The Coronavirus Thread - Part 3

+41
Casciavit
Duronto-Roddur
MindYourThinking
Young Kaz
Pedram
Firenze
The Franchise
elitedam
futbol
zigra
futbol_bill
The Demon of Carthage
Blue
Lucifer
McLewis
sportsczy
Freeza
Arquitecto
Hapless_Hans
Zagadka
Robespierre
Vibe
Warrior
guest_07
rincon
iftikhar
Art Morte
VivaStPauli
CBarca
FennecFox7
M99
Nishankly
Adit
Jay29
El Gunner
S
Myesyats
Thimmy
BarrileteCosmico
RealGunner
Babun
45 posters

Page 18 of 42 Previous  1 ... 10 ... 17, 18, 19 ... 30 ... 42  Next

Go down

The Coronavirus Thread - Part 3 - Page 18 Empty Re: The Coronavirus Thread - Part 3

Post by The Franchise Wed Mar 17, 2021 6:20 pm

@Jay29 re; the justification for lockdown 1.

The first lockdown in March of last year, was on some level acceptable even to me.

I still didnt agree because it was a matter of proportion and at no point was there evidence brought forward as to how and why lockdown works and what collateral damage will be causes by it. In short, there was no cost-benefit analysis which is common place in all big gov decisions. As I said, to this day it has not been done.

But again, I was willing to support the 1st lockdown on some level as it was sold on the notion that the NHS needed the time to cope with the increased pressure and after a suitable number of weeks it would no longer be needed.

But when NHS pressure subsided, the lockdown did not. When I read the "WHO 2019 pandemic guidelines" which had exactly planned for such a situation and saw it was totally scraped due because of quickly debunked computer modelling and extended versions of lockdown continued this is when it became very clear a grave mistake had been made.

The Franchise
Admin
Admin

Posts : 19617
Join date : 2011-06-05

Back to top Go down

The Coronavirus Thread - Part 3 - Page 18 Empty Re: The Coronavirus Thread - Part 3

Post by The Franchise Wed Mar 17, 2021 6:42 pm

Rincon.

Yes population density is important, but its more important a factor than lockdown v non lockdown? As someone who supports lockdowns, is this your claim?

Are you advocating for lockdown in some places and not lockding down in others?

You say say compare Sweden to Norway or Finland instead to have better metrics and that has been done. The only difference is you are using the poor measuring tool. You are using the PCR and I am using all cause mortality, which do you think is better?


Of course the virus' rate of spread is impacted but the  availability of hosts in its vicinity, however, you should then be able to show me data of lockdowns working. Which you cannot. Your method, even if it works is simply kicking the can down the road for those people to die later down the line. Meanwhile, the number of people who arent getting treatment for other things, who's livehood's are destroyed and education being lost has a impact you totally ignore.

Your lockdown's are not saving the number of years of lives it is costing, do you not agree with that?
The Franchise
The Franchise
Admin
Admin

Club Supported : Real Madrid
Posts : 19617
Join date : 2011-06-05
Age : 34

Back to top Go down

The Coronavirus Thread - Part 3 - Page 18 Empty Re: The Coronavirus Thread - Part 3

Post by CBarca Wed Mar 17, 2021 6:49 pm

"2. There might be mutations which can escape current vaccinations. After a year long lockdown marathon, another one isn't feasible if there'll be a mutation/mutations which can escape immunity from the previous waves like the one in Manau/Brazil. A plan B should be in place and life has to go on somehow."

This is an important point from Babun and it's why I and many others here disagree with shelter-at-home policies now and in the future.

That doesn't mean "everything open, no restrictions", no matter what, but it's clear that we can be effective in a public health policy sense without the fairly restrictive measures enacted in the first wave of shelter-at-home, especially since COVID-fatigue/shelter-at-home fatigue really dampens the effectiveness.

As a high school teacher I also have to say that the virtual schooling has been difficult. BUT my personal opinion from what I've seen is that I think the students will be OK (I am only talking about adolescents, teenagers etc, I do not have any experience with children younger than that). Our youth are the most resilient people (in some ways) than anyone else. They have suffered, their education has suffered, but the vast majority of them are going to be fine. I do think we paid a price. I don't think we scarred children for eternity.
CBarca
CBarca
NEVER a Mod

Club Supported : Athletic Bilbao
Posts : 20028
Join date : 2011-06-17
Age : 25

Back to top Go down

The Coronavirus Thread - Part 3 - Page 18 Empty Re: The Coronavirus Thread - Part 3

Post by The Franchise Wed Mar 17, 2021 7:17 pm

@CB

Why do you need a vaccine for something which such a low IFR. This is the question I feel you should ask yourself.

At your age, your rate as per my last check is 0.003-0.005. As is said, if people want to take it, that is their choice and I wont tell you otherwise. But this is not justifaction for a lockdown which by the way, has not worked.


"We're past 2.5 million deaths, and that's with the use of extensive shelter at home policies"

You have no way of  knowing that unfortunately. Perhaps we should discuss the fallacy of PCR?

Do you think these stay at home orders also produce stats like these?


Dementia/Alzheimers:

Dec 20' - 5, 281
Dec 5 year average - 28,198

Heart disease:

Dec 20' - 4,635
Dec 5 year average - 21,997

Chronic Lower Resp. Dis. :

Dec 20' - 1,790
Dec 5 year average - 13,385

Influenza / Pneumonia :

Dec 20' -  1,190
Dec 5 year average - 11,296

I havent made these numbers up, there are UK offical data and can be found if you dig hard enough. I have seen them myself, these are not secondary sources.

Do you serious think these numbers are possible? Do you think the lockdown's caused this? Why are so few people dying of these thing suddenly?

How can there be such a decrease in these numbers?

The answer is people with these conditions are not escaping death..no, they are still dying and just so happen to have tested positive PCR at some point in the last 28 days before death and go down in the numbers as a COVID death. This PCR test which is completely WRONG to use in the way it has been. We can go into the technical details as to why if you like, but there is no question about it and even the inventor would have told you this before he died.

PCR test are being misused and people "dying with 28 days of a positve PCR" is NOT a COVID death.
The Franchise
The Franchise
Admin
Admin

Club Supported : Real Madrid
Posts : 19617
Join date : 2011-06-05
Age : 34

Back to top Go down

The Coronavirus Thread - Part 3 - Page 18 Empty Re: The Coronavirus Thread - Part 3

Post by The Franchise Wed Mar 17, 2021 7:20 pm

This is just for everyone who is reading along.


