So, coronavirus...

[Bimbowomxn]

Small coterie:


https://www.publichealth.org/public-awa ... ines-work/

First google search.

The Herd Immunity Imperative
Vaccines don't just work on an individual level, they protect entire populations. Once enough people are immunized, opportunities for an outbreak of disease become so low even people who aren't immunized benefit. Essentially, a bacteria or virus simply won't have enough eligible hosts to establish a foothold and will eventually die out entirely. This phenomenon is called "herd immunity" or "community immunity," and it has allowed once-devastating diseases to be eliminated entirely, without needing to vaccinate every individual.

[JM2K6]

So the vaccine producing the “antibody lesson” works but the infection producing the “antibody lesson “ doesn’t ?

In most cases people are getting a weak infection, right? So there's a weak response.

A vaccine can be made that provides a stronger response than what would happen naturally; the more salient point is you can have vaccine boosters to cope with the fact that the immune response might not hang around for very long.

The Germans are not claiming that a vaccine will not happen (which is of course a possibility!). They are simply stating that reinfection is a possibility and that the way we generate immunity via our antibodies is not conducive to getting herd immunity without a vaccine.

Yes, this super clever vaccine for a corona virus (there’s never been a vaccine succes for a Corona virus) will act by creating a stronger response (without infection) than the actual virus.

A stronger response compared to the 'remembered' immune response a weak infection would give, yes. Trying to find the sweet spot for immune system response is kinda important to vaccine development.

Is there any science on even “weak infections” yet let alone this amazing vaccine.?

Uh, what?

The idea that a vaccine will be produced that is more infectious than the actual virus does seem odd. But hey these are the hoops we leap through.

We don't want a vaccine that's infectious... that seems a bit of a strange thing to talk about.

I'm not convinced you're arguing in good faith here. It appears you've started from "we're never going to have a vaccine", tried to argue that the Germans are saying there can't be a vaccine because of how short the immunity period is with infections (they're not saying that), and are now trying to cast doubt on... how vaccines work at all? The concept of weaker infections / weaker immune responses to infection? The idea that a vaccine should be more infectious(?!).

[JM2K6]

Any new strategy would still have these incompetents in charge of it, so I'm not sure that logic holds.

A new strategy whereby they are not trying to deal with the entire population and that is more targetted might be within their capability but just dismissing it out of hand because alternative, in your opinion, appears worse does not help move us forward especially when the current strategy is so bad.

I don't think having scientists like the Germans investigate and expand upon the reasons why it's a worse alternative counts as "dismissing it out of hand because 'in my opinion' it appears worse". I certainly am not comfortable with trying it for a laugh because a handful of dubious people have banged the drum about it but a whole lot more have said it's a bad idea.

[JM2K6]

Small coterie:


https://www.publichealth.org/public-awa ... ines-work/

First google search.

The Herd Immunity Imperative
Vaccines don't just work on an individual level, they protect entire populations. Once enough people are immunized, opportunities for an outbreak of disease become so low even people who aren't immunized benefit. Essentially, a bacteria or virus simply won't have enough eligible hosts to establish a foothold and will eventually die out entirely. This phenomenon is called "herd immunity" or "community immunity," and it has allowed once-devastating diseases to be eliminated entirely, without needing to vaccinate every individual.

Y... yes. No-one is claiming everyone needs to be vaccinated. The percentage of the population varies depending on each scenario.

Herd immunity as a concept is well understood and no-one here is arguing it's not a thing. Herd immunity without a vaccine is what's under discussion. I can't speak for Biffer but I certainly wouldn't be trusting the word of any scientist who believed herd immunity as a concept was a myth.

The more you post the less I am convinced you understand this stuff at all. Instead of coming closer to mutual understanding, we seem to be moving ever further apart. I'm not sure I have the appetite to continue.

[Carter's Choice]

This thread reminds me of Simon Sinek's 'The Infinite Game'. We have two groups of posters effectively playing different games. On one hand we have the posters trying to engage rationally and reasonably with Bimboman. They are playing a finite game. They are trying to get some resolution, and are keen to debate the point only until a shared understanding is reached. But Bimboman is playing an infinite game. As long as people are arguing the point he is winning. He has no interest in finding a resolution or coming to an agreement, the longer and more cyclic the discussion is, the happier and more successful he is.

