Coronavirus

[Trev]

Such an unprecedented law would obviously be to the direct financial benefit of select pharmaceutical companies'.

Reckon this sums it up lovely

Vaccines are a miniscule part of pharmaceuticals profits, a lot stopped manufacturing them because of the tiny margins

This whole idea that its all being manufactured so "Big Pharma" can make a rakeload of cash is just way too far fetched for me

[pete]

Has anyone else noticed that with all the latest outbreaks, they are only being highlighted by the blanket testing and not by people actually being sick? Does anyone find that a bit strange, that all these people are carrying a deadly disease and yet have to do a test to know if they have it or not? Surely this adds credence to the notion that the death rate is markedly lower than the confirmed numbers would have us believe.

Just reading there about how hospital numbers have remained stable despite the upturn in numbers testing positive and wondering how far will we all go before we realise that we went too far with it all and that a lot of the measures taken are contradictory and fruitless. So if I run in to a shop for a litre of milk for 2 minutes I must put on a mask and yet if I want to sit in a pub for the guts of 2 hours eating a pizza I don't need one.

At the start of all of this I was thinking in all directions about it and reading all sorts of stuff both for and against the many different approaches to dealing with this but now that the dust has settled somewhat surely I can't be the only one who thinks it's becoming apparent that it has been entirely blown out of proportion and the whole response driven by competing interests for the usual suspect cause of more money. Can everyone not see that because of the sheer level of people who are not sick and have no idea they have it, that all solutions are doomed to failure? Is it time to forget about the whole lockdown approach and go with protecting the vulnerable and letting the rest have at it in the usual fashion?

Talking to people in general on the street I can feel there is traction increasing in that train of thought and not because of the whole "it's not real it's a conspiracy" angle, but more because it's getting obvious it isn't going to work and the realisation that the increase in numbers doesn't equate to an increase in deaths or sick people.

Who here on this forum is afraid of getting it and if you are, are you cocooning yourself, or are you doing the minimum required by public health advice in full trust that the government knows exactly what it is doing and have good reason why people can be unmasked in a restaurant and not a shop?

Edit: Just saw there that hospital waiting list numbers are now over 819,000. Can we see now that the response to the coronavirus will potentially be far more damaging than anything the virus would have done in the long term? 819,000 people who are not asymptomatic, who have actual reasons to be seen in a hospital and stuck on a waiting list. That is about a fifth of the population. What percentage of the population has been affected by the covid? 0.04% deaths and 0.5% discovered infections in total. That is over the 6 months, not at the one time by the way so what is the percentage of affected people at the minute? I dunno but it's far less than that anyway. I'm not even going to get into the economic repercussions of all of this beyond saying just wait for the greatest buyout of all time coming to a world near you in the next year or two. 2008 will be like a dummy run for what happens next.

So which is the more damaging, the covid or the response?

Covid

[astfgyl]

I think the response is far more damaging as it happens, but each to their own. Have a look at this example and tell me what the idea of this sort of scaremongering is. You could make the point that they didn't know enough at the time, but now that the numbers are there for all to see, no one has come out and said they were a bit wrong. No, the NPHET are unquestionable even when they are working off projections that are highly questionable.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=2&v=fffzkwMIikI&feature=emb_title

Just look at the claim that every family in Ireland would have a death from Covid if we were to take the Swedish approach for example.

This all ties back into the idea of the influence of the media and social media on the worldwide response to all of this.

[Juggz]

You recall that Trev and his good lady actually had it?

[astfgyl]

Such an unprecedented law would obviously be to the direct financial benefit of select pharmaceutical companies'.

Reckon this sums it up lovely

Vaccines are a miniscule part of pharmaceuticals profits, a lot stopped manufacturing them because of the tiny margins

This whole idea that its all being manufactured so "Big Pharma" can make a rakeload of cash is just way too far fetched for me

The part about the potential conflict of interest involving Professor O' Neill is actually spot on though. He is one of the founders of Sitryx, who are after signing an astronomical deal with GlaxoSmithKline and Lilly Pharmaceuticals, who both happen to be developing vaccine candidates, which if successful will potentially make a shitload of money for our scaremongering Professor.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=2&v=fffzkwMIikI&feature=emb_title

Leaving that video there again in case it gets lost along the way.

You recall that Trev and his good lady actually had it?

