For help, advice and discussion about stuff not related to aviation. Play nice: no religion, no politics and no axe grinding please.
  • 1
  • 236
  • 237
  • 238
  • 239
  • 240
  • 582
#1852201
eltonioni wrote:I heard it perfectly well but didn't choose to split hairs or make assumptions on her behalf, preferring to take what she actually said as what she thinks, rather than what I think she might have said if she'd said something different. Because "forever, to some extent" is, as I wrote, forever.

While you're here JAFO, have you had any thoughts on this other than a rolly eye smiley?
eltonioni wrote: In other words - what's the exit strategy now we have vaccines? I happen to think we're there - it's all over bar the shouting. You and others disagree but (unless I missed it - which is entirely likely :oops: ) haven't articulated why in any convincing way.


Well, "forever to some extent", which is what she actually said, not an assumption, is not the same as "forever".

I did the rolly eye smiley because I'd explained it numerous times and it seemed to have got me nowhere, so I gave up and figured you'd stick to your view and I'd stick to mine. I had said why I didn't think it was all over bar the shouting, to remind you, that was:

Cases:

03-06-2021 5,274
27-05-2021 3,542
20-05-2021 2,874
13-05-2021 2,657
06-05-2021 2,613
30-04-2021 2,381


Of course, I can now add:

10-6-2021 7,393

A three times increase in the number of daily cases over the last six weeks is not "all over bar the shouting", no matter how many times you insist it is.
TopCat, kanga liked this
User avatar
By Flyin'Dutch'
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1852221
for those who thinks that additional measures over and above what we are dealt with as stock are rubbish and therefore we should brave new threats without masks and vaccines I ask; how to deal with the cold, shortsightedness (of the visual kind), illness.

Just take it on the chin?

Form an orderly queue...
kanga, MikeB liked this
By TopCat
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1852229
flybymike wrote:God gave us an inbuilt immune system with which to fend off transmissible diseases. It is the happy circumstance which ultimately allows us herd immunity.

So, name one disease for which herd immunity has actually been achieved without vaccines.

That's ok, no rush. I can wait.
kanga liked this
#1852250
I have a friend who uses exactly the same phrases as flybymike.

Do you fly from DX by any chance?
Either that or you watch the same YouTube videos.

He will not be vaccinated. I met another anti vaxxer recently, he was full on conspiracy.

The thing is, I don’t like it, but flybymike is right.

The way EVOLUTION works is that a disease comes along, it kills some of us, the rest have immune systems that can deal with it, they survive to procreate and the human race continues.

The problem? that works on a macro level.

I know 2 people that needed oxygen to survive, and oxygen didn’t work for my cousin. He didn’t make it.

My wife has a blood condition, she wouldn’t make it.

My niece had it, quite poorly for a few days,
2 of my friends, a bit poorly for a few days.
2 more of my friends, hardly noticed.

So.. as flybymike says, I know 6 people who survived without a hospital.

2 who needed oxygen.

1 didn’t make out of hospital.

That would have been 6 survived, 3 dead without hospital. Could have been

9 survived if we’d had the vaccine earlier.

So, he’s right, it’s not going to wipe us out as a race. It’ll wipe out lots, but not all.

flybymike, where you are wrong is that not everybody has an immune system that can deal with it.

It’s great that you want to take the 1 in 50 chance that yours can’t. (49 out of 50, that you can, good odds eh?) That’s up to you.

Sadly it means you might spread it to someone who can’t.

130,000 and counting in the UK who couldn’t.

In a macro level, we just leave it be, like the bubonic plague. We’d lose 500,000 in this country, and it’d be over in 6 months.
You’d hope your immune system kept you outside the 500,000.

On a micro level, that’s very bad for 500,000 people.

Of course some people say that we needed a cull, and they’re not fussed about the 130,000 (and can accept 500,000). Some say it’s all made up anyway. Obviously if you’re either of them, then there’s no debate to be had.

If you just think you’ll be ok and you don’t care about those that won’t, that’s a different viewpoint again.
Mike Tango, JAFO, Flyin'Dutch' and 2 others liked this
#1852258
flybymike wrote:Must admit you’ve got me there.
Cant understand what mechanism allowed the human race to survive until Edward Jenner came along in 1798.


Not such a happy circumstance for the countless millions that have had to die miserably over many millennia as part of the process though. Still, what’s a few more in these theoretically more enlightened times (quite probably unnecessarily) added to that number I suppose.
JAFO, Flyin'Dutch', kanga liked this
By johnm
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1852261
The logic that says leave it all to nature has some merit. Tribes in the Amazon lived sustainably for upwards of 5000 years. However, we aren't hunter gatherers clothed in animal skins anymore and so the leave it all to nature argument is drivel.

We are now in a rather more complicated world and we need to manage it whether we like it or not.

The management process is the art and science of risk management. At the moment the risks are basically

a)variants as a result of growth in case numbers
b)hospital capacity also as a result of growth in case numbers.

Risk management strategies are:

Vaccination, top of the list, and in turn is this is vulnerable to variants and we've already seen that a single dose is less effective against delta than it was against alpha

Mask wearing in more crowded places to reduce the risk of aerosol transmission

Distancing where practicable.

Selective quarantine

My wife and I are double jabbed, she AZ me Pfizer. Yesterday we went to London to do some clearing on a relative's flat. We wore masks entering and leaving the building and in the lift.

When we got home we were tired and thirsty so went to the pub. Wore masks on entry and exit chose a table in a covered outside area, tables are around 1.5 to 2 metres apart but not all were occupied.

We will be going to the market over the next couple of days and will wear masks in amongst the punters.

We had a PCC meeting in the Church earlier in the week and simply sat at least 2 metres apart.