[Bimbowomxn]

We don't want a vaccine that's infectious... that seems a bit of a strange thing to talk about.

I'm not convinced you're arguing in good faith here. It appears you've started from "we're never going to have a vaccine", tried to argue that the Germans are saying there can't be a vaccine because of how short the immunity period is with infections (they're not saying that), and are now trying to cast doubt on... how vaccines work at all? The concept of weaker infections / weaker immune responses to infection? The idea that a vaccine should be more infectious(?!).

I’m absolutely arguing in good faith that if there’s not enough general protection from being actually infected by the virus and recovering, that the idea of a vaccine Being more efficient and actually producing antibodies across the number of scenarios require and safely is highly unlikely.

That such a vaccine will be produced and tested correctly in record time makes that even more unlikely if it’s true that we can be infected but develop no immunity.

[Bimbowomxn]

This thread reminds me of Simon Sinek's 'The Infinite Game'. We have two groups of posters effectively playing different games. On one hand we have the posters trying to engage rationally and reasonably with Bimboman. They are playing a finite game. They are trying to get some resolution, and are keen to debate the point only until a shared understanding is reached. But Bimboman is playing an infinite game. As long as people are arguing the point he is winning. He has no interest in finding a resolution or coming to an agreement, the longer and more cyclic the discussion is, the happier and more successful he is.

Do you think that a vaccine is unlikely if even the actual virus infection doesn’t offer antibody protection?

[Northern Lights]

So the vaccine producing the “antibody lesson” works but the infection producing the “antibody lesson “ doesn’t ?

In most cases people are getting a weak infection, right? So there's a weak response.

A vaccine can be made that provides a stronger response than what would happen naturally; the more salient point is you can have vaccine boosters to cope with the fact that the immune response might not hang around for very long.

The Germans are not claiming that a vaccine will not happen (which is of course a possibility!). They are simply stating that reinfection is a possibility and that the way we generate immunity via our antibodies is not conducive to getting herd immunity without a vaccine.

I'm not sure why you're bothering. NL and bimbo have their small coterie of experts that they pay attention to because of their predisposition to agree with them, as NL admitted in an earlier post. Everyone else is ignored and then they just wail at you and attack sources, as per a fair number of the posts on this page. They then pick some detail to scream about until they can claim victory. Unscientific, poor understanding of the subject matter, and the more you answer them, the more they'll bang on with their borderline conspiracy theory nonsense *and they don't even realise they're lining themselves up with the conspiracy theorists).

Yep and I've come to the same conclusion with you and to a lesser extent JM2K6. You have your view, you wont be challenged on it, so it's pointless, you lads love your echo chamber and post shite like "scream about until they claim victory". Conspiracy theorists from Oxford, Harvard and Stanford, yep those crazies. Too far gone, Sturgeon doing a great job, let's give her a clap.

[JM2K6]

We don't want a vaccine that's infectious... that seems a bit of a strange thing to talk about.

I'm not convinced you're arguing in good faith here. It appears you've started from "we're never going to have a vaccine", tried to argue that the Germans are saying there can't be a vaccine because of how short the immunity period is with infections (they're not saying that), and are now trying to cast doubt on... how vaccines work at all? The concept of weaker infections / weaker immune responses to infection? The idea that a vaccine should be more infectious(?!).

I’m absolutely arguing in good faith that if there’s not enough general protection from being actually infected by the virus and recovering, that the idea of a vaccine Being more efficient and actually producing antibodies across the number of scenarios require and safely.

OK, so consider this:

Most people get a very weak infection from corona. The immune system generates antibodies, the infection is fought off. In corona's case, these antibodies hang around for a relatively short time. The person is immune during this period. The "memory" will then produce a weak immune response the next time they are infected.

We can dick around with vaccines to try and produce a stronger response without actually, y'know, making our subjects very ill. The HPV vaccine for example produces a stronger immune system response than HPV itself does.

That such a vaccine will be produced and tested correctly in record time makes that even more unlikely if it’s true that we can be infected but develop no immunity.

