Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
The Great Barrington Declaration
Options
Comments
-
But life is about taking risks. The purpose of life is not the avoidance of death. Sensible precautions such as hand washing should be enough.
Where do we draw the line?
,,,maybe we should stop spending money on Covid tests, should we write-off anyone sick with symptoms or just when elderly get sick. The list could go on and on to the point where we get rid of the health service altogether.0 -
is_that_so wrote: »BBC summary for those of us who can't be bothered with YouTube.
https://www.bbc.com/news/health-54442386
One of its "noble" intentions. Condescension 101.
"Retired people living at home should have groceries and other essentials delivered, it says."
Why's that a bad idea?
But they say it should be up to the person, in this case the retired person, to decide whether they want to shield themselves or not. They emphasise personal choice and responsibility.0 -
Where do we draw the line?
,,,maybe we should stop spending money on Covid tests, should we write-off anyone sick with symptoms or just when elderly get sick. The list could go on and on to the point where we get rid of the health service altogether.
Healthy people should not be tested. I have never before heard of a healthy person getting tested for a virus. It would be like a healthy person going to the doctor to have a chat. So that's one thing that could be done. But I understand that people have been required by their employer to get tested. I'm not blaming people for getting tested if required by their employer to. But one sees and reeds of people queuing up to get tested who are perfectly healthy.0 -
HSE have anyone over 60 as high risk. I live at home, and both my parents are over 60. Both my parents still work. One in a school and one in a hospital. Now, at level 5+ (let's say march lockdown), my dad will still go to work as he did back in march and my mom doesn't. The school are now down one employee. If I live my life as normal (back in office, going travelling etc) I put my mom at risk and my dad who works in a hospital at risk, and thus others in the hospital at risk.
Considering lots of schools and hospitals will have staff over 60, and considering our housing situation lots of people live with those over 60 years old, how do you eliminate that risk?
If everyone over 60 left the workforce, you'd have a hard time to replace them never mind the ones you who fall into high risk category too
You don't eliminate it, but you try to minimise it. Life is not without risks. We try our best to minimise risk, but we also take risks.
By the way, I'm not commenting on your personal situation. I'm just talking in general about how we reduce risk as opposed to eliminating it.
If I recall correctly, one of the doctors in the interview suggests that people over 60 work from home, if possible. Of course that depends on the type of job.0 -
Apart from insulting a large chunk of the population most retired people I know would tell me where to go! It's a simplistic Lego brick strategy with the only evidence being the claimed damage that's being done now.Why's that a bad idea?
But they say it should be up to the person, in this case the retired person, to decide whether they want to shield themselves or not. They emphasise personal choice and responsibility.0 -
Advertisement
-
You don't eliminate it, but you try to minimise it. Life is not without risks. We try our best to minimise risk, but we also take risks.
By the way, I'm not commenting on your personal situation. I'm just talking in general about how we reduce risk as opposed to eliminating it.
If I recall correctly, one of the doctors in the interview suggests that people over 60 work from home, if possible. Of course that depends on the type of job.
Imo, the best way to minimise it is what we're currently doing by everyone sharing the load of reducing contacts. Im pretty anti government and I'm fiscally right wing so prefer low taxes and low public spending, but I'm pretty cool with my taxes here being used to support jobs that can't work as well in a socially reduced world. I know it sucks for the people who've lost their jobs but I'd rather job losses and government taxes being used to support people there than deaths across the country.
If everyone plays their part, we're fine but when people dont, we get higher cases.0 -
Deleted User wrote: »One of the major proponents of this is Sunetra Gupta, who published a model in March that suggested up to 68% of the population could have already been infected. I would take any proposals from her with a pinch of salt.
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.03.24.20042291v1.full.pdf
The paper presented three scenarios for the UK, with proportions ranging from 36% to 68%. Never trust headlines.0 -
is_that_so wrote: »Apart from insulting a large chunk of the population most retired people I know would tell me where to go! It's a simplistic Lego brick strategy with the only evidence being the claimed damage that's being done now.
I don't think it's insulting. People often help elderly neighbours by getting messages for them.
And, as they say, the retired people who don't want help can get their own messages. They're saying that it should be up to them to decide whether they want to stay at home and shield or not. But if an elderly person wants to stay at home and shield themselves then someone doing their shopping for them makes sense. It's not insulting or patronising. It's either a neighbour does their shopping for them, or they buy online and get it delivered. Same result.0 -
Imo, the best way to minimise it is what we're currently doing by everyone sharing the load of reducing contacts. Im pretty anti government and I'm fiscally right wing so prefer low taxes and low public spending, but I'm pretty cool with my taxes here being used to support jobs that can't work as well in a socially reduced world. I know it sucks for the people who've lost their jobs but I'd rather job losses and government taxes being used to support people there than deaths across the country.
