IOM Covid removing restrictions

[Ramseyboi]

2 minutes ago, Ham_N_Eggs said:

Last week?

Does that not undermine your own argument that it is spreading faster than ever? 😂

Anyway.  Have a clue.

[Ramseyboi]

Just now, Gladys said:

Well, just a couple of wars, refugees, AML regulations, subsequent lesser terrorist attacks, radicalisation.  I could go on, but 9/11 was a major shift.  Whether you agree with the changes or not, life has changed.

 

Relevant to COVID restrictions though?  Nope

[Ham_N_Eggs]

1 minute ago, Ramseyboi said:

Does that not undermine your own argument that it is spreading faster than ever? 😂

Anyway.  Have a clue.

Which arguement? The one that masks are having an effect on reducing the numbers or that Omicron will spread cases quicker. Because of its the latter then it will but most of the cases over here are Delta.

As for the July figure... The high was before they changed from the 14 day "gold standard" isolation period to 10 days, vastly reducing the numbers. If we get anywhere near that figure again we're in the shit big time.

[The Voice of Reason]

2 minutes ago, Gladys said:

Well, just a couple of wars, refugees, AML regulations, subsequent lesser terrorist attacks, radicalisation.  I could go on, but 9/11 was a major shift.  Whether you agree with the changes or not, life has changed.

 

With respect the discussion was on how it impacted our own lives.

Not many of us have been impacted by your couple of wars, refugees and radicalization however unfortunate these things are.

Changes in AML regulations not a immense impact on most and in the round a force for good. 
 

Lesser terrorist attacks, who is complaining about that ?( if true)

Has all this really impacted on the way we live our lives which was what was originally asked?

 

[Ramseyboi]

2 minutes ago, Ham_N_Eggs said:

Which arguement? The one that masks are having an effect on reducing the numbers or that Omicron will spread cases quicker. Because of its the latter then it will but most of the cases over here are Delta.

As for the July figure... The high was before they changed from the 14 day "gold standard" isolation period to 10 days, vastly reducing the numbers. If we get anywhere near that figure again we're in the shit big time.

What has isolation got to do with it?

You have really lost me now.  Whatever point you are trying to make is long gone.

[Cambon]

2 hours ago, AcousticallyChallenged said:

I think that’s a fundamentally naive view. We are past the age of needing to tell everyone to wear masks to exert any form of control. 

Trillion dollar companies exist based on marketing the data they collect about you. Governments around the world hoover up this data too.

Even in the 70s and 80s, special branch had lists of “subversives” to round up if needed in a run up to say, a war those subversives may protest. To quote “in 1978, the Home Secretary decided that a 'subversive' was
anyone who sought this through 'political, industrial or violent means'-a much wider definition (which is very close to that of the Army Counter Revolutionary Operations Manual), covering anyone whose activities, lawful or not challenges the system.”

In 1974, there were exercises in Heathrow just to get people used to the idea of troops on the streets. 

The document itself quotes a US congressman a decade prior to its publication with “we can tranquilize, impede, immobilise, harass, shock, upset, stupefy, nauseate, chill, temporarily blind, deafen or just plain scare the wits out of anyone the police have a proper need to control”

https://digitalarchive.wilsoncenter.org/document/110194.pdf

Control isn’t anything new, and there’s no need to draw out a pandemic to try and implement new measures. 

And your post is completely naive of the 21st century. These days, Governments are more bothered about financial support, not armies. What big pharma says, goes! The CEO git from Pfizer was on tv being interviewed the other day. He basically said we will all be having boosters for years to come, but he had a smarmy, sly look on his face. Liar. Git! Covid is done. It is all about money now. Nothing else. 

[P.K.]

17 minutes ago, Ramseyboi said:

The main difference being that it was unexpected and worse than most people had ever imagined.  We hadn’t taken life changing precautions in advance just in case.

Now,  with COVID.  It has never been as bad as predicted and yet we continue to have restrictions imposed on us “just in case”

Not "just in case" but rather "it would be fucking stupid not to..." Here's why.

The SA data shows Omicron is very infectious. As to how sick folks get that is still something of an unknown. We do know that the elderly suffer much more from Covid. Unfortunately relatively speaking SA has a very very young population. So in general comparing the possible mild effect it has in SA is very different from the effect it may have in Western Europe.

Which is why the current modelling is "best guess" at:

In the most optimistic scenario, which assumes Omicron has low immune escape and booster jabs are highly effective, the model projects between 1 December and 30 April in England there will be:

20.9 million infections

175,000 hospital admissions

24,700 deaths

In the most pessimistic scenario, which assumes Omicron has high immune escape and booster jabs are less effective, the model projects between 1 December and 30 April in England there will be:

34.2 million infections

492,000 hospital admissions

74,900 deaths

Yet to be peer reviewed.

But if the best outcome equates to 24,700 fatalities then everybody should be taking this situation very seriously indeed. Especially as 144k deaths already shows just how quickly things can go to shit - if you let them...

[Gladys]

6 minutes ago, Ramseyboi said:

Relevant to COVID restrictions though?  Nope

I would argue it is, because there was a demand for the state to protect its citizens as individuals. Previously, I would argue that the emphasis was on citizens protecting the state. Do your duty etc.

Only suggesting a potential origin of the infantalism that seems to be evident.  That is where we are, IMHO  The government is there to protect me rather than me deciding what risk is acceptable as an individual rather than society as a whole, which is why we have the clamour for border controls.