"In conclusion, using current data, - 98% of the comparisons using 87 different regions of the world we found no evidence that the number of deaths/million is reduced by staying at home"

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-021-84092-1


This is 1 study, I have available 28 other lack of efficacy published papers and 18 lockdown harm papers which I am happy to send the link to. The science im sure your Gov's tell you they are following, pales in comparison to these. I would be happy to read anyone's study showing something different which doesnt include computer modelling without real world data.

You can find it yourself online or PM me if you care enough about it but for some reason GL or my work PC doesnt allow me to post the image so I will explain. But this relates to the Oxford stringency index.

"This is a composite measure based on nine response indicators including school closures, workplace closures, and travel bans, rescaled to a value from 0 to 100 (100 = strictest). If policies vary at the subnational level, the index is shown as the response level of the strictest sub-region."

Once you plot each nation on a graph with total deaths per million, you get a shot gun scatter graph. So no pattern whatsoever.

Surely if lockdown's work, the higher the stringency the lower the deaths? Even if just compensate rather than in absolutes, but no a complete scatter graph with no pattern.

I also still have the "WHO 2019 Pandemic guidelines" which specifically rule out lockdowns.

I dont see what argument can still be made they can be effective, yet alone they have been.
The Franchise
The Franchise
Admin
Admin

Club Supported : Real Madrid
Posts : 19617
Join date : 2011-06-05
Age : 34

Back to top Go down

The Coronavirus Thread - Part 3 - Page 18 Empty Re: The Coronavirus Thread - Part 3

Post by The Franchise Wed Mar 17, 2021 7:21 pm

This is just for everyone who is reading along.


"In conclusion, using current data, - 98% of the comparisons using 87 different regions of the world we found no evidence that the number of deaths/million is reduced by staying at home"

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-021-84092-1


This is  1 study, I have available 28 other lack of efficacy published papers and 18 lockdown harm papers which I am happy to send the link to. The science im sure your Gov's tell you they are following, pales in comparison to these. I would be happy to read anyone's study showing something different which doesnt include computer modelling without real world data.

You can find it yourself online or PM me if you care enough about it but for some reason GL or my work PC doesnt allow me to post the image so I will explain. But this relates to the Oxford stringency index.

"This is a composite measure based on nine response indicators including school closures, workplace closures, and travel bans, rescaled to a value from 0 to 100 (100 = strictest). If policies vary at the subnational level, the index is shown as the response level of the strictest sub-region."

Once you plot each nation on a graph with total deaths per million, you get a shot gun scatter graph. So no pattern whatsoever.

Surely if lockdown's work, the higher the stringency the lower the deaths? Even if just compensate rather than in absolutes, but no a complete scatter graph with no pattern.

I also still have the "WHO 2019 Pandemic guidelines" which specifically rule out lockdowns.

I dont see what argument can still be made they can be effective, yet alone they have been.
The Franchise
The Franchise
Admin
Admin

Club Supported : Real Madrid
Posts : 19617
Join date : 2011-06-05
Age : 34

Back to top Go down

The Coronavirus Thread - Part 3 - Page 18 Empty Re: The Coronavirus Thread - Part 3

Post by rincon Wed Mar 17, 2021 10:15 pm

@The Franchise you are picking what you accept as evidence as it fits your point, but disregarding the same type of evidence against it.

You asked for evidence of a lockdown working, I gave the local case here, you call it "correlational, not causal", then you cite a study entirely made in the same way to show the lack of efficacy of lockdowns. If one is not valid evidence then neither is the other in principle, as it is just as easy to argue that there are confounding variables in the data they studied. A "lockdown" looks very different in every case where it has been applied. I can be dismissive of methodology as well.

You mention also no masks studies showing they help, but there are plenty, and linked in an earlier post. Those are much easier to perform, and show clear results. Since you are citing scientific literature, then surely you can accept that masks work, as the large majority of scientific studies conclude.

Furthermore, the study you cited starts with this note:
"11 March 2021 Editor’s Note: Readers are alerted that the conclusions of this article are subject to criticisms that are being considered by the Editors. A further editorial response will follow once all parties have been given an opportunity to respond in full."

So maybe its best not to take these conclusions at face value until they address it?

@The Franchise wrote:Rincon.

Yes population density is important, but its more important a factor than lockdown v non lockdown? As someone who supports lockdowns, is this your claim?

Absolutely.

Are you advocating for lockdown in some places and not lockding down in others?

Yes, obviously. A measure is only good in a certain context, it's pointless to generalise and do the same in every case. If you live on farm there is no point in asking you to stay inside. If you live in the center of a city then of course reduced contact and masks will result in a lower spread of the virus.

You say say compare Sweden to Norway or Finland instead to have better metrics and that has been done. The only difference is you are using the poor measuring tool. You are using the PCR and I am using all cause mortality, which do you think is better?

Why is it one or the other? If you have a pandemic, a disease that is pretty unknown and has been shown to kill huge amounts of people, why would you not test those who are dying? Did they die due to covid, did they die in spite of covid, or something in between? For a large amount of them we don't know the answer. You can't claim it, so to disregard test results would be negligent.

What we absolutely know is that more people have died in Sweden, per capita, with covid that in Norway and Finland, by a long distance. Norway never locked down by the way, they just handled it better than Sweden with some soft measures.


Of course the virus' rate of spread is impacted but the  availability of hosts in its vicinity, however, you should then be able to show me data of lockdowns working. Which you cannot. Your method, even if it works is simply kicking the can down the road for those people to die later down the line. Meanwhile, the number of people who arent getting treatment for other things, who's livehood's are destroyed and education being lost has a impact you totally ignore.

who is ignoring that? It's It's emergency situation, just as so many people got sick and died many others lost their businesses and sources of income. What is the answer though? To not try to save people and instead prioritise the economy? To what degree? You would have to be extremely sure to justify that approach and for most of the last year, no one was sure enough. If you err on the side of the economy you risk to kill many more people, a number that we couldn't really predict.

To judge in hindsight with information we have in March 2021 for a situation that occurred in March 2020 is a delicate exercise. With the information we have today things would have been done a LOT better, but that's not the case.

Yes, lockdowns (and most measures) is precisely kicking the can down the road. No one is advocating for permanent lockdowns or even strict lockdowns at all in 2021. That's what the vaccines are for, once enough people are immune you reach an "end goal" for this phase of the pandemic.


Your lockdown's are not saving the number of years of lives it is costing, do you not agree with that?

don't understand the phrasing of this.

