View Poll Results: Will you get a vaccine against the Coronavirus?

Voters
18. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes, the sooner, the better!

    0 0%
  • Yes, eventually

    2 11.11%
  • I'll be fencesitting for now

    4 22.22%
  • No, highly unlikely

    1 5.56%
  • No, never

    11 61.11%
Page 44 of 73 FirstFirst ... 34394041424344454647484954 ... LastLast
Results 431 to 440 of 729

Thread: Coronavirus/COVID-19: Global Terror

  1. #431

  2. The Following User Says Thank You to jagdmesser For This Useful Post:


  3. #432
    One with Nature
    „Friend of Germanics”
    Funding Membership Inactive
    Vķšįlfr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Last Online
    Sunday, April 4th, 2021 @ 03:16 PM
    Ethnicity
    Daco-Germanic
    Ancestry
    Dacian & German
    Gender
    Family
    Óšins męr
    Politics
    Völkisch
    Religion
    Heathenry
    Posts
    1,076
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    1,023
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1,055
    Thanked in
    497 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Elizabeth View Post
    He was 71. (...) He was recovering from the stroke, was able to talk and then he catches the virus and dies.
    (...)My aunt is 65. They were together 28 years.
    Condolences and sorry to read about your loss! All the Best possible to you and your dear ones and to your aunt as well!

    Did you see this? 2012 Olympics Opening:



    Petition to sign against the mandatory vaccination for the coronavirus.
    Die Farben duften frisch und grün... Lieblich haucht der Wind um mich.

  4. #433
    Active Funding Member
    „Friend of Germanics”
    Skadi Funding Member
    Rędwald's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Last Online
    7 Hours Ago @ 02:29 AM
    Ethnicity
    Anglo-Saxon
    Gender
    Age
    28
    Occupation
    Thrower of Rocks
    Politics
    Anti-Judaist
    Religion
    Crypto-Marcionite
    Posts
    868
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    181
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    356
    Thanked in
    198 Posts
    If only you knew how bad things really are

  5. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Rędwald For This Useful Post:


  6. #434
    Roslagen til Danelagen
    „Friend of Germanics”
    Skadi Funding Member
    Rodskarl Dubhgall's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Last Online
    @
    Status
    Available
    Ethnicity
    Vķnsk
    Ancestry
    Engelsk (Autosomal), Uppland (Y-DNA) och Dalarna (mtDNA)
    Subrace
    Nordid
    Y-DNA
    R-BY30613
    mtDNA
    K2A5A1
    Country
    Vinland Vinland
    State
    Kentucky Kentucky
    Location
    Nya-Sverige
    Gender
    Age
    38
    Zodiac Sign
    Leo
    Family
    Married parent
    Occupation
    Väring och Vķking
    Politics
    Munsöätten
    Religion
    Forn Sed
    Posts
    3,847
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    8,971
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    412
    Thanked in
    359 Posts
    @LeRoux,

    To be clear, I'm only being wary and side with HokM (but not the mindless rants of you-know-who), not finding everything set in stone any more than you do. It's only because of eternal vigilance by civil libertarians in the States, that the Bill of Rights has been preserved. For my part, potential dangers must be exposed to prevent them being clandestinely undertaken and I merely draw attention to the possibilities at hand.

    Yes, violations have happened since at least the first declaration of martial law in Civil War Maryland and when Taney was ignored by Lincoln, both matters of political expediency and nothing more. Nevertheless, while I totally disagree with those events due to the affected parties being native Americans, don't fault the Feds for internment camps during 20th century wartime, as the roundups were of suspected saboteurs in league with other countries in a state of war with America.

    Judging by the Chinese reaction to the outbreak and their targeting of Turkish internment camps, I'd say that today is different from the undoubtedly natural influenza and the Maoists are seizing opportunities under the guise of emergency management, not that I side with the Turks, but hope Indogermanic Pamiris aren't caught in the crossfire, nor even friendly Tibetans, Cantonese and Taiwanese.

    We have every reason to pay attention to government behavior in peacetime and vulnerability, because of proven exploitation by politicians playing dirty tricks. Whether such happens under a blue jackass or red elephant makes no difference, just a purple elephant ass, which Trump represents as a former Democrat and newfound Republican. In today's Republicracy, there's no telling what happens next at any given time and former Republican Hillary could have amounted to the same disturbing vaccillations. I was never on the Trump train, just thought Hillary was the biggest hypocrite and at least he didn't pretend he wasn't.

  7. #435
    6th army lives matter
    Chlodovech's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Last Online
    @
    Ethnicity
    Flemish
    Ancestry
    Frankish
    Country
    Holy Roman Empire Holy Roman Empire
    Gender
    Religion
    Catholic
    Posts
    3,807
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    2,230
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    3,296
    Thanked in
    1,523 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Chlodovech
    Was Neophyte right? And has any mass media hype ever turned out to be true? Are we but a bunch of misled, panicky idiots compared to the world's moral super power? The passing of the weeks seem to indicate this - apparently the only parts of the lockdown which have been useful are the cancelling of mass events and closing schools. But millions will die due to TBC, poverty and untreated cancers because of overreaction. And delaying herd immunity is costing lives, it seems. Heads should roll, no?

    This week Knack, Flanders biggest political magazine, published an interview with science historian Bert De Munck, who views Corona as a seasonal flu: "The Swedish approach seems the most sensible one to me. Events with more than 50 people are forbidden and residential care centres are monitored. The Swedes protect the most vulnerable while building up herd immunity. In the long term that seems the best solution to me and for now the stats don't contradict me. Sweden limits itself to evidence-based measures; for many measures there is no evidence. Opinions vary wildly amongst experts."

    Countries with only minor lockdowns, like Sweden and South Korea, seem to be doing just fine.

