Coronavirus

[SFO]

2 hours ago, Clive59 said:

It would be unethical to start vaccinating children without first having made sure that it’s safe, especially considering that the risk to children from covid is infinitesimal. 

Agree. Children are in the lowest or essentially no risk category. There is no reason to vaccinate them if they are unsure whether the vaccine is safe for children. 

[andydclements]

@Buddsy, the definition of the efficacy is how much it stops people contracting the disease, not how much it allows them to become asymptomatic. So that claim is disproved by the various studies that allowed the vaccines to be approved. 

[Colin P]

Not a doctor etc, but my laymans understanding is that a vaccine works by allowing your body to identify the disease. Therefore by definition surely you have to have "caught it" before your body can attack it.

Therefore, surely no vaccine prevents you from "getting a disease" it just sets you up to deal with it before it does a number on you. In this case it rather seems that even post vaccine some people will still see effects of the disease, but they will be less than otherwise.

Because of the vaccine those who are immunised will deal with the disease quicker, as such will have it for a shorter time, will therefore not spread it to as many people and therefore it should reduce the spread of the disease.

Well, that's my logic anyway.

[andydclements]

The vaccine works by allowing your body to identify some markers as being alien, those markers belong to the virus. Your body learns that finding those means it's something to attack. You haven't caught the virus but you have learned what to attack.

 

Think army training, you get told the uniform the enemy wear, you learn to attack at any sighting of that uniform, doesn't mean you've been invaded.

[Chillidoggy]

I saw a doctor once. But he didn’t see me.

[Kimbers]

18 hours ago, Techyd said:

It is in my mind, highly suspicious....

That the WHO have not been allowed in to investigate the virus origins is very concerning, I'm sure many of you have read this article from last month?? https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-china-55364445

China is very tightly controlled country so this may simply be the government continuing to exercise its unblinkered controlling policies over its media, foreign media access and its general population.   But frankly, from where I'm sitting, it's really difficult to conclude anything but a cover up!! 

 

I have been saying for months that it is highly suspicious that Chinese and other Asian countries have by far the lowest transmission rate and lowest fatalities. You look at Japan. twice the population of the UK, full testing and only 294k cases with 3989 deaths. Korea, Virtually the same population of the UK 30k cases, 501 deaths (Yes 501). Though China is controlling its information I suspect it is not because many more have died than stated, I think its because its a very low figure and they know how suspicious that looks at the Point of Origin!

If you genetically engineer a weapon, you aim it at those you want to kill. Western, Males, Black (Incl Indian etc) Males. Middle age upwards as they are the ruling classes with the most say! Especially in countries like India and Pakistan who have a Patriachal society. But you also need to build in a level of immunity for your own Society and race.

I know its a bit of a conspiracy theory but its one that just seems obvious, non? 

[Bibs]

44 minutes ago, andydclements said:

as being alien

Don't tell Buddsy about the aliens!

[Chillidoggy]

41 minutes ago, Kimbers said:

 

If you genetically engineer a weapon, you aim it at those you want to kill. Western, Males, Black (Incl Indian etc) Males. Middle age upwards as they are the ruling classes with the most say! Especially in countries like India and Pakistan who have a Patriachal society.
 

 

You really think the perpetrators would want to be left with the kids?

[Kimbers]

Nice an malleable, alot more liberal, not a fucking clue....yes.

[Techyd]

Oh I don't think there's any malicious intent going on, only just that it seems likely to have been made made as part of the institute of virology's work in to SARS as part of developing vaccinations.  IF it is man made, I would think this is the result of an accident / leak of the virus.

In terms of the low infection rates in China, we saw that lockdown meant lockdown - buildings were provided food for 14 days and then sealed.  There was no going out.  That, coupled with their already segmented cities, where you require passes to move between districts they were quickly able to contain the spread.

 

What's the alternative?  Tomorrow Never Dies?! 🤯

[Chillidoggy]

2 hours ago, Kimbers said:

Nice an malleable, alot more liberal, not a fucking clue....yes.

