Jump to content
DeeCee

Coronavirus | COVID-19 | Global Pandemic | PLEASE KEEP DISCUSSION TO THIS THREAD

Recommended Posts

On 12/6/2020 at 7:38 PM, terrestrial said:

 I think it was e.g. to be able to do the twice per week tests of all staff for (in direct contact or all of them?) care home residents as a mandatory thing. We had 474 death within last week in Bavaria (population = something over 13m), too many of those out of care home residents. The impact of the count might be clearer if considering we had ‘only’ 4291 death in Bavaria since the beginning of the virus. ‘Only’ = as its a really high jump.

 

Schools, Kindergarten, stores in Bavaria stay open, for schools only 8th grade and higher do split ups ... forgot the term in English. 8th grade and higher pupils who are at school have to eat in their class rooms and all grades are not allowed to mix outside the building, have to wear masks also outside, as long as its on the school property (I think too many pupils stand too near together).

In hot-spots curfew begins at 21:00 o‘clock. (9 in the evening)

 

Libraries are closed again since a week or so, but that could be German-wide too....

I don't know about closed libraries.

 

 

So seems like Saxony will go into a "hard" lockdown (so closing down schools etc and stores apart from the necessary ones). Honestly didn't expect that, especially not from Saxony.

I don't think many others will follow, especially not Schleswig-Holstein and Mecklenburg-Vorpommern (their incidence is around 50). And will Bavaria for example follow it the others didn't at least agree on doing it.

On the other hand, why exactly are we closing those done acting like that's the problem, when people don't care and a significant amount seems to meet up in larger groups at home or in church or whatever.

And like half say they will celebrate Christmas normally (the rules currently are supposed to be 10 members from as many house holds as you want) and a lot say they will celebrate it with more people. 

They seem to really want a hard lockdown in January.

  • Sad 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Taruseth said:

don't know about closed libraries.

All closed beside the ‚Hochschulbibliotheken‘ (libraries of the universities)

I am running one specialised for eg large print and other details than can help eg dyslexic, had to close too. But I do ~ online choice and do then the delivery to the class-rooms in the night, so they get them the next morning.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, juni78ukr said:

Sorry but all talks about "people making their own choices" is a total bullshit. You have to tell them what to do, you have to silence morons and conspiracists, you have to punish reckless and selfish idiots and enforce. Otherwise in any major crisis your country is doomed. People like to tell that China eventually did so well because its authoritarian state and draconian measures. Bullshit again. Their reaction after initial mistakes wasnt much different from Europe or Australia. It was simply much more effective, Enforced measures works. Encouraged not so much. Also not so many were dumb enough to whine about their freedoms or dumb enough not to do what they were told. 

 

Apparently many believe it works like this. Encourage and do not take any responsibility, create chaos and let people decide for themselves = democracy and fredom. Take the same approach but enforce everything = autoritarian state, dictatorship and draconian measures. Sorry but if you do not care about the others, do not listen to goverment and to scientists you do not decerve any freedom at all. 

I think we can control the covid withour throwing civil liberties totally out the window..which is what you advocate.

I note you are from the Ukraine, so I have to make allowance that you live a part of the world that has never know real democracy or real freedo just cheap imitations controlled by a Strong man.

Incicdently this whole "Western Democracy and Freedom does not work" is the BS that your neighbor PUtin is selling.

 

 

Edited by dudalb
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, dudalb said:

I think we can control the covid withour throwing civil liberties totally out the window..which is what you advocate.

I note you are from the Ukraine, so I have to make allowance that you live a part of the world that has never know real democracy or real freedo just cheap imitations controlled by a Strong man.

Incicdently this whole "Western Democracy and Freedom does not work" is the BS that your neighbor PUtin is selling.

Um, no, that isn't what he was advocating at all. Nor did he in any way, shape or form imply that "western democracy and freedom do not work". That's just a strawman on your side.

 

And juni78ukr is also fully right in that asking people to do stuff instead of giving clear orders has never been as effective. It's one thing to give people the choice on what they like to drink or do for a living, it is something entirely different to let people decide on how to behave on a matter that impacts society as a whole. There is a reason why we have laws, it's because otherwise some morons would simply do whatever they want. We do not let people decide on whether they want to drive 30, 100 or 250 kph in a rural neighbourhood, because that is just asking for trouble. We do not grant people the right to kill whoever they want either. Instead we give explicit orders on how that works, and punish those who threaten others with their behaviour (in this case speeding). Without clear cut rules, you end up with a apathetic and anti-social mob, who runs on "Why should I adhere to that? I can handle myself" or "who cares about those people, I want to do what I want to do". What this was all about, and it's actually very clear from that post, is that two concepts aren't equally valid just because they get said. Be it climate change, medical issues or the world being round and not flat, there are things on which you cannot just randomly claim that you disagree with the facts and that your opinion is at least as valid as the facts are. Trump's regency should have shown what that kind of behaviour leads to. There comes a point where you need to tell the people that they are free to think whatever they want to, but that there is this set of laws and everyone has to abide by them, or you run into all sorts of cults who think you can cure cancer if you just give enough money to a "pastor" so he can buy himself a new jet.

