Å·±¦ÓéÀÖ

I was listening to NPR this morning and they were going on and on and talking to scientists and medical "experts" about UNDERestimating the deaths attributed to COVID 19 during this "second wave". They even included the deaths of people who died of heart attacks at home because they were too afraid of going to the hospital as if the virus itself was responsible, not the draconian measures or the fear mongering of the media is spreading.

The overall gist was that the death rate in the US is higher than it normally is so it must be coronavirus causing this increase.

@ James re. Message 249

I am pre-empting any attempted mandatory vaccination by writing to Boris Johnson and others in his Government, serving a prior Will Notice and Mandate with Affidavits to be completed, stating that
each party accepts personal liability for ill health, side effects, death and genocide as a result of any vaccination the victim was compelled to take in order to receive their entitlements.
The notice includes:-
1. I do not consent to any legislation that places conditions of my rights to my full entitlements,
2. I do not consent to any legislation for mandatory or compelled vaccination.
3. I do not consent to accept any program of vaccination, for Myself, and
4. As contract law prevails, you require My consent to compel me to accept any vaccination program upon Me.
etc.
I recommend you check the following link: which will take you to ‘Solutions Empowerment� where you can download the Vaccine Denial Form, for a minimum donation - or what you can afford.

Anni wrote: "@ James re. Message 249

I am pre-empting any attempted mandatory vaccination by writing to Boris Johnson and others in his Government, serving a prior Will Notice and Mandate with Affidavits to be..."

Hi Anni - loving your spirit of resistance!
If enough people can awaken and can become aware of the nefarious events that are unfolding beneath the MSM news, then we will continue to enjoy the freedoms we have pre-2020.

Roth wrote: "I was listening to NPR this morning and they were going on and on and talking to scientists and medical "experts" about UNDERestimating the deaths attributed to COVID 19 during this "second wave". ..."

Such estimates are little better than guesses, but if you don't test corpses I guess there must be some underestimate.

Ian wrote: "if you don't test corpses I guess there must be some underestimate...."

With Postmortem Testing, 'Last Responders' Shed Light On Pandemic's Spread

Collection and Submission of Postmortem Specimens from Deceased Persons with Known or Suspected COVID-19

Why Dallas Is Testing the Recently Deceased to Combat COVID-19

James Morcan, narrative, exactly!

Roth, what you say is very important! Of our 22 deaths here, almost all were people dying either with Covid-19 not of it, or people "associated with" (from the same resthome as others) . The 21st death was of someone who had tested negative, the 22nd had recovered from the disease a month before she died. The majority were in their 90s or 80s.

Debby wrote: "James Morcan, narrative, exactly!"

For most people, narrative trumps facts, even in many modern doctors and medical scientists. It's a really sad day when you discover that about the medical scientific community...You would not believe how much pseudoscience and anti-scientific beliefs or dogma now exist in the modern medical establishment. (or maybe you do if you have experience in this realm?).

But once the narrative is successfully sold, very few people have enough neuroplasticity or flexibility or mental fortitude to keep questioning the narrative until it is proven...And again, continuous questioning would be the ONLY path of science.

A neuroscientist recently explained to me that human brains evolved by primarily comprehending narratives and it's only in very recent times that we have had access to vast amounts of facts.

Real science is something that will never trust authorities or academic consensus -- real science will ALWAYS keep questioning and leaving room for error (instead of censoring "dissenting scientists") until everything is proven about each thesis - which often may not be possible within each scientist's lifetime.,.

Debby wrote: "Roth, what you say is very important! Of our 22 deaths here, almost all were people dying either with Covid-19 not of it, or people "associated with" (from the same resthome as others) . The 21st d..."

That's another example where real science would be DELIGHTED to investigate these anomalies and welcome any contrarian scientists and medical doctors (even if sometimes just to successfully debunk those contrarians if indeed they are promoting pseudoscience).

Fortunately we got a thread right here in the Underground on this very topic (I'm sure every true scientist in this group has analysed these contrarian medical professionals thoroughly!):

Doctors and Medical Scientists with alternative opinions on the Coronavirus (please only include links to statements made by doctors, scientists and medical professionals) /topic/show/...

