Covid-19 Discussion

[whitenemesis]

Soylent Green ...

 

[ChipChop]

Proportionality for a health issue that currently sees less than 800 people in hospital in the UK.

"Anti-Vaxxers". Use of a perjorative term for some reason. The vaccination issue is far more complex and cannot be dismissed quite so easily.

There are no faiths or religions that require followers to drink and drive. There are faiths or religions that have issues with the constituent parts of some vaccines and that is not factoring in the recent development to market of mRNA vaccines which alter human DNA.

^ Probably refusal to insure.
You'll need a vaccination passport to travel too if the rumour jungle is to be believed.
And that could/will be? extended to leaving your home and any social interaction outside of immediate family.

It's the New World Order don't you know?

The future sure looks bright!

 

[ChipChop]

Soylent Green ...

...great dystopian film.

 

[ChipChop]

I don't see this happening... totally unenforceable.

The first lockdown was (generally) observed mostly because the disease was unknown And people were genuinely concerned, and not because we are naturally compliant, or because someone was actually enforcing it.

At any rate, there just aren't enough police officers to enforce it, even if they tried.

Keep in mind that Boris Johnson, Chris Whitty, and Patrick Vallance talked about 'behavioral science' in the first press briefing in March - they know they can't enforce something that the majority of the population objects to.

Wearing face masks on public transport and in shops is a good example - the majority of people are fine with it and so the police will only have to deal with a small number of cases where someone might insist to be served without a mask. Hence why it was possible to pass such a directive.

I have never worn a mask in the supermarket. Never been questioned about it.

Why would i be? Who has the right to demand an individuals medical history on the spot? The is the UK is not f*****g China.

 

[markjay]

Proportionality for a health issue that currently sees less than 800 people in hospital in the UK.

"Anti-Vaxxers". Use of a perjorative term for some reason. The vaccination issue is far more complex and cannot be dismissed quite so easily.

There are no faiths or religions that require followers to drink and drive. There are faiths or religions that have issues with the constituent parts of some vaccines and that is not factoring in the recent development to market of mRNA vaccines which alter human DNA.

The future sure looks bright!

'Anti-vaxxers' are people who object to vaccination as a matter of principle. There are many more people out there who object to specific vaccines, for a range of valid reasons. For example, the false concerns regarding MMR caused many parents to give their children three separate shots instead of one triple-shot. These parents were not anti-vaxxers, onstead they simply had real concerns about a particular form of vaccine. The same applies to anyone who refused the new ('almost there') COVID-19 vaccine on the grounds that it hasn't been tested properly.

So it would be interesting to see how many anti-vaxxers object to vaccines for religious reasons? A minority, I presume. I suspect that the majority will have other reasons, from total distrust in established medicine to 'natural citizens' and Libertarian beliefs.

Indeed, where religion in involved, we have always been tolerant and found a way forward. But as I said that will probably not be needed here because those objecting to modern medicine on religious grounds will be a very tiny minority.

 

[markjay]

I have never worn a mask in the supermarket. Never been questioned about it.

I guess that in some circles it's a badge of honor...

Why would i be? Who has the right to demand an individuals medical history on the spot? The UK is not China.

"Medical history on the spor"? Never heard that one before - where did this come from? Another anti-vaxxers 'news' website?

 

[ChipChop]

The term Anti-Vaxxer is perjorative term intended to have negative connotations, to belittle or to disparage. It is a very loaded form of grammar. It has no place in a balanced argument about an individuals right to choose with regards to there own health.

 

[markjay]

The term Anti-Vaxxer is perjorative term intended to have negative connotations, to belittle or to disparage. It is a very loaded form of grammar. It has no place in a balanced argument about an individuals right to choose with regards to there own health.

OK, so what colloquial term do you suggest we use to describe those who object to all vaccination, as a mater of principle?

 

[markjay]

...apparently we should call them 'Vaccine Risk Aware':

Twitter

I am fine with that

 

[ChipChop]

I guess that in some circles it's a badge of honor...

"Medical history on the spor"? Never heard that one before - where did this come from? Another anti-vaxxers 'news' website?

