The Lemon Fool

Lootman wrote:
Let's assume that Peru took the least precautions.

Let's not.

Clearly facts do not matter to you.

9873210 wrote:

Lootman wrote:Let's assume that Peru took the least precautions.

Let's not. Clearly facts do not matter to you.

And what other reason do you have? You gave no "facts" either.

But if your point is that at least some of those "precautions" might have been ineffective, then I might agree.

Lootman wrote:

9873210 wrote:Let's not. Clearly facts do not matter to you.

And what other reason do you have? You gave no "facts" either.

But if your point is that at least some of those "precautions" might have been ineffective, then I might agree.

My point is that you are just making things up. Not only are you making things up but you are now defending making things up. Further proof that you do not care about facts.

9873210 wrote:

Lootman wrote:And what other reason do you have? You gave no "facts" either.

But if your point is that at least some of those "precautions" might have been ineffective, then I might agree.

My point is that you are just making things up. Not only are you making things up but you are now defending making things up. Further proof that you do not care about facts.

I offered more facts than you did. If you want a debate then offer evidence rather than just cheap mindless gainsaying and personal attacks.

Lootman wrote:

9873210 wrote:My point is that you are just making things up. Not only are you making things up but you are now defending making things up. Further proof that you do not care about facts.

I offered more facts than you did. If you want a debate then offer evidence rather than just cheap mindless gainsaying and personal attacks.

More evidence that you do not care about facts. Pointing out logical flaws is neither mindless gainsaying nor a personal attack. If it seems like a personal attack it is because you are too attached to flawed logic.

9873210 wrote:

Lootman wrote:I offered more facts than you did. If you want a debate then offer evidence rather than just cheap mindless gainsaying and personal attacks.

More evidence that you do not care about facts. Pointing out logical flaws is neither mindless gainsaying nor a personal attack. If it seems like a personal attack it is because you are too attached to flawed logic.

So explain this alleged "logical flaw". Present an argument.

Or indeed, almost anything?

XFool wrote:Or indeed, almost anything?

?
It's better here than in those parts of the internets where retarded old scrotes use their lack of understanding of maths to tendentiously justify their racist positions.
So I for one applaud the mods while at the same time am keeping my fingers crossed for a global miracle of comprehension.... if not in maths then for the understanding that spouting nonsense on the tubes in defence of ones fragile ego when mistaken just makes one look thick

From the BBC:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-65204169

Best wishes, Steve

...Snap!

Steveam wrote:From the BBC:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-65204169

Best wishes, Steve

A very good article from the BBC. Unlike the closed minds of some on here they point out another likely origin theory, and also include that the racoon dog could have caught the virus from a human.

However, I will stick with my view that I trust the FBI over the Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention based in Beijing for the origin of Covid. The FBI simply would not come out with this view if their knowledge was based on just speculation or conspiracy theory.

I'd like to ask what happened to the regular booster jabs?

A year or so back, everyone was told of the vital importance of boosters and people were queuing down the street for them. Now, apart from the highly vulnerable, they don't seem to be important at all.

So what changed?

MrFoolish wrote:I'd like to ask what happened to the regular booster jabs?

A year or so back, everyone was told of the vital importance of boosters and people were queuing down the street for them. Now, apart from the highly vulnerable, they don't seem to be important at all.

So what changed?

Lots of reasons, not limited to:

- Covid was never a risk to fit and healthy under 50's, bar a couple of outlier cases
- The vast majority have had the virus so it is no longer a novel virus
- The spike protein of the virus has mutated many times away from the spike protein given in the vaccine
- Giving out unneeded vaccines does more harm than good to overall vaccine uptake
- Can the cost and disruption on the health system justify having healthy people queuing down the street to have a time limiting vaccine against a virus that does not affect them?

MrFoolish wrote:I'd like to ask what happened to the regular booster jabs?