What kills someone can be debated, but I think a reasonable excuse to label it as the virus was responsible is to ask had the person not got infected would they have been expected to live for another six months. Yes, some are old, and you could say they died of something else, and strictly speaking it may be plausible the virus cannot kill you; it just weakens you and something else kills you.

My father would be an example of what I mean. Technically, he died of a heart failure. His heart stopped largely because of malnutrition. The malnutrition occurred because he could not digest food. He could not digest food because a pancreatic cancer shut of the necessary enzymes. So the day he died his heart decided to give up, but it would be reasonable to state he died of cancer because if the cancer was not there, he would not have been in that condition. I think the same issues go with the virus. A cancer usually does not kill; it leads to other things going wrong and the weaker the body, the quicker it happens. Same with a virus. The virus simply weakens the body to the point that something gives out.

Debby wrote: "Of our 22 deaths here, almost all were people dying either with Covid-19 not of it, or people "associated with" (from the same resthome as others) . The 21st death was of someone who had tested negative, the 22nd had recovered from the disease a month before she died. The majority were in their 90s or 80s...."

What you are commenting on here re the NZ deaths is similar to this Italian politician who slammed the 'False COVID-19 Numbers: 25K Did Not Die, it's a way to Impose a Dictatorship'" on YouTube

Not saying I know enough about the NZ or Italian deaths to comment, just presenting this as a flip side.

What's worthy of even more research are the Doctors and Medical Scientists I linked to in the other group thread...Yes, these scientists are in the minority...But the history of medical science has untold examples whereby the scientific minority eventually overrode the mainstream consensus, so you never know.

Also, did we ever get to the bottom of Anni's question posted earlier in the week: What is the name of the primary specialist peer reviewed paper in which the ‘virus� is illustrated and it’s full genetic information described?

Ian J Miller, I just have to say that your father's situation is in now comparable to the sitch I mentioned, of the woman in her 90s who *despite testing negative* was listed here, and to W.H.O as having died of Covid-19, because she had lived at the same rest home as others who had actually had Covid-19.

James Morcan, my figures come from my diary, I listened to Ashley Bloomfield's daily press conferences and made notes.

The NZ cases do not represent a proper cross-section of cases because the lockdown was intense and worked to the extent that it eliminated the virus. As Debby said, the death rate was mainly from old people, in part through the infections of two (from memory) aged care facilities, each case being brought in by an assistant. There were then something like three main clusters. There was a wedding, that produced 83 cases on its own, thanks to an airline cabin crew member (I think) who could be thought of as a super spreader, BUT weddings are particularly bad situations because everyone gets close up and personal. There was also at least one boarding school.

The overall death rate was something like 1.4%, with the deaths largely from the aged (including, from the wedding, the groom's father) but the cases mainly the young (from weddings, schools, and subsequent associates) and the young are more capable of fighting it off. So, with such skewed infection, statistics are irrelevant other than to note that by not getting into the general population it may not be as infectious as some claim in terms of short-term contact. However, one problem noted here was that infection of family members, and so on, occurred over quite long time periods, which suggests that while the probability of infection is low per contact, the person remains infectious over a longish period.

On the question of masks, I believe the size of the virus is irrelevant because airborne infection that comes from coughs/sneezes, etc, depends on the size of the droplet. The virus is hydrophilic, thanks to the protein spikes, and once in water does not come out. The cough/sneeze throws out a spray of such droplets that contain the virus, and it is the breathing in or contact with such droplets that elads to infection. Also why hand washing is important. If the virus were hydrophobic, that would be relatively useless.

Here’s a couple of questions for those more knowledgeable than me on viruses and pandemics, but first some background�

I heard an Australian medical spokesperson announce recently that the influenza death rate this year was down a staggering 95%. Unfortunately, I didn’t catch whether she was referring to the Australian or worldwide death rate resulting from flu.