The psychology is interesting. 

[Ramseyboi]

3 minutes ago, Gladys said:

I would argue it is, because there was a demand for the state to protect its citizens as individuals. Previously, I would argue that the emphasis was on citizens protecting the state. Do your duty etc.

Only suggesting a potential origin of the infantalism that seems to be evident.  That is where we are, IMHO  The government is there to protect me rather than me deciding what risk is acceptable as an individual rather than society as a whole, which is why we have the clamour for border controls.

The psychology is interesting. 

Never before have I seen a single post where I wholeheartedly agree with some of it 

4 minutes ago, Gladys said:

The psychology is interesting. 

and yet disagree so wholeheartedly with other bits of it.

5 minutes ago, Gladys said:

The government is there to protect me rather than me deciding what risk is acceptable as an individual rather than society as a whole

There isn’t an emoji either suitable or strong enough.

[Gladys]

7 minutes ago, The Voice of Reason said:

With respect the discussion was on how it impacted our own lives.

Not many of us have been impacted by your couple of wars, refugees and radicalization however unfortunate these things are.

Changes in AML regulations not a immense impact on most and in the round a force for good. 
 

Lesser terrorist attacks, who is complaining about that ?( if true)

Has all this really impacted on the way we live our lives which was what was originally asked?

 

If you believe that these things haven't impacted on lives, then you are not looking critically.  I am not saying any impact is bad, just that they do impact.

[Cambon]

12 minutes ago, P.K. said:

Not "just in case" but rather "it would be fucking stupid not to..." Here's why.

The SA data shows Omicron is very infectious. As to how sick folks get that is still something of an unknown. We do know that the elderly suffer much more from Covid. Unfortunately relatively speaking SA has a very very young population. So in general comparing the possible mild effect it has in SA is very different from the effect it may have in Western Europe.

Which is why the current modelling is "best guess" at:

In the most optimistic scenario, which assumes Omicron has low immune escape and booster jabs are highly effective, the model projects between 1 December and 30 April in England there will be:

20.9 million infections

175,000 hospital admissions

24,700 deaths

In the most pessimistic scenario, which assumes Omicron has high immune escape and booster jabs are less effective, the model projects between 1 December and 30 April in England there will be:

34.2 million infections

492,000 hospital admissions

74,900 deaths

Yet to be peer reviewed.

But if the best outcome equates to 24,700 fatalities then everybody should be taking this situation very seriously indeed. Especially as 144k deaths already shows just how quickly things can go to shit - if you let them...

Yes, SA has a very young population. However, that very young population is also a very sick and generally unvaccinated population. There is no comparison. 

We need to live with it and move on. 

[Anyone]

Out and about and in shops etc where it is required all are masked up ( because we are by and large a pliable lot). In pubs and restaurants ( where you could argue the risk might , just might be greater because no bugger knows ) not a mask in sight. I prefer the latter. But I could be wrong. But I could be right. Perhaps I should ask an expert , but which one? The one that thinks this way or that way or the third way. I love experts. Wish I was one then I’d know what to do , or not depending on how accurate , or inaccurate , my modelling was or was not. Or I could be right or , perchance wrong. 

[Gladys]

3 minutes ago, Ramseyboi said:

Never before have I seen a single post where I wholeheartedly agree with some of it 

and yet disagree so wholeheartedly with other bits of it.

There isn’t an emoji either suitable or strong enough.

Not sure what you disagree with, but the point was that there was, possibly still is, psychology at play.  Behavioural psychologists were used to advise on how to gain compliance at a time of threat. They were wheeled out at many news reports.

Problem is they haven’t been consulted since. 

 

[The Voice of Reason]

5 minutes ago, Gladys said:

If you believe that these things haven't impacted on lives, then you are not looking critically.  I am not saying any impact is bad, just that they do impact.

An “immense impact “ “on our own lives” is what was suggested.

Of course they have an impact. 
 

The troubles in Northern Ireland had an impact.

Most obviously on those who lost their loved ones.

Resulting legislation and the Good Friday Agreement created ripples affecting civil rights within the Union. But I would be hard pressed to say how I myself have been affected either positively or adversely by them

 

[AcousticallyChallenged]

20 minutes ago, Cambon said:

And your post is completely naive of the 21st century. These days, Governments are more bothered about financial support, not armies. What big pharma says, goes! The CEO git from Pfizer was on tv being interviewed the other day. He basically said we will all be having boosters for years to come, but he had a smarmy, sly look on his face. Liar. Git! Covid is done. It is all about money now. Nothing else. 

But have things really changed that much? The only difference is that information is much more available and readily handed over.

The reality is, in society where everything operates on a just in time model, something like COVID is fundamentally a perfect storm. Not deadly enough to burn itself out, but problematic enough to overwhelm at a national level when you get a flare up. 

9 minutes ago, Cambon said:

Yes, SA has a very young population. However, that very young population is also a very sick and generally unvaccinated population. There is no comparison. 

We need to live with it and move on. 

SA also has a population where many have had COVID in previous waves. 

What we know is that Omicron is much more transmissible with a much higher chance of reinfection. The question at scale is whether the smaller proportion of people likely to become seriously ill is still enough to overwhelm care capacity. 

A single COVID patient in for 9 days might delay as many operations that would need that ICU bed as a contingency. Operations are being cancelled left right and centre as a result. We can’t build more hospitals and train more staff overnight.