    On the other hand: I am reading horror stories of Swedish hospitals unable to cope with COVID patients and hence being forced to let some of them die without being treated.

    Regarding the anti-lockdown demonstrations in Germany, which had an attendance of about 6000 protesters nationwide according to the MSM: we had one too in Brussels yesterday. There were about 30 people. The 13 organizers who called for a protest march against "the lockdown dictature" on Facebook were arrested upon arrival, everyone else was chased away - as all demonstrations are forbidden. Meanwhile, it has come to light that there have been migrant riots in Brussels for weeks, but the authorities & media covered them up until this weekend.


    The Swedish experiment looks like it’s paying off



    Source: Spectator

    Two weeks ago, I wrote about ‘the Swedish experiment’ in The Spectator. As the world went into lockdown, Sweden opted for a different approach to tackling coronavirus: cities, schools and restaurants have remained open. This was judged by critics to be utterly foolish: it would allow the virus to spread much faster than elsewhere, we were told, leading to tens of thousands of deaths. Hospitals would become like warzones. As Sweden was two weeks behind the UK on the epidemic curve, most British experts said we’d pay the price for our approach when we were at the peak. Come back in two weeks, I was told. Let's see what you're saying then. So here I am.

    I'm happy to say that those fears haven’t materialised. But the pressure on Sweden to change tack hasn’t gone away. We haven't u-turned. We’re careful, staying inside a lot more. But schools and shops remain open. Unlike some countries on the continent, no one is asking for ‘our papers’ when we move around in cities. The police don’t stop us and ask why we are spending so much time outdoors: authorities rather encourage it. No one is prying in shopping baskets to make sure you only buy essentials.

    The country’s Public Health Agency and the ‘state epidemiologist’, Anders Tegnell, have kept their cool and still don’t recommend a lockdown. They are getting criticised by scientific modellers but the agency is sticking to its own model of how the virus is expected to develop and what pressure hospitals will be under. The government still heeds the agency’s advice; no party in the opposition argues for a lockdown. Rather, opinion polls show that Swedes remain strongly in favour of the country’s liberal approach to the pandemic.

    So why isn’t Sweden changing tack in the fight against the pandemic? ‘The evil that is in the world always comes of ignorance’, wrote Albert Camus in The Plague – a book that eerily depicts the suffering of the human condition when a disease sweeps through society. And lately, scientists and observers have ventured that explanation publicly: perhaps Sweden’s refusal to fall into line is because Tegnell and his team are a bunch of philistines?

    A group of 22 scientists made that charge in an op-ed last week in Dagens Nyheter, appealing to the government to rein in supposedly ignorant officials at the Public Health Agency. Last week, a piece in the Daily Telegraph ran with the same theme and expanded it to include much of the national population: Swedes have willingly been duped by ignorant authorities and a chief epidemiologist who has been seduced by his own sudden fame. Our faith in government is so big, and our bandwidth for dissent is so small, that we even scold criticism of the government as ‘shameful betrayal of the national effort’. A journalist from French television that I talked to on Sunday admitted, somewhat sheepishly, that ‘it’s almost as if we want Sweden to fail because then we would know it is you and not us that there is something wrong with’.

    There is a simpler explanation: Sweden is sticking to its policy because, on the whole, it is balanced and effectual. So far, the actual development is generally following the government’s prediction. On Monday, 1,580 people had died and tested positive for Covid-19. The number of daily deaths has remained pretty stable at about 75 for a while but is now on a declining path. A lot more people will die in the next weeks and months but our death toll is far away from the pessimistic and alarmist predictions suggesting 80 to 90,000 people would die before the summer.

    There are also encouraging signs that the growth of reported infections is also slowing down – a development that holds for both Stockholm (by far the worst affected region) and the rest of the country. The estimate from the Public Health Agency is that 100,000 people will show up at a hospital and test positive for Covid-19: the current headcount, just south of 14,800, suggests we are broadly in line with that estimate – if not below it.

    Perhaps more important is the situation at our hospitals and their intensive care wards. The main ambition of suppression policies, after all, has been to avoid hospitals getting overwhelmed by patients they cannot treat because of shortages of staff, equipment and intensive care beds. Modellers in Sweden that have followed an Imperial College type approach have suggested demand will peak at 8,000 to 9,000 patients in intensive care per day. But actual numbers are telling a very different story. Yes, the situation is stressful, but – mercifully – the growth in intensive care patients has slowed down remarkably and the number of patients currently in intensive care has flatlined.

    We now have about 530 patients in intensive care in the country: our hospital capacity is twice as high at 1,100. Stockholm now averages about 220 critical care patients per day and its hospitals, far from being overwhelmed, have capacity for another 70. Stockholm also reports that it has several hundred inpatient care beds unoccupied and that people shouldn’t hesitate to seek hospital care if they feel sick. A new field ward has been set up in Stockholm for intensive and inpatient care and some predicted it would start getting patients two weeks ago. It hasn’t received any patients yet.

    Sweden hasn’t declared 'victory' – far from it. It’s still early days in this pandemic and no one really knows yet how the virus will spread once restrictions are lifted and what excess mortality it will have caused when it’s all over. Sweden doesn’t know the size of its ‘iceberg’ – how many people that have had the virus with only mild or no symptoms. It will remain unclear for at least another couple of weeks if parts of Sweden (especially Stockholm) has developed some degree of herd immunity.

    A recent test at Karolinska suggested that 11 per cent of people in Stockholm had developed antibodies against the virus. Professor Jan Albert, who has led these tests, says the rate is most likely higher – perhaps substantially higher. So far they have only tested a small sample of blood donors and they can only donate if they are healthy and free of symptoms. Albert thinks the actual situation isn’t far away from the ballpark suggested by professor Tom Britton in a study that was released this weekend: that between 25 and 40 per cent of the Stockholm population have had the virus and that the region will reach herd immunity in late May.