Just to conclude, deaths are not the only consequence of covid to a person. I had covid, and felt horribly for a month, then went months before recovering my lung capacity to a decent level. A friend the same age as me (very much not in the risk demographic) still has no sense of smell 7 months after getting covid. Those affected aren't just the ones who died. Efforts to reduce infections (and intensity of infection) of an infections disease are generally a good thing.
rincon
rincon
World Class Contributor
World Class Contributor

Club Supported : Juventus
Posts : 15865
Join date : 2012-06-07

Back to top Go down

The Coronavirus Thread - Part 3 - Page 18 Empty Re: The Coronavirus Thread - Part 3

Post by rincon Wed Mar 17, 2021 10:29 pm

Anyway I think that's enough typing from me Laughing posts came out longer than I hope.

In any case hopefully we are quite close to getting out of this situation in the UK or EU. With time things will become much more clear and there will be more time and data to evaluate, for now we see it from these perspectives.
rincon
rincon
World Class Contributor
World Class Contributor

Club Supported : Juventus
Posts : 15865
Join date : 2012-06-07

Back to top Go down

The Coronavirus Thread - Part 3 - Page 18 Empty Re: The Coronavirus Thread - Part 3

Post by CBarca Thu Mar 18, 2021 2:50 am

It makes it difficult for me to want to engage fully when it appears we are coming from completely different places. The entire scientific community is behind masks as a contributing, but not sufficient on its own, NPI. It isn't difficult to find studies that attribute shelter at home policies as effective, and without a note about its integrity at the start. The scientific community has no issues with PCR tests as a gold standard for detection of COVID-19. Vaccines are the road to the end of this thing, but you don't see a need for someone to get a vaccine, and seem to disregard why it might be important for someone to get one.

This might feel like a cowards way out of a conversation and I think you're entitled to the opinions you have, and I would never say you have to get a vaccine, that's your own choice. I don't judge you less for it either, I've always got the utmost respect for you and always have, really happy to see you posting around here again.

But on this issue there seems to be a deep distrust of the data that seems to make it hard for me to see a path towards any sort of productive conclusion. If Rincon wants to engage, I can just echo that I pretty much agree with him on everything and have done for the entire pandemic, and his opinions match my own very closely.
CBarca
CBarca
NEVER a Mod

Club Supported : Athletic Bilbao
Posts : 20028
Join date : 2011-06-17
Age : 25

Back to top Go down

The Coronavirus Thread - Part 3 - Page 18 Empty Re: The Coronavirus Thread - Part 3

Post by Myesyats Thu Mar 18, 2021 10:42 am

For the lockdown to work you gotta move swiftly and decisively like in Wuhan. But it's impossible in the west to contain everyone and close off an entire city. And if it doesnt work the 1st time, during 2nd and 3rd lockdowns people really stop giving a crap and then it can never fully work.

Also now i think comparisons between countries are very often misleading because it largely depends on the number of population and state of the healthcare system and the culture.

I think the better way to deal with this is not with lockdowns but clear measures and guidelines to ensure the public is well-informed. But then it can also never work in many countries because it depends on whether you trust your government. And basically no one here does except scandinavians maybe. And then there is my health minister who used the pandemic to make big bucks and then scurried off and now we're fukked.

Myesyats
World Class Contributor
World Class Contributor

Club Supported : PSG
Posts : 15288
Join date : 2015-05-03
Age : 22

Back to top Go down

The Coronavirus Thread - Part 3 - Page 18 Empty Re: The Coronavirus Thread - Part 3

Post by The Franchise Thu Mar 18, 2021 6:57 pm

@Rincon.


I do not accept your view on what evidence I am ignoring vs accepting. Not all, I am balancing everything and coming to the most logical conclusion.

You surely cant think I have some hidden agenda. Either I am wrong or I am right, but I am not ignoring particular info to fit some pre-arranged position.

What you call "evidence of lock down working" in one particular place (or a number of particular places) isnt important me, that is true. Why?

Because for lockdown to be proven effective, it has to at LEAST trend in the right direction on a larger scale. That wouldn't be proof but at least if you had clear correlation between lockdown stringency and decreased Covid cases/deaths I would understand why someone would support it. We actually need more than that to justify the measures but we dont even have correlation, which to me completely justifies my position.

I cannot just pick and choose areas it seems to be effective and conclude therefore its conclusively works and should be implements in all the countries it has been. I will look at the bigger picture, as the article I linked (or the 29 others I can link to you) which compares across a large number of regions/countries.

There is even a Danish study which something like half a dozen municipalities had a strong lockdown and other municipalities did not and there was no correlation either. I wouldnt say lockdown do not work because of this one particular example, like you are doing, I am using global comparisons which reflect my point.


I will go back to your mask study soon, but there has been research going back decades into masks and showing them not to work. You are citing recent studies, which again, I will agree to look at, but the science on masks in on my side, not yours.

If I agree to look at your link, will you then look at mine?

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2749214


The note from the study I posted. Why did you quote that? Of course the study is subject to criticisms which will come. But please address the study yourself. You dont need to be an expert to pick flaws. How can you completely ignore it? This is one study, do you want 29 others? I mean, there are at least studies which strongly support my positon, can you send me any study which shows lockdown working across different countries compared to non locked down countries?



"Why is it one or the other"


You say this relating to the Nordics and PCR V Mortality. The reason is because the PCR is the wrong tool and being used in the completely wrong way. The inventor himself (Kerry Mullis, now deceased) explained this a long time ago. The basis of your argument is flawed from the start.

How do you think cases have been diagnosed before COVID? It is not by testing healthy people with an over sensitive tool (which a PCR with a CT range over at least 25 is) and concluding this is a case and therefore down the line, a death.

No, the way it is done is by using clinical collaboration. In simple terms someone has symptoms, then you test them appropriately, then you diagnose this a case or not. This is not what is happening with COVID. If this was done from the start, the numbers you would quote would be completely different.

Instead we have mass testing of the public, with or without symptoms. In many cases multiple tests to the same person (school children tested twice a week).

They test using the PCR at an increased CT, far beyond what you should be. When you do this, you are picking up even dead material which could be from months previous. Yes, you pick up genuinely sick people, but you are also picking up a high number of false positives.

If you increase the CT to a high enough level you can produce a positive result on practically anyone. As a result, you are going to have a huge number of what they call cases. Now, if you happen to die of anything at all within 28 days (less or more in some places, but 28 seems the average) you go down as a COVID death. This is not my opinion, this is absolute facts.

So when you say statements like;


"What we absolutely know is that more people have died in Sweden, per capita, with covid that in Norway and Finland, by a long distance"


You have no way to prove this. You can only rely on false PCR data. Even your own wording suggests this because you say WITH Covid. You say with because you cant actually say FROM COVID. This is why excess mortality is far more accurate picture. No, not because it fits my stance but because these mortality is obviously more reliable than PCR positive.

