UK government decided to ask for more tests when travelling in to the UK. Even though I'm double jabbed- X-mas holiday cancelled. Covid's bullshit at this point
Cause they keep raising the price on PCR test and moving goalposts constantly.I’m not convinced entry requirements are much more than political posturing but since they’re there why can’t you get tested?
Cause they keep raising the price on PCR test and moving goalposts constantly.
Initially it was 65 gbp to get tested before going out, now it's going out and also going back needs seperate testing. I still think they'll block traveling before x-mas anyway at this pointfair enough, PCR tests are expensive and I‘ve avoided travelling overseas for the past two years anyway just in case rules change in any of the countries…hopefully by spring next year the UK entry rules will be loosened again
I got a booster , my kids got covid at school and now me and my wife who are both vaccinated and recent got boosters now have it. Having no taste isn’t fun. Though I’m sure it would be worse without being vaccinated it’s definitely not a fool proof defense.Just got booster jab.
Come at me super-covid.
![]()
Having no taste isn’t fun.
Hey GA, interesting post, glad to see you back on the program
"Fox News host Tucker Carlson sits down with Sky News Australia’s Sharri Markson to discuss What Really Happened in Wuhan, the culmination of Ms Markson’s investigation into the origins of COVID-19. Mr Carlson discusses issues with decisions made by Dr Anthony Fauci and his role in funding controversial research in Wuhan, where the disease was first discovered." (Nov 30, 2021)
It's just 1 month, but I guess i can already quote this.That's a nice post-apocalyptic fantasy you're living in. I had to break it to your dreams of living in a Walking Dead future, but the reason why the CDC says cases and deaths are going to be falling over the next month is because the virus is running out of people to infect and the country is getting closer and closer to herd immunity through a combination of people being vaccinated and idiots getting infected due to not being vaccinated.
We conclude that, despite seeming evidence to support vaccine effectiveness, this conclusion is doubtful because of a range of serious inconsistencies and anomalies.
Plenty of evidence that the vaccinated who die within 14 days of vaccination may be categorized as unvaccinated. Then someone who dies within 14 days of first dose is miscategorised as unvaccinated and a similar thing could occur post second dose.
After our offset adjustment we observe no significant benefit of the vaccines in the short term. They appear to expose people to an increased mortality, in line with what we know about immune exposure or pre-infection risks
From Norman Fenton, professor of risk information management (statistician) at a University of London. They analysed available ONS data:
"Possible systematic miscategorisation of vaccine status raises concerns about claims of Covid-19 vaccination effectiveness"
x: weeks after 1st shot, y: mortality rate
![]()
![]()
Possible systematic miscategorisation of vaccine status raises concerns about claims of Covid-19 vaccination effectiveness
24 Dec Update: The new ONS report has serious anomalies 5 Dec Update : Norman Fenton was interviewed about this work on the Maajid Nawaz ...probabilityandlaw.blogspot.com
Hmmm although this blog is ostensably about 'probability and risk' ('Improving public understanding of probability and risk with special emphasis on its application to the law. Why Bayes theorem and Bayesian networks are needed') in fact just about all of the blog entries are not about statistical theory, but rather about how vaccines are bad.
It's a little suspicious when their guy says, "The data clearly shows that vaccines work, but if we squint our eyes and do a bunch of other calculations that may or may not be relevant we can see increased mortality". Their way of data analysis looks overly convoluted, but I can't rule out the possibility that I just don't know what they're talking about. My initial hunch says that they are unintentionally (or intentionally?) smuggling in bias by comparing numbers of a universe where COVID exists and where everyone will eventually be exposed to it vs a world where COVID doesn't exist yet.From Norman Fenton, professor of risk information management (statistician) at a University of London. They analysed available ONS data:
"Possible systematic miscategorisation of vaccine status raises concerns about claims of Covid-19 vaccination effectiveness"
x: weeks after 1st shot, y: mortality rate
![]()
![]()
Possible systematic miscategorisation of vaccine status raises concerns about claims of Covid-19 vaccination effectiveness
24 Dec Update: The new ONS report has serious anomalies 5 Dec Update : Norman Fenton was interviewed about this work on the Maajid Nawaz ...probabilityandlaw.blogspot.com
So where is this "paper" being published, other than on a blog post?From Norman Fenton, professor of risk information management (statistician) at a University of London. They analysed available ONS data:
"Possible systematic miscategorisation of vaccine status raises concerns about claims of Covid-19 vaccination effectiveness"
x: weeks after 1st shot, y: mortality rate
![]()
![]()
Possible systematic miscategorisation of vaccine status raises concerns about claims of Covid-19 vaccination effectiveness
24 Dec Update: The new ONS report has serious anomalies 5 Dec Update : Norman Fenton was interviewed about this work on the Maajid Nawaz ...probabilityandlaw.blogspot.com
Vaccination does not prevent you from not getting COVID. You might not even have symptoms and be vaccinated 100 times, but your plans will collapse if the test shows that you have COVID.I’m not convinced entry requirements are much more than political posturing but since they’re there why can’t you get tested?