It's not a major imposition and we need to be sensible and prudent anything else is just stubborn and stupid and makes me very angry.... :twisted:
JAFO, kanga liked this
User avatar
By flybymike
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1852301
It’s great that you want to take the 1 in 50 chance that yours can’t. (49 out of 50, that you can, good odds eh?) That’s up to you.

Sadly it means you might spread it to someone who can’t.

:scratch: Sorry, I can’t find the bit where I said I was “anti vaxxer,” or prepared to take the risk of not having a vaccination.
My original point was confined to the long term effects on the immune system of those who espoused living forever in a life of isolationism and mask wearing.
For myself, whilst (for the moment) my personal medical history is private, I’m old, I’m vulnerable and I think vaccinations are a good thing. So what do you think?
#1852304
JAFO wrote:
eltonioni wrote:I heard it perfectly well but didn't choose to split hairs or make assumptions on her behalf, preferring to take what she actually said as what she thinks, rather than what I think she might have said if she'd said something different. Because "forever, to some extent" is, as I wrote, forever.

While you're here JAFO, have you had any thoughts on this other than a rolly eye smiley?
eltonioni wrote: In other words - what's the exit strategy now we have vaccines? I happen to think we're there - it's all over bar the shouting. You and others disagree but (unless I missed it - which is entirely likely :oops: ) haven't articulated why in any convincing way.


Well, "forever to some extent", which is what she actually said, not an assumption, is not the same as "forever".

I did the rolly eye smiley because I'd explained it numerous times and it seemed to have got me nowhere, so I gave up and figured you'd stick to your view and I'd stick to mine. I had said why I didn't think it was all over bar the shouting, to remind you, that was:

Cases:

03-06-2021 5,274
27-05-2021 3,542
20-05-2021 2,874
13-05-2021 2,657
06-05-2021 2,613
30-04-2021 2,381


Of course, I can now add:

10-6-2021 7,393

A three times increase in the number of daily cases over the last six weeks is not "all over bar the shouting", no matter how many times you insist it is.

"Forever... to some extent" is a non-sequitur. The overriding statement is "forever". I'm leaving it there because I'm not as nuts as she is and I don't feel the need to keep repeating the obvious.

However, I will repeat that due to vaccinations, the previous link between cases and deaths / serious illness has been broken. Consequently, your rising case numbers, which are neither disputed or unexpected, fall squarely into the category of "so what?". That's the part which you need to elaborate on, please... so what if the case numbers rise?.

It would be really helpful if the explanation could be parsed into the question in the thread title.
flybymike liked this
#1852306
Flyin'Dutch' wrote:for those who thinks that additional measures over and above what we are dealt with as stock are rubbish and therefore we should brave new threats without masks and vaccines I ask; how to deal with the cold, shortsightedness (of the visual kind), illness.

Just take it on the chin?

Form an orderly queue...


You can wear spectacles, or not, as you choose. It would be thought odd.. bold... nay, totally nuts... to expect the whole world to make itself a bit out of focus and totally dysfunctional just to suit your stigmatism.
#1852371
eltonioni wrote:"Forever... to some extent" is a non-sequitur. The overriding statement is "forever". I'm leaving it there because I'm not as nuts as she is and I don't feel the need to keep repeating the obvious.


Maybe not as nuts but clearly nowhere near as intelligent. She said "forever, to some extent", that is, some parts of the behavioural aspects of virus prevention are a good idea to continue doing. Surely you can neither dispute nor misunderstand that.

eltonioni wrote:However, I will repeat that due to vaccinations, the previous link between cases and deaths / serious illness has been broken. Consequently, your rising case numbers, which are neither disputed or unexpected, fall squarely into the category of "so what?". That's the part which you need to elaborate on, please... so what if the case numbers rise?.


There's no need to repeat it, I understand what you mean even though you continue to phrase it poorly. I know someone who is young, fit and healthy who contracted COVID six months ago and is still suffering every day from it with no-one able to tell them how long this might last or even if it will ever go away. That's a big so what in a young life. Even if none of yesterday's 7,393 new infections die or even end up in hospital, if a small proportion suffer to this extent then that is a so what in my book.

eltonioni wrote:It would be really helpful if the explanation could be parsed into the question in the thread title.


I told you that I thought it was an idiotic thread title right at the start, I'm not likely to try to explain anything in a way that panders to that question 238 pages later.
johnm liked this
#1852385
It is worth remembering that there are no winners from covid. Obviously, it is tragic for those that die, and their family and friends left behind. Everyone who gets ill enough to suffer pays a high price, and for those who get long covid it is clearly a nightmare.

Then there are those who suffer other ailments who can't get the help they need because resources are deployed on covid.

But, they aren't the only ones who are suffering. It has also wreaked economic havoc. Many people are going through really tough times financially. Kids are having their education adversely affected, and they are going to pay a large part of the final bill this will inevitably bring for generations to come.

People can't travel. My poor wife hasn't seen her mother for a couple of years. We are both resigned to the fact we might never see her again due to her age and ill health. Many have gone through far worse.

In short, it has been a terrible thing for almost everyone.

A lot of the trade offs are between conflicting interests, but the bottom line is that everyone is paying a price. When we get into terse arguments here that degenerate into insults, it is worth bearing in mind that there aren't really any winners here. There are definite differences on emphasis on the best way forward, but it is important to keep a level of respect in these debates. There really isn't one correct solution. There are just a series of very unfortunate trade offs when it comes to deciding how to proceed.

The thread hasn't been easy reading recently. Perhaps we should all pause a bit longer for reflection before hitting that submit button.
nallen, Colonel Panic, flybymike and 7 others liked this
  • 1
  • 236
  • 237
  • 238
  • 239
  • 240
  • 582