You know what excess mortality is, your clearly a smart guy. Once you look at excess mortality, you quickly realise people are not dying in Sweden at an exceptional rate compared to other years or compared to other countries, even the Nordics. It within the scope of normal for a bad flu year. More deaths than the last 2 but in line with the 4 previous. Once you accept this, your only conclusion should be the lack of lockdown hasnt done them the damage you think it has. People will try and claim the Swedes are somehow more careful than anyone else, but there is no proof of that at all. Some are, some arent, the point being those people have the CHOICE. It was not forced on them like it has the rest of us.

I know I am typing more than anyone wants to read and Ive accepted some parts you dont need to reply to. But this PCR one is an absolute must.



"Your lockdown's are not saving the number of years of lives it is costing, do you not agree with that?

don't understand the phrasing of this"


Sorry. I didnt word this well.

People are dying and will die as a result of lockdown. Irrespective of our disagreement on  how many people are dying due to this virus, the collateral damage on other health conditions, would you not agree many others have and will die as a direct result of the lockdown?

If you do agree, then you will you also agree those people are getting far more years shaved from their lives from the theoretical years of life that is being saved (according to pro lockdowners) due to the lockdown.

For example. If you save an at risk 80 year old from COVID with lockdown (who will go on to die shortly there after), but a 35 year old doesn't get diagnosed with Cancer (because people were not going for screenings) and dies 2 years later...you are losing far more life years in comparison.

For months now people have not gone to screenings and procedures, not because of hospital capacity, but because they were told not to because of the risk of COVID/the government fear mongering of COVID.

Its not just about the economy, but no country had better healthcare by making themselves poorer. Which is exactly what countless countries are doing.
The Franchise
The Franchise
Admin
Admin

Club Supported : Real Madrid
Posts : 19617
Join date : 2011-06-05
Age : 34

Back to top Go down

The Coronavirus Thread - Part 3 - Page 18 Empty Re: The Coronavirus Thread - Part 3

Post by The Franchise Thu Mar 18, 2021 7:16 pm

@CB

You talk about the "entire scientific community" but its just not true. The scientific community which is allowed a voice on MSM agree, but that is not the same thing.

The number of experts who have not been invited to the debate (in fact there has been no debate) or had their views removed from Youtube, IG and the like is extremly alarming. The MSM has completely failed in their duty and what you say is proof of this because all the expert who have a different view clearly you are not that aware of.

Go look at the great Barrington declaration for the vast number of people who do not think that.

The entire scientific community is NOT behind masks. You can find recent studies with rushed together quackery, I can find decades of studies showing the opposite.

You say "as a contributing NP" which tells me you have this knowledge yourself. You know that many of these studies have as limiting factors such as social distancing. If you have social distancing and wear a mask and you dont get the virus, how do you tell which was the main contributing factor? Of course you cannot. But when you study the mask independently (which has been done for decades aswell as recently) you get inconclusive evidence.


Vaccines are the road to the end of this thing, but you don't see a need for someone to get a vaccine, and seem to disregard why it might be important for someone to get one.

No they are not. I wish they were because then we would be out of this mess already.

If the vaccines are the way out, why is there a lockdown right now? over 90% of the potential hospital admissions in the UK have already been vaccinated, I dont know what the situation is where you live but I cant imagine it is very different? If that number of people are safe, why on earth would we need a lockdown?

I ask why its important to get one? Is it important for health reasons or because you want your freedom back? If its for health reasons, it doesn't make any sense. If you want your freedom back, I understand your decision but it is called coercion.

But no, CB I dont think you are taking the cowards way out.

I respect you as much as you respect me. We just disagree on this and I actually didnt intend to change anyone's opinion and I apologize if this is how it comes across. I can see how it may seem like that. I am just frustrated at what I believe to be the complete trickery that has been pulled over good people.
The Franchise
The Franchise
Admin
Admin

Club Supported : Real Madrid
Posts : 19617
Join date : 2011-06-05
Age : 34

Back to top Go down

The Coronavirus Thread - Part 3 - Page 18 Empty Re: The Coronavirus Thread - Part 3

Post by The Franchise Thu Mar 18, 2021 7:18 pm

@Myesyats wrote:For the lockdown to work you gotta move swiftly and decisively like in Wuhan. But it's impossible in the west to contain everyone and close off an entire city. And if it doesnt work the 1st time, during 2nd and 3rd lockdowns people really stop giving a crap and then it can never fully work.

Also now  i think comparisons between countries are very often misleading because it largely depends on the number of population and state of the healthcare system and the culture.

I think the better way to deal with this is not with lockdowns but clear measures and guidelines to ensure the public is well-informed. But then it can also never work in many countries because it depends on whether you trust your government. And basically no one here does except scandinavians maybe. And then there is my health minister who used the pandemic to make big bucks and then scurried off and now we're fukked.

I dont think even the Scandinavians do. I see rioting in Denmark very frequently.

The Franchise
The Franchise
Admin
Admin

Club Supported : Real Madrid
Posts : 19617
Join date : 2011-06-05
Age : 34

Back to top Go down

The Coronavirus Thread - Part 3 - Page 18 Empty Re: The Coronavirus Thread - Part 3

Post by The Franchise Thu Mar 18, 2021 7:24 pm

I doubt many here are familiar with Lord Sumption.

I dont agree with him on some things but he is former senior judge who sat on the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom. I want to quote him, just because here is far better with words than me.

"The real problem is when human societies lose their freedom. Its not usually because tyrants take it away, its because people willingly surrender their freedom for “protection” against some external threat and usually the threat is a real threat but it is usually exaggerated and that’s what I fear we are seeing now. The pressure on politicians has come from the public who want action, they don’t pause to ask if the action will work, they don’t pause to ask if the cost will be worth paying, they want action anyway.

Study history, you will recognize the classic symptoms of collective hysteria. Hysteria is infectious, we are working ourselves up into a lava in which we exaggerate the treat and stop asking ourselves if the “cure” is worse than the disease.

We should not be surprised that we have to recognise that this is how societies become despotisms. We must also recognise that this is a process which leads naturally to exaggeration. The symptoms of coronavirus are clearly serious for those with other health conditions, especially of those people who are elderly. There are exceptional cases in which young people have been struck down which have had a lot of publicity but the numbers are incredibly small. Yes it is serious, but is it serious enough to warrant putting the entire population into house imprisonment, wrecking the economy for an an indefinite period, destroying business that honest and hard-working people have taken years to build up, saddling future generations with debt, depression, stress, heart attacks, suicides inflicting on millions, if not billions who are not especially vulnerable and will suffer mild symptoms if any at all.