You need to get out more.

[andydclements]

Re the Asia infection rates, you'd expect them to be slightly lower than Europe etc as it's now part of common courtesy for people to wear masks/ face covering, following the SARS outbreaks, so disease-spread measures we in Europe etc are only recently starting to adopt (or some of us are), were already in place there.

[Bibs]

This would be a very poor weapon, it's mainly killing the old folks so not really that effective in reducing a countries effectiveness, just reducing their pension bills!

[C8RKH]

14 minutes ago, Bibs said:

This would be a very poor weapon, it's mainly killing the old folks so not really that effective in reducing a countries effectiveness, just reducing their pension bills!

Yes but given the older generations in this country still need to spoonfeed the majority of the younger snowflake generations the plan is a wise one. Kill off the population that is resilient and and resourceful and leave the young turds to wither and die whilst they lie there desperately crying into their digital assistant "bring me water, bring me food, feed me....."

[Kimbers]

Yes mate, chest infection

[SFO]

Great that you have immunity 

[Bibs]

Not a good time to be old! Looks like 75% of cases are the 75 and overs, still! 

Why the vulnerable have not been the ones subject to lockdown and the rest of the population allowed to carry on makes little sense to me.

[andydclements]

That approach would align to the PRC's view that we'd be better to inoculate the working population first. The trouble is that the isolation for the vulnerable people isn't absolute, so care homes have workers etc going in, if my Dad was still alive we'd still need daily visits to help care for him, etc, all of which give routes for the infection to get in then spread like a wildfire amongst  those groups.

 

That said, one c80yr old nearby gets weekly visits from two of here daughters (one could be art of the bubble but not two), they arrive in two cars, then all three go out in one car. So, not really as if some vulnerable people are taking isolation seriously.

[Bibs]

On 08/01/2021 at 18:49, Bibs said:

They've had a recount by the looks of it! 

[LotusLeftLotusRight]

Maybe the smooth lines are the weekly rolling averages, whereas the jagged lines are daily figures?

[TdM]

To be fair (sorry this is obviously from the Tuesday point) whilst I must be clear that I don't subscribe to this theory, IF China had deployed this as a weapon, it's relatively smart, though not for the reasons mentioned already. Why?

 

You wouldn't design it as a weapon in the traditional sense, it's more like an economic weapon. If you had a vaccination already, you would release it at home in a certain area, suppress (most of) the news, allow it to spread to other countries then start mentioning it's a big problem. Now your people have had it it looks less like you did it deliberately. You then fix the problem at home, whilst all the other nations of the world lock down and struggle.

The fatalities would not be your intention as such but a secondary effect, it's the relative economic damage you would be after. Yes it hurts you too but it hurts them a lot more. This has a large impact on China vs US in relative financial strength and therefore would be a strong strategy.

 

Again, I don't think it's at all the case at all, it's an accident. But as an academic point it's interesting to ponder.

[mg4lotus]

China is very competitive on a global market. It was expanding and developing into a leading player anyway. Would it be of any advantage to damage that global market?

[andydclements]

Now, if the conspiracy theory was doing the rounds that the disease had been created by an extremist group who were campaigning that the planet is over-populated by humans, and there needs to be a cull. Well, that would hit the mark on many fronts, population impacted (but marginally, nowhere near enough to knock us back by decades/centuries), travel so fossil fuel use down, production on may goods impacted both directly and indirectly by economic contraction so further reduction on fossil fuel use. No, I don't believe such a theory, but I can believe that there are people who do / would believe it.

 

[Barrykearley]

1 hour ago, mg4lotus said:

Would it be of any advantage to damage that global market?

Damage will only be short term. Short term it has huge impacts on values of companies and fixed assets - as can be seen by many firms going under. It’s a real opportunity to swoop in and buy.

[mg4lotus]

As the market shrinks and local economies take a hit It will be more attractive to do things locally using the newly created cheap labour than outsourcing to the distant Chinese.

Local entrepreneurs will be quicker to react than the Chinese government in local emerging markets.