UK Covid death toll

[baggiebuckster]

Further to my recent post the obvious factor relates to vaccines. It is thought that potentially 50% of the population would not want the jab so let's assume that the other 50% do take it. With the current 10% of previously infected (sage figures) plus the jab takers we would have 60% of the population protected in some way. Would we be locked down if this was the situation? And yet this could be where we are at already according to certain experts and we are being locked down and mass tested. There is a massive division across these beliefs and it is time that reasoned discussions took place instead of the current approach of believing everything SAGE say even though they have been wrong on numerous occasions already.

[Ossian]

I'm replying to JOK's post (#635), which I haven't requoted but with which I broadly agree; particularly the part where he says "Governments can’t be held responsible for every minute detail. NHS staff are truly brilliant people, as a whole, but they are not all infallible. Should there be an enquiry, I believe we would find not every death was down to government action or inaction..."

All true. Protheroe, however, selectively differs from that view; hence his continued use of the tiresome epithet #bodybags whenever he mentions Andy Burnham.

That said, after more than a decade in office some conclusions are inescapable; one being where it is that the buck primarily stops.

[billybassett]

A vaccine if ready and viable is obviously a good thing. For those most at risk it is something they should take.

If you've read anything about the current set of success factors for a vaccine you should be frightened mind. They are so wishy washy as to be worthless.

As to whether we need a vaccine clearly we don't. The vast vast majority of the population will become immune naturally or be protected by the community. There's absolutely no reason to spend billions on a vaccine that will be less tested and no more successful than any other seasonal flu jab...other than for financial purposes or for the furtherance of science or to protect future vulnerable people. It does nothing for today.

We had a cold disease clinic for 43 years specifically to look into providing a cure for seasonal respiratory viruses. It was closed because it had no successes.

[Tom Joad]

want the jab so let's assume that the other 50% do take it.Further to my recent post the obvious factor relates to vaccines. It is thought that potentially 50% of the population would not  With the current 10% of previously infected (sage figures) plus the jab takers we would have 60% of the population protected in some way. Would we be locked down if this was the situation? And yet this could be where we are at already according to certain experts and we are being locked down and mass tested. There is a massive division across these beliefs and it is time that reasoned discussions took place instead of the current approach of believing everything SAGE say even though they have been wrong on numerous occasions already.

I can't say I will be queuing up to try a rushed out vaccine. Maybe after a year or two perhaps. Meanwhile I await the book, I am sure is being written as we speak, detailing all the government awarded contracts and the success rate thereof. They are so arrogant, they don't even bother denying or hiding the evidence, it shouldn't be too much researching.

[baggiebuckster]

want the jab so let's assume that the other 50% do take it.Further to my recent post the obvious factor relates to vaccines. It is thought that potentially 50% of the population would not  With the current 10% of previously infected (sage figures) plus the jab takers we would have 60% of the population protected in some way. Would we be locked down if this was the situation? And yet this could be where we are at already according to certain experts and we are being locked down and mass tested. There is a massive division across these beliefs and it is time that reasoned discussions took place instead of the current approach of believing everything SAGE say even though they have been wrong on numerous occasions already.

I can't say I will be queuing up to try a rushed out vaccine. Maybe after a year or two perhaps. Meanwhile I await the book, I am sure is being written as we speak, detailing all the government awarded contracts and the success rate thereof. They are so arrogant, they don't even bother denying or hiding the evidence, it shouldn't be too much researching.

What if they try to make it mandatory?

[billybassett]

want the jab so let's assume that the other 50% do take it.Further to my recent post the obvious factor relates to vaccines. It is thought that potentially 50% of the population would not  With the current 10% of previously infected (sage figures) plus the jab takers we would have 60% of the population protected in some way. Would we be locked down if this was the situation? And yet this could be where we are at already according to certain experts and we are being locked down and mass tested. There is a massive division across these beliefs and it is time that reasoned discussions took place instead of the current approach of believing everything SAGE say even though they have been wrong on numerous occasions already.

I can't say I will be queuing up to try a rushed out vaccine. Maybe after a year or two perhaps. Meanwhile I await the book, I am sure is being written as we speak, detailing all the government awarded contracts and the success rate thereof. They are so arrogant, they don't even bother denying or hiding the evidence, it shouldn't be too much researching.

What if they try to make it mandatory?

They can't unless they undo Human Rights law that was brought into place after Mengele and WW2

[baggiebuckster]

Well maybe not 'mandatory' but they could place restrictions on travel etc.

[HawkingsHalfpint]

We had a cold disease clinic for 43 years specifically to look into providing a cure for seasonal respiratory viruses. It was closed because it had no successes.

Did they keep making Livermore head doctor?

[Tom Joad]

want the jab so let's assume that the other 50% do take it.Further to my recent post the obvious factor relates to vaccines. It is thought that potentially 50% of the population would not  With the current 10% of previously infected (sage figures) plus the jab takers we would have 60% of the population protected in some way. Would we be locked down if this was the situation? And yet this could be where we are at already according to certain experts and we are being locked down and mass tested. There is a massive division across these beliefs and it is time that reasoned discussions took place instead of the current approach of believing everything SAGE say even though they have been wrong on numerous occasions already.

I can't say I will be queuing up to try a rushed out vaccine. Maybe after a year or two perhaps. Meanwhile I await the book, I am sure is being written as we speak, detailing all the government awarded contracts and the success rate thereof. They are so arrogant, they don't even bother denying or hiding the evidence, it shouldn't be too much researching.

What if they try to make it mandatory?

In that case then unfortunately, the conspiracy theorists will have had a valid point all along. I've seen the way the government has been handling things so far and my own gut instinct of 60+ years experience tells me not to jump straight in. I freely admit I'm happy for a good few others to try it out though so maybe I'm hypocritical? Or just practical?

[baggiebuckster]

Great news - it will all soon be over folks. 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-54873105