We develop immunity. Just not for very long. This is something we can work around with vaccines and boosters.

I'm not an expert - I don't know whether a stronger immune system "memory" producing more antibodies would also mean that immunity lasts longer, for example - but a short immunity period is not a death knell for a vaccine or for the concept of herd immunity via vaccination.

[Carter's Choice]

This thread reminds me of Simon Sinek's 'The Infinite Game'. We have two groups of posters effectively playing different games. On one hand we have the posters trying to engage rationally and reasonably with Bimboman. They are playing a finite game. They are trying to get some resolution, and are keen to debate the point only until a shared understanding is reached. But Bimboman is playing an infinite game. As long as people are arguing the point he is winning. He has no interest in finding a resolution or coming to an agreement, the longer and more cyclic the discussion is, the happier and more successful he is.

Do you think that a vaccine is unlikely if even the actual virus infection doesn’t offer antibody protection?

Don't ever engage with me again on this forum, you worthless piece of cyber-shit.

[JM2K6]

In most cases people are getting a weak infection, right? So there's a weak response.

A vaccine can be made that provides a stronger response than what would happen naturally; the more salient point is you can have vaccine boosters to cope with the fact that the immune response might not hang around for very long.

The Germans are not claiming that a vaccine will not happen (which is of course a possibility!). They are simply stating that reinfection is a possibility and that the way we generate immunity via our antibodies is not conducive to getting herd immunity without a vaccine.

I'm not sure why you're bothering. NL and bimbo have their small coterie of experts that they pay attention to because of their predisposition to agree with them, as NL admitted in an earlier post. Everyone else is ignored and then they just wail at you and attack sources, as per a fair number of the posts on this page. They then pick some detail to scream about until they can claim victory. Unscientific, poor understanding of the subject matter, and the more you answer them, the more they'll bang on with their borderline conspiracy theory nonsense *and they don't even realise they're lining themselves up with the conspiracy theorists).

Yep and I've come to the same conclusion with you and to a lesser extent JM2K6. You have your view, you wont be challenged on it, so it's pointless, you lads love your echo chamber and post shite like "scream about until they claim victory". Conspiracy theorists from Oxford, Harvard and Stanford, yep those crazies. Too far gone, Sturgeon doing a great job, let's give her a clap.

NL, I've never called them conspiracy theorists. However, just because they're from Oxford / Harvard / Stanford, doesn't mean they're not capable of being disingenuous, motivated by money or financial greed, or are overly influenced by their political leanings.

Plenty of shit and dubious science has been produced by credentialed people. It should not be armour against criticism; it certainly should not elevate them above the much larger number of their peers or superiors who are disagreeing quite strongly with them.

[Bimbowomxn]

This thread reminds me of Simon Sinek's 'The Infinite Game'. We have two groups of posters effectively playing different games. On one hand we have the posters trying to engage rationally and reasonably with Bimboman. They are playing a finite game. They are trying to get some resolution, and are keen to debate the point only until a shared understanding is reached. But Bimboman is playing an infinite game. As long as people are arguing the point he is winning. He has no interest in finding a resolution or coming to an agreement, the longer and more cyclic the discussion is, the happier and more successful he is.

Do you think that a vaccine is unlikely if even the actual virus infection doesn’t offer antibody protection?

Don't ever engage with me again on this forum, you worthless piece of cyber-shit.

And as always unable to answer the most basic question to back up an argument made.

[Bimbowomxn]

I'm not sure why you're bothering. NL and bimbo have their small coterie of experts that they pay attention to because of their predisposition to agree with them, as NL admitted in an earlier post. Everyone else is ignored and then they just wail at you and attack sources, as per a fair number of the posts on this page. They then pick some detail to scream about until they can claim victory. Unscientific, poor understanding of the subject matter, and the more you answer them, the more they'll bang on with their borderline conspiracy theory nonsense *and they don't even realise they're lining themselves up with the conspiracy theorists).

Yep and I've come to the same conclusion with you and to a lesser extent JM2K6. You have your view, you wont be challenged on it, so it's pointless, you lads love your echo chamber and post shite like "scream about until they claim victory". Conspiracy theorists from Oxford, Harvard and Stanford, yep those crazies. Too far gone, Sturgeon doing a great job, let's give her a clap.