A year or so back, everyone was told of the vital importance of boosters and people were queuing down the street for them. Now, apart from the highly vulnerable, they don't seem to be important at all.

So what changed?

It was thought the vacines would stop people catching and transmitting Covid 19. However particularly after the emergence of the Omicron variant this isn't the case. It may reduce the severity of any infection, but for non-vulnerable people this isn't a significant risk so there really isn't any point going to the expense of trying to vacinate everyone (regardless of any possible risk of taking the vacine), so the programme has been reduced to just those who are most at risk from the infection.

Ashfordian wrote:

MrFoolish wrote:I'd like to ask what happened to the regular booster jabs?

A year or so back, everyone was told of the vital importance of boosters and people were queuing down the street for them. Now, apart from the highly vulnerable, they don't seem to be important at all.

So what changed?

Lots of reasons, not limited to:

- Covid was never a risk to fit and healthy under 50's, bar a couple of outlier cases
- The vast majority have had the virus so it is no longer a novel virus
- The spike protein of the virus has mutated many times away from the spike protein given in the vaccine
- Giving out unneeded vaccines does more harm than good to overall vaccine uptake
- Can the cost and disruption on the health system justify having healthy people queuing down the street to have a time limiting vaccine against a virus that does not affect them?

That's mostly true but you've not defined "outlier".

As a novel virus it was batting in the order of "something nasty" even in the under 50 cohort

Now it's not novel I think you're right in that the economic balance has shifted; the cost of advertising and administering vaccines no longer offset by the impact

servodude wrote:

Ashfordian wrote:
Lots of reasons, not limited to:

- Covid was never a risk to fit and healthy under 50's, bar a couple of outlier cases
- The vast majority have had the virus so it is no longer a novel virus
- The spike protein of the virus has mutated many times away from the spike protein given in the vaccine
- Giving out unneeded vaccines does more harm than good to overall vaccine uptake
- Can the cost and disruption on the health system justify having healthy people queuing down the street to have a time limiting vaccine against a virus that does not affect them?

That's mostly true but you've not defined "outlier".

As a novel virus it was batting in the order of "something nasty" even in the under 50 cohort

Now it's not novel I think you're right in that the economic balance has shifted; the cost of advertising and administering vaccines no longer offset by the impact

There are "outlier" cases with any infection. Covid was never unique in this regard.

You've heard of the "nocebo" effect? How much more "nasty" was the virus because unwarranted fear was spread around the virus?

I was not solely referring to the economic costs, but as importantly, the resource costs of administering the vaccine. There is definitely a negative affect from this.

They set up a COVID vaccination centre in an empty retail unit in a local shopping park.

It was great for business for the surrounding shops.

Maybe a vaccination centre in every UK town centre would do wonders for our ailing high streets.

It was quite clear early on that omicron was a relatively low risk. I remember African doctors at the vanguard of dealing with omicron were telling us this and they were incredulous that many in the west didn't want to listen. Some on these boards were saying there aren't enough old people in Africa to make a judgement - clearly nonsense when you think about it for a second. They may be lower percentage-wise but they definitely exist in large numbers!

I think our failure to listen to those African doctors showed how paranoid about covid we had become, and there was probably an element of subconscious racism too IMO.

What Dr. Angelique Coetzee Actually Said About Omicron Variant

Snopes

"On Nov. 28, 2021, Gateway Pundit, among other far-right news and opinion outlets, published a story about the omicron COVID-19 variant and Dr. Angelique Coetzee, the chair of the South African Medical Association. The headline for the brief, 59-word article read: "UPDATE: South African Doctor Who Discovered 'Omicron' Variant Says There’s Nothing to Worry About – Only Mild Symptoms (VIDEO).""

"In sum, the "nothing to worry about" line that was misleadingly attributed to Coetzee in reference to omicron appeared to be another attempt to downplay COVID-19, a deadly pandemic that has already taken the lives of more than 5.2 million people worldwide."

So yes, history is indeed being rewritten. As usual...