Bearing in mind the current global death rate from coronavirus at the time of writing stands at 521,355, Global Research.ca quotes WHO as saying “the common flu causes up to 5 million cases of severe illness worldwide and kills up to 650,000 people every year.�

The same article compares flu symptoms with those of coronavirus, stating, “The initial symptoms of coronavirus are typically similar to those of a cold or flu...�

WebMD.com lists the following as common symptoms of coronavirus:
Fever, Fatigue, A dry cough, Loss of appetite, Body aches, Shortness of breath, Mucus or phlegm, Sore throat, Headache, Chills sometimes with shaking, Loss of smell or taste, Stuffy nose, Nausea or vomiting and Diarrhea.

Can anyone tell me (1) how those symptoms differ from influenza? and (2) why COVID-19 isn’t classed as another flu virus strain?

And more to the point� IF coronavirus was categorized as common flu (albeit flu on steroids as someone said), and if the worldwide influenza death rate (inclusive of COVID-19 deaths) over the past six months was compared with strictly flu-related deaths over the same time span in recent years, how would it compare?

If the difference was negligible, or not as great as we might assume, why don’t the authorities close borders and impose quarantines and lockdowns every flu season????

Thinking on it...I guess one obvious answer to above might be if the quarantines and lockdowns hadn't been imposed the current death rate would be a lot higher than it currently is�

Lance wrote: "Can anyone tell me (1) how those symptoms differ from influenza? and (2) why COVID-19 isn’t classed as another flu virus strain?..."

Intentional and/or accidental reclassification of Influenza and Pneumonia cases as COVID-19 cannot be discounted yet either...

According to reports I've seen, flu and pneumonia deaths are down this year to date in most countries...just as Covid is spiking...

What's intriguing also is that previous coronaviruses (first discovered by science about a century ago) have been labelled by doctors and scientists at times as "the flu"...

Lance, re (2) it is classification. one is from the family coronaviridae, while influenza viruses come from the family orthomyxoviridae. You can't mix up families - the taxonomists would get upset.

I think some of the gross symptoms are similar for a lot of different viruses. The difference may lie in the S of SARS - severe. We still do not know how severe the difference is because we cannot be sure what are facts, what are guesses, and what has yet to be determined.

The one thing we do know is this virus has a way to go yet. Comparing death rates might be better in a year or so, when the pandemic has run its first course.

To repeat I'm quoting again verbatim from the CDC's website (note the "coronaviruses, such as the one that causes the common cold" excerpt):

What do your results mean? -...

"If you test positive:
A positive test result shows you may have antibodies from an infection with the virus that causes COVID-19. However, there is a chance a positive result means that you have antibodies from an infection with a virus from the same family of viruses (called coronaviruses), such as the one that causes the common cold."

Accordingly, where that test is used there will be very many false positives because who has not had many colds?

What follows below is a British Freedom of Information Act request re the Coronavirus.

The reply from the Prime Minister's office is interesting because they say they don't hold any info pertaining to the request, and fob the person off to the Public Health dept - but the individual's reply "whoever endorsed the Corona Act is obliged to ensure that its benefits do outweigh its risks" is a valid point in my opinion. They should have all such info in order to weigh up a proper risk assessment when setting laws, after all our health departments are not agencies that have classified documents or anything. So I'm still interested, in particular, to hear of "the name of the primary specialist peer reviewed paper in which said virus is illustrated and its full genetic information described" - as we have that other viruses...


Proof of the Covid-19 virus

Dear Prime Minister's Office,
Please supply the following on Covid-19
1. Is there an electron micrograph of the pure and fully characterised virus (SARS-CoV-2)?
2. What is the name of the primary specialist peer reviewed paper in which said virus is illustrated and its full genetic information described?
3. What is the name of the primary specialist peer reviewed paper which provides unequivocal proof that the ‘Covid-19� virus is the sole cause of a particular disease?
4. Where is (if there is proof of SARS-CoV-2) its antibody test that fulfils the Koch postulates and has a false positive below 30%; that can confirm being infected by SARS-CoV-2?