    These results are hopeful, even if they are still informed estimates and not observed reality, and are open to dispute. Nor will they change Swedish policy anytime soon. In fact, all the uncertainties around the future of this pandemic are part of the motivation for Sweden opting for a liberal approach. We have to plan for strong social distancing measures to remain in place for a long time and they won’t work if they are harder than necessary.

    Countries like Austria and Denmark are now beginning to ease their lockdown restrictions but the virus is still spreading in their countries, albeit at a slower rate than earlier. Once more of the restrictions have been lifted, they may soon have to be imposed again to control new outbreaks of the virus. No country in Europe has yet figured out how a policy of test, track and trace could be organized on a large scale. We don’t know when a vaccine will be ready. For the foreseeable future, the backbone of every country’s defence against the virus will have to be based on strong social distancing. Sweden’s authorities proposed a liberal approach based on individual responsibility because it can be tolerated for longer and it has the effect of ‘flattening the curve’.

    There is also a broader case for it. Lockdown policies harm basic civil liberties: in Sweden these liberties are, with some exceptions, intact. Lockdown policies have huge consequences on public health. And they are profoundly damaging to the economy. Sweden is no exception: our economy has been falling like a stone in the past month. In the city where I live, Uppsala, bankruptcy notices are now put up on many shop windows and I hear every day about friends and acquaintances that have lost their jobs or their small firms. National production has also slipped because global trade has closed. Big industrial stalwarts like ABB and Sandvik are still producing but can’t ship their products to other countries. Carmakers like Volvo and Scania decided to close their factories at an early point in March because they couldn’t get parts and components from other countries.

    So everyone was already set up for gloomy reading about the economic outlook when the government unveiled its new budget last week. Still, the experience was grim. In the main scenario, our national output will decline by 4 per cent this year, taking unemployment up to 9 per cent and the fiscal deficit to 3.8 per cent of the gross domestic product.

    The only silver lining is that it could have been worse. We are pretty far away from the levels of economic decline predicted for most lockdown countries. In fact, the Swedish economic situation looks sensationally positive when compared to the ghastly reports and scenarios elsewhere. Cash turnover indicators, for instance, suggest that personal consumption in Denmark and Finland has dropped substantially more than in Sweden. Unemployment benefit claims in Norway have shot through the roof and grown four times as fast as in Sweden. Fiscal deficits in the UK and the US are likely to be in the region of 12 to 15 per cent. Last week’s economic scenario from the OBR suggested that Britain’s GDP could drop by almost 13 per cent this year.

    So yes: the economy has to be factored into a balanced pandemic response if it is going to last for longer than a few weeks more. No country can sustain suppression policies if they have catastrophic consequences for the economy. Many countries can borrow cash now to pay people that aren’t working and help businesses that are on the verge of bankruptcy. But that isn’t an unlimited option. Debt accumulated now will have to be repaid later. We can hope for a sharp economic recovery but chances are that it will be slow and that it will take years to rebuild national production. And we already know what that means: unemployment will remain high, people will be poorer and there will be less spending on benefits, welfare services and core state functions like the police. Sweden won’t be spared, but our economy will not be as ravaged as elsewhere.

    So Sweden isn’t edging closer to a lockdown. Nor is team Tegnell panicking and fighting for its reputation. The vast majority of people think Sweden broadly opted for a balanced and effectual policy and current trends support that view. Everyone is upset about carelessness in nursing homes – that a very high share of our death toll is elderly nursing home residents – and that emergency plans were so poor and medical contingency stocks so small. People will be held to account. Some heads will roll. My guess is that it won’t be Tegnell’s.



    Was Britain's full lockdown a waste of time? Scientists find blanket stay-at-home orders had little effect on curbing coronavirus outbreaks in Europe - but closing schools and banning all mass gatherings DID work

    • University of East Anglia analysed policies in 30 European countries and found only some measures effective
    • They wanted to see which were the best at controlling the pandemic as countries worldwide locked down
    • Banning mass gatherings and closing schools were the most effective ways of stopping virus spread
    • But stay-at-home orders and shutting non-essential businesses had little effect, the scientists claim
    • It comes as Boris Johnson is expected to agree tentative moves to lift outdoor restrictions this week
    • Here’s how to help people impacted by Covid-19


    Source: DailyMail

    Draconian stay-at-home orders and shutting all non-essential businesses had little effect on fighting coronavirus in Europe, according to a study.

    But the same scientists discovered closing schools and banning all mass gatherings did work in slowing outbreaks across the continent.

    University of East Anglia researchers now say relaxing the stay-at-home policy and letting some businesses reopen could be the UK's first step to easing lockdown.

    The findings throw into question whether Britain's total lockdown - announced on March 23 - was ever necessary amid claims social distancing policies announced on March 16 curbed the crisis on their own.

    UEA researchers looked at a range of social distancing measures adopted across 30 European countries.

    They cautioned that the study, which was funded by the National Institute for Health Research Health Protection Research Unit in Emergency Preparedness and Response at King's College London and Public Health England, is experimental.

    Banning mass gatherings, along with closing schools and some non-essential businesses, particularly in the hospitality sector, were the most effective ways at stopping the spread of the disease, the researchers found.



    They said that more investigation is needed on the use of face coverings in public, as the current results, which do not support using them in public, were 'too preliminary'.

    One of the scientists involved in the research, Dr Julii Brainard, said they found clear distinctions between which measures were more effective.

    'We found that three of the control measures were especially effective and the other two were not,' she told BBC Radio 4 this morning.

    'It pains me to say this because I have kids that I'd like to get back into education, but closing schools was the most effective single measure, followed by mass gatherings.

    '[This was] followed by what were defined... as the initial business closures. So that was the point when, in the UK for instance, they closed gyms and clubs.