NL, I've never called them conspiracy theorists. However, just because they're from Oxford / Harvard / Stanford, doesn't mean they're not capable of being disingenuous, motivated by money or financial greed, or are overly influenced by their political leanings.

Plenty of shit and dubious science has been produced by credentialed people. It should not be armour against criticism; it certainly should not elevate them above the much larger number of their peers or superiors who are disagreeing quite strongly with them.

Where as all the other scientists are immune from these influences....

And there isn’t a “much larger” anything.

[Bimbowomxn]

JM, I can see your convinced that the vaccine will be affective even if the antibody memory doesn’t work. I’ll be honest I don’t, or certainly not in a very very short time frame.


We also are ignoring the role T cells play for Corona virus’s.

[Raggs]

There are successful coronavirus vaccines btw.

Not in humans, but then we've never really needed one for long enough. No one will pay to develop for a vaccine against one of the many cold viruses out there. It'd be pointless.

[JM2K6]

Yep and I've come to the same conclusion with you and to a lesser extent JM2K6. You have your view, you wont be challenged on it, so it's pointless, you lads love your echo chamber and post shite like "scream about until they claim victory". Conspiracy theorists from Oxford, Harvard and Stanford, yep those crazies. Too far gone, Sturgeon doing a great job, let's give her a clap.

NL, I've never called them conspiracy theorists. However, just because they're from Oxford / Harvard / Stanford, doesn't mean they're not capable of being disingenuous, motivated by money or financial greed, or are overly influenced by their political leanings.

Plenty of shit and dubious science has been produced by credentialed people. It should not be armour against criticism; it certainly should not elevate them above the much larger number of their peers or superiors who are disagreeing quite strongly with them.

Where as all the other scientists are immune from these influences....

And there isn’t a “much larger” anything.

Sure there is. There's a reason why all the main health bodies (as mentioned: the CMO, CSO, NHS, BMA, WHO, ECDC, CDC, etc) are saying largely the same thing. The small handful of people who keep getting airtime are espousing a fringe viewpoint. There's no shortage of their peers and superiors who'll tell you that.

Still, I'm sure Sikora's still basking in the warm glow of his "It'll all be over by the end of September" prediction he kept making. Which was an update to the one he kept confidently stating about June.

I fully expect there to be disagreement within and among the various health bodies about how best to tackle this pandemic. I don't think listening to a handful of people who like promoting their shit in the media and whose recent record is of embarrassing themselves are the ones who should steer the response.

[Bimbowomxn]

Sure there is. There's a reason why all the main health bodies (as mentioned: the CMO, CSO, NHS, BMA, WHO, ECDC, CDC, etc) are saying largely the same thing. The small handful of people who keep getting airtime are espousing a fringe viewpoint. There's no shortage of their peers and superiors who'll tell you that.

This would be professors who disagree with a few other professors.


Carl Heneghan btw has changed UK record keeping by 20%already with his “fake “ science so I’ve no idea why you feel free to dismiss them.

Once again it’s worth pointing out that the advice of sage, the operation of the CDC have all failed in many places. Cheering on failed policy with “it would be worse” takes us right back to disaster numbers at the outset to look good later.


FYI, the HPV vaccine was at least 10 years in development before deployment.

[Bimbowomxn]

I fully expect there to be disagreement within and among the various health bodies about how best to tackle this pandemic. I don't think listening to a handful of people who like promoting their shit in the media and whose recent record is of embarrassing themselves are the ones who should steer the response.

Yeah that shrivdar lady is really pushing away the media bloody hell.


The people you’re referring to btw are full tenure professors at esteemed universities, the fact you dismiss them as “media” hungry etc is worrying.


Either way, we won’t agree, eventually the “cure” will be worse than the medicine and this nonsense will end.

[Bimbowomxn]

And for the records Gupta is far more qualified than the lady from Edinburgh in relation to the covid outbreak.

[JM2K6]

I don't know how often I have to say that the point of quoting Sridhar was her link to the bit of actual interest, i.e. the German scientists' work. It's not her work, and nor is she making it out to be. I'd have quoted pretty much anyone giving a translated precis of what they wrote.