Should I not hear from you within 20 days with full answers to the above points, everyone will be entitled to assume that 1, 2, 3 & 4 are not proven to exist, and that there is no true scientific evidence for the virus causing ‘Covid-19�; and that all related legislation are null and void.

The doctors, biologists and epidemiologists involved in this discussion mention that the best death toll stats show 2020 is up by only 20% compared to the (underreported) 2017/2018 Influenza outbreak...

Measuring the risk of coronavirus | Michael Levitt, Anne Johnson, David Alexander and Toby Young

Michael Levitt, Anne Johnson, David Alexander and Toby Young debate how to measure the risks of coronavirus.

#risk #lockdown #coronavirus

Michael Levitt is a biophysicist and a professor of structural biology at Stanford University.

David Alexander is professor of risk and disaster reduction at University College London.

Dame Anne Mandall Johnson is an epidemiologist, known for her work in the areas of HIV, sexually transmitted infections and infectious diseases.

Debby wrote: "Of our 22 deaths here, almost all were people dying either with Covid-19 not of it, or people "associated with" (from the same resthome as others) . The 21st death was of someone who had tested negative, the 22nd had recovered from the disease a month before she died. The majority were in their 90s or 80s...."

It appears to be the same thing in Ireland according to an Irish government report reported in this mainstream media article (expect the same official reports to eventually be released from various other countries in near future):

Excess deaths 'substantially' less than Covid-19 figures - HIQA

Excess deaths in Ireland from March to June were "substantially" less than the officially reported Covid-19 figures, analysis from the Health Information and Quality Authority has found.

HIQA says this could be due to the inclusion within official figures of people who were infected with coronavirus but whose cause of death may have been predominantly due to other factors.

Excess deaths refers to the number of deaths over and above what would normally be expected for that time of year.

HIQA found that the officially-reported Covid-19 deaths likely overestimates the true burden of excess deaths caused by the virus.

It says this could be due to the inclusion within official figures of people who were infected with coronavirus at the time of death, whose cause of death may have been predominantly due to other factors.

James wrote: "The doctors, biologists and epidemiologists involved in this discussion mention that the best death toll stats show 2020 is up by only 20% compared to the (underreported) 2017/2018 Influenza outbre..."

I guess the obvious counter to that, as I mentioned earlier, is if the border closures and other strict measures hadn't been imposed worldwide that percentage increase in deaths this year could be much higher�

The cause of death is always debatable. The argument that the virus caused it lies on the premise that the person would have lived somewhat longer and enjoyed the life he/she had been living without it. However, the virus itself does not kill anyone. What it does is mess with the respiratory system and the body gets insufficient oxygen. This leads to multiple organ failure, particularly in the brain, heart and kidneys, which interact with each other. My guess is every patient actually died of heart failure, but it was an inevitable consequence of the viral infection.

Are we trying to say that the 44,000 deaths in the UK attributed to the virus had n othing to do with it, and there would have been such a spike in deaths anyway, and it was just coincidental they tested positive for the virus?

Lance wrote: "I guess the obvious counter to that, as I mentioned earlier, is if the border closures and other strict measures hadn't been imposed worldwide that percentage increase in deaths this year could be much higher�..."

Yep, but beyond that then you've gotta consider if the slightly increased deathtoll ("slightly increased" compared to previous years of other outbreaks such as a epic 2017-2018 Influenza pandemic) also includes incorrectly labelled Coronavirus deaths -- as per the Irish article posted above where the Irish government has now announced their true death toll is "substantially" less than the officially reported Covid-19 figures...

That all goes back to the question of whether the carnage to come (e.g. potentially wars, economic meltdowns, increasing crime etc), not to mention all those who died because they could not get hospital treatments for non-Covid illnesses (including even children dying of cancer), was/is going to be worth it...

Ian wrote: "Are we trying to say that the 44,000 deaths in the UK attributed to the virus had n othing to do with it, and there would have been such a spike in deaths anyway, and it was just coincidental they tested positive for the virus?..."

