Chat about Novel Coronavirus - 2019-nCoV - COVID-19

That article is worth reading tbh.

Already, the Bush administration is assembling an international coalition for an Israeli-style war against terrorism, as if such counter-productive acts of outrage had an existence separate from the social conditions out of which they arise. But for every "terror network" that is rooted out, another will emerge - until the injustices and inequalities that produce them are addressed.

Here's a digital version for ease

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/200­1/sep/13/september11.britainand911

Meanwhile a good thread from Francois Balloux about the drawback of overstating the effectiveness of the vaccines:

https://mobile.twitter.com/BallouxFranco­is/status/1452463987921231881

Which newspapers do you like then? I assume that for each of them you have looked back through every article in the last >20 years and approve of every single one.

The Times is the best fit for me politically. But generally I'm better off consuming less news. It just winds me up. All the papers of course publish stories that aren't of significance but will get an emotional reaction, usually negative (outrage, anger etc) from their readers. At least The Times only updates its site three times a day. But I'd rather just get a newspaper from the shop as and when I absolutely need to. I listen to Radio 4 news through the day and sometimes Times radio.

I'm sure in the 1990s we just didn't consume so much news and were happier for it.

I'm sure in the 1990s we just didn't consume so much news and were happier for it.

okay boomer

That was all the Garys everyone was consuming instead.

Bit of a weird take though. Have any of you forumites seen a senior academic claim that vaccines block transmission? I've only seen medics and academics say that vaccines reduce transmission.

Francis Bollocks is a top name though, I'm reading his stuff just for that from now on.

I mean, the UK government and NHS guidance on vaccines go to great lengths to explain that vaccines have side effects, only reduce the rate of transmission and serious illness and even go so far as to spell out that vaccines don't guarantee safety....who exactly is Francis Bollocks seeing say otherwise?

I'm no Boomer!

Gen X erasure is real :(

Pink callies!

Not an arguement more an additional of what I think:

Thought the vaccine reduces the risk of extreme reactions to covid and needing hospitalisation. While masks and clean hands reduce the transmission.

clean hands

That probably does very little to reduce Covid spread.

who exactly is Francis Bollocks seeing say otherwise?

The strawman he's just created.

This Dr looks worth following too.

https://mobile.twitter.com/drraghibali/

2 Attachments

Sure, but isn't that tweet then for everyone? Yet he only aims it at "the negative UK views" without giving more context. The overly positive ones were wrong too. Eat out to help out, the faffing about with Christmas last year have led to deaths.

"I can't understand how those who are so wrong last March and Christmas are now so certain doing nothing is fine" equally applies...

At least it looks like the peak is going down again, perhaps in some cities people have been re-infected again. There is definitely a lot we don't know yet.

Not sure we need a lockdown right but sure hope the government won't wait until the very very last moment and Christmas be a mess, again. If cases keep dropping, then fine we won't need it. (though Norn Ire where I live it doesn't look good, too much NHS pressure)

Careful now, he's commenting on a guardian piece.

......

Sanitising/washing hands is what I meant. Would cleaning hands have made more sense?

Sanitising/washing hands is what I meant. Would cleaning hands have made more sense?

In a preventing the spread of Covid context, not really. Almost all spread is by airborne particles, not touch.

Right then ! The christmas work party has raised its ugly head after two years ! An Italian place in Liverpool . The echo/ mail reading workers think its a great idea .
Personally hell no would i spend any more time with them .
The presumption is that its all safe now . Non of them wear masks either. I still do .

I hate the Times but having worked in PR for 20 years and for a very big news agency for seven of those I've dealt with more national journalists than anyone would ever want to. It has to be said that these days the Guardian is often just sloppy. Well meaning, but sloppy, with some often super crap journalism.

The Times tends to be much more thorough and journalistically sharper, but it's editorially evil, running misguided campaigns against vulnerable groups and fuck me does it bear grudges.

Basically all newspapers are shit. The FT is the one exception I can think of right now but it's pretty much a slave to mammon isn't it?

But generally I'm better off consuming less news. It just winds me up.

Can't agree on the Times but I do agree with this. I worry that I'm becoming like my Dad, watching loads of TV news and slowly getting wound up by it until he starts shouting at the telly.

I'm sure in the 1990s we just didn't consume so much news and were happier for it.

I probably agree on this too but I was 10 in 1990 so possibly I was just younger and less miserable.

blimey - I thought you were quite a bit younger than me. turns just a little bit.
what's more worrying is my dad agreeing with all the TV news he watches...

thought you were quite a bit younger than me. turns just a little bit.

He does look it doesn’t he? Appear younger than me and I was 5 in 1990!