 

All those wannabe "freedom"-lovers with their pathetic disregard for everyone who isn't them is exactly the problem in this world, and a large threat to freedom as a whole, because they put their own freedom above the fate of everyone else. "Who cares what happens to others as long as I get to do what I want to do" has never ever been a good approach, nor is it in any way connected to freedom. It's nothing but a self-centered view that has enabled the most vile crimes committed by humanity.

 

A person's right to "freedom" ends where he impacts another person's rights to the same. Somehow people tend to forget that "civil liberties" don't just apply to them but everyone else as well, and that they have no right to negatively impact others just because they have decided that they want to act like a moron.

  • Like 7
Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, George Parr said:

Um, no, that isn't what he was advocating at all. Nor did he in any way, shape or form imply that "western democracy and freedom do not work". That's just a strawman on your side.

 

And juni78ukr is also fully right in that asking people to do stuff instead of giving clear orders has never been as effective. It's one thing to give people the choice on what they like to drink or do for a living, it is something entirely different to let people decide on how to behave on a matter that impacts society as a whole. There is a reason why we have laws, it's because otherwise some morons would simply do whatever they want. We do not let people decide on whether they want to drive 30, 100 or 250 kph in a rural neighbourhood, because that is just asking for trouble. We do not grant people the right to kill whoever they want either. Instead we give explicit orders on how that works, and punish those who threaten others with their behaviour (in this case speeding). Without clear cut rules, you end up with a apathetic and anti-social mob, who runs on "Why should I adhere to that? I can handle myself" or "who cares about those people, I want to do what I want to do". What this was all about, and it's actually very clear from that post, is that two concepts aren't equally valid just because they get said. Be it climate change, medical issues or the world being round and not flat, there are things on which you cannot just randomly claim that you disagree with the facts and that your opinion is at least as valid as the facts are. Trump's regency should have shown what that kind of behaviour leads to. There comes a point where you need to tell the people that they are free to think whatever they want to, but that there is this set of laws and everyone has to abide by them, or you run into all sorts of cults who think you can cure cancer if you just give enough money to a "pastor" so he can buy himself a new jet.

 

All those wannabe "freedom"-lovers with their pathetic disregard for everyone who isn't them is exactly the problem in this world, and a large threat to freedom as a whole, because they put their own freedom above the fate of everyone else. "Who cares what happens to others as long as I get to do what I want to do" has never ever been a good approach, nor is it in any way connected to freedom. It's nothing but a self-centered view that has enabled the most vile crimes committed by humanity.

 

A person's right to "freedom" ends where he impacts another person's rights to the same. Somehow people tend to forget that "civil liberties" don't just apply to them but everyone else as well, and that they have no right to negatively impact others just because they have decided that they want to act like a moron.

Ok another person whe wants to throw individual freedom out the window.

  • Not Cool 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, dudalb said:

Ok another person whe wants to throw individual freedom out the window.

No that's not true if I understood George Parr correctly (and it wasn't that hard to understand).

 

It's just that our freedom extends only so far. If you have more than one person living in an area - and that's how 99,99999% of humanity live - those freedoms overlap and have to be weighed against each other.

You know, the idea and ideal of human rights (and I hope everyone here agrees that those are good ideas) always includes human duty. Else they're pointless.

Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person.

That's probably the most important article in the declaration uf human rights. But. If a human has the right to live, it is the other humans duty to not kill him. If it is a human right to enjoy "security of person", it is the other humans duty do not put him in unneccessary danger.

 

Now we're clearly in a grey arey with a pandemic. If we put the whole world in total lockdown, we will probably save most humans from getting infected with the virus, but we will have widespread economic failures, breakdown of supply chains leading to famine and so on. So, it's completely open to debate how much effort we put into slowing the spread of the virus. But saying that a lockdown is "throwing individual freedom out the window" is bullshit, because if you infect someone and so put him in ICIU, then you're throwing this one's freedom out the window. Our freedom is never 100% doing what we want, and most times not even 50%, because it always has to include our duties to the other individuals.

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

Canada did well with the first wave, not doing well with the second.

https://www.cnn.com/2020/12/08/world/canada-covid-second-wave/index.html

 

"At least we're not as bad as the States."