I haven't seen anyone saying anything like "None of the 44,000 deaths in the UK had anything to do with the virus"

So instead of trying to oversimplify and push black and white extremes, it's far better to look at what the likes of the Irish government are saying in their latest report (posted above): "Excess deaths in Ireland from March to June were "substantially" less than the officially reported Covid-19 figures, analysis from the Health Information and Quality Authority has found."

So why not instead ask yourself: Well, if Irish medical scientists have rounded down their deathtoll from 1,740 Covid deaths to only 1,200 (a 31% decrease) then is it possible the UK authorities may do the same in time? Is it possible more like 25,000 or less died in the UK?

Anyone have any stats or estimates on what the deathtoll would be for those who died because they could not get hospital treatments for non-Covid illnesses during the last 3 or 4 months?

Then I guess a secondary stat (although much harder to assess accurately) would be increases or spikes of indirect deaths from increases in suicides and domestic violence or other crimes during the lockdown period.

Ian wrote: "The cause of death is always debatable..."

Then why try to imply that debating the debatable is silly? :)

Various countries early on (e.g. Italy and the US and the UK) were listing everyone who died with Covid in their system as being "a Covid death"...Over time, there was an underreported restructuring of medical departments where medical professionals were forced to specify and judge who was dying anyway and just happened to die WITH the virus in their system, as opposed to those who died BECAUSE of the virus. From about late May, most countries started only counted those deaths that medical professionals assessed to be because of the virus. Coincidentally (or perhaps not) death rates started to drop substantially in most countries from May onwards...

Now obviously that's still not an exact science (medical professionals can get their assessments wrong at times), but it's a major change in reporting. And that is very different from saying "there is always debate about exactly how someone died" as if we should just trust and erase all our suspicions or criticisms from our minds...

James, I am sure the dead could not care less what they died of. The only purpose of such statistics is to guide policy of what we should do next. The problem then is, if everyone is doing something different, the virus will continue. If you are correct and it is little better than a flu, except to the old, then it might be correct to let it rip through and solve the pension problem.

Countries that change their reporting are suspect unless they clearly state the criteria applied. If they died through organ failure that could reasonably be amplified by low oxygen concentration, then it reasonable to attribute it to the virus. It would at least be a contributing feature.

A rose by any other name...
I'd anything COVID could have aggravated their condition. So in a way, they are COVID deaths..
Their life span remarkably reduced is valid cause to call it a COVID death.

Ian wrote: "If you are correct and it is little better than a flu, except to the old, then it might be correct to let it rip through and solve the pension problem...."

You're putting words in my mouth there Ian and making me sound mercenary - just like I previously misunderstood your "collateral damage" comment and thought you were implying to let non-Covid sick die so hospitals remain are reserved for "infected" only.

But to clarify, if this disease had a super high fatality rate in the 70+ or 80+ people, then I would not be recommending we just do nothing - I think the elderly deserve to live as long as they want (especially as I do not believe in the theory of overpopulation). And if necessary for younger people to make any small sacrifices for senior citizens, I would be for that in principle.

But I dunno, haven't seen stats to indicate it's that much more deadly for the elderly than the flu which in itself can be quite fatal (and which nobody has ever previously mentioned we lockdown for). There is admittedly a higher fatality rate in the older age groups, but it's not clear how much higher. Haven't seen specific stats for age groups. Also, I've seen numerous reports of very elderly people recovering -- including a 116 year old who made headlines with a full recovery (you'd think an extremely fatal disease for the elderly would easily and quickly kill all 100+ year olds!).

So I wonder if it may go back to the Irish government's recent admission (as per article posted earlier in this thread) about so many deaths being people dying WITH Covid and not specifically DUE to Covid?

Besides all that, I want to make it clear my only focus is on saving lives. Therefore, you are correct that lives are at stake right now...But the difference appears to be that I am not underestimating the coming carnage and devastation due to what's just transpired here. Some of your comments to date about what citizens in poorer nations like India are enduring (due to the lockdown) sounded dismissive to me...Whereas I have the opposite opinion, in Third World or developing nations in particular I think upending the world like this could have massive consequences in terms of survival monies and healthcare. Remember, there are many people who earn with cash in hand each day to put food on their families' tables that evening...