So the virus evolves into more infectious but less deadly (just like usual). News at 11.So the latest hot news over on the coronavirus subreddit (yeah, I know) is that Omicron appears to be about three times more infectious (!) but way less virulent at the same time. The narrative goes that this is reason for hope, because it may crowd out Delta with a less dangerous disease.
Jesus Christ, the whole thing is embarrassing for the French - just fucking kick them out of DOM-TOM so we do not need to be associated with this shit. We still have a lot of meaningless islands to feel important.That's a lot of red neck Trump supporters!
Accept its not , South Africa is preparing for more hospitalization, you can only start to see the impact when this starts to spread .. but than it’s to late .. donuts better to start measures early .Concerning but it's less dangerous? That's puzzling to me.
It's a lie. According to their own internal data about side-effects, their vaccine caused about 1200 death in the first few months around the world (the number of doses even estimated is not disclosed in the confidential report they were forced to publish).
You could dig into the numbers and find that out of 10 million people who got vaccinated, 3 died in an accident on the way to or from the vaccination site. While out of 10 million others who did not get vaccinated, no one died traveling to or from the vaccination they did not get.it concludes that vaccines might have no short term benefit, that term being the 28 days that are recommended for maximum effectiveness, because in that 28 days you might be more susceptible to infection
in conclusion, it’s probably FUD
Thats why I put him back on ignore. He is just picking up from where he left off before.From the second page:
Several studies of vaccine effectiveness have been conducted in the UK which indicate that 2 doses of vaccine are between 65 and 95% effective at preventing symptomatic disease with COVID-19 with the Delta variant, with higher levels of protection against severe disease including hospitalisation and death. There is some evidence of waning of protection against infection and symptomatic disease over time, though protection against severe disease remains high in most groups at least 5 months after the second dose.
Antivaxxers fucking love ‘AHA’ moments, let’s just forget the context.
Thats why I put him back on ignore. He is just picking up from where he left off before.
People are allowed to go anywhere. They just have to go to their local pharmacy at any time and get a free and safe vaccine that can not only save their life, but also potentially save other people's lives as well.I'm someone who has been in the middle on mandates. I'm against federal mandates, but I support businesses and institutions implementing them because they should have the right to want to feel safe or do what they want.
And I'm not even someone who thinks all federal mandates are done for power, I just think they're unjust and hurt more than they help.
With that said though, if COVID turns out to be endemic, I'm even more against federal mandates. You can't have a large segment of the population barred from public life in perpetuity. There has to be a point where enough is enough. And if variants keep popping up, it can't be 2024 where people still aren't allowed to go places. I really worry about ramifications of it all.
Getting my Moderna booster today, hoping it doesn't kick my ass like the second shot of the first round did. I was either dripping with sweat or freezing cold. The associated fever was fairly mild, but the body aches/chills etc. were worse than any flu I remember.
It's not even consistent. A friend at work had no issues with the vaccine, but got hit with nausea when he got his booster. His wife had the opposite reaction.Whelp, the reaction was the same, seemed to last a little less longer this go round but it was still 36 hours of misery.
Has any research been done as to why some react so badly to the vaccine while others have zero side effects? I don't remember these types of reactions from the multitudes of other vaccines that I've had.
It's not that simple. There's no logical reason someone who caught COVID in September should be barred from public life. And someone vaccinated in January isn't. When the person in September is less contagious and more protected. And there are people who can't get the vaccines for medical reasons. Rare, but they exist. None of the above people should be barred from public life. It's wrong.People are allowed to go anywhere. They just have to go to their local pharmacy at any time and get a free and safe vaccine that can not only save their life, but also potentially save other people's lives as well.
This isn't difficult.
Unvaccinated people are not barred from going to the mall. Jesus Christ. All that businesses ask for is that if you are an idiot and haven't gotten the vaccine for some stupid reason then they want you to wear a mask. They don't even check for vaccination status if you are flying within the US. I flew from Texas to Oklahoma and back last month. Not once did I even get asked if I had been vaccinated. I just had to wear a mask within the airport and while I was on the flight.It's not that simple. There's no logical reason someone who caught COVID in September should be barred from public life. And someone vaccinated in January isn't. When the person in September is less contagious and more protected. And there are people who can't get the vaccines for medical reasons. Rare, but they exist. None of the above people should be barred from public life. It's wrong.
And hell, even people who just don't want it. If these mandates are still going on years down the road, it's still wrong. Because eventually you won't be considered vaccinated until you get your booster. And eventually you know everyone is going to have to get a booster every 6 months(or less depending on variants) to be considered vaccinated. It's untenable. And all this for a disease that is serious, but isn't smallpox or the plague. And there's no evidence whatsoever the mandates have stopped any breakouts at all with COVID.
