Relaxation of Restrictions, Part XII *Read OP For Mod Warnings*

I'll ask the same question.

Should there be restrictions, if so, what restrictions and on which groups?

If no restrictions, which groups do you deny treatment to first (either by keeping them in care homes or outright deny them treatment).

If you think there shouldn't be restrictions because it's a big hoax and the government(s) are doing it for other reasons, what reasons are they?

Has anyone ever claimed that it's all a hoax on this thread? If not you're using dirty, cheap tactics, which is common with those who are desperate. If you weren't desperate you wouldn't be putting words in peoples mouths.

I don't agree that covid has made fools of us all.

I recall my own accurate predictions not out of pride but because I understand that different sets of assumptions lead to different conclusions and I'm trying to demonstrate that in real time.

So last January I said we would be restricted this year from October onwards.

Since I'm not a time traveller how can I know what's going to happen 10 months before it happens? Because I'm making logical deductions based on my own (correct) pattern-reading.

You are essentially saying 'No one can know when covid will do x, y,z'.

First of all, yes they can - through observation.

Second of all, you are conflating the political response to covid with covid itself in a kind of reductionist material determinism. "The virus made us close nightclubs. Now the virus is making us do this" etc.

No matter how many times the government characterises its specific chosen actions as passive responses determined by material factors outside its control (and you echo them) this is just not the case.

That would be from your OP.

Its not safe though - there is a level of risk associated with each shot, however small. The more shots you get, the less reward/risk there is, which defeats the case for getting a booster. Even with waning immunity, most of the population are now protected enough from covid that they need to fear nothing from it - but they can still get any manner of bad side effects from jab 3/4/5.. etc

Unless you are immunocompromised or have some other significant risk factor, there is no justification for a booster shot. The death and ICU stats back this up.

HIV and immunocompromised patients are at a higher risk of severe disease.

I was responding to a poster who said HIV and the immunocompromised arent recommended to get the vaccine. And he linked the numbers of HIV patients and immunocompromised to those in ICU. That's factually incorrect.

How exciting for you! To be honest I find this type of posting truly baffling because it offers no solutions, and is really an exercise in ego massage. If your wisdom is indeed as deep as you claim it is some of these insights would have found a way to places where they can actually do something but all you seem to want to do with it is to prove to people how right you are. I've no idea what you are trying to do with that pseudo intellectual piffle in the middle of that.

A lot of people and politicians were banging on about zero COVID (and people on here), we should have been keeping hospitals near capacity with COVID (along with whatever opening got us to that point), but hindsight is a wonderful thing.

However, boosters should mitigate the worst effects and the viral pills should handle the rest, so normality is coming, but the powers that be need to let cases (and hospitalisations) stay relatively high but manageable to get there, locking down for 2 weeks just prolongs everything for 2 more weeks.

The question is if we can get away with the current increased restrictions or will they need to go further, keep watching the hospitals.

Yeah this is a key, but uncomfortable, thing that isn't mentioned much. If we're all going to get infected anyway, then we may as well optimise capacity, essentially.

I do not know where you are getting that there was a variant of concern reported in March 2020. According to the European Centre for Disease Control and Prevention the first reported variant of concern was not until September 2020, the Beta variant which had low transmission levels. Followed in December 2020 by the Gamma variant and the Delta variant. The government plan you are talking about was from summer 2020 when none of those variants had been reported, least of all the present one which is the major problem, and before we even knew if there was going to be a vaccine.

With no knowledge of the present variant, (or indeed any variants or a vaccine in summer 2020), I do not know what you believe the plan then should have been that would take into account two unknows ?

If we are relying on the EMA, 2023