Some circles? Please explain.

"Medical history on the spoT" meaning a member of staff or even another customer asking why are you not wearing a mask.
Never worn a mask and never been questioned.

In fact had plenty of conversations with supermarket employees while maskless and they could not give two hoots.

That will be because they have worked through the pandemic before masks were enforced and none of them have become ill.

 

[ChipChop]

...apparently we should call them 'Vaccine Risk Aware':

...or people with a point of view.

Remember that? When people were allowed to have a point of view, even opinions.

Twitter is an echo chamber of stupidity. Ignore it always.

It is the online version of Tony Blair. Whatever it says do the opposite.

 

[markjay]

"Medical history on the spoT" meaning a member of staff or even another customer asking why are you not wearing a mask.

No, it does not mean 'medical history on the spot'. But I can how this phrase can be useful in evoking the necessary illogical emotions to drive people to refuse wearing masks.

 

[markjay]

..In fact had plenty of conversations with supermarket employees while maskless and they could not give two hoots.

That will be because they have worked through the pandemic before masks were enforced and none of them have become ill...

With this skewed reasoning, I can only say that I am happy that they chose a career in retail and not decided to become healtcare professionals - phew.

 

[markjay]

...or people with a point of view.

Remember that? When people were allowed to have a point of view, even opinions.

Twitter is an echo chamber of stupidity. Ignore it always.

It is the online version of Tony Blair. Whatever it says do the opposite.

....you didn't actually click on the Twitter link, did you?

Is Twitter yet another mainstream media source that you refuse to get exposed to?

 

[ChipChop]

....you didn't actually click on the Twitter link, did you?

Is Twitter yet another mainstream media source that you refuse to get exposed to?

Why would any person wishing to retain their sanity want to listen to the left wing activists that dominate Twitter?

Virtue-signalling and tweeting abuse to anyone with the temerity to disagree with their views.

So no i do not use Twitter, just like i do not read the Morning Star newspaper. I will leave both for the Marxists to enjoy.

 

[Bobby Dazzler]

Why would any person wishing to retain their sanity want to listen to the left wing activists that dominate Twitter?

Virtue-signalling and tweeting abuse to anyone with the temerity to disagree with their views.

So no i do not use Twitter, just like i do not read the Morning Star newspaper. I will leave both for the Marxists to enjoy.

I don’t get even the slightest whiff of left wing activists on Twitter, because I don’t follow any left wing activists.

Isn’t the whole point of Twitter that the views of people you choose to follow are delivered to you on a plate?

Does Twitter become a better place if you stop following the people whose views you don’t like, and start following those people whose views you do like?

 

[markjay]

Err... one of Twitter's biggest fans is.... Donald J Trump.

But this is beside the point. If you limits yourself to watching and reading only media channels that agree with your preconceived ideas.... then you will never learn anything new or understand what other people think.

 

[ChipChop]

Err... one of Twitter's biggest fans is.... Donald J Trump.

But this is beside the point. If you limits yourself to watching and reading only media channels that agree with your preconceived ideas.... then you will never learn anything new or understand what other people think.

Well i never knew Twitter was based on such egalitarian ideals. Every day is a school day as they say.

I wonder why they ban people, like President Trump, then?

Do they not like what the democratically elected President of the United States of America has to say.

 

[GeeJayW]

Well i never knew Twitter was based on such egalitarian ideals. Every day is a school day as they say.

I wonder why they ban people, like President Trump, then?

Do they not like what the democratically elected President of the United States of America has to say.

I guess they ban people when they make tweets that breach the T&Cs they agreed to when they signed up to use the app?

 

[markjay]

Well i never knew Twitter was based on such egalitarian ideals. Every day is a school day as they say.

I wonder why they ban people, like President Trump, then?

Do they not like what the democratically elected President of the United States of America has to say.

...which is precisely why Twitter didn't actually ban Trump. If you read or watched or listened to any of the 'mainstream' media channels you'd know that. But I guess that the media channels you choose to frequent carry their own version of events, and one that chimes well with your own ideas. A match made in heaven. .