Those were the words uttered by so many Canadians during the first wave of coronavirus, perhaps without malice although with a good dose of smugness.
But that complacency may have helped fuel a deadly second wave in Canada that is now straining hospital capacity in nearly every region of the country as health officials impose more restrictions and lockdowns.
"What you're saying is we're better than the worst country in the world," says Amir Attaran, an American-raised Canadian professor of law and public health at the University of Ottawa during an interview with CNN.
 
Canada has logged record new cases and deaths from the coronavirus in the past month, according to Covid-19 tracking data from Johns Hopkins University.
The country has reported more than 425,000 cases of Covid-19 and nearly 12,800 deaths to date, according to Johns Hopkins.
New daily cases are now 10 times higher than they were in late summer with deaths averaging about 88 per day now, according to Canada's Public Health Agency.
 
By nearly every measure of Covid-19 tracking, Canada is still faring better than the US but Canadian officials have warned that hospital capacity is reaching its breaking point and community transmission must be reduced.
 
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, RamblinRed said:

Canada did well with the first wave, not doing well with the second.

https://www.cnn.com/2020/12/08/world/canada-covid-second-wave/index.html

 

"At least we're not as bad as the States."

Those were the words uttered by so many Canadians during the first wave of coronavirus, perhaps without malice although with a good dose of smugness.
But that complacency may have helped fuel a deadly second wave in Canada that is now straining hospital capacity in nearly every region of the country as health officials impose more restrictions and lockdowns.
"What you're saying is we're better than the worst country in the world," says Amir Attaran, an American-raised Canadian professor of law and public health at the University of Ottawa during an interview with CNN.
 
Canada has logged record new cases and deaths from the coronavirus in the past month, according to Covid-19 tracking data from Johns Hopkins University.
The country has reported more than 425,000 cases of Covid-19 and nearly 12,800 deaths to date, according to Johns Hopkins.
New daily cases are now 10 times higher than they were in late summer with deaths averaging about 88 per day now, according to Canada's Public Health Agency.
 
By nearly every measure of Covid-19 tracking, Canada is still faring better than the US but Canadian officials have warned that hospital capacity is reaching its breaking point and community transmission must be reduced.
 

People took it seriously in the beginning. We had less than 300 cases throughout the entire country by the end of Aug. Then people became complacent and schools opened in Sept and now it's nearly 7000 cases. 

Edited by meridan
  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, George Parr said:

Um, no, that isn't what he was advocating at all. Nor did he in any way, shape or form imply that "western democracy and freedom do not work". That's just a strawman on your side.

 

And juni78ukr is also fully right in that asking people to do stuff instead of giving clear orders has never been as effective. It's one thing to give people the choice on what they like to drink or do for a living, it is something entirely different to let people decide on how to behave on a matter that impacts society as a whole. There is a reason why we have laws, it's because otherwise some morons would simply do whatever they want. We do not let people decide on whether they want to drive 30, 100 or 250 kph in a rural neighbourhood, because that is just asking for trouble. We do not grant people the right to kill whoever they want either. Instead we give explicit orders on how that works, and punish those who threaten others with their behaviour (in this case speeding). Without clear cut rules, you end up with a apathetic and anti-social mob, who runs on "Why should I adhere to that? I can handle myself" or "who cares about those people, I want to do what I want to do". What this was all about, and it's actually very clear from that post, is that two concepts aren't equally valid just because they get said. Be it climate change, medical issues or the world being round and not flat, there are things on which you cannot just randomly claim that you disagree with the facts and that your opinion is at least as valid as the facts are. Trump's regency should have shown what that kind of behaviour leads to. There comes a point where you need to tell the people that they are free to think whatever they want to, but that there is this set of laws and everyone has to abide by them, or you run into all sorts of cults who think you can cure cancer if you just give enough money to a "pastor" so he can buy himself a new jet.

 

All those wannabe "freedom"-lovers with their pathetic disregard for everyone who isn't them is exactly the problem in this world, and a large threat to freedom as a whole, because they put their own freedom above the fate of everyone else. "Who cares what happens to others as long as I get to do what I want to do" has never ever been a good approach, nor is it in any way connected to freedom. It's nothing but a self-centered view that has enabled the most vile crimes committed by humanity.

 

A person's right to "freedom" ends where he impacts another person's rights to the same. Somehow people tend to forget that "civil liberties" don't just apply to them but everyone else as well, and that they have no right to negatively impact others just because they have decided that they want to act like a moron.