So it doesn't matter if Gupta is better credentialed - she can take it up with the Germans. I'd have quoted a journalist if they were the ones I saw reporting it.

[Bimbowomxn]

I don't know how often I have to say that the point of quoting Sridhar was her link to the bit of actual interest, i.e. the German scientists' work. It's not her work, and nor is she making it out to be. I'd have quoted pretty much anyone giving a translated precis of what they wrote.

So it doesn't matter if Gupta is better credentialed - she can take it up with the Germans. I'd have quoted a journalist if they were the ones I saw reporting it.

Well actually you went on to denigrate one because she had a different view , which you don’t like. With respect Gupta and Heneghan are very well qualified and respected.

[JM2K6]

I simply can't believe I have to continue to explain the difference between "this person gave a translated summary of the thing I am interested in" vs "this person keeps saying stuff that gets proven wrong and is a dubious character and it's the things she says and does that are of interest to me"

Sridhar could be a fucking twitter bot for all I care. It's not her opinion I'm interested in. It's the information she provided - which is not impacted by her opinion - that is the important bit.

[Bimbowomxn]

I simply can't believe I have to continue to explain the difference between "this person gave a translated summary of the thing I am interested in" vs "this person keeps saying stuff that gets proven wrong and is a dubious character and it's the things she says and does that are of interest to me"

Sridhar could be a fucking twitter bot for all I care. It's not her opinion I'm interested in. It's the information she provided - which is not impacted by her opinion - that is the important bit.

That doesn’t address the issue of the later denigrating of other scientists...... so let’s leave it there.

[Saint]

We don't want a vaccine that's infectious... that seems a bit of a strange thing to talk about.

I'm not convinced you're arguing in good faith here. It appears you've started from "we're never going to have a vaccine", tried to argue that the Germans are saying there can't be a vaccine because of how short the immunity period is with infections (they're not saying that), and are now trying to cast doubt on... how vaccines work at all? The concept of weaker infections / weaker immune responses to infection? The idea that a vaccine should be more infectious(?!).

I’m absolutely arguing in good faith that if there’s not enough general protection from being actually infected by the virus and recovering, that the idea of a vaccine Being more efficient and actually producing antibodies across the number of scenarios require and safely.

OK, so consider this:

Most people get a very weak infection from corona. The immune system generates antibodies, the infection is fought off. In corona's case, these antibodies hang around for a relatively short time. The person is immune during this period. The "memory" will then produce a weak immune response the next time they are infected.

We can dick around with vaccines to try and produce a stronger response without actually, y'know, making our subjects very ill. The HPV vaccine for example produces a stronger immune system response than HPV itself does.

That such a vaccine will be produced and tested correctly in record time makes that even more unlikely if it’s true that we can be infected but develop no immunity.

We develop immunity. Just not for very long. This is something we can work around with vaccines and boosters.

I'm not an expert - I don't know whether a stronger immune system "memory" producing more antibodies would also mean that immunity lasts longer, for example - but a short immunity period is not a death knell for a vaccine or for the concept of herd immunity via vaccination.

This is one if the reasons why part of the Phase III testing is involving whether we get a better immune response from either a larger initial dose or a repeater dose 3-6 months later. I Don believe thatbthere are any vaccines under development using even a weakened live virus, so there isn't really a safety question, unless we somehow trigger a cykotine storm - but as these have only been observed in COVID19 patients with huge active viral loads, the would appear to be an extremely remote possibility, albeit one that is being looked for.


To bring a new cell type into discussion- immune memory is formed from memory "B cells". As with T-cells, B-cells appear in a number if different functions, and the memory variant is responsible both fir generating the specific antibody it "remembers" from the initial infection, and for working with other B-Cells to direct T-Cells in their various forms to more directly target an infection.

So the idea of a vaccine is to develop an immune response in such a way that a sufficiently strong B-cell memory is created. Why some vaccines are better at this than others is a bit of an unknown, which is one of several reasons that many vaccines that appear to generate an immune response don't create a lasting immune response and are often abandoned.

