Everyone else is not 'locked down' , restrained or forbidden to leave their houses. Large numbers of people are still going to work and mixing on public transport and workplaces.
Ive just literally given you 15 peer reviewed scientific journals to read. Can I see the ones showing it’s worked please?
But you have - you state immunity means immunity... (black and white) I am stating in medical terms 'immunity has 'greys'. In non medical terms ...antibodies are like a defending army... They can fight off invaders especially if trained and prepared to do so (e.g. vaccine) -i.e. "know your enemy!" However depending on the size of the invading army it may be either totally destroyed, (no symptoms), fight a drawn out battle, ultimately defeating the invader but causing the host to have symptoms and still be infectious or in worst case scenarios being overwhelmed by the invaders who kill the host. Vaccination boosts the body's natural defences but is not a 100% watertight guarantee in the same way that distancing/mask etc is not a watertight way of preventing the spread as no way can the entire population isolate for the pre-requisite time necessary to totally eradicate the disease.you are so resistant to the Even if you don't agree with me I really don't understand why you are so resistant to Blivy's posts which have provided much more detailed medical points explaining this.
I don't know why you bother TM. You just want everyone to die so you can go to the pub, and everyone else is so just and humane that it puts you to shame. There's no nuance or questions around locking down an entire society. The Chinese Communist Party did it and it really REALLY worked, because let's be right - we can trust every word they say can't we. At least 780 billion would have died without locking down, because reasons. Anyway, the precedent has been set now. Any emergency that the govt of the days sees fit then locking everyone down is the policy that is there to deal with it. Anyone arguing against it like you TM has no regard for their fellow humans, young old, rich poor, whatever. We just don't know what's good for us.
See my post #57 Medical experts or not the principle of social distancing is sound. It is the methodology and practicalities of how it has been is being applied that is problematic and people like yourself on social media arguing against it that is damaging. (Not dis- similar to the conspiracy theorists in the US elections) All the cr*p about it being used as a cover to control the population. To what end seeing as how it it costing the economies of the World trillions?
You have read that, right?: ‘By comparing the number of deaths counted with deaths predicted by their model if no lockdown measures had been introduced, they found some 3.1 million deaths were averted.’ Yes, but the model they’re using as a baseline is widely discredited in the scientific community. That’s the sole basis for their assertion - they’re literally saying ‘how many died versus how many do the model say’. We know the Imperial model is wildly wrong because on those countries where minimal or no controls were put in place, deaths were also massively lower than the model. Are you going to read the swathes of evidence I’ve put in front of you that they don’t work, or just continue blindly following Imperial?
I didn't say there wasn't, I just said it's impossible for him to give evidence that evidence doesn't exist. I have never murdered anyone but I can't give you any evidence that the police don't have evidence that I have even though I know it is true.
Sorry been responding to more than one topic in this thread. ..mainly lockdown and Jay's 'immune' arguments... juggling is not my forte and I dropped the ball!! I think...'wibble' I was responding to TM
Fine, if common sense and a specific model you say is 'discredited' then there's others as per my previous post for the Italian study. Here's a French one
Worth adding this article to this thread I think. More study's like this than vice versa, which tells it's own story. Lockdowns have no clear benefit vs. other voluntary measures
He wasn’t defining immunity and you weren’t questioning the definition of immunity. You said it isn’t a vaccine if it doesn’t provide immunity. That isn’t factually correct.
Lockdown obvs worked But tbf traumatising kids like this is just for their own good. Bet Neil Ferguson is getting erect at the thought of leaking this to the press as the next step in the good fight. Oh it’s in the Daily Mail though so some Nazis wrote it or something. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...suits-leaving-school-amid-Covid-outbreak.html
Perhaps, instead of the models, we could look at the real world example of Manaus in Brazil. In the first wave, the city (pop 2.2m) had 2600 deaths (0.12% of the *population*) - and possibly up to twice as many more as testing was inadequate. It is believed that upwards of 50% of the population was infected and the authorities hoped they'd achieved herd immunity. Then the second wave started, and deaths are already back at the same level as they were in the first wave. And they've brewed their own new variant too. Sweden stayed open - although advised people to distance and take precautions. Their approach was hailed as a "success" and plenty of people, including on here wanted to follow their approach. In the summer they were praised by many for seeing it off - although their first wave ended 2-3 weeks after their school year ended in early June. Now, their entire approach has been abandoned due to the high number of cases and the death rate that has seen over 10000 die in the country - including over 2000 in the last 3 weeks alone. Compare Sweden with neighbouring Finland, Denmark and Norway - all 3 of which has some degree of national or regional lockdowns and Sweden (832deaths/million) really does not compare well - over 3x the death rate of Denmark (285), 7x Finland (111) or 8x Norway (95).
No I didn't, read it again. I said if a supposed vaccine doesn't provide immunity then it isn't a vaccine. I believe the covid vaccine does provide immunity and there's been a misunderstanding regarding what immunity is.
You’ve argued heavily on her about the fallibility of COVID tests when arguing against mass testing. With your approach here, the virus will likely end up in the (care) homes of old people and run riot. The more virus that is in the general population, the more chance of it reaching the OAPs.