3 Tier system or circuit breaker lockdown?

[Notch7]

I already gave you an example of how anyone can be protected. You refuse to see it, because it would fatally hole your position

Wrong

It is impossible to protect the vulnerable, I stand by that because it is true.

You gave me examples of theory
How wonderful

Here is reality: cares homes need care staff, home carers need staff.
If herd immunity is chosen, a significant % of those workers would get infected and infection control procedures won't be sufficiently effective to prevent the spread. Care workers can't isolate from families it's not realistic.

Not only that but apart from the 2.5 million there are millions more with underlying conditions. It wouldn't be possible to properly protect those either.


Herd immunity advocates make bland statements about protecting the vulnerable, but they don't bear any scrutiny.

 

[Brigadier]

Please tell me where: "it is impossible to protect the vulnerable"
Has been quantified.

Point to the numbers I mentioned.

I did not.

When you look up " the vulnerable" 2.5 million is the figure.

So you are wrong

There are 2 1/2 million CEV clinically extremely vulnerable people in UK, it's impossible to protect them......if you believe me, perhaps you might want to some research, like I've done.

 

[Brigadier]

Wrong

It is impossible to protect the vulnerable, I stand by that because it is true.

You gave me examples of theory
How wonderful

Here is reality: cares homes need care staff, home carers need staff.
If herd immunity is chosen, a significant % of those workers would get infected and infection control procedures won't be sufficiently effective to prevent the spread. Care workers can't isolate from families it's not realistic.

Not only that but apart from the 2.5 million there are millions more with underlying conditions. It wouldn't be possible to properly protect those either.


Herd immunity advocates make bland statements about protecting the vulnerable, but they don't bear any scrutiny.

You can't help yourself, can you?

In one post, you've gone from:

- it's impossible to protect the vulnerable, to
- it's possible to protect the vulnerable, but not realistic, to
- it's possible to protect the vulnerable and more, but not properly protect them.

If you don't know what you think, how can you defend it?

 

[Notch7]

y stated that controlled herd immunity could be sought

It can't.

No herd immunity advocate has provided any plan to show how the vulnerable can be protected sufficiently.

Despite:
The elderly shielding since mid March
Huge government intervention to damp the R value
Closing down economic activity
Social distancing

There has still been over 40,000 deaths including 600 health care staff.

So if herd immunity was put in place tell me what are these magic procedures that will protect the vulnerable that aren't being done now.

 

[Notch7]

Squirming

That was a later post, do keep up

 

[Notch7]

You can't help yourself, can you?

In one post, you've gone from:

- it's impossible to protect the vulnerable, to
- it's possible to protect the vulnerable, but not realistic, to
- it's possible to protect the vulnerable and more, but not properly protect them.

If you don't know what you think, how can you defend it?

It is not a case of what I think. Taking quotes out of context proves nothing other than your lack of a counter argument.

All you are arguing is that the original statement was not qualified......which shows you were smug point scoring, as I pointed out.

 

[IT Minion]

Also worth noting:

"Covid-19 is currently rarely fatal in children and young people, less so than influenza for which we already have a vaccine. Showing that a vaccine is safer than covid-19 in young people is, therefore, tough."

Is it worth noting that? I doubt it's news to you.

The reason I said that the author was talking about vaccination and natural immunity was that it wasn't obvious.

 

[Brigadier]

It can't.

No herd immunity advocate has provided any plan to show how the vulnerable can be protected sufficiently.

Despite:
The elderly shielding since mid March
Huge government intervention to damp the R value
Closing down economic activity
Social distancing

There has still been over 40,000 deaths including 600 health care staff.

So if herd immunity was put in place tell me what are these magic procedures that will protect the vulnerable that aren't being done now.

While some of the elderly were shielding /shielded, care homes were (deliberately?) seeded with the virus.

You can't use deliberate infection of the vulnerable to bolster your view that they can't be protected .
Like saying "seat belts don't work ; I'll take it off and deliberately crash, to prove it".

 

[Brigadier]

All you are arguing is that the original statement was not qualified......which shows you were smug point scoring, as I pointed out.

Thank you for pointing out that you keep changing your message, as the previous version's weaknesses are shown up.

 

[Brigadier]

Is it worth noting that? I doubt it's news to you.

It should be worth noting for some. Especially those who advocate "no return to normal until vaccine".

 

[IT Minion]

It should be worth noting for some. Especially those who advocate "no return to normal until vaccine".

Why? They probably already know it, no one disputes it and it's not relevant because whilst the children may not die, they might kill their grandparents.

 

[Brigadier]

probably already know it,

I wouldn't bet on it.
Some on here have advocated forced vaccination. Why would anyone do that, if they already know it will not do any good for some forced to have it, and (having been rushed to "market") may actually do some harm in the future?

 

[ellal]

Ryler is fundamentally wrong, it's a conflated argument

What Ryler should have said is "due to government intervention, Covid deaths were mostly limited to the very elderly"

Ah, so Ryler (whatever his 'guise' is I disagree with him/her most of the time) has been condemned as a 'conspiracy theorist'...

And yet you have just done the same!

 

[IT Minion]

I wouldn't bet on it.
Some on here have advocated forced vaccination. Why would anyone do that, if they already know it will not do any good for some forced to have it, and (having been rushed to "market") may actually do some harm in the future?

Oh not the paranoid 'rushed' sillyness. The vaccines are being tested properly as normal. If they don't work then they don't get used.

 

[Brigadier]

The vaccines are being tested properly as normal.

I don't disagree.
That is not the same as ensuring no long - term adverse effects. Only elapsed time can do that.

If they don't work then they don't get used.

That's a different situation to long - term adverse effects.