    'Adding very little additional effect was the stay-at-home measure, surprisingly, and the additional business closures.'

    The research adds to claims from Dr Johan Giesecke, of Stockholm's Karolinska Institutet, that total lockdowns are unnecessary because the virus is unstoppable. Although he admits the benefit of preventing hospitals from becoming overwhelmed which, the UK Government says, has been its aim all along.

    Writing in an article in The Lancet, Dr Giesecke said: 'Many countries (and members of their press media) have marvelled at Sweden's relaxed strategy in the face of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic: schools and most workplaces have remained open, and police officers were not checking one's errands in the street.

    'It has become clear that a hard lockdown does not protect old and frail people living in care homes—a population the lockdown was designed to protect.

    'Neither does it decrease mortality from COVID-19, which is evident when comparing the UK's experience with that of other European countries.'

    Dr Giesecke explained that estimates in Sweden suggest a quarter of 2.4million people in the capital, Stockholm county, have had the virus already and around 99 per cent of them were never diagnosed. The country has recorded only 2,941 deaths - only a 10th as many as Britain.

    He added: 'These facts have led me to the following conclusions. Everyone will be exposed to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus, and most people will become infected.

    'COVID-19 is spreading like wildfire in all countries, but we do not see it - it almost always spreads from younger people with no or weak symptoms to other people who will also have mild symptoms.

    'This is the real pandemic, but it goes on beneath the surface, and is probably at its peak now in many European countries. There is very little we can do to prevent this spread: a lockdown might delay severe cases for a while, but once restrictions are eased, cases will reappear.

    ' I expect that when we count the number of deaths from COVID-19 in each country in 1 year from now, the figures will be similar, regardless of measures taken.'

    The University of East Anglia researchers looked at the number of cases and deaths taken from daily published figures by the European Centre for Disease Control.

    These were compared with the start dates of different measures including the restriction of mass gatherings, the closure of schools and different types of businesses, stay-at-home orders and the wearing of face masks.

    Lead researcher Professor Paul Hunter, from UEA's Norwich Medical School, said the study shows that school closures in Europe had 'the greatest association with a subsequent reduction in the spread of the disease', but it does not clarify the ongoing puzzle of whether children can pass Covid-19 to adults.

    He said: 'And it does not identify which level of school closure has the most impact, whether it is primary, junior, senior school or even higher education.

    'It's also important to remember that our results are based on total closure, so it is possible that partial school closures could have worthwhile impacts on the spread of infection.'

    Banning public and private mass gatherings was another key tool in fighting the spread of the virus.

    Professor Hunter noted that the size of the current banned mass gatherings varied between countries and so the importance and impact of the scale of the individual event is still not clear.

    Dr Julii Brainard, of UEA's Norwich Medical School, said the researchers were 'really surprised' to learn that stay-at-home orders may not be needed to control the outbreak, provided that this did not lead to more mass gatherings.

    It was found that these stay-home policies were not linked with a decline in incidences, and that as the number of lock-down days increased, so did the number of cases.

    Differences in how the countries carried out these policies have ranged from them being an advisory notice in some places, while elsewhere they were orders which were enforced by police with penalties.

    The shut-down of non-essential businesses, which included places where people gathered such pubs, leisure centres, restaurants and venues, also had an impact on the spread of infection in each country.

    Professor Hunter said: 'This suggests that keeping some businesses closed, particularly in the hospitality and leisure sector, would have the most impact.

    'However, we also know that while outbreaks of food poisoning are frequently linked with restaurants, outbreaks of other respiratory infections generally in the hospitality sector are fairly rare.'

    Dr Joshua Moon, of the University of Sussex Business School, noted that differences in testing rates and strategies in each country would have an impact on the number of cases.

    He said the study may indicate that stay-at-home orders could be the first things to be relaxed.

    Dr Moon said: 'We have to remember that decisions like this cannot and should not be made on a single finding.

    'Nor should policy be made based solely upon science – there are many social, economic, political, and moral factors to consider that science simply cannot answer.

    'When it comes to this pandemic, caution is paramount, otherwise we could tip too far and risk a second wave and a return to lockdown.'

    The cautious sentiment is in line with warnings from the World Health Organization. Its director-general, Dr Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, said countries must act slowly and be willing to row back if the virus spiralled out of control again.

    Dr Ghebreyesus said in a briefing yesterday: 'The risk of returning to lockdown remains very real if countries do not manage the transition extremely carefully and in a phased approach.

    'The COVID-19 pandemic will eventually recede, but there can be no going back to business as usual.'

    Senior emergency officer at the WHO, Dr Catherine Smallwood, said that moving out of lockdown must be done 'in a step-by-step manner, that it is gradual and it is cautious,' The Mirror reported.

    Researchers from the University of Newcastle, the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine and Tshwane University of Technology in South Africa are also part of the study team.

    Experts not involved with the research said the difficulty lies in separating the effects of individual restrictions when, in many cases, they were introduced at the same time.

    Dr Brainnard addressed this in her Radio 4 interview, saying: 'Because none of the countries implemented all of the measures, and there was variable timing, we can kind of look at separate timings.'

    Professor Keith Neil, an epidemiologist at the University of Nottingham, said: 'The main limitation of the study is that in many countries various measures were put in place at the same time making it difficult to disentangle which effects were having an impact. The strength lies in looking at data from 30 countries.

    'The more of the lockdown restrictions that have a minimal, if any, benefit in controlling spread that are then relaxed the better the physical and mental health of the country will be.

    'They found stay-at-home orders and closure of non-essential businesses appear to have minimal effects on transmission prevention. Relaxing these would therefore likely to have minimal adverse consequences on the epidemic.

    'In controlling spread their main finding was that school closures were important. As many schools have now gone, or soon will go, back in Europe the impact of school closures and the re-opening will become apparent and help the UK’s exit strategy with real data.