If everyone plays their part, we're fine but when people dont, we get higher cases.
I too am anti-government and think this is grotesque government overreach.
But those job losses will result in suicides, depression, terrible damage to mental health and wellbeing, and despair. For months now Covid-related deaths have been on the floor, and yet they're still persisting with a strategy based on Neil Ferguson's ridiculous model.0 -
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.03.24.20042291v1.full.pdf
The paper presented three scenarios for the UK, with proportions ranging from 36% to 68%. Never trust headlines.
Read what I wrote "up to 68%". 36% was also quite clearly nonsense.0 -
Advertisement
-
Can you completely separate lower risk people and higher risk people so that none of them are in contact with each other? No, imo, so it's about as useful as the magic money treeThis, you’d be operating with half a brain if you thought possible.
But with deaths way lower than last March - May, what level of risk are we talking about here? From what I can see, death numbers in Europe appear to be fairly in line of what's expected for this time of year.
In the meantime, the big unknown is how much death is being creating as a side affect of corona lockdown measures. I saw a UK news article that estimates 75K excess deaths over the next 5 years due to delayed cancer diagnoses, suicide etc. Rough numbers , but still interesting to get an approximated sense of it. There seems to be relatively little dialogue of the impact of corona measures here.0 -
https://www.bbc.com/news/health-54442386
There seems to be some weight behind it:
"Thousands of scientists and health experts have joined a global movement warning of "grave concerns" about Covid-19 lockdown policies. Nearly 6,000 experts, including dozens from the UK, say the approach is having a devastating impact on physical and mental health as well as society."
"And the declaration has now been signed by nearly 6,000 scientists and medical experts across the globe as well as 50,000 members of the public."0 -
No-one should be categorised by age, or anything else. People should decide themselves whether they'd rather live as high risk or low.HSE have anyone over 60 as high risk. I live at home, and both my parents are over 60. Both my parents still work. One in a school and one in a hospital. Now, at level 5+ (let's say march lockdown), my dad will still go to work as he did back in march and my mom doesn't. The school are now down one employee. If I live my life as normal (back in office, going travelling etc) I put my mom at risk and my dad who works in a hospital at risk, and thus others in the hospital at risk.
Considering lots of schools and hospitals will have staff over 60, and considering our housing situation lots of people live with those over 60 years old, how do you eliminate that risk?
If everyone over 60 left the workforce, you'd have a hard time to replace them never mind the ones you who fall into high risk category too
Your concerns about people leaving jobs in that scenario, depends how many would opt-in to level 5 for several months or more. (I don't think many would).
If one of your family decides they are at high-risk - and therefore wants to live at level 5 for, say 6 months to a year or however long they believe there's a risk - that would mean a separate living space, if the house is big enough to convert and they want to do that, with government support. Otherwise they could move somewhere for 6 months or a year or however long. They are fully supported to move somewhere comfortable where they can have groceries etc delivered.0 -
I listened to their video yesterday morning and found this declaration in the evening through this thread. I just signed it now.
Something has to be done about the current situation.
We acted they way did in March because we didn't know much and predictions by scientists were potentially devastating. We learned much more about this virus since then, especially about its severity and about fatality rates. We're still not at the end of that, but even with the data we have now we can see that early predictions were vastly overestimated. Fatality rates are a tiny fraction of what we predicted and affect the very same demographic that is being affected by other respiratory diseases. This isn't such a new thing and its not that dangerous in comparison either.
Genuine mistake and a good one to make. I'd rather live in a society where we don't gamble with lives.
But like I said, the picture has changed dramatically yet we seem determined to ignore this. A hysterical media empowered by political cowardice supported by a population who has been frightened into a state of anxiety by nonstop fear propaganda does not allow us to see the wood from the trees anymore. This has to stop now before irreversible damage to our society is being done.
I dont really know these people and I am not sure everything they say is 100% correct. I also suspect they may not be your average Guardian reader. These people are not our saviours or the only people in the world who know or anything like that. But that doesn't mean that they are wrong. I believe what they say is fundamentally correct. We are currently way down a rabbit hole and this may help us to get out of it. Thats why I signed this declaration.