I am also factoring in we are now potentially in the "age of viruses", whether naturally occurring or bioterrorism. So there can be a "creep" aspect where let's say the CDC are correct (or thereabouts) and this virus has a 0.26% fatality rate... Well, then we have set a precedent. If another virus comes along that's twice as severe with a 0.52% fatality rate, does that mean we now lockdown for 1 year?? Or conversely, if the next virus has a 0.19% fatality rate (which some seasons of Influenza do) does that mean we have enough of a precedent to lock down for say the winter for that also?

It's lives versus lives. In other words, saving lives at the front end (the vulnerable, elderly or immune compromised) will kill lives at the back end (after effect). It's a philosophical and ethical debate which you apparently are not prepared to consider and instead believe it's a very simple black and white subject that deserves no deeper discussion (correct me if I am wrong).

None of that is to even mention my concerns about human rights, individual freedoms, privacy violations and vaccine and/or microchip mandates! :)

The required period for a lockdown is, I believe, two virus cycles, so no need for a year, provided the lockdown is complete. If there are routes for the virus to continue infecting, even a small number, and they are not contained you are right back to where you were.

For old people, flu is not the same because there are vaccines for flu, so if you are worried about it, you have that option. There is no COVID-19 death rate figure for old people because it apparently goes up quite markedly as they get older and have more things wrong with them anyway, which means they have weaker immune responses. This happens with age, and for all sorts of things. I personally found that sports injuries that I could get over in a couple of days when in my twenties would be still annoying a week later in my forties.

As for new viruses, they are a real problem. If you think about it, we were lucky with Ebola because it turned up in a part of Africa where hardly any of the locals travelled. In principle we should be prepared but here the hospitals were very short of ventilators, for example. One of those things that were totally unnecessary to have more until now, and I think most hospitals around the world always have things that they need to upgrade now but are short of money. Lockdowns are all very well, but they only work if everyone does it properly, preferably early in the infection stages. If some places do not get rid of the virus, it makes it very difficult economically later for those that did. What do they do? Open the borders and let it in, or keep the borders shut and live in their own little world?

A medical laboratory scientist in the US emailed me (in reply to similar questions I've been raising on here) to say this decision made by the CDC (to suddenly start counting non-confirmed cases as positive for covid19) was concerning to her:


Confirmed & Probable Counts

As of April 14, 2020, CDC case counts and death counts include both confirmed and probable cases and deaths. This change was made to reflect an interim COVID-19 position statement issued by the Council for State and Territorial Epidemiologists on April 5, 2020. The position statement included a case definition and made COVID-19 a nationally notifiable disease. Nationally notifiable disease cases are voluntarily reported to CDC by jurisdictions.

A confirmed case or death is defined by meeting confirmatory laboratory evidence for COVID-19.

A probable case or death is defined by one of the following:

Meeting clinical criteria AND epidemiologic evidence with no confirmatory laboratory testing performed for COVID-19

Meeting presumptive laboratory evidence AND either clinical criteria OR epidemiologic evidence

Meeting vital records criteria with no confirmatory laboratory testing performed for COVID19

Sounds like we need a "Probably Covid" deathtoll? :)

Coronavirus could 'burn out naturally' so vaccine not needed, former WHO director claims
Professor Karol Sikora said it is likely the British public has more immunity than previously thought and it could "peter out by itself

It is too early to make any statement on immunity. We have no long-lasting immunity to the coronviruses that cause the common cold, presumably because of mutations. Of course it may mutate to something more resembling the cold in seriousness

@ Ian - if there is no vaccine against the common cold coronavirus, have you asked yourself why we are being threatened with the possibility of mandatory vaccination against the COVID 19 version? This suggests to me that the virus (if it exists) is just an excuse to get other undisclosed items (microchips, anyone?) into our bodies.

@ Anni, In my opinion, since there is no vaccine against COVID 19, and it is highly unlikely there will be one anytime soon, at least any that is properly tested, I think any talk of mandatory vaccination is just silly. There may be an element of Big Pharma wanting to make lots and lots of money in it and thus preparing the way, but nothing more because it is too far away.

