The ânatural immunityâ âargumentâ is bullshit.
Presume that only includes dead in England. Given how many Irish travelled to and returned from both events id say there was a fair few deaths here from it.
Yes, those were deaths in local hospitals. Doesnât count all the plastic pool fans from all over the country or the dead Irish killed by the cunts who travelled over to Cheltenham.
Thread by Shane Crotty from August 20th. He linked to this thread today so clearly stands by its contents despite it being nearly two months old.
Key part here:
And this is important too:
Are lads still taking NPHET seriously after their models during the summer was hopelessly wrong.
1 Like
Wouldnât you think UEFA and the British Horse Racing Board - and the British Government of course - are the real people to blame?
Poster @Dziekanowski had a very astute reading of it at the time.
1 Like
Jesus F. Christ. 8% of 11-16 year olds infected in one go.
Covid flows through the path of least resistance.
Mentally double underline previous sentence.
This is why all age groups down to 0 need to be vaccinated. If we do that, there a chance we might be done with it. If weâre lucky.
The science and the reality shows that vaccines largely stop infection. And you canât have transmission if you donât have infection.
So only the most semantic and pedantic reading of the concept of transmission would say that vaccines donât have a massively beneficial effect in terms of stopping transmission.
Youâve mixed up age and school year here. Year 7-11 would be 11/12-16/17 years of age. Anyone know what age kids they are vaccinating in England?
Yeah I realised that before you posted and edited it. Itâs 11/12 years of age to 16/17 years of age.
Itâs almost certainly bottoming out before rising again.
This is cast iron real world evidence that in a no restrictions environment it is the unvaccinated who drive virus spread.
The debate about this is over.
What year is that from? Or copy and paste from 2013? 2014? 2015? 16 17 or 18?
Hard to take anything on twitter at face value, but interesting none the less.
5 Likes
Patrick Vallance was the Chief Scientific Advisor to a UK Government which mounted one of the developed worldâs worst policy responses. Of course he wants to keep science and politics separate, because to do so absolves him from any blame whatsoever for that appalling policy response, which continues today.
The world doesnât work like that.
You use science to inform policy responses - and policy responses to, oh, the worst pandemic in a century, have to be grounded in morals. The UKâs policies were not, which is why they have predictably been an utter disaster.
In the real world Vallance has no right to claim to be a dispassionate, blameless observer of the disastrous policies he was a key part of.
Others â such as Independent SAGE â used science to advocate for a moral policy response. What use is science if we do not use it to inform policy responses that actually value lives â rather than give a fake veneer of âlegitimacyâ to appalling, unscientific policy responses which were designed to cut corners because of the desperation of an appalling government?
Vallance allowed science to be corrupted for dastardly political ends by the Johnson Government. That was a nakedly political act in itself.
Thatâs funny. Calling themselves independent sage is a bit like the military calling themselves the ministry of peace. The level of fuckery is quite remarkable. Youâve an extremist dubious group of inscrutable behavioural scientists being marshalled by an even more dubious inscrutable group. Its hard to believe that the alleged tension is real and that the moves arenât being choreographed.
1 Like