[Biffer]

I simply can't believe I have to continue to explain the difference between "this person gave a translated summary of the thing I am interested in" vs "this person keeps saying stuff that gets proven wrong and is a dubious character and it's the things she says and does that are of interest to me"

Sridhar could be a fucking twitter bot for all I care. It's not her opinion I'm interested in. It's the information she provided - which is not impacted by her opinion - that is the important bit.

You're making the mistake of thinking bimbo will actually want to engage in any kind of worthwhile conversation rather than just shout his opinions at you.

[Bimbowomxn]

I simply can't believe I have to continue to explain the difference between "this person gave a translated summary of the thing I am interested in" vs "this person keeps saying stuff that gets proven wrong and is a dubious character and it's the things she says and does that are of interest to me"

Sridhar could be a fucking twitter bot for all I care. It's not her opinion I'm interested in. It's the information she provided - which is not impacted by her opinion - that is the important bit.

You're making the mistake of thinking bimbo will actually want to engage in any kind of worthwhile conversation rather than just shout his opinions at you.

But I did want to and did engage Biffer,


You’re following me around now just calling me names. You’ve taken being corrected on facts quite badly,

[Sandstorm]

[Northern Lights]

I'm not sure why you're bothering. NL and bimbo have their small coterie of experts that they pay attention to because of their predisposition to agree with them, as NL admitted in an earlier post. Everyone else is ignored and then they just wail at you and attack sources, as per a fair number of the posts on this page. They then pick some detail to scream about until they can claim victory. Unscientific, poor understanding of the subject matter, and the more you answer them, the more they'll bang on with their borderline conspiracy theory nonsense *and they don't even realise they're lining themselves up with the conspiracy theorists).

Yep and I've come to the same conclusion with you and to a lesser extent JM2K6. You have your view, you wont be challenged on it, so it's pointless, you lads love your echo chamber and post shite like "scream about until they claim victory". Conspiracy theorists from Oxford, Harvard and Stanford, yep those crazies. Too far gone, Sturgeon doing a great job, let's give her a clap.

NL, I've never called them conspiracy theorists. However, just because they're from Oxford / Harvard / Stanford, doesn't mean they're not capable of being disingenuous, motivated by money or financial greed, or are overly influenced by their political leanings.

Plenty of shit and dubious science has been produced by credentialed people. It should not be armour against criticism; it certainly should not elevate them above the much larger number of their peers or superiors who are disagreeing quite strongly with them.

That was why i did say lesser extent. These professors and they are not alone, they may well not be the majority viewpoint but they are most certainly mainstream in their viewpoint should not be dismissed out of hand and there have been plenty of instances within history that the majority have been wrong and badly so. To think that "your side" is not being disingenuous, motivated by money or financial greed, or are overly influenced by their political leanings is naive in the extreme.

I know you are now just saying Sridhar was only the messanger but she is about the worst possible example of someone influenced by their political leanings in this sphere, I did see metnion on twitter that her german translation was poor and some of taken out of context but my German is near non-existent outside of orer a beer and saying thank you so i dont know the validity of that and she certainly never responded to the ones calling her out on it.

[Enzedder]

Today New Zealand has officially stamped out COVID-19 in the community for the second time.

The Ministry of Health has reported all COVID-19 patients in the community are now recovered.

The news comes as Auckland prepares to move to alert level 1.

The total number of confirmed cases in New Zealand since the pandemic began is 1,505.

On Monday, Cabinet decided to move Auckland into alert level 1 from 11.59pm tonight.

That means no limits on gatherings and the removal of social distancing requirements in restaurants and bars.

Masks are not required on public transport at alert level 1 but Ardern urged people to continue being vigilant - by washing hands, staying home if sick, scanning QR codes and getting tested if even feeling slightly sick.

Yay us - we still don't know how the hell this one came back into the community which is a worry.

Have they discounted the refrigeration angle or just can't be sure?

Almost discounted - speculation has stopped as we have no idea.

However, I think it is telling that they have really tightened up restrictions on flight crew now.

[JM2K6]

That was why i did say lesser extent. These professors and they are not alone, they may well not be the majority viewpoint but they are most certainly mainstream in their viewpoint should not be dismissed out of hand and there have been plenty of instances within history that the majority have been wrong and badly so. To think that "your side" is not being disingenuous, motivated by money or financial greed, or are overly influenced by their political leanings is naive in the extreme.

