Brexit, for once some facts.
- Thread starter flecc
- Start date
I carefully avoided any indication of approval or disapproval of some form of certificate re Covid! Just kept to the technical issues.Careful. You’ll be branded a fascist
I don’t blame you!I carefully avoided any indication of approval or disapproval of some form of certificate re Covid! Just kept to the technical issues.
What Zatlan /Susan and JHC both ignore is the huge difference between public health and private risk. Everything seems to indicate that public health is served by giving the vaccines, and if there is some collateral damage, it is manageable ..from a public health perspective.
To the private individual, taking these vaccines is a 100% risk and for the majority low reward. The global death rate from confirmed CV19 is 3%, but that risk is concentrated at the elderly ,with a young population the individual risk of death is at least 70 perhaps 100 times less. ..So the risk of death is now 0.03%. For that young person
Giving and taking the vaccination means injecting a noxious material into the body with a significant risk of discomfort, and maybe death. Remember all these deaths were caused by a odd reaction ..not yet understood, in normal healthy people. It is therefore absolutely imperative for the regulatory authorities to investigate exhaustively all the potential paths to minimise the risk.
For me and my son the risk reward ratio is overwhelmingly in favour of any vaccine. It is not so for my 30 year old daughter.
I, m afraid it's that very attitude that has led to many deaths of young blokes on motorbikes. Simple fact is our road network is for public and commercial transport. Historically its seen by many as a sports venue. It isn't. If folk want to take risks, drive fast, wheelie down road get on race track.
I agree taking risks is all about growing up, I, ve taken more than my fair share but we should all learn from an early age our public roads are simply not the place to do it. Never have been, never will be.
There are ample places and activities to get adrenaline fixes, doing so in cars and on motorbikes is just an easy way out for people too lazy to go to right places and the risk they take is nearly always carried by somebody else.
PS
I raced Caterhams/Westfields for 15 years. Never had a speeding ticket, accident, or even a bump in 45 years on road.
Track doesn't have kerbs(edges) kids jumping out, traffic lights, oil on road, prams crossing and stuff coming at you in opposite direction. It's safer.
Road cars should be fitted with a great big spike out of steering wheel. We all might give cars and other road users the respect they deserve then. Road cars are designed to give you a feeling of isolation from noise, weather, and danger. Drive a 7 without a windscreen to see what's actually going on.
Risk to a 40 year old of dying from Covid is 0.1%...1 in a thousand. Now repeat your maths.
And that's before we examine effects of long covid.
What you call it is irrelevant.
Its simply how many will die if /when they contract covid against how many might die from vaccine. You complicate stuff so much you get lost.
I wonder how many of the 126,000 deaths we could have saved had we had AZ vaccine 18 months ago. And, you are always telling us how many deaths have happened in UK, yet when a working solution to prevent them is rolled out you throw up all these negatives.???
Now now, calm down. Find a comfy chair and take one of those benzos the nice doctor gave you. You abused the freedom the state gave you to vote for brexit and boris. And made yourself complicit in the avoidable traumatic deaths of tens of thousands of inocent fellow citizens. And we accept you (despite your gross lack of insight and self awareness). And you're even allowed to roam the streets. And there isnt any form of identification or test to protect us against your very special kind of stupidity. Now isnt that something to celebrate?
I strongly disagree, the outcomes are factual and result from our respective handling of the crisis. Sweden held its nerve and held to a consistent policy while we panicked and lurched from relaxed to strict control and back and forth again repeatedly. We are still doing that and it's stupid as most of us have stated. Every policy has advantages and disadvantages and repeatedly switching midstream stands a good chance of missing any advantages and gathering more disadvantages. Gambling once again.
Nothing strange at all, we do indeed disagree. OG sees it as an issue of saving life at any cost. I disagree and see it as an issue of a life/cost balance which we've got spectacularly wrong, spending a vast sum to still fail to control the virus while achieving a very high death rate.
Like Sweden I would have spent virtually none of that money and still had the deaths we have. What you fail to realise is that the money we spent almost certainly increased our death rate by paying people to stay off work and go home. Of course they didn't stay at home staring at four walls, they went out socialising far more than they would have done at work. Remember the crowds on the beaches and in the parks enjoying that fine 2020 Spring and Summer? Remember the hordes gathering at beauty spots with crowded car parks? We all criticised them didn't we. Most would have been safer at work getting on with their jobs and keeping our economy going.
We got it very wrong and you simply can't admit that an EU member got it very right after both of us made the identical bad start.
