Coronavirus

[Crouchend_Hammer]

The money the government are spending on covid related advertising is huge
I listen to the radio a lot in the day time, and every ad break there are almost always two ads regarding covid, either the ventilation one or the one about first two vaccines being pointless so need the booster, or the one about vaccines now being available for other 12s

Begs the question - if the first two vaccines are pointless why are they part of the vaccine passport!?

[Burnley Hammer]

The money the government are spending on covid related advertising is huge
I listen to the radio a lot in the day time, and every ad break there are almost always two ads regarding covid, either the ventilation one or the one about first two vaccines being pointless so need the booster, or the one about vaccines now being available for other 12s

Begs the question - if the first two vaccines are pointless why are they part of the vaccine passport!?

I'm sure I've seen (or heard) that recent hospitalisations are largely driven by the unvaccinated (ie not double jabbed). Therefore you'd have to conclude that the old vaccines were still relevant.

[Crouchend_Hammer]

Maybe so, but that is not what the Government radio ad urging people to get the booster says!

[EvilC]

The money the government are spending on covid related advertising is huge

Indeed, they have been a permanent fixture for months now.

[sendô]

I listen to the radio a lot in the day time, and every ad break there are almost always two ads regarding covid, either the ventilation one or the one about first two vaccines being pointless so need the booster, or the one about vaccines now being available for other 12s

The "open your windows in your poorly insulated house in the middle of winter when energy prices are skyrocketing to save yourself from a virus that you've been vaccinated against three times that has an extremely low risk of being dangerous to you" advert really ****'s me off.

[Hummer_I_mean_Hammer]

The "open your windows in your poorly insulated house in the middle of winter when energy prices are skyrocketing to save yourself from a virus that you've been vaccinated against three times that has an extremely low risk of being dangerous to you" advert really ****'s me off.

Not knocking it, latest place of work has a decent pipeline of ventilation reviews with proposed remediation works. Should keep me busy for a while.

[sendô]

Unvaxinated woman deliberately infects herself with covid then dies.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-60050996

[wolf359]

Unvaxinated woman deliberately infects herself with covid then dies.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-60050996

That is what happens when you 'do your own research'. This 'I know better than 100s of Scientists' crap just has to stop

[Burnley Hammer]

That is what happens when you 'do your own research'. This 'I know better than 100s of Scientists' crap just has to stop

Bit of a sweeping statement. It's never happened to me and I do my own research.

How am I supposed to know what a 100 scientists say unless I research that?

Blindly accepting everything you hear without question is no better.

Doing research isn't wrong. Doing really rubbish research is wrong... especially if you've already made up your mind before you even start researching.

[Crouchend_Hammer]

Unvaxinated woman deliberately infects herself with covid then dies.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-60050996

If ever an article sums up the absymal state of UK journalism in this day and age then it is this one

[Burnley Hammer]

If ever an article sums up the absymal state of UK journalism in this day and age then it is this one

It's really no different to the tactics that the anti-vaxx camp use.

Pro Vaccine camp: Find an unvaccinated person somewhere in the world that died of COVID, make a big headline out of it, and then use that to push home your message.

Anti-Vaxx camp: Find a vaccinated person somewhere in the world that had an extreme adverse reaction to the vaccine, make a big headline out of it, and then use that to push home your message.

There's no difference really is there?

Anybody can do biased research to support a narrative. Most of us do it all the time without even realising it. It's human nature.

Science interests me, as do statistics, studies, and intervention trials. I'm also interested in reading critiques of those things from both sides. This article on its own is utterly meaningless in the grand scheme of things. It's a story about one person. It's very sad of course, but I'd say that if she was under 60 and had no underlying health conditions then rather than this being typical, I'd say it was more along the lines of she was desperately unlucky.

[uptonparkhurst]

Bit of a sweeping statement. It's never happened to me and I do my own research.

How am I supposed to know what a 100 scientists say unless I research that?

Blindly accepting everything you hear without question is no better.

Doing research isn't wrong. Doing really rubbish research is wrong...
especially if you've already made up your mind before you even start researching.

Nail on head!
I suppose that it is human nature to be pre-disposed towards opinions and studies that agree with what you expect is true or
what you would like to be true and pay less attention towards those opinions and studies that do not.
I can't pretend to be any different,btw..

Even if you try to be open-minded there is the further problem that the goalposts are continually changing -
e.g. first we have no vaccines,then we have vaccines but then we do,but then - after millions of doses have been given - there is
evidence of dangerous side-effects that discourage vaccine take-up and then the goalposts change again with each variant
and again with new studies with results that conflict with previous studies.

Every time I see posts on here putting "the science" in quotation marks I suspect that the poster is probably doing exactly that.

[Burnley Hammer]

I've been trying to make an effort to stay in the middle, free to question both sides. It's difficult though. It's much easier just choosing a side.

[Collison Theory]

It's really no different to the tactics that the anti-vaxx camp use.

Pro Vaccine camp: Find an unvaccinated person somewhere in the world that died of COVID, make a big headline out of it, and then use that to push home your message.

Anti-Vaxx camp: Find a vaccinated person somewhere in the world that had an extreme adverse reaction to the vaccine, make a big headline out of it, and then use that to push home your message.

There's no difference really is there?

Anybody can do biased research to support a narrative. Most of us do it all the time without even realising it. It's human nature.