I am not a scientist but it is the right and duty of every citizen to see what the scientists have said and to analyse it for themselves and draw common sense conclusions and we are perfectly capable of doing that. There is no reason why the scientific nature of the problem should mean that our liberty should be in the hands of scientists, especially not when the scientists are most clearly not in agreement.
The Franchise
The Franchise
Admin
Admin

Club Supported : Real Madrid
Posts : 19617
Join date : 2011-06-05
Age : 34

Back to top Go down

The Coronavirus Thread - Part 3 - Page 18 Empty Re: The Coronavirus Thread - Part 3

Post by Babun Fri Mar 19, 2021 9:32 am

@CBarca wrote:
As a high school teacher I also have to say that the virtual schooling has been difficult. BUT my personal opinion from what I've seen is that I think the students will be OK (I am only talking about adolescents, teenagers etc, I do not have any experience with children younger than that). Our youth are the most resilient people (in some ways) than anyone else. They have suffered, their education has suffered, but the vast majority of them are going to be fine. I do think we paid a price. I don't think we scarred children for eternity.

1. Small children need feedback and other children to develop. That one year between 6-7 or7-8 ist for them like 4-5 years for us. My nephew and niece suffer a lot even though they're siblings, lots of folks have got one child only. The situation is aceptable in exceptional times like during a war but now, I don't think so. We're social animals, kids learn the socializing part at a very early age.
2. High schoolers are a different story. In Germany, in the last year of middle school (10th class), there's a mandatory test (MSA = mittlerer Schulabschluss) to decide whether a teenager is allowed to go onto highschool and to study at an university at a later point or not. Their future depends on it. Otherwise, they're left with apprenticeships and a MUCH more complicated way to achieve a higher degree. To be eglible for the test, they ought to have above average marks specially in majour subjects (Maths, German, English). Usually, 50-70% of a class make it. My Russian neighbour's son goes to school, his grades detoriated with corona lockdowns and homeschooling drastically because they were bombarded with stuff with little to no explanation. He is still eglible for the test, for he had exceptional marks in the first half of the year. Out of all of the class, now, 20% are allowed to write the test Laughing
I don't know what you teach but I could give you their questions (pdf) so you'll get an idea of how difficult their tests for their age are. It doesn't help those tests are central and given by the ministry of education. Teachers have got no influence on them.
My sister who is finishing her master's degree in chemical engineering was required to write her last exam into a....................microsoft word document Laughing Then save as a pdf and send per email. She's got just 30min more than usual (90min) for the exam. Woudln't be so bad if she didn't have to type in matrices and equations. I don't know whether her prof was a total jackass or others, too (German profs have got no fucking clue about home schooling and online teaching). Moral of the story, I took a day free, prepared all kinds of equation and matrice templates she might've needed in a separate word document then sat next to her. She wrote everything on paper I typed in her answers. The thing is, in Germany, you just have 3 tries at an exam. If you fail for a 3rd time you're exmatriculated and not allowed to study the same or heavily related subject at any university in Germany ever again. It was her 2nd try so..

What I noticed might be anectodatal evidence but I do think there's more to the damage than just what the eyes meet at a first glance. I don't even want to talk about students who just finished their degrees and where in promising startups Laughing

EDIT: I'll give you an example of the maths exams this year because they're easiest to understand without a language barrier.
The exam itself takes 155 minutes which consists of 45min multiple choice part without the use of a calculator (not allowed) and a 110min part for 3 text based questions either from geometry, functions, probability theory or trigonometry with the use of calculator.
Link:
https://www.hamburg.de/contentblob/8186856/e86ae7bf155b4eb9a6089f19ef631940/data/msa-hinweise-und-beispiele-zu-den-zentralen-schriftlichen-pruefungsaufgaben-mathematik.pdf
Mutiple choice part starts at page 10. They're going to get 34 questions combined from all of those examples (20 can be solved in one step, 14 require multiple steps) from either measuring, geometry, functions, probability theory or trigonometry. Afterwards, they have to hand in the multiple choice part to get the main part with the 3 questions (possible to hand in earlier if finished prior to 45min to get more time).

Starting page 56, the main part starts. They're going to get 3 complete questions of that sort from 3 different topics (geometry, functions, probability theory or trigonometry, duplicate topic isn't possible), 110min for that part. That's it.

To pass, 51% of all answers have to be correct for a 4.0 (barely passed).
Babun
Babun
Fan Favorite
Fan Favorite

Club Supported : Real Madrid
Posts : 7206
Join date : 2011-06-05

Back to top Go down

The Coronavirus Thread - Part 3 - Page 18 Empty Re: The Coronavirus Thread - Part 3

Post by BarrileteCosmico Fri Mar 19, 2021 10:19 pm

Sorry for the delay, crazy week at work

@The Franchise wrote:
Spoiler:
1. No, there most certainly IS a lockdown in place here in the UK. Of course defining a lockdown is troublesome but let me explain in a second.

But before that, we have this the completely wrong way round. Freedom isnt something the government decides we should or shouldn't have, it is not for them to give or not to give. They have removed them (regardless of to what degree or form) under the notion of an exceptional circumstance. Fortunately, it is not exceptional circumstance and I strongly question if it ever was. The entire justification, which got approval from the house, was on the basis that the NHS would otherwise collapse. This did not happen, was never going to with or without a lockdown) and more importantly absolutely will not now.

In fact, the collapse was nothing more than a projection of computer modelling which proved to be wrong almost immediately and when transferred to non-locked countries were also completely wrong.

Yet changes have not happened as goal posts continue to shift and now have been completely removed.

Yes, I have been able to play football, but I am breaking the law to do so. Also this is firstly not with usual regularity, at a place with actual facilities nor with the usual group of people. This is actually not a complaint of mine, even though it is an inconvenience, it would be selfish to use this as an example. I only mentioned it to be honest and not try and hide any of my intentions or actions. My freedoms consist of far more than playing regular football and the vast majority have far more complex problems.

As I said, the collateral damage is absolutely tremendous and will be worse in time.

The latest lockdown here has been from Dec  and will run in some form untill June. Along the way some things MAY change but up until the end of this month at least, we have been allowed by law to do 2 things. 1 hour of exercise (without any facilities obviously) and leave for essential reasons (you cant work from home, food shopping and so on). Nothing else is legal.