.
The world you aim for would eventually reduce us all the lives of the Hymenoptera.
No life at all.
.
Is Sweden's coronavirus strategy a cautionary tale or a success story?
Despite claims that soft lockdown was a good idea, so far Sweden has had more covid-19 related deaths than its Scandinavian neighbours with little difference in economic slowdown
www.newscientist.com
So did Sweden. Its neighbours did far better
And a 20 year old and a 25 year old or in my case a 30 year old ?. Yes the risk is age related.. 40 is middle aged!. . I choose not to query why the UKs rates of reported blood clots is significantly and statistically lower than EU rates. It could be different data sets or it could be jingoistic The point is that you want others to put themselves at risk for a reward you gain. Again I say I will be happy to take whatever vaccine is available because the reward risk ratio is very high for me and my brothers and families. It is not as balanced for a 30 year old female.
Had we has ANY of the vaccines 13 months ago, there would have been a global death toll measured in thousands not millions.. and well you know that. Had Island countries actually quarantined, effectively in March a year ago, their death tolls would have been in hundreds ..with ir without vaccination.
Last edited:
That always happens anyway, no matter how sophisticated the documents.
The only thing that works for good security is online confirmation, like that with vehicle tax, MOT and insurance, plus finger print reading and/or facial recognition with personal items like a vaccine card.
.
What lockdown sceptics get wrong about Sweden
Should Britain return to a form of lockdown — the logical conclusion of a suppression strategy — or should we adopt a different approach, one that looks more like Sweden? Those in favour of a so-called ‘segmentation strategy’, where the vulnerable are shielded and the rest of us are allowed to...
www.spectator.co.uk
Sweden and UK are different countries.. People insist on comparing UK with utterly different countries with regards almost every metric. And Sweden hasn't handled pandemic as well as its neighbours. Look on worldometer for upto date data.
For goodness sake engage your brain, that is not relevant to my argument. They did as well as us without spending enough to wreck their future.Is Sweden's coronavirus strategy a cautionary tale or a success story?
Despite claims that soft lockdown was a good idea, so far Sweden has had more covid-19 related deaths than its Scandinavian neighbours with little difference in economic slowdown
So did Sweden. Its neighbours did far better
If we'd done the same we wouldn't have been £400 billions of debt worse off, our economy would have been in far better shape, our kids education wouldn't have been seriously damaged and their exams would have been taken. All with no more deaths than we already suffered, and possibly less.
.
Utter rubbish, the 70 limit is nothing to do with safety.
It was trialled for two years in the late 1960s and when it made no difference to any accident rates it was withdrawn.
Then when the Arab oil crisis happened in the early 1970s the 70 limit was reintroduced as an economy measure, together with the national 60 mph limit for the same reason. There was no mention of safety in that legislation.
Those two limits were never withdrawn so they remain an economy measure that by default already also applies to the newer electric cars.
As always, one needs to know the subject well enough to comment.
.
Point 1: You can’t name three people and refer to them as, “both.”
Point 2: Long Covid
Point 3: The threat from the virus > the threat from the vaccine.
Yes he can, Suzan and Zlatan are one and the same person.
> we hope. One day we'll know for certain.
.
Given that the Kent variant was both more infectious and, we now read, more likely to cause hospitalisation and death, we need to factor that into the equation.
The death rate could worsen very significantly due to further/different variations. If any vaccine provides at least some protection, thus keeping hospitalisation and death rates down, then its worth would appear to rise very considerably.
Whereas the danger of the AZ vaccine is unlikely to change. And we just might find some factor which, if addressed, could reduce dangers further.
Not quite true. There was a bit of a fracas in parliament over an AC Cobra doing 150 mph on a newly opened stretch of M1... An E type (a factory version) had also been tested to a similar speed...
I don't actually think raising speed limit to 85 or so(its that at moment really) would affect overall figures much but accidents are more damaging with only slight increases in speed.
Its perhaps not the speed limit but our attitude. 100 mph in some places is fine... 25 in others too fast.. Only point I was making is that roads are not race tracks for anybody in answer to JA saying it was normal to take risks driving. It shouldn't be.
And to be fair drivers in UK are without doubt best in EU... French roads are lethal and their death figures suggest same. They still (some anyway) still work to their old right of way system on roundabouts. ie) going onto roundabout you have priority. There used to be an old chap everyday drive from Boulou to Argeles, drove onto roundabouts oblivious to anyone on there. How he didn't kill anyone I don't know... End of day he do same going back.