Coronavirus - potential Black Swan?

[Confusion of VIs]

9 minutes ago, anonguest said:

How many are still suffering?

One that I know of, several months on she still has shortness of breath and cannot do any more than gentle walking. A couple others had something similar to a real flu, not dangerous but enough to convince her friends to get the vaccine.   

[pig]

1 hour ago, Mikhail Liebenstein said:

The original insight came from individuals receiving convalescent blood plasma, i.e. where they were immune compromised, got ill with COVID, and then had antibodies from a healthy recovered COVID patient injected into them: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/954990/s1015-sars-cov-2-immunity-escape-variants.pdf

This was actually found in a Cambridge University study: https://www.cam.ac.uk/research/news/study-highlights-risk-of-new-sars-cov-2-mutations-emerging-during-chronic-infection

Now the description above is not identical to what i am saying as the paper only implies the issue and skirts a round it a bit, also highlighting the interval between first and second doses.  But the premise is identical, i.e. given a poor immune response and insufficient antibodies to kill off the virus(be they natural or from the vaccine ) then via natural selection of variants that arise over time in an enduring chronic infection in that individual, then escape variants for those antibodies will be produced.

To me this is the same mechanism as antibiotic resistance in bacteria, i.e selecting those best able to evade the antibiotic.

Any, it may be partly be fair to blame Hancock and Boris for spreading out the doses. But actually the fundamental issue is with the immune compromised, both in terms of the death rate and in terms of continuing the pandemic.

Whilst i often come across as a total bar steward, I am quite often right and not afraid to say what i think, even as risk of distressing or offending.

(My wife has even stopped asking me for advice on whether a particular dress looks good 🤨)

 

 

 

 

I have this theory that everybody has a blind spot(s), the best we can do is be aware of it so imho this is a little bit to your credit.  Anyway, pretty sure back in the 80s you'd get these religious nut-jobs claiming Aids was a gay disease and this was just Gods way of punishing the sinful. Have a think about it.

[pig]

5 minutes ago, Confusion of VIs said:

One that I know of, several months on she still has shortness of breath and cannot do any more than gentle walking. A couple others had something similar to a real flu, not dangerous but enough to convince her friends to get the vaccine.   

I remember last year they were saying this isn't like a cold - the disease attacks all the organs of the body.

[Mikhail Liebenstein]

2 minutes ago, pig said:

I remember last year they were saying this isn't like a cold - the disease attacks all the organs of the body.

That is not the virus attacking the organs specifically, it is just that the immunity guard has been lowered and the body is overrun. The virus doesn't care, it is just looking for cellular hospitality. Other viruses, bacteria, moulds, fungi , algae and nematodes could equally takeover without an immune system.

[Bruce Banner]

1 hour ago, pig said:

Yes, but as you are old your opinion does not matter. Suck it up.

Relinquished to a zone where we are spoken of in the third person and nannied whether we like it or not .

 

[Ah-so]

7 hours ago, anonguest said:

I know. It was a tongue in cheek response.

Of course - it was just a suggestion of a foray into this "one teen year old or a million 80 year olds" discussion.  

We do have a way to keep ten year olds safer, but choose on balance not to, so I wonder whether those willing to sacrifice lives worried be personally prepared to make minor sacrifices to save lives. We know that a lot of children die from air pollution caused by traffic pollution. 

All around the world children die of easily preventable diseases. How many of us would make a one off donation of £10,000 to Save the Children? 

[Ah-so]

10 hours ago, scottbeard said:

I'm finding this conversation difficult, I admit because it goes like this:

scottbeard:  If could only save 1 child or lots of old people, who would you save?

anonguest:  I'd save the child first and then as many of the old people as I could.

scottbeard:  Yes but if you could only save either the 1 child or the old people, who would you save?

anonguest:  I'd save the child first and then as many of the old people as I could.

scottbeard:  Yes but what if it was just one or the other?  Would you really let all the old people die.

anonguest:  I'd save the child first and then as many of the old people as I could.

You're never really getting to the point of what I'm asking.  I think there's no point me adding another iteration now.

The usual example given in moral philosophy puzzles is a runaway train hurtling towards a carriage with a single child onboard. However, the train has not reached the points and you have the option to redirect it, but if you do it will instead crash into another carriage full of 80 year olds. 

Of course change the contents of the carriages as you wish. It's a useful for making these assessments of the value of life, but also of people's willingness to be personally responsible for death. And you can mix it up - eg some children on one but some doctors on another travelling to a disaster to administer emergency aid. 

[Will!]

The Verge: Amazon's Ivermectin problem

[scottbeard]

1 hour ago, Ah-so said:

The usual example given in moral philosophy puzzles is a runaway train hurtling towards a carriage with a single child onboard. However, the train has not reached the points and you have the option to redirect it, but if you do it will instead crash into another carriage full of 80 year olds. 

Of course change the contents of the carriages as you wish. It's a useful for making these assessments of the value of life, but also of people's willingness to be personally responsible for death. And you can mix it up - eg some children on one but some doctors on another travelling to a disaster to administer emergency aid. 

Yes that’s the kind of moral dilemma I was trying to debate.

The fact that most posters didn’t see it as a debate, but rather just felt their own opinions are in some way factual or the “natural order of things” is probably just another example of the increasing  polarisation the modern world comes from.

Same as the Brexit discussions all boiled down to “so which is it - are you a racist or someone who wants another 70 million immigrants?”

[Ah-so]

7 minutes ago, scottbeard said:

Yes that’s the kind of moral dilemma I was trying to debate.

The fact that most posters didn’t see it as a debate, but rather just felt their own opinions are in some way factual or the “natural order of things” is probably just another example of the increasing  polarisation the modern world comes from.