I am not asking people to sign. But I am asking people to not shut their minds. This situation is too serious to be led by emotion and fear alone. Watch what they have to say and make up your mind. Please.0 -
CalamariFritti wrote: »I listened to their video yesterday morning and found this declaration in the evening through this thread. I just signed it now.
Something has to be done about the current situation.
We acted they way did in March because we didn't know much and predictions by scientists were potentially devastating. We learned much more about this virus since then, especially about its severity and about fatality rates. We're still not at the end of that, but even with the data we have now we can see that early predictions were vastly overestimated. Fatality rates are a tiny fraction of what we predicted and affect the very same demographic that is being affected by other respiratory diseases. This isn't such a new thing and its not that dangerous in comparison either.
Genuine mistake and a good one to make. I'd rather live in a society where we don't gamble with lives.
But like I said, the picture has changed dramatically yet we seem determined to ignore this. A hysterical media empowered by political cowardice supported by a population who has been frightened into a state of anxiety by nonstop fear propaganda does not allow us to see the wood from the trees anymore. This has to stop now before irreversible damage to our society is being done.
I dont really know these people and I am not sure everything they say is 100% correct. I also suspect they may not be your average Guardian reader. These people are not our saviours or the only people in the world who know or anything like that. But that doesn't mean that they are wrong. I believe what they say is fundamentally correct. We are currently way down a rabbit hole and this may help us to get out of it. Thats why I signed this declaration.
I am not asking people to sign. But I am asking people to not shut their minds. This situation is too serious to be led by emotion and fear alone. Watch what they have to say and make up your mind. Please.
Great post.
Professor Gupta says that they put politics aside because they felt it was such an important issue.
I was horrified to discover that an additional 130 million people are at risk of starvation because of lockdowns and the diabolical consequences of them.
I signed it as well, but Johnson rejected it the other day. The Irish and UK governments are not for turning, it seems.0 -
I think any country that has tried this already has:
1) Been unable to protect the vulnerable.
2) Suffered economically
3) Killed or injured many health care workers
4) Had horrific death counts
5) Have STILL not reached herd immunity.
The prob with this approach is:
1) We dont even know if immunity is possible past 6-12 months. This bug isnt even 9 months old yet amd already proven cases of reinfection.
2) Mortality isnt the ONLY way to measure this bug, it looks like it damages the immune system each time.
3) Its been proven to attack the testes in moderate and severe cases with a 50% reduction in sperm count. Wont know for another 6 months if that is reversibe or permanent. (I guess no more kids for Boris!)
4) It also attacks other organs, heart,kidneys,lungs,brain.
5) Its not like this is our only option. NZ, Australia, South Korea, Japan, Singapore, Taiwan, Vietnam, Hong Kong, China, South Africa ALL managed to bring it under control without throwing their vulnerable under the bus, why cant we?0 -
A small group of scientists are advocating to let it rip through parts of the population. A much much larger group of scientists, including most of those with expertise of these sort of epidemics are saying it will not work.
the larger numbers doesn't mean anything.Scientists aren't any nobler than the rest of us and they have bills to pay. And there are vert few Tony Stark characters about who are independently well off to speak freely.
What are the risks of speaking out?
We see here in ireland the risk of being a dissenter to the state message.
Doctors are being ostracised and lose their job.
Some of the Students of UCD tried to have a Professor sacked because she spoke out against government guidelines.
As somebody said recently (name escapes me) speaking against the status quo in medicine has always had huge ramification and penalties.
Science should be about being wrong and finding the truth but covid has shown it's become religious and you dare not question the mainstream view.0 -
paw patrol wrote: »the larger numbers doesn't mean anything.Scientists aren't any nobler than the rest of us and they have bills to pay. And there are vert few Tony Stark characters about who are independently well off to speak freely.
What are the risks of speaking out?
We see here in ireland the risk of being a dissenter to the state message.
Doctors are being ostracised and lose their job.
Some of the Students of UCD tried to have a Professor sacked because she spoke out against government guidelines.
As somebody said recently (name escapes me) speaking against the status quo in medicine has always had huge ramification and penalties.
Science should be about being wrong and finding the truth but covid has shown it's become religious and you dare not question the mainstream view.
But I wonder is that risk specific to Ireland, and maybe to the UK as well, which are both highly and post-propagandised countries. I thought from the beginning that this was the worst time, for specific reasons, to have a pandemic. The specific reasons I'm referring to are the internet, which means 24/7 news and fear, and social media (also the internet), which means 24/7 news and fear.0 -
paw patrol wrote: »the larger numbers doesn't mean anything.Scientists aren't any nobler than the rest of us and they have bills to pay. And there are vert few Tony Stark characters about who are independently well off to speak freely.
