.


Indeed but you don't seem to be able to understand for some reason.


What "needs" are you referring to?


This question makes no sense; did you mean to say that catching Sars-CoV-2 is absolutely guaranteed, so why wouldn't you get vaccinated?

Either you have worded the question incorrectly by mistake or you fundamentally misunderstand the purpose of vaccines.

No; you are the one who is not making a scientific choice. Have you seen my posts linking to videos by Dr John Campbell? If you disagree with anything he says I would be interested to hear your reasoning and justification.

The scientific choice is to get vaccinated because it is inevitable we are going to get exposed to this virus; this gives our immune system prior knowledge of the virus meaning we are going to be better at fighting it when we catch it. Once we've had a few exposures to the vaccine and the live virus we will have the sort of immunity we already have against similar viruses such as OC43.

It really isn't that difficult to understand.

Those who get vaccinated and yet still wear flimsy, loose fitting masks are not only misunderstanding the effectiveness of masks (flimsy masks do nothing; you need an FFP2/3 to actually be effective) but are also signalling their denial of the effectiveness of vaccines, which is very irrational behaviour indeed. This sort of irrational behaviour which is exhibited by a signifcant minority in England doesn't tend to occur in other countries I've been to recently, such as Switzerland or Hungary.



It is you whose logic is flawed.

“Dr” John Campbell isn’t, in fact, a Doctor and his YouTube videos have been widely dis-credited by many real doctors and scientists for containing misinformation.

 

[yorkie]

“Dr” John Campbell isn’t, in fact, a Doctor and his YouTube videos have been widely dis-credited my real doctors and scientists for containing misinformation.

How do you define a "Doctor"? You seem to have your own definition, so it would be interesting to hear it.

The sort of people who have discredited his videos are those who want indefinite restrictions and should not be listened to.

I refer you to these posts:
https://www.railforums.co.uk/thread...such-as-hong-kong.214159/page-34#post-5584165
and
https://www.railforums.co.uk/thread...tions-in-scotland.220688/page-13#post-5584176

What part of these videos do you claim to be "misinformation" exactly and what alternative information do you consider to be true?

Also what are your thoughts on Eric Ding?