I dont really understand American and their freedom. They ain't that free, can't even have a swig of alcohol until they reach 21. They aren't as free as holland. You can literally get drunk, sleep with a prostitute with a joint in 1 hand infront of cop. Now that's called being free

  • Haha 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

UK warning that Pfizer vaccine should not be used with those who have had serious allergic reactions in the past (use an epipen)

https://www.cnn.com/2020/12/09/health/covid-vaccine-allergies-health-workers-uk-intl-gbr/index.html

 

People with a "significant history of allergic reactions" should not be given the Pfizer/BioNTech coronavirus vaccine, UK health authorities said Wednesday, after two health care workers experienced symptoms after receiving a shot the day before.

The precautionary advice was given after the pair "responded adversely" following their shots on the first day of the mass vaccination rollout in the UK, National Health Service England said Wednesday.
The two staff members -- who both carried an adrenaline auto injector and had a history of allergic reactions -- developed symptoms of anaphylactoid reaction after receiving the vaccine on Tuesday. Thousands overall were vaccinated in the UK on Tuesday, NHS England told CNN on Wednesday.
 
The MHRA issued new advice to health care professionals stating that any person with a significant allergic reaction to a vaccine, medicine or food -- such as previous history of anaphylactoid reaction, or those who have been advised to carry an adrenaline autoinjector -- should not receive the Pfizer/BioNtech vaccine.
The advice also states that vaccines "should only be carried out in facilities where resuscitation measures are available."
 
Vaccine expert Dr. Paul Offit told CNN that allergic reactions to vaccines were not uncommon: "Certainly, vaccines can cause severe allergic reactions. In the United States, roughly one of every 1.4 million doses of vaccines is complicated by a severe allergic reaction."
He said that rather than a "blanket recommendation" for people with allergies, "the smarter thing to do would be to try and look at these two patients and see what specific component of the vaccine they were allergic to."
Offit said people should realize that there are immediate treatments for allergic reaction. "That's why you're hanging out in the doctor's office," he said, before warning that the reports of allergic reactions "will only serve as yet another way to scare people."
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, RamblinRed said:

UK warning that Pfizer vaccine should not be used with those who have had serious allergic reactions in the past (use an epipen)

https://www.cnn.com/2020/12/09/health/covid-vaccine-allergies-health-workers-uk-intl-gbr/index.html

 

People with a "significant history of allergic reactions" should not be given the Pfizer/BioNTech coronavirus vaccine, UK health authorities said Wednesday, after two health care workers experienced symptoms after receiving a shot the day before.

The precautionary advice was given after the pair "responded adversely" following their shots on the first day of the mass vaccination rollout in the UK, National Health Service England said Wednesday.
The two staff members -- who both carried an adrenaline auto injector and had a history of allergic reactions -- developed symptoms of anaphylactoid reaction after receiving the vaccine on Tuesday. Thousands overall were vaccinated in the UK on Tuesday, NHS England told CNN on Wednesday.
 
The MHRA issued new advice to health care professionals stating that any person with a significant allergic reaction to a vaccine, medicine or food -- such as previous history of anaphylactoid reaction, or those who have been advised to carry an adrenaline autoinjector -- should not receive the Pfizer/BioNtech vaccine.
The advice also states that vaccines "should only be carried out in facilities where resuscitation measures are available."
 
Vaccine expert Dr. Paul Offit told CNN that allergic reactions to vaccines were not uncommon: "Certainly, vaccines can cause severe allergic reactions. In the United States, roughly one of every 1.4 million doses of vaccines is complicated by a severe allergic reaction."
He said that rather than a "blanket recommendation" for people with allergies, "the smarter thing to do would be to try and look at these two patients and see what specific component of the vaccine they were allergic to."
Offit said people should realize that there are immediate treatments for allergic reaction. "That's why you're hanging out in the doctor's office," he said, before warning that the reports of allergic reactions "will only serve as yet another way to scare people."

 

Yeah, this news had my CLL doc today email me (a week before my appt) and tell me to schedule Shingrix next week with the appt (and then in 3 months), since I won't be able to have any of the early Covid vaccines (b/c I have an epi for my food allergies...and b/c the worry is that if allergy immune systems can't handle it, then screwed up immuno-compromised cancer ones might also have a big issue)...and he figures better to get Shingrix definitely in b/c I can't have it once I'm treated, so it has a time component almost as large as the Covid ones (for me, anyway)...

 

Edit to add: Originally, we were thinking Shingrix in March to leave open the remote option for the Covid vaccine for winter, especially if Covid got really bad where I am (which it never actually has - I live in a very compliant area, and that has paid off)...but now, it will be late spring for me (May/June), if we have one around that I can take - maybe one of the less effective ones will also be less harsh on immune systems, and I might be able to get one of those if they come to the US...

Edited by TwoMisfits
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.




×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Guidelines. Feel free to read our Privacy Policy as well.