What are the risks of speaking out?
We see here in ireland the risk of being a dissenter to the state message.
Doctors are being ostracised and lose their job.
Some of the Students of UCD tried to have a Professor sacked because she spoke out against government guidelines.
As somebody said recently (name escapes me) speaking against the status quo in medicine has always had huge ramification and penalties.
Science should be about being wrong and finding the truth but covid has shown it's become religious and you dare not question the mainstream view.
I’m not a scientist but I think that declaration is overly simplistic for all the reasons others have highlighted.
However, I think a level 5 is looking and I think there is a serious democratic failure at present in that the consequences of this are not being currently debated in full detail.
I disagree with the fact that dissenting voices are being silenced without debate. Well it appears to me that is the case.0 -
SeaBreezes wrote: »I think any country that has tried this already has:
1) Been unable to protect the vulnerable.
2) Suffered economically
3) Killed or injured many health care workers
4) Had horrific death counts
5) Have STILL not reached herd immunity.
The prob with this approach is:
1) We dont even know if immunity is possible past 6-12 months. This bug isnt even 9 months old yet amd already proven cases of reinfection.
2) Mortality isnt the ONLY way to measure this bug, it looks like it damages the immune system each time.
3) Its been proven to attack the testes in moderate and severe cases with a 50% reduction in sperm count. Wont know for another 6 months if that is reversibe or permanent. (I guess no more kids for Boris!)
4) It also attacks other organs, heart,kidneys,lungs,brain.
5) Its not like this is our only option. NZ, Australia, South Korea, Japan, Singapore, Taiwan, Vietnam, Hong Kong, China, South Africa ALL managed to bring it under control without throwing their vulnerable under the bus, why cant we?
A further 130 million people risk starving to death in the world because of all of this. 25% of young Britons have contemplated suicide since this began. 1 in 4 in the US in August, I believe.
What's going on in Melbourne is horrifying. I don't think Australia is an example to follow. I read an article a few months ago by a Polish man living in Melbourne. He wrote that Melbourne reminded him of, and was possibly worse then, Communist Poland. Most of the Polish people who commented on the article agreed with him.0 -
Advertisement
-
I’m not a scientist but I think that declaration is overly simplistic for all the reasons others have highlighted.
However, I think a level 5 is looking and I think there is a serious democratic failure at present in that the consequences of this are not being currently debated in full detail.
I disagree with the fact that dissenting voices are being silenced without debate. Well it appears to me that is the case.
But they have been silenced since all of this began. A few months ago doctors in the US who argued for the use of hydroxychloroquine had their website taken down and their video removed from YouTube. Dr Knut Wittkowski had his videos removed from YouTube. There are dozens of other examples of censorship.
In Ireland a doctor was forced to resign recently and a Limerick doctor forced to stand down as chairman of a group.0 -
If you are at risk from Covid-19 then you should take whatever precautions necessary to minimise your chances of contracting it, cocooning, masks, hazmat, taxis instead of public transport etc. The rest of us who aren’t at risk from this virus can go on and live our lives normally and try to mitigate the economic damage unfairly inflicted upon businesses and healthy people.
The majority of people at risk are the elderly. This be the same elderly that predominantly voted Fianna Fáil all their lives, stood back and allowed district hospitals all over the country to be closed in the 1980s.
For example in 1988, 13 district hospitals closed and over 1000 beds closed. You reap what you sow.
Mary from Thurles complaining she is stuck on a trolley for over 5 days in UHL waiting for a bed. They didn’t even go out and protest when Thurles District Hospital was closed.0 -
But they have been silenced since all of this began. A few months ago doctors in the US who argued for the use of hydroxychloroquine had their website taken down and their video removed from YouTube. Dr Knut Wittkowski had his videos removed from YouTube. There are dozens of other examples of censorship.
In Ireland a doctor was forced to resign recently and a Limerick doctor forced to stand down as chairman of a group.
It does seem that way. If we take what just happened in Ireland. Level 5 leaked so we end up at Level 3. What happened to the county by county approach? Restaurants in tiny rural locations being forced to close.
When NPHET present a COVID recommendation, where are the facts & figures re the consequences of acting on that recommendation.
I do think the welfare of children is important but keeping the schools open above all else, I’m not sure about that.
Where’s the plan for the nursing homes, the discussions around removing the vulnerable from the frontlines to the extent possible. So currently the restaurants are closed but teachers with seriously underlining conditions are surrounded by children each day.