    'Next of importance was the banning of mass gatherings comes as no great surprise and also has little impact on the economy overall if it needs to be continued.

    'Overall the paper helps those planning the exit strategy with some more science.'

    Despite Number 10 confirming that lockdown will start to be eased on Monday, it is expected the measures will be extended for another three weeks today.

    On Sunday, Mr Johnson will unveil a series of 'easements' to the nation, which will be announced after the Cabinet finalises details.

    The government's stay at home message will be replaced with a 'be careful when you're out' mantra, according to one Cabinet minister.

    The minister added that the easing of lockdown will be based on how much each step of the plan affects the rate of infection - or R.

    The government is thought to have drawn up a draft 50-page blueprint to gradually ease lockdown in staggered steps between now and October.

    This blueprint is expected to lead to a five-step roadmap to see Britain leave lockdown completely by Autumn.

    But an 'emergency brake' could be applied if a second wave of the deadly virus arrives.

    Other leading scientists have claimed Britain's COVID-19 outbreak peaked and started to decline before the official lockdown began, arguing that Number 10's drastic policy to shut the UK down was wrong.

    Transport use plummeted and fewer people were visiting GPs with tell-tale coronavirus symptoms the week before lockdown, suggesting the government's call for the public to work from home where possible and to only take essential travel was effective enough.

    And one Swedish researcher, Dr Johan Giesecke, who has seen his country resist calls for a lockdown but escape relatively unharmed, said the pandemic is unstoppable and everyone will be exposed to the coronavirus sooner or later.

    It comes after Boris Johnson yesterday confirmed that strict rules imposed under the six-week coronavirus lockdown will start to be eased on Monday, on the same day that Britain's death toll became the first in Europe to rise above 30,000 and the number of people diagnosed with the disease surged past 200,000.

    The Prime Minister will outline a five-step plan for Britain's 'second phase' on Sunday, with the government set to drop its 'Stay at Home' message and replace it with 'Stay Safe'.

    But as the UK and other countries in Europe prepare to lift restrictions the World Health Organization has warned them not to be afraid of restarting them it the virus begins to take off again.

    A leading Oxford University expert has argued that the peak of Britain's coronavirus crisis was a week before lockdown was announced on March 23, and that the early warnings for people to try to social distance and to wash their hands regularly had an impact on their own.

    Professor Carl Heneghan claims data clearly showed infection rates halved after the Government launched a public information campaign on March 16.

    Health bosses urged Brits to wash their hands and keep two metres (6'6") away from others before rolling out the unprecedented lockdown.

    Professor Heneghan argued ministers 'lost sight' of the evidence and rushed into a nationwide quarantine six days later.

    He said that they were instructed by scientific advisers who have been 'consistently wrong' during the crisis.

    Professor Heneghan hailed Sweden - which has not enforced a lockdown despite fierce criticism - for 'holding its nerve' and avoiding a 'doomsday scenario'.

    He told MailOnline: 'The peak of deaths occurred on April 8, and if you understand that then you work backwards to find the peak of infections.

    He referred to a delay in the time it takes for an infected person to fall seriously ill and die - three weeks on average.

    Data shows the rate of Britons with upper respiratory tract infections dropped from 20 per 100,000 people on March 15 to around 12 per 100,000 just six days later.

    The figures do not relate solely to coronavirus but may be a good indicator because so few people were being tested for the deadly infection.

    Explaining the logic behind his claim, Professor Heneghan said: 'The UK Government keeps saying it is using the best science.

    'But it appears to be losing sight of what’s actually going on. We’ve been getting scientific advice that is consistently wrong.

    'It has failed to look at all the data and understand when the peak of infections actually occurred.'

    He added: 'Fifty per cent reductions in infections occurred on March 16, right when hand washing and social distancing was introduced.

    'If you go look at what’s happening in Sweden, they are holding their nerve and they haven’t had doomsday scenario. Our Government has got it completely the wrong way around.'

    Some scientists have suggested that splitting the lockdown into two 'tiers' based on personal risk could be a more effective way of managing them.

    Researchers at the University of Edinburgh suggested that people vulnerable to the disease, such as the elderly and those with serious health problems, should abide by stricter rules than young healthy people who are less likely to die if they catch COVID-19.

    They said the approach, dubbed 'segmentation and shielding', is the only way to get the UK back to normal without overwhelming the NHS and causing a second wave.

    Healthy Britons would be allowed back out, but stringent contact tracing, social distancing and hand-washing rules would need to be in place.

    Anyone with symptoms would need to quarantine along with their entire household for two weeks.

    The study, which used modelling to predict the virus's spread after lockdown, did not say how much longer elderly people would need to stay cooped up at home.

    The researchers concluded that the best course of action would be the 'two-tier' approach, which would give young healthy adults and children greater freedoms while ensuring that the most vulnerable are protected.

    Certain measures would stay in place, such as the use of the NHSX contact-tracing app, social isolation upon expressing symptoms of COVID-19, quarantine of entire households and social distancing.

    However, it would allow society's fittest to reclaim some of their lost freedoms.

    The most vulnerable – the elderly and those with underlying medical conditions – would still need to avoid anyone potentially infected with the virus.

    Dr Bram van Bunnik, a researcher at the University of Edinburgh's Usher Institute, said: 'Easing the measures taken during the lockdown is important as they currently have a tremendous effect on our society, but this should only be done in a way that is both safe for the people that are most vulnerable as well as for the health and safety of NHS staff.

    'Segmentation and shielding is a possible way of achieving this: measures could be eased for a large proportion of the population, however the vulnerable population likely still needs to be protected for a prolonged period.'

    The team said the risk to non-vulnerable people released from lockdown could be managed via effective clinical care and public health measures as well as ensuring universal high standards of hygiene and hand washing.