Same as the Brexit discussions all boiled down to “so which is it - are you a racist or someone who wants another 70 million immigrants?”

I think it is an interesting debate, but in this context, we are not proposing to force children to have a vaccination and all adults can have the vaccine, so the reality is that there isn't an either or or. But it is a useful device to consider how we prioritise lives, particularly when there is an absolutely binary decision on the train tracks, rather than one that gives people the opportunity to side-step the question.

[anonguest]

1 hour ago, Ah-so said:

I think it is an interesting debate, but in this context, we are not proposing to force children to have a vaccination and all adults can have the vaccine, so the reality is that there isn't an either or or. But it is a useful device to consider how we prioritise lives, particularly when there is an absolutely binary decision on the train tracks, rather than one that gives people the opportunity to side-step the question.

Aren't we?  I thought the reports were indicating that the move is to vaccinate all kids (in schools with or without parental consent?) down to age 12.   That is roughly what TPTB are 'gunning for'?

If there is no practical opt out then it is de facto 'forcing' the vaccine on them.

Edited September 2, 2021 by anonguest

[pig]

9 hours ago, Bruce Banner said:

Relinquished to a zone where we are spoken of in the third person and nannied whether we like it or not .

 

Or dumped in the skip at the first inconvenience apparently.

[Dr Doom]

2 hours ago, Will! said:

The Verge: Amazon's Ivermectin problem

This shouldn't come as a huge surprise to anyone given the history of big tech
censoring anything that threatens the Fauci / pro vaccine narrative. 

Ivermectin does work, it just isn't profitable enough, hence the demonisation
campaign which you've clearly fallen for, hook, line, and sinker. 

 

[scottbeard]

17 minutes ago, anonguest said:

Aren't we?  I thought the reports were indicating that the move is to vaccinate all kids (in schools with or without parental consent?) down to age 12.   That is roughly what TPTB are 'gunning for'?

If there is no practical opt out then it is de facto 'forcing' the vaccine on them.

I think the plan is to vaccinate 12-17 year olds if EITHER they or their parents consent.

I am not aware of ANY plan to vaccinate people without any consent at all!  What would you have to do to even do that?  Tie them to a bench and jab them?!

[Dr Doom]

8 minutes ago, scottbeard said:

I think the plan is to vaccinate 12-17 year olds if EITHER they or their parents consent.

That's ok then, parents shouldn't have any say in the matter. 

[Will!]

32 minutes ago, anonguest said:

Aren't we?

No.

[Bruce Banner]

5 minutes ago, Will! said:

No.

Are they not proposing to vaccinate 12 year olds, in school, without parental consent?

[Dr Doom]

There's no time for parental consent, and they might make the wrong decision anyway. 

[pig]

10 hours ago, Mikhail Liebenstein said:

That is not the virus attacking the organs specifically, it is just that the immunity guard has been lowered and the body is overrun. The virus doesn't care, it is just looking for cellular hospitality. Other viruses, bacteria, moulds, fungi , algae and nematodes could equally takeover without an immune system.

Had a look for a pre vaccine study and came up with this:

https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/11/3/e048391.long

Quote

The study population was at low risk of COVID-19 mortality (obesity 20%, hypertension 7%, type 2 diabetes 2%, heart disease 5%), with only 19% hospitalised with COVID-19. 42% of individuals had 10 or more symptoms and 60% had severe post-COVID-19 syndrome. Fatigue (98%), muscle aches (87%), breathlessness (88%) and headaches (83%) were most frequently reported. Mild organ impairment was present in the heart (26%), lungs (11%), kidneys (4%), liver (28%), pancreas (40%) and spleen (4%), with single-organ and multiorgan impairment in 70% and 29%, respectively. 

Be interesting to see how knowledge has developed over the year...

[Bruce Banner]

Italy extends COVID-19 Green Pass to trains, planes, ferries and coaches | Reuters

"They are right to ask for a Green Pass. If you don't want to get the vaccine then stay at home and don't travel," Rome resident Alessia Colombi said at the city's main train station."

[markyh]

10 minutes ago, Dr Doom said:

There's no time for parental consent, and they might make the wrong decision anyway. 

My 15 year old wont be getting the vaccine, have already told them i forbid it, and if they disobey me and take it and risk their life because they want too, there will be no £20k+ EV bought for them when they pass their driving test @ 17. 

"I wont dad" was they reply i got.  I like being extra wealthy very much now i am, you have more power and control of those around you when you control the pursestrings.  

 

[Will!]

22 minutes ago, Bruce Banner said:

Are they not proposing to vaccinate 12 year olds, in school, without parental consent?

I've yet to see any credible suggestion that vaccination will be without consent.

[Bruce Banner]

3 minutes ago, Will! said:

I've yet to see any credible suggestion that vaccination will be without consent.

Parental consent?

[Riedquat]

4 hours ago, Ah-so said:

Of course - it was just a suggestion of a foray into this "one teen year old or a million 80 year olds" discussion.  

We do have a way to keep ten year olds safer, but choose on balance not to, so I wonder whether those willing to sacrifice lives worried be personally prepared to make minor sacrifices to save lives.

Personally yes, I'd rather take the very slightly higher level of risk of not living in such a nannied world. Unfortunately that's usually stupidly equated to going to the opposite extreme by the defenders of said world.

Quote

We know that a lot of children die from air pollution caused by traffic pollution.

Do we? A lot?

[scottbeard]

32 minutes ago, Bruce Banner said:

Are they not proposing to vaccinate 12 year olds, in school, without parental consent?

I think the child's own consent will be deemed sufficient, regardless of the parent's.