I read that supermarket workers weren’t badly impacted. That’s very interesting but do NPHET know why that is? Age profile maybe?
Lots to discuss besides just the numbers.0 -
A further 130 million people risk starving to death in the world because of all of this. 25% of young Britons have contemplated suicide since this began. 1 in 4 in the US in August, I believe.
What's going on in Melbourne is horrifying. I don't think Australia is an example to follow. I read an article a few months ago by a Polish man living in Melbourne. He wrote that Melbourne reminded him of, and was possibly worse then, Communist Poland. Most of the Polish people who commented on the article agreed with him.
The starvation will be WORSE if we allow this virus free reign and collapse our health systems and economies.
I repeat, every country who let it rip suffered MORE economically and with crazy mortality rates and this virus is only warming up.
If the suicidal teenagers get moderate covid and become sterile what then? Its a crap situation, lets not make it worse.
Yeah, Oz policing Im not a fan of, but thats one in a list of MANY countries that are controlling the virus and thriving.
It just seems incredible to me, with all the civilised modern tools to hand, our response would be a medieval solution like letting the virus run thro the population.
Tho, Im maligning medieval times.
Quarantine originated in Italy during plague.
Previous posters brought up analogies with the Russian Flu in the 1800s when they didnt even have running water. Surely we have evolved since then?
We can do better.
We have to if we want to call ourselves civilised.0 -
No, we still do not know enough about the long term effects of even a mild dose and the potential life changing impact that could have to young people down the line. If we could clarify that and be sure it was incredibly rare, then this might have some basis, but with this big potential unknown it's not a good idea.
This.
We just dont know.
HPV virus, you wouldnt even know you had.
And see what that leads to down the line.
What if this brand new virus does something similar?0 -
-
SeaBreezes wrote: »The starvation will be WORSE if we allow this virus free reign and collapse our health systems and economies.
I repeat, every country who let it rip suffered MORE economically and with crazy mortality rates and this virus is only warming up.
If the suicidal teenagers get moderate covid and become sterile what then? Its a crap situation, lets not make it worse.
Yeah, Oz policing Im not a fan of, but thats one in a list of MANY countries that are controlling the virus and thriving.
It just seems incredible to me, with all the civilised modern tools to hand, our response would be a medieval solution like letting the virus run thro the population.
Tho, Im maligning medieval times.
Quarantine originated in Italy during plague.
Previous posters brought up analogies with the Russian Flu in the 1800s when they didnt even have running water. Surely we have evolved since then?
We can do better.
We have to if we want to call ourselves civilised.
It won't be worse because the people will have already starved to death. It's horrifying.
What crazy mortality rates are you talking about? Japan has done very little and has had very few dates. Sweden messed up with care homes, but has managed to get that under control. And then you have to consider that the numbers may be inflated.
Surely locking up the population is a medieval solution. It's anti-human and has achieved absolutely nothing.
The article I referred to about Melbourne: https://www.theaustralian.com.au/commentary/victoria-is-reminding-me-of-poland-in-1981/news-story/5300d2c901efe3fc3a74022973b5f214
But they're not saying to let it run through the entire population, but rather the young members if the population. Young people who are at risk can choose to shield themselves.0 -
This.
We just dont know.
HPV virus, you wouldnt even know you had.
And see what that leads to down the line.
What if this brand new virus does something similar?
It's an unfortunate fact that there are diseases and illnesses in life. Some people are unlucky and get a bad one, others are lucky and don't. Life isn't without risk and risks. I think 130 million more people potentially starving to death because of all of this should be reason enough to abandon this anti-human and catastrophic approach.0 -
It's an unfortunate fact that there are diseases and illnesses in life. Some people are unlucky and get a bad one, others are lucky and don't. Life isn't without risk and risks. I think 130 million more people potentially starving to death because of all of this should be reason enough to abandon this anti-human and catastrophic approach.
Brand new virus.
Never seen before. If it does anything like HPV does, we dont know.
In fact we know nothing about what it can do long term.
I think I would rather not get it than get it with no symptoms.
Since we know nothing about its long term effects0 -
Advertisement
-
6000 signed the declaration, do they also count signatures of people that don't agree? Of course not.
Are they accountable in any way shape of form for their recommendations? Of course not.
This is the perfect example of confirmation bias and echo chamber, I would trust NPHET and the government a lot more, at least there is a level of debate, not a bunch of people that grouped together isolating themselves from any dissenting opinion.0
![[Deleted User]](/applications/dashboard/design/images/defaulticon.png)
Advertisement