It's all so gross. You'd honestly be ok if in 2025 someone who didn't get the vaccine still wasn't allowed to go to a mall to buy clothes?
It's not ubiquitous, but what prompted my initial post was this:Unvaccinated people are not barred from going to the mall. Jesus Christ. All that businesses ask for is that if you are an idiot and haven't gotten the vaccine then they want you to wear a mask. They don't even check for vaccination status if you are flying within the US. I flew from Texas to Oklahoma and back last month. Not once did I even get asked if I had been vaccinated. I just had to wear a mask within the airport and while I was on the flight.
This fairy tale of the unvaccinated being treated terribly and have their rights taken away needs to stop.
It's not ubiquitous, but what prompted my initial post was this:
And I do believe strongly more cities will do this.
Im pretty much in the same boat, but I find it infuriating that people refuse to get vaccinated without a good reason. I don't want federal mandates, but they really shouldn't even need to be talked about, and I blame the anti-vaxxers for making them a possibility.I'm someone who has been in the middle on mandates. I'm against federal mandates, but I support businesses and institutions implementing them because they should have the right to want to feel safe or do what they want.
And I'm not even someone who thinks all federal mandates are done for power, I just think they're unjust and hurt more than they help.
With that said though, if COVID turns out to be endemic, I'm even more against federal mandates. You can't have a large segment of the population barred from public life in perpetuity. There has to be a point where enough is enough. And if variants keep popping up, it can't be 2024 where people still aren't allowed to go places. I really worry about ramifications of it all.
The question isn't is it constitutional. It's do the ends justify the means. Or will it do more good than it does harm. I don't believe the mandates will. I don't think they're going to have that much of an impact on COVID spread, but I do believe in a variety of other areas they will have a negative impact on our society. I think however many years from now we'll look back on the federal mandates globally as something that was a major mistake and regret it.Even if some do the majority will not. And if you happen to live in a place that does then the vaccine is readily available, safe, and free. There is no valid excuse for not taking it besides medical reasons. And no it is not unconstitutional or illegal to have such mandates. There is precedent for all of this.
There is no longer any excuses for refusing the vaccine at this point aside from medical reasons. Beyond that it is just simple stubborn ignorance at this point.
The vaccine literally saves lives. So yes it does more good than harm I would say. Unless you want to try and convince me there a big downside to saving lives?The question isn't is it constitutional. It's do the ends justify the means. Or will it do more good than it does harm. I don't believe the mandates will. I don't think they're going to have that much of an impact on COVID spread, but I do believe in a variety of other areas they will have a negative impact on our society. I think however many years from now we'll look back on the federal mandates globally as something that was a major mistake and regret it.
I said mandates, not the vaccine. The vaccine saves lives, but I don't believe enforcing federal mandates is going to have a noticeable impact on COVID spread. There's been no evidence that it has. There's been surges in cities and countries that have strict mandates. We've seen no significant drops in COVID spread in regions that have mandates as far as I can tell. I've looked around and found no evidence of it. If there was any indication that mandates would wipe COVID out flat, then I may even change my opinion on it, but it doesn't exist.The vaccine literally saves lives. So yes it does more good than harm I would say. Unless you want to try and convince me there a big downside to saving lives?
I don't want to derail discussion, but I gotta say that this is an interesting parallel. The slow creep of stretching the definition of 'service animal' has quietly been ramping up over the last decade(?), and it's a subject that deserves attention.It's like the jackasses with their fake service dogs making life that much more difficult for people with a real need for a service animal and creating a stigma about them.
Wait so you don't think the mandates that are incentivizing people to get the Covid vaccine that has been scientifically proven to be effective against the spread of Covid and helps reduce the number of deaths related to Covid will not help with the cost and spread of Covid?I said mandates, not the vaccine. The vaccine saves lives, but I don't believe enforcing federal mandates is going to have a noticeable impact on COVID spread. There's been no evidence that it has. There's been surges in cities and countries that have strict mandates. We've seen no significant drops in COVID spread in regions that have mandates as far as I can tell. I've looked around and found no evidence of it. If there was any indication that mandates would wipe COVID out flat, then I may even change my opinion on it, but it doesn't exist.
Cases are rising across the country right now, many in states that have mandates. They aren't doing anything positive. I think the reason is because for mandates to have any significant impact, they need to be extreme, like parts of Australia extreme, which the US obviously isn't going to do, because that's authoritarian. Most people have already made up their minds on the vaccine, so it isn't going to make much of a difference. And COVID can still spread with those vaccinated.
And with individual businsesses and institutions doing their own mandates independently... with masks and still a lot of people vaccinated, federal mandates aren't really necessary.