Science interests me, as do statistics, studies, and intervention trials. I'm also interested in reading critiques of those things from both sides. This article on its own is utterly meaningless in the grand scheme of things. It's a story about one person. It's very sad of course, but I'd say that if she was under 60 and had no underlying health conditions then rather than this being typical, I'd say it was more along the lines of she was desperately unlucky.

It's a legitimate human interest story, you're going into this with the assumption it's pro-vax propaganda, but it's just an interesting event. If one football fan at a game stabs someone, that's news, no one is saying it represents all the other fans. Deliberately getting a disease instead of vaccinating yourself is crazy behaviour. It doesn't have to be about Covid, if she'd deliberately got the flu or something and killed herself that way it would still be reported.

She was very unlucky, but she still pointlessly risked her life and died, it's tragic.

[Burnley Hammer]

It's a legitimate human interest story, you're going into this with the assumption it's pro-vax propaganda, but it's just an interesting event. If one football fan at a game stabs someone, that's news, no one is saying it represents all the other fans. Deliberately getting a disease instead of vaccinating yourself is crazy behaviour. It doesn't have to be about Covid, if she'd deliberately got the flu or something and killed herself that way it would still be reported.

She was very unlucky, but she still pointlessly risked her life and died, it's tragic.

It might well be just a bog standard human interest story and you may well be right. I'm a little cynical of the BBC though due to a few other stories or articles they've published in the last year or so. But even if it wasn't it's intent to be pro-vax propaganda, sadly that's how it will be used in argument. I'm not sure I agree about the bit I highlighted. Who knows though, maybe one day they'll be writing a story about me - after all, I don't bother with the flu vaccine and if someone else in the house was to catch it, I'd probably make no effort to shield myself.

I'll be honest, catching omicron is something I was hoping to do myself. Difference is though that I've been double-jabbed and had 2 previous infections.

[Crouchend_Hammer]

It's really no different to the tactics that the anti-vaxx camp use.

Pro Vaccine camp: Find an unvaccinated person somewhere in the world that died of COVID, make a big headline out of it, and then use that to push home your message.

Anti-Vaxx camp: Find a vaccinated person somewhere in the world that had an extreme adverse reaction to the vaccine, make a big headline out of it, and then use that to push home your message.

There's no difference really is there?

Anybody can do biased research to support a narrative. Most of us do it all the time without even realising it. It's human nature.

I agree
However I expect better from professional journalists, especially those from the BBC

[Collison Theory]

It might well be just a bog standard human interest story and you may well be right. I'm a little cynical of the BBC though due to a few other stories or articles they've published in the last year or so. But even if it wasn't it's intent to be pro-vax propaganda, sadly that's how it will be used in argument. I'm not sure I agree about the bit I highlighted. Who knows though, maybe one day they'll be writing a story about me - after all, I don't bother with the flu vaccine and if someone else in the house was to catch it, I'd probably make no effort to shield myself.

I'll be honest, catching omicron is something I was hoping to do myself. Difference is though that I've been double-jabbed and had 2 previous infections.

There's a pretty big difference between not shielding and deliberately getting an illness. If you decided to deliberately get the flu and then died of it, you'd probably be going round the internet and winning a Darwin award (do they still do those)?

The only benefit of catching omicron is that you're less likely to catch it again, so why would you want it? That makes no sense to me. I think it's important to remember all the stuff about how mild it is doesn't apply to everyone. One of the healthiest people I know, sporty guy in his mid twenties, was just wiped out for a week with it.

I understand not taking certain precautions, because you've got to live your life sometime. I was out in a nightclub on New Years Eve, and somehow managed to dodge it.

Crouchy, you've said twice what a terrible article that was, but you haven't given a single reason why.

[Burnley Hammer]

The only benefit of catching omicron is that you're less likely to catch it again, so why would you want it?

Because I'm not having the booster (and don't think it will be given to the whole population for much longer as its unsustainable) and would like to keep my own natural immunity up to date. A bit of exposure every few months does that. And preventing you from catching it again isn't the only benefit. The other benefit would be that you'll deal with it much better if you do become infected and it provides cross immunity with future variants. As I'm nicely topped up with antibodies at the moment from the double jab and previous infections, now would be a good time to get it. The fact that I dealt with alpha or delta with a minimum of fuss (I preferred it to catching a cold - I hate colds) before I'd even been jabbed has maybe given me an unhealthy confidence in my own immune system. Also had it last September after being jabbed and if it wasn't for a couple of strange symptoms (heart fluttering and phantom smells) I wouldn't have even known. Looking at the stats for vaccinated (double-jabbed) vs unvaccinated recently, it seems like the original jabs are still offering plenty of protection - although weirdly the hospitalisations and death stats on the latest vaccine surveillance reports don't mention the booster at all. They're purely focused on double-jabbed vs unvaccinated.

[666 hammer]

I find it strange that they have been forcing NHS staff working with Covid patients to have the vaccine, when the vaccine is less effective than natural immunity which they must have coming in contact with the virus daily. The vaccine would not protect or stop the spread of the virus in that environment. Unless it was one on one treatment.

[Burnley Hammer]

I find it strange that they have been forcing NHS staff working with Covid patients to have the vaccine, when the vaccine is less effective than natural immunity which they must have coming in contact with the virus daily. The vaccine would not protect or stop the spread of the virus in that environment. Unless it was one on one treatment.

Maybe it's easier and quicker than giving everyone antibody tests.