#COVID19 | Page 970 | Vital Football

#COVID19

European Medicines Agency:
The benefits of AstraZeneca outweigh the side effects

So Macron, stop twatting about and jab.
 
Forest-England said:
Johnson and the tories have caused many deaths through their handling of Covid.
So many f@ck ups!!
Click to expand...

Sorry, but you are wrong.
Covid has caused all the deaths, many though could have been prevented, with different actions.

The same must be said of Sturgeon and Drakeford.
 
Calvin Plummer said:
What politics are you seeing in the modelling by epidemiologists?
Click to expand...
I'm not seeing politics in it.
My point was that the modelling is limited in its usefulness when it comes to drastic decisions with a massive effect on society like covid passports, because we are no longer looking at a situation where we are trying to prevent some awful disaster, but instead are in a position of trying to "contain covid" which is a very different proposition.
The question has changed from
"How do we prevent total societal breakdown due to covid and what measures are necessary"
to
"How do we contain this virus"
which are two completely different questions, and the solutions being proposed no longer fit the problem we are trying to solve imo, which is why I pointed out the disagreement about what comprises sensible measures and why I'm questioning exactly how the government is interpreting these models.
 
i am a tree said:
I'm not seeing politics in it.
My point was that the modelling is limited in its usefulness when it comes to drastic decisions with a massive effect on society like covid passports, because we are no longer looking at a situation where we are trying to prevent some awful disaster, but instead are in a position of trying to "contain covid" which is a very different proposition.
The question has changed from
"How do we prevent total societal breakdown due to covid and what measures are necessary"
to
"How do we contain this virus"
which are two completely different questions, and the solutions being proposed no longer fit the problem we are trying to solve imo, which is why I pointed out the disagreement about what comprises sensible measures and why I'm questioning exactly how the government is interpreting these models.
Click to expand...

We are still in the position of trying to contain a disaster, what makes you think we aren't? It's a global pandemic and until there is a global solution we have to be ultra cautious.

I'm not a supporter of a vaccine passports but I think you're overplaying the societal changes a touch.
 
Calvin Plummer said:
We are still in the position of trying to contain a disaster, what makes you think we aren't? It's a global pandemic and until there is a global solution we have to be ultra cautious.

I'm not a supporter of a vaccine passports but I think you're overplaying the societal changes a touch.
Click to expand...
Maybe I am. I have to confess, I really hate the idea of the government deciding who can or cannot socialize in various settings. It my eyes it seems like an absolutely massive step, an unprecedented (and unfair) one, and one that isn't being taken seriously enough.

I understand we are still in the middle of a situation, but the fact is that situation has changed since the vaccine. I'm not trying to say that covid presents no danger, but the type of danger it presents is now very different to what it was a few months ago. We are no longer looking at a significant danger of the NHS going down, which was the number 1 concern, and most of the people who are vulnerable to serious illness have already been vaccinated.

So the question is, what is now justified when it comes to limiting the spread of covid?

Hopefully, rather than spending all their energy figuring out what methods they can use to slow covid down because of all the people they didn't bother to offer vaccines, the government put their energy into getting under 50s vaccinated as quickly as possible.
 
i am a tree said:
Maybe I am. I have to confess, I really hate the idea of the government deciding who can or cannot socialize in various settings. It my eyes it seems like an absolutely massive step, an unprecedented (and unfair) one, and one that isn't being taken seriously enough.

I understand we are still in the middle of a situation, but the fact is that situation has changed since the vaccine. I'm not trying to say that covid presents no danger, but the type of danger it presents is now very different to what it was a few months ago. We are no longer looking at a significant danger of the NHS going down, which was the number 1 concern, and most of the people who are vulnerable to serious illness have already been vaccinated.

So the question is, what is now justified when it comes to limiting the spread of covid?

Hopefully, rather than spending all their energy figuring out what methods they can use to slow covid down because of all the people they didn't bother to offer vaccines, the government put their energy into getting under 50s vaccinated as quickly as possible.
Click to expand...

The short term situation has changed, the long term situation is very much in flux. It's sensible to protect ourselves from existing and future mutations.