    REVEALED: THE MEASURES THAT WORKED... AND THE ONES THAT DIDN'T

    WORKED

    Closing schools


    There has been a lot of uncertainty about whether schools and nurseries should be closed – particularly given that children seem to show mild or no symptoms.

    Throat swabs from children have shown similar viral load to those in adults, yet other studies have not found evidence of children transmitting the infection to adults.

    Professor Hunter said: 'Our study shows school closures in Europe had the greatest association with a subsequent reduction in the spread of the disease.

    'But this study does not resolve the lack of consensus about whether children can pass COVID-19 to adults. And it does not identify which level of school closure has the most impact whether it is primary, junior, senior school or even higher education.

    'It's also important to remember that our results are based on total closure, so it is possible that partial school closures could have worthwhile impacts on the spread of infection.'

    Banning mass gatherings

    Banning public and private mass gatherings had the second greatest impact on the spread of COVID-19. These findings are backed up by past experience.

    Professor Hunter said: 'In the past there have been several outbreaks of other respiratory infections linked to music festivals. For example, in 2009, outbreaks of swine flu were recorded at three of Europe's six largest music festivals, while at one point some 40 per cent of pandemic flu cases that season in Serbia were linked with the Exit music festival.

    'How big a mass gathering may need to be to have been prohibited varied between countries so it is not clear what size of mass gathering would have been important.'

    FAILED

    Stay-home policies


    Stay-home policies were not associated with a decline in incidence, and actually showed a positive association with cases. As the number of lock-down days increased, so did the number of cases.

    Dr Julii Brainard said: 'This result really surprised us and shows that stay at home orders may not be required to control the outbreak, provided that this does not lead to more mass gatherings.

    'However there have been considerable differences in how countries have carried out stay-home policies.

    'Acceptable reasons for being outdoors has varied between countries, and stay-home orders in some countries have been advisory rather than enforced by police with penalties.

    'Because of this, the results for the potential of stay-home advisories may be under-estimated.'

    Business closures

    The study found that the first wave of non-essential closures in each country had the biggest impact on the spread of infection. Those initial closures tended to be directed at businesses where people congregate such pubs, leisure centres, restaurants and venues.

    Professor Hunter said: 'This suggests that keeping some businesses closed, particularly in the hospitality and leisure sector, would have the most impact.

    'However, we also know that while outbreaks of food poisoning are frequently linked with restaurants, outbreaks of other respiratory infections generally in the hospitality sector are fairly rare.

    'The closure of other types of business, such as non-essential shops, seems to have made little impact on the spread of COVID-19.'

    UNDECIDED

    Facemasks

    Wearing facemasks in public was not associated with any independent additional impact. But the researchers say these results are too preliminary to reliably inform policy.

    Dr Brainard said: 'The use of face coverings initially seems to have had a protective effect. However, after day 15 of the face covering advisories or requirements, we saw that the number of cases started to rise – with a similar pattern for the number of deaths.

    'Face coverings may even be associated with increased risk, but the data quality for this is very uncertain.

    'The results on face coverings are too preliminary to reliably inform policy, but what results are available do not support their widespread use in the community.

    'Wearing face covering as an intervention certainly merits close monitoring,' she added.
    “War is waged by men; not by beasts, or by gods. It is a peculiarly human activity. To call it a crime against mankind is to miss at least half its significance; it is also the punishment of a crime.” - Frederic Manning, The Middle Parts of Fortune

  8. The Following User Says Thank You to Chlodovech For This Useful Post:


  9. #436
    Senior Member Veršandi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Last Online
    Wednesday, September 12th, 2018 @ 02:42 PM
    Ethnicity
    Germanic
    Country
    Luxembourg Luxembourg
    Location
    Asgård
    Gender
    Age
    37
    Family
    Two sisters
    Occupation
    Wyrd-weaver
    Posts
    8,080
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    576
    Thanked in
    378 Posts

    Tracking Down the Origin of the Wuhan Coronavirus



    The first documentary movie on the origin of #CCPVirus, Tracking Down the Origin of the #WuhanCoronavirus.

    The CCP virus, which originated from #China, has rampaged through the world and caused more than 80,000 deaths, infecting at least 1.4 million.

    The true number of deaths and infections is unknown due to the underreporting of cases from mainland China.

    In the new documentary presented by The Epoch Times and NTD, Epoch Times investigative reporter Joshua Philipp takes an in-depth look at the progression of the pandemic from January to April and leads us on a journey of discovery to bring the truth behind the matter to light.

    From the Huanan Seafood Market in Hubei Province to the scandals at the Wuhan Institute of Virology, from long-running experiments on viruses to military takeovers, suspicious activities arise from every corner. Through vigorous investigations and the piecing together of hidden information, the documentary will unearth a more complete understanding of the situation surrounding the rise of this pandemic.

    Suspicions uncovered from official reports and publicly available information also sprouted more questions, leading to surprising findings and inquiries.

    More...

  10. #437
    Roslagen til Danelagen
    „Friend of Germanics”
    Skadi Funding Member
    Rodskarl Dubhgall's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Last Online
    @
    Status
    Available
    Ethnicity
    Vķnsk
    Ancestry
    Engelsk (Autosomal), Uppland (Y-DNA) och Dalarna (mtDNA)
    Subrace
    Nordid
    Y-DNA
    R-BY30613
    mtDNA
    K2A5A1
    Country
    Vinland Vinland
    State
    Kentucky Kentucky
    Location
    Nya-Sverige
    Gender
    Age
    38
    Zodiac Sign
    Leo
    Family
    Married parent
    Occupation
    Väring och Vķking
    Politics
    Munsöätten
    Religion
    Forn Sed
    Posts
    3,847
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    8,971
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    412
    Thanked in
    359 Posts
    A funny side effect of this hysteria, is the masses being forced to look like Antifa. On the other hand, I wouldn't laugh, because I don't believe in the restrictions on my freedom that aren't in any penal code, but surreptitiously imposed with whatever claimed excuses for violation of my rights. I will not wear a mask outside unless it's Halloween or frigid weather, but I recognize the bylaws of businesses may differ from my preferences and have to respect their rules to enter their premises. Since I don't agree with Silicon Valley social media political correctness and censorship, I don't use their platforms. Any American could approach the American Civil Liberties Union if the government arrests us for not wearing masks. I'm not a criminal to hide my face.