Microchips right now are a bit bigger than what would pass unseen in a vaccination, but compulsory insertion would be more likely for compulsory contact tracing, I think. But I don't think that will happen because most people would not put up with it.

I do hope you are right Ian!

Ian wrote: "Microchips right now are a bit bigger than what would pass unseen in a vaccination, but compulsory insertion would be more likely for compulsory contact tracing, I think. But I don't think that will happen because most people would not put up with it...."

But the thing is there can be a grey area between compulsory and popular... For example, if most people get a vaccine or get a microchip, then it can easily create second class citizens in a population, if you think about it. If most people have the medical ID passports and are microchipped and vaccinated (and basically transhumans!), then employers will hire those people and governments will favour those people.

So as long as such technologies are widely used, there's no need to make things compulsory...

Michigan Makes Worker Microchips Voluntary

Wait, What?
It's protection we didn't even know we needed.

Worker microchips first made headlines in 2017 when 50 out of 80 employees at a Wisconsin company called Three Square Market voluntarily opted into the implant at a "chip party."

Ian J Miller, "solve the pension problem"? Did you intend to sound like David Seymour, or just any other casual millennial eugenicist bastard? FYI I am a pensioner, who told ardern to shove her rules where the monkey stuck its ninepence, & went out, saw people face to face in level 4, and still have only the same problems I started the year with, hypertension and a peripheral neuropathy I have had since childhood. Sorry, we olds aren't co-operating.

Right-on, Debby!

To be fair Debby, I believe Ian was being sarcastic towards me (sarcastic in a friendly discussion way) and wasn't meaning he personally thinks pensioners should be wiped out to save govt's money - there was a context to the to and fro Ian and I were having that's now been taken out of context, it appears. Also, he might be of pensioner age or thereabouts himself I'm assuming, so I'm pretty sure he doesn't want self-annihilation!

So why is Big Tech keen for Coronavirus measures to be implemented? Could it be they'll gain from where all this is going?

Twitter Says It Will Add An 'Edit' Button When Everyone Does This... but, despite repeated requests from users.

Microblogging platform Twitter announced on Thursday that it would add the much sought-after 'edit' button - but only when everyone began wearing a mask amid the coronavirus pandemic. Twitter is estimated to have over 320 million active users, and many have been asking the platform to add a feature which would allow them to edit posts once they have been published.
Twitter has long refused to do so, despite repeated requests from users.

On Thursday, however, the microblogging platform took a stance on the debate around wearing face masks in public, saying it would only add an 'edit' feature once everyone started wearing a mask. "You can have an edit button when everyone wears a mask," Twitter announced.

As it happens, I tend to argue through showing extremes. In my exchange with James, yes I have liked to throw in the extreme as a challenge and to make a point, and maybe convince James. No, I do not want to see pensioners wiped out, not the least because I have been one for quite some time.

As for not cooperating, that is the way to get the worst of both worlds. The lockdown only works when everyone obeys. There may be the idea that if you break it you only risk getting the virus yourself, but if you do you become an agent of transmission and keep it alive. then you become responsible for those that catch it from you. The virus continues, which means the lockdown did not work, BUT you also collect the cost in terms of the economic damage.

For what it is worth, this old guy did obey the lockdown, and while it was a nuisance (the best autumn here for decades was wasted) I feel it was worth it.

Just when you thought it COULD get possibly worse!!! Bubonic Plague surfaces and wants the 14th century back . . . .

A new Dark Age, Iain. Do we get to have witch hunts again?

Oh wait, they've already begun!

Coronavirus: Former MI6 boss says theory COVID-19 came from Wuhan lab must not be dismissed as conspiracy

Iain wrote: "Coronavirus: Former MI6 boss says theory COVID-19 came from Wuhan lab must not be dismissed as conspiracy

..."

Engineered via GOF and escaped by accident . . . . Is this laying the groundwork to bolster a court case predicated on incompetence and a lack of abiding by and invoking standards, regulations and oversight?