David Posted November 9, 2020 Share Posted November 9, 2020 Just now, stewdogg said: I've certainly seen this spouted on facebook but didn't have the urge to go and check it out. I assume that a lockdown is not considered a solution in the long term, it's a means to an end to bring down the numbers so that other preventative measures have a good chance of succeeding. It wasn't Facebook I saw it, i can't remember where it was. I'm sure whoever the quotes were attributed to mentioned the negative aspects of lockdowns far outweighing the positives, such as poor people getting far poorer and so forth. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members BomberPat Posted November 9, 2020 Paid Members Share Posted November 9, 2020 6 minutes ago, David said: It wasn't Facebook I saw it, i can't remember where it was. I'm sure whoever the quotes were attributed to mentioned the negative aspects of lockdowns far outweighing the positives, such as poor people getting far poorer and so forth. This isn't the same thing as it "not working", though, it's a risk analysis. A measure of whether lockdown "works" is whether infection numbers decrease as a result, and nothing else. I'm not necessarily disagreeing with you - just that a weighing of the positives and negatives will often be subjective, and a libertarian capitalist interpretation of the "negatives" of lockdown will be entirely different to a more community-minded outlook. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CavemanLynn Posted November 9, 2020 Share Posted November 9, 2020 1 minute ago, BomberPat said: This isn't the same thing as it "not working", though, it's a risk analysis. A measure of whether lockdown "works" is whether infection numbers decrease as a result, and nothing else. I'm not necessarily disagreeing with you - just that a weighing of the positives and negatives will often be subjective, and a libertarian capitalist interpretation of the "negatives" of lockdown will be entirely different to a more community-minded outlook. There's also a difference between a lockdown being announced and a lockdown being enforced. Any measures are going to look ineffective if there's not sufficient compliance, so the high-level raw data of "we went into lockdown and infection rates didn't decrease" becomes circumstantial. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Factotum Posted November 9, 2020 Share Posted November 9, 2020 13 minutes ago, David said: It wasn't Facebook I saw it, i can't remember where it was. I'm sure whoever the quotes were attributed to mentioned the negative aspects of lockdowns far outweighing the positives, such as poor people getting far poorer and so forth. WHO have said that Lockdowns shouldn't be used as a way to combat it. Lockdown's should be a last resort if you're overrun. They maintain that the way out of this now is mass testing and an effective track and trace system, with some localised lockdown measures if needed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Posted November 9, 2020 Share Posted November 9, 2020 4 minutes ago, BomberPat said: This isn't the same thing as it "not working", though, it's a risk analysis. A measure of whether lockdown "works" is whether infection numbers decrease as a result, and nothing else. I'm not necessarily disagreeing with you - just that a weighing of the positives and negatives will often be subjective, and a libertarian capitalist interpretation of the "negatives" of lockdown will be entirely different to a more community-minded outlook. Yeah, I understand all of that. I'm just saying that I was fairly certain someone from the WHO made that claim, and even mentioned poor people and the effect it has on them more than anyone else. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members LaGoosh Posted November 9, 2020 Paid Members Share Posted November 9, 2020 https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-54873105 Promising development. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Your Fight Site Posted November 9, 2020 Paid Members Share Posted November 9, 2020 24 minutes ago, LaGoosh said: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-54873105 Promising development. Yeah. @Pogueposted the same link on the previous page. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members LaGoosh Posted November 9, 2020 Paid Members Share Posted November 9, 2020 Ah, apologies. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Your Fight Site Posted November 9, 2020 Paid Members Share Posted November 9, 2020 (edited) I bought a share in Pfizer last month. If its value explodes, I’ll be sure to hire a private island for UKFF-ers so we can all have a slice of normality. There may or may not be a hologram of Alex Trebek from WrestleMania VII as well. Edited November 9, 2020 by Your Fight Site Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SuperBacon Posted November 9, 2020 Share Posted November 9, 2020 "Many countries already have orders for the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine. The UK has bought 30m doses – enough for 15 million people because two doses are required." That's...good. Or is that an initial purchase? I'd rather not have to fight someone for a vaccine, but I will. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Posted November 9, 2020 Share Posted November 9, 2020 (edited) 2 minutes ago, SuperBacon said: That's...good. Or is that an initial purchase? I'd rather not have to fight someone for a vaccine, but I will. I assumed the vaccine was primarily for those who were old, ill or vulnerable, no? Like the flu jab, for example? I wouldn't like to think they'd be wasting the stuff on a 40 year old berk with no health issues like myself. Unless you fall into the vulnerable category, of course. In which case you shouldn't be fighting. Edited November 9, 2020 by David Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SuperBacon Posted November 9, 2020 Share Posted November 9, 2020 Just now, David said: I assumed the vaccine was primarily for those who were old, ill or vulnerable, no? Like the flu jab, for example? I wouldn't like to think they'd be wasting the stuff on a 40 year old berk with no health issues like myself. No, that makes sense to offer it to those that need it the most first, but the flu jab is open to all if they wish isn't it? 15 million people just seemed low, that's all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Posted November 9, 2020 Share Posted November 9, 2020 2 minutes ago, SuperBacon said: No, that makes sense to offer it to those that need it the most first, but the flu jab is open to all if they wish isn't it? 15 million people just seemed low, that's all. Yeah, that's true. I'm guessing they'll hit up the poor sods who have been shielding and suchlike, then open the doors to the regular pleb in the street. I doubt I'll bother to be honest. Much like I wouldn't buy a PS5 on its first run for fear of the Red Ring of Death or something similar, I'm the same with vaccines. I'll maybe have a look when the 5th generation of it arrives. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SuperBacon Posted November 9, 2020 Share Posted November 9, 2020 8 minutes ago, David said: Unless you fall into the vulnerable category, of course. In which case you shouldn't be fighting. I was being more tongue in cheek, imagining this to be some sort of dystopia where people fight over vaccines. I mean I'd have it, but not if I have to choke out old Albert who lives 3 doors away. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deathrey Posted November 9, 2020 Share Posted November 9, 2020 (edited) Health care workers and over 85's will be the first to get the vaccine. It will then go to education workers and anyone in the shielding category and the drop down in 5 year increments until everyone who wants a vaccine has one. It will be offered to the whole population eventually but is likely to take the best part of a year for a whole roll out. That is the initial order @SuperBacon. We have 30 million in for the Oxford vaccine too (though that is a single dose vaccine), the initial orders were placed for those 2 as the front runners to get approval and more orders will be made as its rolled out. Edited November 9, 2020 by deathrey Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.