  11. #438
    Senior Member Veršandi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Last Online
    Wednesday, September 12th, 2018 @ 02:42 PM
    Ethnicity
    Germanic
    Country
    Luxembourg Luxembourg
    Location
    Asgård
    Gender
    Age
    37
    Family
    Two sisters
    Occupation
    Wyrd-weaver
    Posts
    8,080
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    576
    Thanked in
    378 Posts

    Opinion: Will the EU witness another Brexit at the end of the Coronavirus pandemic?



    The Coronavirus epidemic has created a multidimensional crisis in the European Union. The health crisis is perhaps the most important part, especially in countries such as Italy and Spain, whose health systems nearly buckled under the weight of the pandemic. In Italy, there are nearly 217,000 COVID-19 cases and about 30,000 deaths, making it one of the worst countries in the world in terms of deaths.

    Spain too has also been strongly affected by the pandemic. Of course, European countries have responded differently to the crisis. While the Germans have achieved relative success in combating the pandemic, other countries haven’t done so well.

    How each country has responded to the virus should make us think about differences in each member state’s ability to deal with crises. Of course there is disparity, but more importantly, it puts many questions before us about the future of the European Union.

    This article seeks to answer a few key questions: Does the current crisis deepen the prolonged political stagnation of the European Union, the last of which was in 2016 when the British voted to leave the European Union? What does the crisis mean for European unity, which seems more at risk in recent years than ever before? Is it possible to witness the exit of other countries from the union in the post-coronavirus world?
    An Ongoing Political Crisis

    The novel coronavirus pandemic is crisis which has three dimensions: economic, social, and political.

    The European Union has suffered a political crisis for nearly a decade, and widespread antipathy is certainly present between different countries within the bloc. This situation contributed to the rise of right-wing populist forces in Hungary, Poland, Italy, and other European countries.

    That dilemma stems from the European sovereign debt crisis of 2009 and 2010.

    Italy, Greece, Portugal, Spain and Ireland all borrowed money from financial institutions in France and Germany. When Greece could not pay back the debt they were subjected to humiliation as Germany imposed strict austerity measures.

    At the time, because there was no populist right movement in any of these countries except for Italy, secession from the bloc was never proposed. But the strike came from Britain – the second largest economy in the European Union – which in June 2016 voted to leave the union. The European Union is still recovering from the economic effects of Brexit.

    Since the coronavirus pandemic was declared in March, political tensions in the bloc have only increased. The large numbers of deaths have prompted each state to focus on internal affairs rather than European solidarity.

    In mid-March, Germany began sending medical aid to the country hit hardest by the pandemic. More than once has Italy requested the assistance of the Crisis Response Coordination Center – a European body designed to provide support to crisis-affected European union countries. The agency’s response, however, has been limited.

    Italy isn’t alone in their discontent. The Prime Minister of Spain slammed the absence of European solidarity during the COVID-19 crisis in an editorial piece. This feeling of disappointment in the absence of European solidarity cuts across the entire political spectrum.

    The absence of the solidarity within the European Union presented right-wing forces an opportunity to criticize two things: European institutions which failed to provide an adequate amount of aid to countries in need as well as open border policies which allowed the virus to spread more rapidly than it would have with closed borders.

    The bloc’s incompetent response also highlighted China’s growing influence on Europe, especially in Italy, a country that’s central to China’s plan to expand globally through its Belt & Road initiate.

    Solidarity or Economy?

    European solidarity was never the primary motivation for the European Union being formed. European countries mainly moved to create the bloc to advance their common interests. The European Union was formed mainly as an economic union and a European common market.

    The northern and southern European countries have both benefited from the European Union, but there is a fundamental problem. Southern European countries like Italy, Spain and Portugal have become dependent on borrowing from major European banks in the north. This borrowing soon stopped, or rather, great obstacles were put in place after the Greek debt crisis. Germany has lead the union towards the era of austerity, which has put southern countries under sustained economic pressure. That pressure has only worsened since the pandemic.

    To deal with the economic repercussions of the pandemic, the European Central Bank announced that it would be spending 750 billion euros on purchasing government debt and private securities before the end of 20202. Days ago, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said that a new Marshall Plan was needed to ensure Europe’s recovery.

    Southern European countries to have called on the European Union to provide them with low-interest funds and loans, which Germany has often opposed, as Merkel and her allies like France have defended a more reasonable strategy of borrowing, especially for countries where public debt exceeds a large proportion of GDP. The Germans are moving in light of the fact that these policies could deepen the debt crisis in countries such as Spain and Italy.

    How can Europe change after the crisis?

    The European Union suffers from an accumulation of crises, and there are major political tensions which have arisen not only because of the rise of the populist Right, but because of the role that Germany plays and its imposition of its economic vision, especially with regard to debt in the countries of the southern Europe.

    Also, the rise of the populist right-wing places great pressure on the European institution. However, the most significant factor in the union’s survival so far is the great advantages that countries who are apart of the union enjoy. The easy access to markets, the low cost of trade, and the linkage of European production chains today are more pronounced than ever.

    Consequently, the economy ultimately controls the survival of the European Union in its present form. However, in light of the severe economic crisis the world is suffering due to the Coronavirus outbreak, it is difficult at this time to expect any future for the European Union. That future is tied to the bloc’s ability to demonstrate strength and economic solidarity in assisting heavily affected countries. So far, the bloc has failed in both of these categories.