Barbershops, salons, restaurants, gyms, council/gov sports fields, sports clubs, youth sports, retail, nightlife, small businesses which dont sell food and many others have been closed. This is the 3rd version of this situation with the only respite being summer, but with gradual opening to some of those places, not all at once.

So to say, some businesses have closed to forced to change is not accurate. The vast majority have been forced to closed and many cannot change to the point of more than breaking even from a financial point of view. I know of restaurants who now do a take away service but this doesnt cover the cost of business, let alone pay employees and so on. I am sure this is the norm and many have clearly closed for good.

Lockdowns at best are the luxury of the rich and well off. For the majority of the people it is not viable on many levels. I wont keep beating this drum because I sense you mostly agree.
Like you say, in principle I mostly agree. I think people should be responsible, and public shame can be a powerful tool to get people to do what is "best", but that ultimately the govt should not be forcing anyone to abide by a lockdown.

But I think it'd be useful to separate this into 2 parts: The govt should not be able to force anyone to remain in their own home for an extended period of time. BUT the govt should be able to set safety limits for businesses (as they have since before covid) and sometimes close them if the risk is too great.

So for example, if we take something like indoor dining, where multiple groups of people meeting in a non-ventilated environment and there is a great risk of spreading a virus. I think it absolutely makes sense that they might be forced to operate at half capacity or even at takeout-only for some time. Should that be applied to all businesses? Absolutely not. But specific targeted high risk places make sense to me (as long as they are temporary).

I feel like the US struck the balance mostly right (or at least MA where I live). It sounds like the UK went too far in the authoritarian direction.

A never ending lockdown is a different story though. Argentina has that and it's been a nightmare. My parents could be fined for simply being outside. They live in the capital, one of the densest places in the world, and they couldn't leave to a country home where they have more space than they would know what to do with, for half a year. The roads were blocked. This is absolutely overboard, not to mention ineffective because everyone that could get away not following did, so cases didn't even come down.

I also agree with something else you kind of alluded to, which is that originally lockdowns were a measure to prevent hospitals from going over-capacity, which would be bad not only for covid patients but for everyone who needs medical attention. But eventually we figured out that respirators were not so important, we got better at triaging who belongs at the hospital and not, we got better at treating the disease with different medicines, we built temporary hospitals to house more people.And hospitals stopped being in danger of over-capacity. And yet lockdowns remained. Somewhere, somewhen the criteria for ending the lockdown provisions went from "save the hospitals" to "slow the spread" to "stop the spread". So I think people are (reasonably) upset at this moving of the goal posts.

@The Franchise wrote:
Spoiler:
2. First part, you mentioned here that many have made the choice to isolate or wear masks in Sweden. I have seen images to the contrary but it isnt important, I will take what you say as having much truth because I have seen evidence of that also. But that right there is the point, it was their personal choice to do so. It is not appropriate to mandate. This is a crucial point.

Second, you say the death per 1000 is worse. I say that when you adjust for important factors, I disagree. I can post the charts from official sources, but it would take alot of effort, but if you want I can do it. Regardless, I have in front of me right now "age standardised mortality" and Sweden is below Denmark and above Norway. More importantly, comparing Sweden in 2020 to each of the years going back to 2014, there is nothing to suggest an abnormal year. Furthermore, comparing under 65y mortality, we see a similar picture. Less than Denmark, more than Norway, not signifanctly different to the last 6 years.

You close with saying it may have worked as in Sweden if people in England for example, were as responsible as the Swedes. I consider this an assumption without much basis. What do you consider responsible? I have seen people in salons and shopping malls maskless...something not seen in the UK. So I need some explanation on that one.

I wont go into the US because my knowledge is limited. But I do find it intresting to compare Florida with its aged population to California.

Overall, the UK have not done well by any measure and the onus on proof is on pro lockdowners to prove their worthwhile value which has yet to happen outside modelling which leaves out various levels of variables.

I have to mention however, the entire discussion hinges on the understanding for PCR. We say one country is doing better or worse than another based on PCR cases and deaths, that in itself is wrong. I believe strongly, excess mortality is much better figure to use as it cannot be manipulated as PCR has been. Different countries using different cycle threshold's (all of whom I know of are WAY over the recommended value) make all the talk of "cases" and "deaths" extremely muddy water.

I agree excess deaths is the metric to look at, but what I've read on this at least says Sweden did worse than their peers. For example: https://www.news-medical.net/news/20201116/Study-compares-deaths-in-Sweden-and-Norway-before-and-after-COVID-pandemic.aspx (first result in my google search)

I hadn't heard about the age-adjusted statistics, but I'd be surprised to learn that Sweden's population breakdown is much more different than Denmark's or Norway's.

In terms of what makes me think Swedish people are more responsible than Brits/Americans. I guess it's my own bias Laughing Certainly did pull that out of nowhere, although I'm not convinced I'm wrong.

Spoiler:
6. Yes, giving it to someone who falls under the bracket of vulnerable is not ideal. Which is why the idea of "focused protection" which has been suggested from day 1 by many experts makes alot of sense. This option was always one the table and ignored in favour of something which is clearly not working. Those who are at risk, must and should be helped. But that doesnt include the locking up of healthy citizens.

In theory I could see it working, maybe. But in practice I could never the elderly abide by a scenario were everyone is able to go about their lives normally and they are forced to stay inside. Not sure it would be right either.

Spoiler:
7.  Completely disagree. You will be unable to link me to any study which shows they work, as you would agree. You cannot say they "decrease the risk" with absolutely nothing to back that up. The only study done since this started I am aware of, was in Denmark which show they have no clear positive impact.

Regardless, this is the key point. Mandate vs voluntary. Absolutely no need for them be mandated, because there is no proof of them working. You say its a minor inconvenience, well I disagree. My partner has some real breathing issues due to various conditions, her wearing a mask is an absolute disaster and yet because she listens to all the quackery and follows the rules she suffers.

True, this is the minority, most people will be fine wearing it I agree. But I come back to the point, there is no proof they work and I would bet my bottom dollar no study will convince they do indeed work. Especially not in the middle of summer when they were mandated here. Surely, once the mandate came into effect we would see a change in the precious case numbers? There was no change whatsoever and this has been observed in many countries.

I just don't understand why this is so controversial. When it comes to all these civil rights vs public health trade offs we are all making I can typically see both sides. In this one? not so much. It's a minor inconvenience for the individual vs a big benefit for society. That's why I'm not opposed to the mandate.

In terms of studies, do you really need them? Do you need a study to tell you that an umbrella protects you from rain? Try to blow a candle while wearing a medical mask. You won't be able to. Is it that much of a logical stretch that putting layer between our breathing holes and the public prevent us from spreading our germs further? And that it protects us from the germs of others? Seems like an easy win, personally.

Countries that had mask mandates did far better in the early phase of the epidemic than those that didn't. It's a big reason for why Asia was more successful in managing it than European countries, and even in Europe if you look at Czechia much of their early success is attributed to mask wearing.

Spoiler:
8. We do not agree here. See my PCR rant earlier. It is not fit for purpose. I can go in to more detail but I would have guessed you was familar with the PCR problem already.
Going to skip this one

Spoiler:
9.  No, it is indeed not the same thing. Where do we see this in the data? I dont really want to spend much time discussing this issue, to me its not at all signifcant in terms of the lockdown. There are surely 3 or 4 more important justifications (or lack there of) for a lockdown than variants.
I agree it's a secondary issue, but just logically if the mortality remains the same but it spreads easier then it will lead to higher mortality. I agree the existence of a strain should not be enough to justify a lockdown, but if it leads to actual increases in hospitalizations it might.

Spoiler:
10 and 11. Countries can prevent others from coming in if that is their desire. I agree. I completely disagree with it, but in the end that is the decision of each country which I have no right to speak on. I would not compare COVID to other countries which require vax's like yellow fever like the Congo and neither should you. We are talking about 20% to 50% death rate to those who contract it, Covid's rate is up for debate but we both know it is under 1% and im being generous as to not go into that grey area.

But it does seem, some countries like Turkey have some sense and are not demanding this.
A lot of the diseases that you need to get some vaccinations for are not all that deadly either, but this more of a mute point, we are mostly agreed here.

Spoiler:
You have failed (to me) to explain why I should get a vaccine. If those at risk are vaccinated, they are indeed no longer at risk? Where am I going wrong here?

If they are no longer at risk, how can un-vaccinated me pose any danger to them? Perhaps I am not reading your explanation correctly but I am not getting it.
I might've missed it in my original read, but this has the important caviat of "given that everyone at actual risk is vaccinated". And if that's the case, then sure, I think it's fairly safe for you to go unvaccinated.

That said, I can think of a few scenarios for why you should:
-Mortality is not the only symptom that matters. Even if you're not afraid you will die from it, there's a chance that you will still get sick and possibly develop long term symptoms.
-A lot of people at risk are not eligible to take the vaccine. Some others tried, had a bad reaction, and will not take the 2nd one so their protection is shakier. By not taking the vaccine you risk become a carrier for the virus and passing it on to one of these people.
-In order to fully develop herd immunity we need 80%ish of people to get the vaccine (or so I've read), by taking the vaccine you help pass that threshold.

@The Franchise wrote:
Spoiler:
The last I checked the Nuremberg Code is still a thing. The first point being voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential. My consent is not given and putting up roadblocks to crush my consent is absolutely wrong. I do not take the flu jab, I have not visited a hospital or doc in decades now. This will not change. The result of these mandatory vaccines is simply a 2 tiered society akin to apartied. I already see this Isreal and I am sure the same will happen elsewhere.

I wont even get into the questionable nature of the vaccine itself. I dont have proof of anything, but there is some worrying things to point to. But I do not want this to detract from my main point, a great vaccine or not, it is absolutely not needed.
It should be voluntary. And your government shouldn't put roadblocks to crush your consent. But it's entirely appropriate for individual businesses, private individuals and foreign governments to do so if that's their choice.
BarrileteCosmico
BarrileteCosmico
Admin
Admin

Club Supported : Barcelona
Posts : 27098
Join date : 2011-06-05
Age : 31

Back to top Go down

The Coronavirus Thread - Part 3 - Page 18 Empty Re: The Coronavirus Thread - Part 3

Post by Myesyats Mon Mar 22, 2021 12:59 pm

Why do we always have to be worst in everything Sad

The Coronavirus Thread - Part 3 - Page 18 Ew2495jW8AsSuhk?format=jpg&name=large

Myesyats
World Class Contributor
World Class Contributor

Club Supported : PSG
Posts : 15288
Join date : 2015-05-03
Age : 22

Back to top Go down

The Coronavirus Thread - Part 3 - Page 18 Empty Re: The Coronavirus Thread - Part 3

Post by Babun Tue Mar 23, 2021 9:09 pm

Shit is going down the drain over here. Ironically, I'm eglible for the Astrazeneca vaccination because I belong to a group with extensive contact with risk groups (my employer gave me an attestation which I have to show at the vaccination centre). I tried to get a vaccination date and got one on 31.03.2021 Laughing
So if you have any question about Astrazeneca, I'll be able to answer them come next week.
Babun
Babun
Fan Favorite
Fan Favorite

Club Supported : Real Madrid
Posts : 7206
Join date : 2011-06-05

Back to top Go down

The Coronavirus Thread - Part 3 - Page 18 Empty Re: The Coronavirus Thread - Part 3

Post by Myesyats Tue Mar 23, 2021 9:12 pm

They've confirmed Astrazeneca to be as safe as the other ones after more trials. I hope so because some of these cases were worrying.

My grandma got vaxed with Pfizer last week.

Myesyats
World Class Contributor
World Class Contributor

Club Supported : PSG
Posts : 15288
Join date : 2015-05-03
Age : 22

Back to top Go down

The Coronavirus Thread - Part 3 - Page 18 Empty Re: The Coronavirus Thread - Part 3

Post by Thimmy Tue Mar 23, 2021 9:22 pm

I have no clue how safe Astrazeneca is, but we've had at least 5-10 reports here of people getting blood clot a relatively short time after taking it, and at least one of those people died from it. I'm sure the majority of people aren't at risk of getting such severe side-effects, but I know I'm happy that I'm getting Pfizer instead on thursday.
Thimmy
Thimmy
World Class Contributor
World Class Contributor

Club Supported : Real Madrid
Posts : 11805
Join date : 2011-06-05
Age : 33

Back to top Go down

The Coronavirus Thread - Part 3 - Page 18 Empty Re: The Coronavirus Thread - Part 3

Post by BarrileteCosmico Tue Mar 23, 2021 10:12 pm

@Myesyats wrote:Why do we always have to be worst in everything Sad

The Coronavirus Thread - Part 3 - Page 18 Ew2495jW8AsSuhk?format=jpg&name=large
USA can into Europe now ? hmm
BarrileteCosmico
BarrileteCosmico
Admin
Admin

Club Supported : Barcelona
Posts : 27098
Join date : 2011-06-05
Age : 31

Back to top Go down

The Coronavirus Thread - Part 3 - Page 18 Empty Re: The Coronavirus Thread - Part 3

Post by Babun Tue Mar 23, 2021 11:00 pm

@Thimmy wrote:I have no clue how safe Astrazeneca is, but we've had at least 5-10 reports here of people getting blood clot a relatively short time after taking it, and at least one of those people died from it. I'm sure the majority of people aren't at risk of getting such severe side-effects, but I know I'm happy that I'm getting Pfizer instead on thursday.