I know you are now just saying Sridhar was only the messanger but she is about the worst possible example of someone influenced by their political leanings in this sphere, I did see metnion on twitter that her german translation was poor and some of taken out of context but my German is near non-existent outside of orer a beer and saying thank you so i dont know the validity of that and she certainly never responded to the ones calling her out on it.

Google translate works really well for German. You can see for yourself what they say.

There's about 450 replies to her tweets on this article. She hasn't replied to any of them (and judging by the state of her feed, this is her default and who can blame her?). I didn't see any criticism of her translation but tbh I only looked at a few hundred then asked myself what the fuck I was doing and stopped.

On your other point, the moment the chancers come up with some peer reviewed science that backs their viewpoint, I'll start taking them seriously. Until then, all I've got to go on is incredibly dubious work and their stupid predictions that almost immediately blew up in their faces.

[CM11]

Yay us - we still don't know how the hell this one came back into the community which is a worry.

Have they discounted the refrigeration angle or just can't be sure?

Almost discounted - speculation has stopped as we have no idea.

However, I think it is telling that they have really tightened up restrictions on flight crew now.

[Northern Lights]

That was why i did say lesser extent. These professors and they are not alone, they may well not be the majority viewpoint but they are most certainly mainstream in their viewpoint should not be dismissed out of hand and there have been plenty of instances within history that the majority have been wrong and badly so. To think that "your side" is not being disingenuous, motivated by money or financial greed, or are overly influenced by their political leanings is naive in the extreme.

I know you are now just saying Sridhar was only the messanger but she is about the worst possible example of someone influenced by their political leanings in this sphere, I did see metnion on twitter that her german translation was poor and some of taken out of context but my German is near non-existent outside of orer a beer and saying thank you so i dont know the validity of that and she certainly never responded to the ones calling her out on it.

Google translate works really well for German. You can see for yourself what they say.

There's about 450 replies to her tweets on this article. She hasn't replied to any of them (and judging by the state of her feed, this is her default and who can blame her?). I didn't see any criticism of her translation but tbh I only looked at a few hundred then asked myself what the fuck I was doing and stopped.

On your other point, the moment the chancers come up with some peer reviewed science that backs their viewpoint, I'll start taking them seriously. Until then, all I've got to go on is incredibly dubious work and their stupid predictions that almost immediately blew up in their faces.

As good as google translate is, it won’t pick up the nuance of language which was the point that was made to Sridhar.

So when the likes of Ferguson gets things wrong it’s ok, we can write that off and carry on with a failed strategy. Hey restrictions and lockdowns aren’t working, what’s the answer? More restrictions and lockdowns. Do you have even the slightest worry that this might just be mental?

[Sandstorm]

Studies coming out of Israel suggests that Covid sufferers - even those with no symptoms - experience a possibly permanent drop in sperm count. If that doesn't get young males wearing masks, nothing will.

[Ovals]

That was why i did say lesser extent. These professors and they are not alone, they may well not be the majority viewpoint but they are most certainly mainstream in their viewpoint should not be dismissed out of hand and there have been plenty of instances within history that the majority have been wrong and badly so. To think that "your side" is not being disingenuous, motivated by money or financial greed, or are overly influenced by their political leanings is naive in the extreme.

I know you are now just saying Sridhar was only the messanger but she is about the worst possible example of someone influenced by their political leanings in this sphere, I did see metnion on twitter that her german translation was poor and some of taken out of context but my German is near non-existent outside of orer a beer and saying thank you so i dont know the validity of that and she certainly never responded to the ones calling her out on it.

Google translate works really well for German. You can see for yourself what they say.

There's about 450 replies to her tweets on this article. She hasn't replied to any of them (and judging by the state of her feed, this is her default and who can blame her?). I didn't see any criticism of her translation but tbh I only looked at a few hundred then asked myself what the fuck I was doing and stopped.

On your other point, the moment the chancers come up with some peer reviewed science that backs their viewpoint, I'll start taking them seriously. Until then, all I've got to go on is incredibly dubious work and their stupid predictions that almost immediately blew up in their faces.