The NHS remains in a precarious state, the CE has talked about 2 year waiting lists as a consequence of C19, over 120,000 NHS with Long Covid etc. Recovery will take a long time, not just structurally but mentally too.

Vaccines aren't a panacea BTW, no matter how some would like to present them as one. We'll still have cases and deaths, we will need update vaccines annually and measures like masks are likely to stay in at least the short to medium term.

I understand your concerns about a passport, though mine are slightly differently focused. I think it's impact will be felt most tellingly on the poor, on minorities and in less wealthy nations.
 
i am a tree said:
Maybe I am. I have to confess, I really hate the idea of the government deciding who can or cannot socialize in various settings. It my eyes it seems like an absolutely massive step, an unprecedented (and unfair) one, and one that isn't being taken seriously enough.

I understand we are still in the middle of a situation, but the fact is that situation has changed since the vaccine. I'm not trying to say that covid presents no danger, but the type of danger it presents is now very different to what it was a few months ago. We are no longer looking at a significant danger of the NHS going down, which was the number 1 concern, and most of the people who are vulnerable to serious illness have already been vaccinated.

So the question is, what is now justified when it comes to limiting the spread of covid?

Hopefully, rather than spending all their energy figuring out what methods they can use to slow covid down because of all the people they didn't bother to offer vaccines, the government put their energy into getting under 50s vaccinated as quickly as possible.
Click to expand...
The fact that we are talking about opening up and the best way to do it suggests that we are in a different phase and that the peopl that count are aware of it.

What needs to be done is to try and balance everyone’s needs hike also making sure we don’t go backwards.

A variant that ignores current vaccines and/or that targets children would be both a disaster and a tragedy. If we can stop this happening by putting massive restrictions at our borders then we should do so.

Similarly we need to make sure that any plan to open things up doesn’t end in us backsliding. The vaccine should deal with the brunt of it but the question of vaccination passports has been raised and needs to be dealt with.

Plenty of people will want to open fully while others will want restrictions. Then there is the view of the businesses themselves to consider.

Much as I would love to slam the Government for dithering over this, this is a delicate and difficult decision that they have to make - almost a no-win decision really.

It’s going to be interesting to see what happens...
 
Basha73 said:
Much as I would love to slam the Government for dithering over this, this is a delicate and difficult decision that they have to make - almost a no-win decision really.

It’s going to be interesting to see what happens...
Click to expand...

This is why I'm always trying to pick a fight over the issue on here!
Even if people disagree with me about it, its important and people should have an opinion instead of British people as a whole blundering into something important without thinking about it.
 
These Blood clots don’t appear to have an age demographic as several people under the age of 30 have died of it.

Think I’d rather just take my chances with Covid to be honest.
 
The EFL have come out and backed Covid passports saying;

"It is not ideal for everybody but at least it is giving some kind of greater liberty to a greater number of people."

Well isn’t it superb that for a year it was about sacrifice to protect everybody as best we can... now we’ve done that, it’s doesn’t matter about liberties of the ones that did it have.

Also, this substitute for a passport being a negative test is utter tripe. If it expires after a day, you’re effectively expected to do a swab down your nose or throat every time you go out. What a load of shit.
 
Will.NFFC said:
The EFL have come out and backed Covid passports saying;

"It is not ideal for everybody but at least it is giving some kind of greater liberty to a greater number of people."

Well isn’t it superb that for a year it was about sacrifice to protect everybody as best we can... now we’ve done that, it’s doesn’t matter about liberties of the ones that did it have.

Also, this substitute for a passport being a negative test is utter tripe. If it expires after a day, you’re effectively expected to do a swab down your nose or throat every time you go out. What a load of shit.
Click to expand...

Utter disgrace.

In other words "bad luck on the millions of people who are fucked over by this, but at least the over 50's get everything they want as usual, as they are the most important people in the country obviously. Oh, by the way, buy your fucking season tickets again, dickheads".

I've paid £200 to go to the British Grand Prix this year. What's the betting I'll be allowed to go?
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.