I do recall that, and I wish them all the best with the recovery from it. The fact that someone on the forum had Covid doesn't take anything from the validity of what I'm saying and doesn't mean that I'm saying it doesn't exist or anything like that at all, just that the whole response is highly questionable. The scaremongering from the likes of Professor O'Neill has driven a disproportionate response which nobody will row back on now and, as mentioned in the article I linked, a lot of the measures in place seem to give the impression that it is the common folk who are in the wrong and absolve the decision makers of any blame for the likes of the nursing homes or the not fit for purpose health service and god knows what else.

Edit: Here's another bit of a video from a chap who was asked to speak about masks to our government. Amazing how his advice was completely ignored. Don't knock it til you watch it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QNI2ocgosgA&feature=youtu.be

[Pedrito]

Agree with you there. The Big Pharma thing that Trev pushed back on is bollox alright, the manslaughter part isn't. The scaremongering and media response is completely disproportionate though as the numbers are showing now.

[astfgyl]

We appear to have been catapulted into some sort of Daily Mail and The Sun style future here, where the screaming headlines do not tally up with the actual information presented in the main body of the article

Edit: I know how easily things go missing in fast moving threads, so I'll leave this one here again

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QNI2ocgosgA&feature=youtu.be

[Pedrito]

We're expecting Clair Byrne, the Guardian, The Sun etc to tell us what to do and they're simply journalists who have a product to sell..hysteria, outrage, fear.

[Black Shepherd Carnage]

You'd be delighted to have Claire Byrne tell you what to do, be honest now! 

[Pedrito]

You always have to bring the tone down ye dirtbird    only with ny mask on!!!

[Trev]

I do think there definitely should have more accountability over the nursing homes, health services etc, especially given the amount of shit that the whole golf dinner got

As an aside, if a vaccine comes out in say the next year or so, how many would be willing to get it?

[astfgyl]

Personally, I wouldn't. I wouldn't tell anyone else not to though and I'm not anti vaccination either. I would treat it like the flu vaccine as in let anyone who falls into the high risk groups get it if they feel the need. If it were the case that everyone was in the high risk group, let everyone get it, but that isn't the case so no I definitely wouldn't be taking it.

Now that you have had it, would you take the vaccine yourself or hope that your immune system has developed a response from it and take your chances?

[Black Shepherd Carnage]

Just a couple of remarks on the Ireland lockdown versus Sweden without lockdown thing; 1) Sweden does have a statistically significantly higher death rate than Ireland. 2) A large part of this, by their own admission, is because they didn't do enough to specifically protect vulnerable populations (retirement homes, etc.). 3) Not to shit on the Irish too much, but I'm strongly convinced that a policy of personal responsibility à la Sweden applied in Ireland would have had as consequence a huge increase in cases; pubs and bars staying open, population on less of a state of alert. Maybe not 11 times higher death rate (and Prof O'Neill seems a bit of a gombeen with his made up projections), but potentially several times more. Impossible to know for sure, but that would be my feeling on Ireland without draconian measures; I don't trust us not to take something lightly if given the choice (which in itself is a reflection of things I love about us as a people too, not just a blanket criticism).

[Trev]

Now that you have had it, would you take the vaccine yourself or hope that your immune system has developed a response from it and take your chances?

Once it's been tested and proven safe I'd have no problem getting it, because it is absolutely something I never want to go through again. Talking to my GP whole back and they were saying the most recent research is showing that there is no long-term immunity developing after having it, with the numbers of people getting it a second time constantly rising

[Pedrito]

Just a couple of remarks on the Ireland lockdown versus Sweden without lockdown thing; 1) Sweden does have a statistically significantly higher death rate than Ireland. 2) A large part of this, by their own admission, is because they didn't do enough to specifically protect vulnerable populations (retirement homes, etc.). 3) Not to shit on the Irish too much, but I'm strongly convinced that a policy of personal responsibility à la Sweden applied in Ireland would have had as consequence a huge increase in cases; pubs and bars staying open, population on less of a state of alert. Maybe not 11 times higher death rate (and Prof O'Neill seems a bit of a gombeen with his made up projections), but potentially several times more. Impossible to know for sure, but that would be my feeling on Ireland without draconian measures; I don't trust us not to take something lightly if given the choice (which in itself is a reflection of things I love about us as a people too, not just a blanket criticism).

It's the same argument in Spain. You couldn't trust the fuckers to do the right thing. That said, I'd probably be the same.