As good as google translate is, it won’t pick up the nuance of language which was the point that was made to Sridhar.

So when the likes of Ferguson gets things wrong it’s ok, we can write that off and carry on with a failed strategy. Hey restrictions and lockdowns aren’t working, what’s the answer? More restrictions and lockdowns. Do you have even the slightest worry that this might just be mental?

Are you seriously suggesting that the Lockdown didn't work ?????

[C69]

The situation is grim as feck locally.
ffs

[Bimbowomxn]

[Northern Lights]

Google translate works really well for German. You can see for yourself what they say.

There's about 450 replies to her tweets on this article. She hasn't replied to any of them (and judging by the state of her feed, this is her default and who can blame her?). I didn't see any criticism of her translation but tbh I only looked at a few hundred then asked myself what the fuck I was doing and stopped.

On your other point, the moment the chancers come up with some peer reviewed science that backs their viewpoint, I'll start taking them seriously. Until then, all I've got to go on is incredibly dubious work and their stupid predictions that almost immediately blew up in their faces.

As good as google translate is, it won’t pick up the nuance of language which was the point that was made to Sridhar.

So when the likes of Ferguson gets things wrong it’s ok, we can write that off and carry on with a failed strategy. Hey restrictions and lockdowns aren’t working, what’s the answer? More restrictions and lockdowns. Do you have even the slightest worry that this might just be mental?

Are you seriously suggesting that the Lockdown didn't work ?????

As a long term strategy on dealing with this virus it is not remotely tenable to maintain a lockdown, if you are only judging success as getting the virus case numbers down yes of course it was a success but that should not be the only metric you are measuring success against.

The current strategy is not working, feel free to disagree.

[Raggs]

As a long term strategy on dealing with this virus it is not remotely tenable to maintain a lockdown, if you are only judging success as getting the virus case numbers down yes of course it was a success but that should not be the only metric you are measuring success against.

The current strategy is not working, feel free to disagree.

Luckily, we didn't use it as a long term strategy.... we used it as a short term one, to get the numbers down and allow more time to develop other strategies for longer term management.

The current strategy isn't working, suggesting we probably need to start tightening restrictions again...

[Northern Lights]

As a long term strategy on dealing with this virus it is not remotely tenable to maintain a lockdown, if you are only judging success as getting the virus case numbers down yes of course it was a success but that should not be the only metric you are measuring success against.

The current strategy is not working, feel free to disagree.

Luckily, we didn't use it as a long term strategy.... we used it as a short term one, to get the numbers down and allow more time to develop other strategies for longer term management.

The current strategy isn't working, suggesting we probably need to start tightening restrictions again...

The initial reason was to stop the nhs being overwhelmed, box ticked, it is not by any stretch close to being overwhelmed at the moment. The current strategy is a pile of shite, it doesnt work and is doomed to fail, ploughing the country back into lockdown is idiotic as you are only looking at this on the impact of COVID numbers, the damage being done to the rest of the economy and other health outcomes is tragic but we are long past trying to manage risk in any debate on here it would seem.

[Ovals]

As good as google translate is, it won’t pick up the nuance of language which was the point that was made to Sridhar.

So when the likes of Ferguson gets things wrong it’s ok, we can write that off and carry on with a failed strategy. Hey restrictions and lockdowns aren’t working, what’s the answer? More restrictions and lockdowns. Do you have even the slightest worry that this might just be mental?

Are you seriously suggesting that the Lockdown didn't work ?????

As a long term strategy on dealing with this virus it is not remotely tenable to maintain a lockdown, if you are only judging success as getting the virus case numbers down yes of course it was a success but that should not be the only metric you are measuring success against.

The current strategy is not working, feel free to disagree.

The 'Lockdown' clearly worked in reducing the cases to a very low level. Equally clearly, lfting most of the restictions has lead to a rapid rise in cases and the current changes do not appear to have reversed the trend. But there's still quite a lot of restrictions that can be put in place between what we have now, and what we had a couple of months back. The longer it is left, the tougher the restrictions will have to be - as we found out previously - unfortunately, our Government have been slow to act - but, in their defence, there is a element of trial and error in trying to get the balance correct.