    The current crisis reveals a severe weakness in the European version of globalization – a version that was based on economic integration between countries and the exchange of benefits. However, in the time of deep crises that we are living in, we find these Germany and France act against the principles that the European Union was founded upon.

    So far, supranational structures have failed miserably to overtake the national state as the most complete framework for managing human life, especially at the time of the crisis, which has been revealed by the current crisis of Europe. The unelected bureaucratic institutions in Brussels have not been able to recreate the institutional structures of the nation states to provide medical assistance to the countries most affected. Neoliberalism has globalized the economy but failed to globalize politics. The failure to globalize politics has clearly been revealed by the coronavirus crisis.
    Support Voice of Europe

    The post Opinion: Will the EU witness another Brexit at the end of the Coronavirus pandemic? appeared first on Voice of Europe.

  12. #439
    Active Funding Member
    „Friend of Germanics”
    Skadi Funding Member
    Rędwald's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Last Online
    7 Hours Ago @ 02:29 AM
    Ethnicity
    Anglo-Saxon
    Gender
    Age
    28
    Occupation
    Thrower of Rocks
    Politics
    Anti-Judaist
    Religion
    Crypto-Marcionite
    Posts
    868
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    181
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    356
    Thanked in
    198 Posts
    Chlod, I’m not sure you can say that South Korea went into a mild lockdown. I was working remotely with South Korean colleagues in February/March. Any Koreans who left their home were forced to remain at their destination for 30 days before they were allowed to return. One guy was stuck in Busan for an additional 30 days after he’d been there a month at least already. Anyone travelling into Korea was forced to remain in a hotel quarantine for at least 14 days before they could be escorted to their final destination. You weren’t even allowed to leave the room for food.

    The response didn’t seem very mild. If anything, I would say the US response is very mild. Quarantines are recommended and not enforced, I can still fly almost anywhere without question, most people are out and about in the neighbourhood now. The decision to keep parks open or closed is left up to the most local authorities, so it depends where you are if you can go to the parks or not. People are still moving, renting and selling homes. The hotel I’m in right now is kind of packed, they have the dining room open, gym open, etc. Meanwhile the one I was at a few weeks ago had closed all those amenities. It’s not very consistent.

    @Rodskarl

    I see your point, but I just think making the argument one about civil liberties during a pandemic is not a good strategy. Especially because the main proponents of this view (Rush, Ramzpaul, AJ, etc) don't have any nuance - they stick with "it's just the flu" and this is all an Orwellian power grab. I would be okay with discussions that centered around nuance where the government or other bad actors are indeed exploiting the situation, but the conspiratard hysteria attached to the standard libertarian arguments isn't worth discussing. In fact, it's just alienating, as very little people share that view, especially young people. Ironically, debating in that fashion will just further convince the younger generation that capitalism is evil.

    I also usually think it's rich that people complain about their liberties being violated by their government when the real invisible hand at work in the US are the corporations who currently own the government. I can use the government to send money to nationalist causes easily, but I can't use GooglePay, Paypal, Stripe etc. Our oppression is completely privatised here, ironically, which is why it's so efficient. On paper, you have a second amendment. In practice, like those poor Georgia boys are finding out, any exercise of that where the victim is the wrong colour means you will be completely destroyed. You'll have the wealthiest lawyers stacked against you, working pro bono against the White man. What use is the right if any exercise of it leaves you buried in costly legal battles, arrested with or without bail, or suspended from your job? Face it, the 2nd amendment is already going away, if not gone already. We already know the 1st amendment is gone, when members of the American Identity Movement remain locked up for no reason. Or this guy, who admittedly kind of dumb, was arrested, investigated by the FBI and sent to jail for 2 1/2 years because he had some guns, a small amount of weed and a Third Reich flag in his possession.
    Last edited by Rędwald; Sunday, May 10th, 2020 at 07:57 PM. Reason: Typo
    If only you knew how bad things really are

  13. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Rędwald For This Useful Post:


  14. #440
    Senior Member Veršandi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Last Online
    Wednesday, September 12th, 2018 @ 02:42 PM
    Ethnicity
    Germanic
    Country
    Luxembourg Luxembourg
    Location
    Asgård
    Gender
    Age
    37
    Family
    Two sisters
    Occupation
    Wyrd-weaver
    Posts
    8,080
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    576
    Thanked in
    378 Posts

    German intelligence says CCP urged WHO to cover-up person-to-person transmission of COVID-19



    Xi Jinping, the highest-ranking official in the Communist Party of China, urged the WHO to hold back information about human-to-human transmission of COVID-19 from the world, delaying ability of individual nations to respond adequately by at least four to six weeks, according to the German Federal Intelligence Service.

    According to a report from Der Spiegel, Germany’s BND says that Communist China persuaded the World Health Organization to withhold key information from the word that would allowed nations to respond to the COVID-19 pandemic more quickly and more effectively.

    “On January 21, China’s leader Xi Jinping asked WHO chief Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus to hold back information about a human-to-human transmission and to delay a pandemic warning,” Der Spiegel journalist Matthias Gebauer writes in the report.

    The report lends further credence to the claims made by the Trump administration that the Chinese Communist Party deliberately held back crucial information from the world which, if released, could have saved tens of thousands of lives.

    The time that China gained from its successful lobbying effort allowed it stockpile critical medical supplies like face masks and ventilators, according to a report by the US Department of Homeland Security.

    Furthermore, the BND’s intelligence report substantiates US President Donald Trump claims that the CCP wields undue influence over the WHO.

    The post German intelligence says CCP urged WHO to cover-up person-to-person transmission of COVID-19 appeared first on Voice of Europe.

    More...

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •