Jump to content


Coronavirus - Part Two.

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, PRESLEY said:

I agree with what you have listed, the Goverment ect said all this last year but I wish the Goverment ect,  would have  done what they are epceptional at doing,  is lied to the Public and stated this Virus can kill everyone no matter what age,  then probably the younger end might have taken this more seriously hence more caution preventing as many lockdowns we have had,  by the way just my opinion, I could be wrong as per,  :huh:

That is what happened isn’t it?

 

amazing story on bbc this morning where they basically say all the 200,000 cases a day thing was just put out to reign people in.

 
unbelievable really.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, makapaka said:

That is what happened isn’t it?

 

amazing story on bbc this morning where they basically say all the 200,000 cases a day thing was just put out to reign people in.

 
unbelievable really.

Yes it's a load of, to put it politely, a load of Politics.   :hihi:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, makapaka said:

That is what happened isn’t it?

 

amazing story on bbc this morning where they basically say all the 200,000 cases a day thing was just put out to reign people in.

 
unbelievable really.

Any chance you could post a link.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What about the doomsday scenarios?

It is true, though, that ministers and government scientists did express concerns that the situation might have got much worse than it has.

Health Secretary Sajid Javid said cases could reach 100,000 a day, while Prof Neil Ferguson, one of the key modellers, said there could even be 200,000 cases.

These scenarios were possible - at the time infection rates were doubling every 10 days - but they were at the upper end of the modelling scenarios.

But there was a reason why the figures were put forward so publicly. It was, in part, to influence behaviour.

"We messed up the communication about masks," said one government source. "We had ministers claiming they were ditching them - it was giving the wrong impression when we needed the public to remain cautious.

"We knew we had to rein things back again."

2 hours ago, butlers said:

The text above @butlers' link is from the link. I assume this is what @makapaka was referring to.

 

What a ridiculous piece of 'journalism'! Who is it who is saying that the doomsday scenarios were put forward to influence behaviour? The implication of the piece is that it is the government but a literal interpretation of what is written is that it is the opinion of the journalist. A bit slippery that. Then again if it is the government saying they tried to influence behaviour how is it that the really big number (200 000 cases per day) is not advanced by a member of the government ... the people in the room for the big number are the BBC (who the journalist works for) and Neil Ferguson who is an academic. So how exactly does the government get the big number in front of the public? We aren't told. Is it possible that the journalist knows that the BBC and Neil Ferguson were told to air the big number but chooses not to report this? This is one of the ways I find the MSM is dishonest/ incompetent: upon careful reading you realise the conclusion you drew from a casual reading is not supported by what is actually written.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From memory the story was a one day wonder.

Makes a great headline.

 

The 100,000 number from memory  possible by early autumn.

Hasn't it always been a compliant that " the press" are stacked with humanities degree holders rather than science grads.

 

London was lacking in vaccinations but figures today say 93% of people testing have antibodies.

 

 

Tesco report , at least 80 percent customers masked .

Of the staff 4 out of 5 were.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It would have certainly suited the government for the 200,000 number to be out there as thier internal critics of FREEDOM

 day not meeting thier full expectations could be molified  ( maybe)

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There has definitely been a big push to get people vaccinated and not everybody involved feels it should be left to individuals to make the decision.

 

The politicians clearly believe in manipulation. I'll bet there aren't many who trust more than half of all politicians and quite a few of us who trust far, far fewer than half.

 

My reading of clinicians is that they tend to see informed consent as a bit of a nuisance because it takes decisions out of their 'expert' hands. Never mind the fact that they do not have skin in the game because that skin belongs to the patients. They also sometimes forget to mention their conflict of interest: they often say get jabbed for your own benefit while failing to mention they really, really want you jabbed for the common good.

 

The BBC has little or no scientific competence but probably feels it should act responsibly (ie pro-vaccination) ... that is when it isn't looking for controversy or trying to frame everything as an argument between two sets of talking heads.

 

I like the scientists. Herding scientists seems to be on a par with herding cats and they seem to like to insist on nuance. [Reminds me of Nixon asking for a one handed economist because he was fed up of hearing 'on the one hand ..., on the other hand ...'.]

 

Nonetheless the vaccines have thus far turned out really well. In the second wave about 1 in 50 cases lead to death, in the current wave it is more like 1 in 700. We also have falling cases  with little in the way of restrictions due in part to vaccination.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Carbuncle said:

What about the doomsday scenarios?

It is true, though, that ministers and government scientists did express concerns that the situation might have got much worse than it has.

Health Secretary Sajid Javid said cases could reach 100,000 a day, while Prof Neil Ferguson, one of the key modellers, said there could even be 200,000 cases.

These scenarios were possible - at the time infection rates were doubling every 10 days - but they were at the upper end of the modelling scenarios.

But there was a reason why the figures were put forward so publicly. It was, in part, to influence behaviour.

"We messed up the communication about masks," said one government source. "We had ministers claiming they were ditching them - it was giving the wrong impression when we needed the public to remain cautious.

"We knew we had to rein things back again."

The text above @butlers' link is from the link. I assume this is what @makapaka was referring to.

 

What a ridiculous piece of 'journalism'! Who is it who is saying that the doomsday scenarios were put forward to influence behaviour? The implication of the piece is that it is the government but a literal interpretation of what is written is that it is the opinion of the journalist. A bit slippery that. Then again if it is the government saying they tried to influence behaviour how is it that the really big number (200 000 cases per day) is not advanced by a member of the government ... the people in the room for the big number are the BBC (who the journalist works for) and Neil Ferguson who is an academic. So how exactly does the government get the big number in front of the public? We aren't told. Is it possible that the journalist knows that the BBC and Neil Ferguson were told to air the big number but chooses not to report this? This is one of the ways I find the MSM is dishonest/ incompetent: upon careful reading you realise the conclusion you drew from a casual reading is not supported by what is actually written.

Bbc quoted an unnamed “government source”.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, makapaka said:

Bbc quoted an unnamed “government source”.

True enough but the government source doesn't seem to be saying the 200 000 was put forward in the media because of government manipulation ... or does it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, top4718 said:

No, the MSM are telling you its young unvaccinated as thats the target audience for their propaganda, its an amazing virus this, didn't affect the young in any way for over a year until it became their turn to be injected with the poison, what a coincidence.

 

I can't believe that intelligent people can't see through this nonsense.

I don't know why you assume it's the MSM that's told me this.  As I said, that section wasn't a direct reply to you, the posts got merged by the forum, but hey ho.

Anyway, I know you don't believe MSM or peer reviewed scientific research, so I used anecdotal evidence of what is actually happening here in Sheffield.

I suppose that's all lies as well though, isn't it.

 

I can't believe people can be so wilfully obtuse and unable to understand there is more going on in the world than occurs within their own experience.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.

X