I prefer Astrazeneca to the vector vaccines. Of course not as comfortable but old school. RNA vaccines are to me like silicon boobs in the 90s: everyone said they're safe, no long term study was in place. Same with RNA vaccines, people getting them are guinea pigs of some sort. Whether they're really safe according to theories will be proven by time.
I'll get my painful Astrazeneca jab and be done with it. We'll probably be both ok anyways (completly healthy with no prior conditions).
Babun
Babun
Fan Favorite
Fan Favorite

Club Supported : Real Madrid
Posts : 7206
Join date : 2011-06-05

Back to top Go down

The Coronavirus Thread - Part 3 - Page 18 Empty Re: The Coronavirus Thread - Part 3

Post by Thimmy Tue Mar 23, 2021 11:25 pm

I feel healthy. Had to fill out a form to rule out underlying conditions, allergies and whatnot, and I didn't have any of those. I'm actually the only person in my workplace who hasn't been ill for 5+ years, and if that's impressive, I don't remember being ill since I was in 9th or 10th grade. I've never taken a day off work due to illness.

But I could have some underlying condition, for all I know. It's not impossible that I'm asymptomatic, and I've been infected by the virus at some point. And with that in mind, it's a bit reassuring to know that I'm not taking the vaccine that some people clearly have gotten blood clot from. Like you say, we're guinea pigs, so we might all be negatively impacted by these vaccines to some degree. Or maybe we won't. We'll find out eventually.
Thimmy
Thimmy
World Class Contributor
World Class Contributor

Club Supported : Real Madrid
Posts : 11805
Join date : 2011-06-05
Age : 33

Back to top Go down

The Coronavirus Thread - Part 3 - Page 18 Empty Re: The Coronavirus Thread - Part 3

Post by Babun Wed Mar 24, 2021 11:19 am

@Thimmy wrote:I feel healthy. Had to fill out a form to rule out underlying conditions, allergies and whatnot, and I didn't have any of those. I'm actually the only person in my workplace who hasn't been ill for 5+ years, and if that's impressive, I don't remember being ill since I was in 9th or 10th grade. I've never taken a day off work due to illness.But I could have some underlying condition, for all I know. It's not impossible that I'm asymptomatic, and I've been infected by the virus at some point.

Same here, I'm never ill and fill up for the others. The only time in the last 10 years I had to take 4 days off was because of a very aggressive influenza A strain in 2018. That one hit short but hard, I had fever. Otherwise, I never get colds, maybe due to exercising in cold weather outside, don't know.
For the underlying conditions, the easiest way is to donate blood every 6 months or so. They check thoroughly without you telling or paying them anything (also works in the US). All the people getting treated after accidents with blood transfusions, the blood has to come from somewhere. I drive a car, so yeah.
@Thimmy wrote:
And with that in mind, it's a bit reassuring to know that I'm not taking the vaccine that some people clearly have gotten blood clot from. Like you say, we're guinea pigs, so we might all be negatively impacted by these vaccines to some degree. Or maybe we won't. We'll find out eventually.

The blood clothing issue isn't exclusive to Astrazeneca. Biontech and Moderna cause them, too. Moderna is actually more suspect to the ones with allergies:
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/different-vaccines/Moderna.html
In Astrazeneca's case, thrombosis in the brain area is possible with neglible probability and mostly for women between 20-45y. From the 13 people at the start who got issues with the vaccine, 12 were female who took antibaby pills.
Babun
Babun
Fan Favorite
Fan Favorite

Club Supported : Real Madrid
Posts : 7206
Join date : 2011-06-05

Back to top Go down

The Coronavirus Thread - Part 3 - Page 18 Empty Re: The Coronavirus Thread - Part 3

Post by Babun Wed Mar 24, 2021 8:32 pm

3251 deaths recorded in one day in Brazil. Manau's mutant seems to be the most dangerous of them all:
https://wicnews.com/world/brazil-3251-coronavirus-deaths-recorded-one-day-550433554/
Babun
Babun
Fan Favorite
Fan Favorite

Club Supported : Real Madrid
Posts : 7206
Join date : 2011-06-05

Back to top Go down

The Coronavirus Thread - Part 3 - Page 18 Empty Re: The Coronavirus Thread - Part 3

Post by Zagadka Fri Mar 26, 2021 7:43 pm

Good discussion last 2 pages.
After almost completely losing my sanity and sitting at home 3 months ALONE in the dead of winter, I escaped the longest lockdown in North America (Toronto) 3 weeks ago and came to Texas just as the mask mandate and all restrictions here in Texas were lifted.

I don't even feel COVID in daily life anymore. I think this was one of the best decisions I've ever made. Not at an office, not at the gym, not outside. God, who knew one day I'd say I love Texas!

a sharp contrast to Europe. Most people I talk to daily in Europe are borderline depressed or completely on the edge with no end for lockdowns in sight. Euro 2021 scheduled to kick off in 85 days! lol

Russia seems to be fully open inside (but limited foreign travel, for example, I can't go) and I know an American friend who's been living in Istanbul for months and says it's very normal and relatively open.

EU seems to be the place not to be in now.

from the map on Kayak website, Serbia is the only country in Europe that has no entry restrictions now...but hopefully @VIBE can update us on the normal life situation.

Once my limit of staying in Texas expires, I need an escape and as long as the 3-day $2000 Guantanamo hotel and 14 day quarantine are still the law in Canada, I ain't going back hmm

But this situation really sucks. to not be able to plan ANYTHING more than 10 days in advance is insane. I keep saying that the next 2-3 months will really tell us more about what shape the world will be going forward, but I truly believe by end of June a lot of questions will be clearer.

Bloomberg had an article yesterday that we must start planning for a Permanent Pandemic by the way.

https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2021-03-24/when-will-covid-end-we-must-start-planning-for-a-permanent-pandemic
Zagadka
Zagadka
Starlet
Starlet

Posts : 636
Join date : 2018-03-20

Back to top Go down

The Coronavirus Thread - Part 3 - Page 18 Empty Re: The Coronavirus Thread - Part 3

Post by Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

Page 18 of 42 Previous  1 ... 10 ... 17, 18, 19 ... 30 ... 42  Next

Back to top


 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum