No Evidence Tougher Restrictions in Wales and Scotland Have Done Very Much, Scientists Say

The tougher Covid restrictions in Scotland and Wales over winter and throughout the pandemic may not have been worth it as there is no evidence they have “really done very much”, scientists have said. MailOnline has more.

Nicola Sturgeon is still yet to commit to a date for ending work from home guidance, despite England dumping the advice last week, while Mark Drakeford is refusing to lift the highly-controversial ‘rule of six’ for another four days.

Both nations resorted to tougher Covid curbs than England early on in the pandemic, and kept people living under economically-crippling curbs for longer.

But experts told MailOnline they could not see a “huge amount of difference” in the cumulative death rates between England and the rest of the U.K.

And they argued Omicron waves panned out similarly across the home nations, even though Downing St slipped through on relatively few rules. 

This is despite Scotland cancelling New Year’s Eve celebrations and Mr Drakeford accusing England of being a “global outlier” for Boris Johnson’s gamble to adopt no extra measures. Ms Sturgeon said yesterday Scotland’s tougher festive curbs were “worth it”, arguing they kept infection rates below levels south of the border. 

Latest statistics from the Department of Health show England saw the lowest Covid infection rate over the Christmas period, even though it was leading the way until December 23rd.

This is despite No 10 refusing to cave in to demands for lockdown. Instead only ‘Plan B’ was introduced, which saw work from home guidance reimposed, face masks in public places and controversial vaccine passports required for nightclubs and other large indoor venues.

SAGE advisers say the Omicron wave fizzled out on its own because of behavioural changes that led to people being more cautious, as opposed to natural immunity causing the outbreak to peak. …

Scotland was quick to impose tighter curbs in December as the nation reeled over the arrival of the Omicron variant, which policymakers feared would spark a big wave in hospitalisations.

About a week after the first case was confirmed, Scottish health chiefs started advising the public not to attend Christmas parties – unlike their counterparts in England.

And as concern over its spread ramped up, Scots were then told not to gather with more than three households and supermarkets asked to impose a one-way system in an echo of the worst of the pandemic.

Imposing ever harsher curbs, Ms Sturgeon then ordered night clubs to close for three weeks and called off public gatherings for New Year’s Eve.

Wales trod a similar path, bringing in a raft of restrictions on Boxing Day that saw sporting events played behind closed doors, the ‘rule of six’ return in pubs, cinemas and restaurants, and nightclubs shuttered.

Mr Drakeford also brought back the two-metre social distancing rule in public places and offices.

Northern Ireland closed nightclubs from December 26th and even prohibited dancing in pubs and restaurants. They also reimposed table service. 

For comparison, England only went as far as ‘Plan B’ – which included making face masks compulsory in indoor public places and bringing in vaccine passports for larger venues. No10 also pivoted back to advising people to work from home wherever possible.

But ministers never went as far as calling off New Year’s Eve celebrations, or bringing back tighter Covid curbs such as the ‘rule of six’, despite calls from some quarters. 

Despite evidence that the curbs had made little difference on the trajectory of the Omicron wave, some scientists said they still appeared to be worth it.

Professor Gary McLean, an immunologist at London Metropolitan University, said: “I do think it was worth it, based on the unknown factor of Omicron. It’s too easy to look back with hindsight and say England got it right.

“There was too much unknown about Omicron at the time the measures were put in place… I think England got lucky.”

Professor Paul Hunter, an infectious diseases expert at the University of East Anglia, said: “It is difficult to see any evidence that tougher restrictions in Scotland actually had an impact over and above what we were seeing in England.”

In another sign tougher restrictions were not needed, England’s cumulative Covid death rate – the total number of fatalities per 100,000 people – still trails behind that of Wales.

This is despite Wales for instance imposing a circuit-breaker lockdown in late October and bringing in the five-mile rule asking people not to travel further than this distance from their home.

Scotland has also been tougher with its Covid restrictions, keeping face masks in place on public transport for weeks longer than England, while Northern Ireland took the longest to start easing the third lockdown.

Dr Simon Clarke, a microbiologist at Reading University, said: “The different restrictions between the nations have not made a huge amount of difference (in terms of Covid deaths). 

“They are all in the same ball park of deaths per capita. It does not suggest that tougher restrictions that Wales or Scotland have put in place have really done very much.”

Disappointing that SAGE is still refusing to recognise that surges naturally peak and decline owing to the development of (variant and season specific) herd immunity, rather than “behaviour change”. This is why their modelling is always wrong: they make poor assumptions and don’t learn from what actually happens. As for Professor McLean’s “England got lucky” – what is that supposed to mean, and would Prof. McLean care to point to the area of immunology this hypothesis falls under?

Worth reading in full.

Subscribe
Notify of

To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.

Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.

328 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
rational
4 years ago

It does look like England is about 10% worse from the chart on death rates.

HaylingDave
4 years ago
Reply to  rational

Yes, Covid death rates I’m always dubious about. In fact, Will, Toby and others have repeatedly pointed out how unreliable the data is (even in relative comparisons) – there’s too many reporting inaccuracies, confounding factors and just plain (and purposeful in my opinion) misdirections.

But yea, I understand it’s just an observation.

rational
4 years ago
Reply to  HaylingDave

Will, Toby and others…

Not exactly unbiassed objective commentators are they?

BS665
BS665
4 years ago
Reply to  rational

Are you?

Cecil B
Cecil B
4 years ago
Reply to  BS665

No she/he/it is from the 77th

BS665
BS665
4 years ago
Reply to  Cecil B

So am I, but at least I can have a bit of fun!

Hugh
Hugh
4 years ago
Reply to  Cecil B

Don’t tell me computers are trolling us now…

rational
4 years ago
Reply to  BS665

Everyone has confirmation bias.
A key characteristic is to recognise this in yourself and look for multiple source of evidence. This I do.

BS665
BS665
4 years ago
Reply to  rational

Can I ask a few questions, rational?

1). Does any of ‘our’ evidence and any of our points make you at least think twice? Can you not see that a synthesis of approaches would be better than doing the same damn thing over and over again?

2). Why is there no equivalent website for ‘orthodox covidians’ – I am talking about a site as brilliant as DS but for ‘your’ side (excluding MSM and dreary gov sites)? Are there no people on your side with more verve and dash than the average troll (no offence intended)?

3). How do you see this ‘pandemic’ ending?

4). Why hasn’t the gov engaged with ‘antiwaxers’ like us, to find common ground and consensus, as opposed to politicising everything?

I am engaging with you because I am genuinely interested in you point of view, and would appreciate an answer.

jeepybee
4 years ago
Reply to  BS665

I’ve wondered exactly the same thing, hopefully we get a rational answer.

Star
4 years ago
Reply to  BS665

Sounds like you got high marks on the “Sealioning” course in the 77th 🙂

BS665
BS665
4 years ago
Reply to  Star

Again, I had to Google that one, Star!

Maybe I just like to invert everything until only the simple truth remains.

rational
4 years ago
Reply to  BS665

I have never seen anything that qualifies as evidence. Since this site is seeking capitalise from people who want to vent at public health measures, there is unlikely to be same level of emotion to drive an opposing site. Pandemic will end in the virus becoming endemic like flu. Government thinks correctly that there is no sense in arguing with unjustified views. Better to deprive the fire of oxygen. The pandemic isn’t a political issue where negotiation will get to a solution. I have sought to understand the mechanics of the pandemic, right from developing my own mathematical model, analysing the data in detail to look for issues (real world and clinical trials). Obviously the pandemic is real. Obviously it is dangerous to many. Obviously restrictions are unwelcome and have adverse side effects. Obviously they were helpful in saving many lives and it would have been better(quicker and more effective) if done earlier. Obviously vaccines are very effective and safe and it is well proven. It is quite startling that inane arguments contrary to these points are so easily swallowed. I personally no nobody who thinks like you, so find it instructive to see what you say and think. I… Read more »

Nearhorburian
Nearhorburian
4 years ago
Reply to  rational

“Obviously vaccines are very effective and safe and it is well proven.”

It isn’t obvious at all: in the Pfizer trial the jabbed had more deaths and experienced worse health than the unjabbed.

We know nothing about the long term effects ( and those in the control groups were jabbed)

The government is making no serious efforts to monitor post-jab adverse effects.

David Beaton
David Beaton
4 years ago
Reply to  Nearhorburian

Perhaps better not to waste precious time on the blatantly obvious BS peddlers?

BS665
BS665
4 years ago
Reply to  David Beaton

I take no offence at name calling, David! 😉

David Beaton
David Beaton
4 years ago
Reply to  BS665

I wasn’t even referring to you “No Name”(?) Unless by default if that really is BS 66(6)?

BS665
BS665
4 years ago
Reply to  David Beaton

I know, I know!

BS665 means: ‘Bullshit, this isn’t 665! (It’s 666!)’

David Beaton
David Beaton
4 years ago
Reply to  BS665

Is calling people you don’t know by their first name part of the” Infantalising as a Means of Control” course you went on, or is it just old style Eric Berne “Transactional Analysis”?

I prefer “Adult to Adult” myself.

BS665
BS665
4 years ago
Reply to  David Beaton

Disturbed you think I’m in military intelligence. I was joking and it was merely a sign of affection, but was clearly taken as over familiarity.

huxleypiggles
4 years ago
Reply to  David Beaton

Exactly. I have made this point several times.

Just ignore him.

Anonymous
Anonymous
4 years ago
Reply to  Nearhorburian

By interacting with that idiot, you are trashing the threads for everyone else.

I’ll remind you of the adage: “Never argue with a fool; onlookers may not be able to tell the difference.”

robnicholson
robnicholson
4 years ago
Reply to  Anonymous

And as a long time administrator of a Facebook community group, NEVER feed the trolls.

rational
4 years ago
Reply to  Nearhorburian

No good making things up.

Please reference the data from the trial that justifies your assertion.

robnicholson
robnicholson
4 years ago
Reply to  Nearhorburian

>The government is making no serious efforts to monitor post-jab adverse effects.

And neither is Pfizer? Read the report of the flaws in the trials on the Canadian website and it’s clear the adverse event reports when active (i.e. people were probed for AEs) were way higher than passive AE reporting (i.e. relied on people reporting). In fact, AE reporting tanked when they unblinded the trial.

Hugh
Hugh
4 years ago
Reply to  Nearhorburian

Why would they? They can’t run up a booze up in a brewery, or indeed a party in number 10.

jeepybee
4 years ago
Reply to  rational

Haha, you are starting to sound like Twitter now Krusty! Very entertaining.

Anonymous
Anonymous
4 years ago
Reply to  jeepybee

By engaging with that idiot, you are trashing the threads for everyone else.

I’ll remind you of the adage: “Never argue with a fool; onlookers may not be able to tell the difference.”

jeepybee
4 years ago
Reply to  Anonymous

Not at all! If it is a paid misinformation merchant, then I have merely given any neutral person extra reason to doubt the post in question.

If it isn’t a paid misinformation merchant, then I am hoping that the actual person behind it has had their mood altered negatively by constant berating from us. That their entire day has been tainted by being called a clown, over and over again.

Meanwhile, I (and I assume many others) have just had a giggle and moved on at this CLOWN’S expense. Don’t take it too seriously.

rational
4 years ago
Reply to  jeepybee

The constant barrage of your logic, reasoning and evidence really is quite something. I don’t know how I cope.

jeepybee
4 years ago
Reply to  rational

Hahah! Fantastic!

BS665
BS665
4 years ago
Reply to  rational

Thank you.

In 1645, the King of Poland, Wladyslaw IV, held the ‘Colloquium Charitativum’ in Torun, Royal Prussia. His aim was for the Catholics, Lutherans, and Calvinists in the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth to have a discussion ‘in charity’ about the Christian religion. He hoped this would lead to unity of faith and inter-religious peace.

The Colloquium held in Torun town hall consisted of 36 sessions. It failed to bring about a closing of differences of opinion, but did lead to greater interreligious dialogue in society.

While I disagree with your point of view, isn’t it time for us all to move on in precisely this way?

Shouldn’t all sides try to close the gap in honest discussion, try to appreciate their opponents’ views, and move on to normalcy as swiftly as possible? Ending unjust discrimination, propaganda, and mutual loathing?

Where crimes and lies have been committed, shouldn’t a range people from all schools of thought assemble to look at things anew to exchange data, insights, and get to grips with what has been a massive shock to our democracy and way of life?

David Beaton
David Beaton
4 years ago
Reply to  BS665

Only problem with this excellent and immaculately referenced advice is that the “other side” (especially those sent on here to troll ) are working to the usual prepared, ad hom, smear agenda that has nothing to do with honesty, logic, open-minded enquiry, new revelations or truth and everything to do with sustaining a false and fraudulent narrative, in the interest of serving those with power and money seeking to extend both their wealth and their control.

They now have so much to hide to persuade the sheep to continue playing along with their Global “project” one should even feel a twinge of sympathy ( or perhaps not).

BS665
BS665
4 years ago
Reply to  David Beaton

You are very largely correct. But my idea is also a way out for the powers that be to bring all this to a close.

The difference between the Early Modern world and today, is that the former’s problems inhered in an excessive passion for truth: today’s problems come from a disdain for truth.

Then, the codes of faith and honour were analogous if not exactly the same; today, there is nothing binding us together but ‘diversity’ and cynical exploitation. Our public sphere is inverted and destroying our freedom, not being a vanguard for it!

Still, I would be happy to meet with any person, or groups of people, of any views, who are willing to move on. Assuming some people could get over personal attacks, this would be an important way forwards.

We have spent two years ignoring each other, fearing each other, hating the government, blaming this group or that figure. I’m not saying we’re not substantially correct: we are. But we should be ready to go even further and open up to the possibility of consensus and unity.

These are heady times, but we have to win the peace as well as the war!

David Beaton
David Beaton
4 years ago
Reply to  BS665

I entirely agree! This is a good piece and should be taken seriously.

Our real compassion should be for those who have been fraudulently coerced into potentially doing themselves great and permanent harm.

The perpetrators want to sow as much conflict and division as they can in all directions in classic ‘divide and rule’ fashion – our efforts should be to prevent that.

The first stage in healing is to recognise and neutralise the disease – for many that still appears to be too great an ask!

Goaded with so many forced binary choices all, designed to divide and confuse us, we cannot help resorting to the oldest binary choice of all – the conflict between Good and Evil – even if this puts life long atheists on religious ground for the first time.

The magnitude of the Crimes Against Humanity currently still being committed makes the term ‘Evil’ the only relevant, satisfactory description of the actions of those involved. – who know full well what they do!

Faced with manifest “Evil” many have been forced to question the nature of the “Good” and the part it plays in Human Civilisation and Human decency.

peyrole
peyrole
4 years ago
Reply to  BS665

Nice but we live in a world where say commenting on an article in the ToL politely and accurately means its deleted if it doesn’t conform to ‘the narrative’. This is on-going, unless this changes we continue to fight a war, the peace is a long way off.

huxleypiggles
4 years ago
Reply to  David Beaton

Sympathy and forgiveness are not on the cards.

stewart
4 years ago
Reply to  rational

Obviously the pandemic is real.

Obviously it is dangerous to many.

Obviously restrictions are unwelcome and have adverse side effects.

Obviously they were helpful in saving many lives and it would have been better(quicker and more effective) if done earlier.

Obviously vaccines are very effective and safe and it is well proven.

It is with this level of precision that horoscopes are written.

You could write the exact opposite of all those statements and they could broadly all continue to be true in some way.

Not to get into the fact that by making those statements you are building a gigantic straw man, implying that commenters on this site argue the opposite.

But to cut to the chase, you’re full of shit. You pretend to be on here with an open mind to see what commenters say. No you’re not. You’re here to either troll or worse still to get some sort of strange gratification from rolling out very unimaginative arguments and techniques for arguing that I suspect you’ve managed to impress someone with at some point.

If you were genuinely interested in learning something about what commenters thought, you’d go about it in a very different way.

rational
4 years ago
Reply to  stewart

So an unimaginative argument is one that you’ve heard many time before. I understand that this frustrates you, as you can’t actually counter such arguments.

ImpObs
4 years ago
Reply to  rational

I personally no nobody who thinks like you

Typical cluster b personalities always claim to know what other people think. It’s unlikely anyone who actually knows you in real life would choose to engage with a cluster b personality, so you’re very unlikely to get a contradictory response, as they’ve learnt from personal experience, arguing with a cluster b idiot will result in you bringing them down to your level and then beating them with experience.

rayc
rayc
4 years ago
Reply to  rational

Maybe explain to us why all the silly restrictions that provably did not bring any effect are still upheld in so many countries. Then you can go on about who is “inane”. Examples: Mask mandates – you can clearly see from the sudden explosion of omicron cases (accompanied with FFP2/N95 mask mandates across the world) how much they did to prevent infections. Also no difference in countries with and without mask mandates – as would be expected for an entirely ineffective measure. Not to mention that it is trivial for anyone to work around any mask mandate by simply sabotaging their mask (poke holes, wear improperly). Vaccination passes and testing used to control travel – no longer make any sense today since the virus is already present in all countries – both at source and destination of any travel. Vaccination passes for domestic use – never made any sense because the vaccinated spread the virus just as much as unvaccinated. Quite obviously, closing venues such as bars only shifts social life into private. So no effect whatsoever from that measure either, as expected. Banning open air demonstrations against measures – clearly against evidence that the virus does not spread in… Read more »

huxleypiggles
4 years ago
Reply to  rayc

Change of personnel on the rayc laptop.

rayc
rayc
4 years ago
Reply to  huxleypiggles

Not at all – I agree with rational’s argument about the benefit of vaccination – and nothing else apart from that.

rational
4 years ago
Reply to  rayc

The central thrust of the majority here is anti-vaxx now.

Peppered with a hint of denial and conspiracy theory nonsense.

stewart
4 years ago
Reply to  rational

The central thrust on here was the futility of lockdowns.

Now that people have come round to accepting we were right, we are engaged in the current major problem which is the over zealous promotion of experimental jabs.

Many still don’t get it, like you, resorting to the lazy anti-vax moniker

John Dee
4 years ago
Reply to  rayc

Banning open air demonstrations against measures

Even this observation omits mention of the fact that some demonstrations were disrupted by the police, while others (BLM, Extinction Rebellion) were tolerated. Presumably, because they didn’t challenge the government’s propaganda about the killer covid and the need to get everybody vaxxed to protect the tenths of one percent who were actually at mortal risk.

Proveritate
4 years ago
Reply to  rational

What a joke you are! Starting a sentence with ‘Obviously’ doesn’t establish your point at all.

It is not at all ‘obvious’ that restrictions saved lives. You can’t simply adopt this as a premise, since you will end up begging the question. Likewise with the vaccines: ‘very effective and safe’ my foot! What idiot could possibly believe that?

You call yourself ‘rational’ but are utterly irrational.

But you are not completely useless: you will do as an exemplar of bad practice.

rational
4 years ago
Reply to  Proveritate

Vaccine efficacy and safety is very well proven and documented.
Your opinion is unsupported.

stewart
4 years ago
Reply to  rational

Vaccine efficacy and safety is not very well proven and documented.

Your opinion is unsupported.

Nessimmersion
4 years ago
Reply to  rational

Not according to A Bourla CEO of Pfizer it isn’t, according to him the vaxx is pretty ineffectual.
https://stevekirsch.substack.com/p/pfizer-ceo-says-two-covid-vaccine

SteveMol
4 years ago
Reply to  rational

Your opinion isn’t unsupported, it’s totally wrong. For a start, if the efficacy was well proven, the vaccinated wouldn’t be contracting or spreading the virus and there wouldn’t be a need for boosters. Likewise, the safety isn’t well proven since so many people have suffered serious adverse events and we can’t possibly know the long-term effects.

peyrole
peyrole
4 years ago
Reply to  rational

Obviously the UK should have followed NZ example.
Obviously we will see the results of the NZ example over the next 5 years when obviously covid is endemic in the UK and NZ suufers from waves of deaths each year.
Obviously you are an idiot.

rational
4 years ago
Reply to  peyrole

NZ will have a vaccinated population, that the UK didn’t have in wave 1 and 2. Have you not noticed this difference?

stewart
4 years ago
Reply to  rational

So?

peyrole
peyrole
4 years ago
Reply to  rational

More to the point NZ isn’t noticing the difference, nor will it. Its the level of natural immunity rather than percentages of a jab that does not reduce infection nor transmission, that influences whether covid is endemic.
Your studying/modelling doesn’t seem to have allowed knowledge to penetrate your little brain cells.

Moist Von Lipwig
4 years ago
Reply to  rational

Since this site is seeking capitalise from people who want to vent at public health measures,”

Not public health measures, domestic abuse masquerading against science.

I leave you to your abuse.

karenovirus
4 years ago
Reply to  rational

“Obviously the vaccines are very effective and safe and it is well proven”.

That just earned you my first downtick 👎 of 2022, I was hoping for a clear run into February 😡 .

What is obvious, and was from the day vaxxes were introduced, is that there is no proof of long term safety from the simple fact that there has been no ‘long term’, nore mid term come to that.

Our problem is that the gullible Great British public were oh so grateful to be freed by the vaccines that they swallowed such lies wholesale and are now too scared to admit that to themselves and each other.

rational
4 years ago
Reply to  karenovirus

So with more than 10 billion doses administered, do you think the trial is big enough yet?

stewart
4 years ago
Reply to  rational

So you acknowledge it’s a trial.
Good.

Now bring us evidence of lower COVID death rates in counties with high proportion of jabbed compared to all countries with low proportion of jabbed.

And we’ll analyse the results.

karenovirus
4 years ago
Reply to  rational

So with more than 10 billion (?) doses paid for . . .
I expect Bill and his chums are hoping for even more.

APC
APC
4 years ago
Reply to  rational

What? More Inane than discarding decades of evidence that B and T cells provide immunity? More inane than the modelling of Warwick and Imperial which have been wrong every time? More inane than comparing Florida (no restrictions) and Calafornia (lots) and their relative cases, hospitalisations and death? More inane than abandoning an existing pandemic plan? More inane than using a PCR test running Ct of over 35. More inane than talking about 140,000 deaths when the ONS have now confirmed only 17,000 had covid as the only cause of death? More inane than spending £400bn – more than 2x the annual nhs budget – on covid measures for a disease with an IFR of 0.15%. Oh and by the way, the scientific consensus is always proved wrong. We just got this ahead of you. Look at the current narrative and see how many full-throated covid zealots are now distancing themselves from the prevailing narrative. Stay on the BBC, you’ll be among friends.

SteveMol
4 years ago
Reply to  APC

Good points. The only thing I’d say though is that the 17000 deaths figure is itself inflated. That figure results from a FOI request to ONS which asked for stats where the death certificate showed covid and no pre-existing conditions. “Pre-existing” is the key point because the 17000 figure includes some deaths where someone, say, had covid and had a stroke. More relevant is the following FOI request which provides details of deaths where covid is the ONLY cause of death mentioned on the death certificate
https://www.ons.gov.uk/aboutus/transparencyandgovernance/freedomofinformationfoi/covid19deathsandautopsiesfeb2020todec2021

eastender53
4 years ago
Reply to  rational

I suggest you seek professional help.
The pandemic is only real because the definition was changed.

Dangerous to many? It’s dangers are radically age and comorbidity stratified. Overall it has a 99.97% survivability rate.

There is no, none, nada, zip, evidence that lockdowns or masking had any positive effect whatsoever. Anti social distancing appears to be a positive until you study how long aerosol particles remain suspended. Then you realise that 2m is pointless.

There are no vaccines. There is experimental gene therapy which appears to provide short lived protection from the worst of the original Wuhan variant. As all the evidence shows this wanes rapidly and in addition the gene therapy is effectively useless against, for example, Omicron. The adverse effects are beyond doubt and escalating. For the young they probably ok utweigh any tangible benefit from the gene therapy.

Please go back to your masters and tell them that your mission has failed.

J4mes
4 years ago
Reply to  rational

You’re suffering from irrational fear due to systematic fraud. Like others, I would suggest you seek medical help about this, but services have been withdrawn for practically all real illnesses.

Furthermore, the doctor will only add to your irrational fears by scaring you more with more lies because they’re fully on board with this scam.

You can self-help though. Open your curtains, put your shoes on and take a walk. Count the number of people who drop down dead in front of your very eyes, then recall the number of times you’ve previously seen this over the last 2 years.

If you have not seen someone drop down dead, there’s a pretty good chance you will be fine and will have nothing to worry about. Turn your TV and radio off and stop paying the TV licence.

You’ll be fine.

robnicholson
robnicholson
4 years ago
Reply to  rational

>Pandemic will end in the virus becoming endemic like flu.

Like now? So you agree the pandemic is over. Thank goodness.

PatrickF
PatrickF
4 years ago
Reply to  rational

You’re a conspiracy nut job, rational.

PatrickF
PatrickF
4 years ago
Reply to  rational

Congratulations on developing your own mathematical modelling!

The old bat
4 years ago
Reply to  BS665

Re ‘orthodox covidians’, the closest I have seen to this is the Mumsnet coronavirus site. I haven’t looked at it again since my first viewing though – I found it quite alarming. Gives you a good insight into how many people (mostly middle class female millenials) think about covid etc.

Aleajactaest
4 years ago
Reply to  The old bat

let me fix that for you “female millenials militia…”

Judy Watson
Judy Watson
4 years ago
Reply to  BS665

You are being very kind

loopDloop
loopDloop
4 years ago
Reply to  rational

You’re a massive plonker and could you please fuck off?

rational
4 years ago
Reply to  loopDloop

Just submit your reasoning.

David Beaton
David Beaton
4 years ago
Reply to  rational

Oh …a “pseudo academic” now are we?

Judy Watson
Judy Watson
4 years ago
Reply to  rational

Just piss off

DevonBlueBoy
DevonBlueBoy
4 years ago
Reply to  rational

Are you looking in the mirror when telling yourself how wonderful you are?

David Beaton
David Beaton
4 years ago
Reply to  BS665

Why even ask?

Anonymous
Anonymous
4 years ago
Reply to  BS665

By replying to that idiot, you are trashing the threads for everyone else.

I’ll remind you of the adage: “Never argue with a fool; onlookers may not be able to tell the difference.”

BS665
BS665
4 years ago
Reply to  Anonymous

We can all choose what we want to do.

I think it was useful to find out that he has nothing more to say.

rational
4 years ago
Reply to  Anonymous

Never argue when you don’t know anything.

X - In Search of Space
X - In Search of Space
4 years ago
Reply to  BS665

Strange isn’t it, this place is completely biased/unworthy and populated by morons …. yet certain ‘enlightened’ beings wish to hang out here. Can’t quite work that out.

BS665
BS665
4 years ago

Wouldn’t know who plays the roles you refer to (of course), but, while real trolls exist, it’s a shame that some people’s behaviour on here is no better, and sometimes much worse than that of trolls.

To the outsider I realise DS may seem utterly bonkers. I find it interesting and enjoyable – but never take the science or conspiracies to heart as absolute truth. I just don’t want a vaccine, mask, or covidianism to continue. This is the only vehicle fighting for those ends.

David Beaton
David Beaton
4 years ago
Reply to  rational

Like you then aren’t they?

PatrickF
PatrickF
4 years ago
Reply to  rational

Pots and kettles?

RickH
4 years ago
Reply to  rational

More so than a government and hangers-on in hoc to Big Pharma

rational
4 years ago
Reply to  HaylingDave

Yet they repeatedly distort the data to fool you idiots.

Here are some clues to look out for :

When you see the words “unadjusted data”, it means that what follows is a conclusion based on inappropriate data, designed to mislead.

When the author is Will or Toby.

amanuensis
4 years ago
Reply to  rational

When you see ‘unadjusted data’ it usually means that there’s no properly adjusted data available. We tend to either have unadjusted data (if we’re lucky) or data that’s been inappropriately adjusted (this is odd as we know that there are experts involved — but time and again the adjusted data presented to us is heavily biased in some way).

David Beaton
David Beaton
4 years ago
Reply to  rational

The trolling is getting a bit obvious now, can’t you be more subtle?

ImpObs
4 years ago
Reply to  David Beaton

“Now” LOL it’s been at it for years, at least 7 different user names on the forum.

David Beaton
David Beaton
4 years ago
Reply to  ImpObs

Thanks for the information! So why does anyone bother?

Jaguarpig
Jaguarpig
4 years ago
Reply to  rational

The sage c***s always get it right, mmmmmm

Judy Watson
Judy Watson
4 years ago
Reply to  rational

Don’t you dare criticize toby will or Noah

rational
4 years ago
Reply to  Judy Watson

Why not?
I thought you people were all about free speech?

Anonymous
Anonymous
4 years ago
Reply to  HaylingDave

By replying to or interacting with that idiot, you are trashing the threads for everyone else.

I’ll remind you of the adage: “Never argue with a fool; onlookers may not be able to tell the difference.”

rational
4 years ago
Reply to  Anonymous

Indeed it’s an echo chamber…

realarthurdent
4 years ago
Reply to  rational

Looking at that chart yes. But all causes mortality would be a better measure than “COVID deaths”. Lockdowns and restrictions cause death too.

rational
4 years ago
Reply to  realarthurdent

You’ll need to quantify that argument. How many, why and with evidence.
Then balance against the lives saved by lockdowns/restrictions.

Which restrictions?

Otherwise just a throw away line from a parott.

Julian
4 years ago
Reply to  rational

lives saved by lockdowns/restrictions” Do tell us about those. How many, by which restrictions. Please cite evidence.

rational
4 years ago
Reply to  Julian

Just look at the correlation between restrictions and peaking infections. Worldwide.
I know it is against the sceptic mantra, but just look at the actual evidence.

Julian
4 years ago
Reply to  rational

I have looked. It seems pretty random to me. Anyway, burden of proof is on those who advocate unprecedented, novel, unorthodox interventions with huge risks and costs to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that they make a positive difference.

stewart
4 years ago
Reply to  rational

Actually, that is exactly my go to, reliable argument for instilling doubt in people who haven’t questioned what they keep hearing in the news.

Step 1: Go to Google.
Step 2; Type in: covid cases [name of country]
Step 3: Look at the graph that comes up and from the graph point out when lockdowns were introduced, when masks were introduced, when jabs were rolled out.

It is at this point that they realise there is literally no correlation between measures and outcomes.

As a bonus, I tell them to type in covid deaths [name of country] to compare cases and deaths and explain why the ratio between ‘cases’ and deaths keeps increasing.

I’d encourage you to do the same, but really you’re just trolling, aren’t you?

JaneDoeNL
JaneDoeNL
4 years ago
Reply to  stewart

There does seem to be some correlation between one of the measures and the outcomes – after vaxx roll-out, there are definite ‘surges’ in infection rates and increases in hospital admissions. Tell them to check out how well Australia has been doing since the vaxx roll-out, and how fabulously Israel is doing since it started handing out the 4th poke – and how many ‘fully vaxxed’ (i.e. triple-poked) people are in serious condition in hospital.

artfelix
4 years ago
Reply to  rational

There isn’t any serious or consistent evidence of this. If there is, please enlighten us – Id love to see a consistent pattern of mitigation following restrictions; with clear correlation between a level of measures enacted and the trajectory of the seasonal wave. As you would know if you actually knew anything about this subject rather than just dropping in as either a typical amateur troll or a bad professional on, you won’t find any.

HaylingDave
4 years ago
Reply to  rational

Lockdowns are an extraordinary response – imposing the largest restrictions to civil liberties (in the UK) since wartime conditions. They require extraordinary proofs.

Surely one, international counterfactual is enough to at least warrant a transparent, objective investigation?

Look Peru, for example, our world in data shows a very high lockdown stringency index and also one of the worst deaths-per-million outcomes.

And how about Belarus, one of the lowest lockdown stringency indexes – and they are sitting 109 at the moment in deaths per million.

Sweden, Florida, Texas, Japan, Taiwan – they all provide counterfactuals for consideration and investigation.

Your “view point” seems dangerous myopic.

Innocent bystander
4 years ago
Reply to  rational

infections are not deaths.

rational
4 years ago

No but deaths are deaths

rayc
rayc
4 years ago
Reply to  rational

We looked. Any time you look at graphs showing introductions of mask mandates, in any country, there is no correlation with infections before and after whatsoever. One study (by Jan M. Brauner at al) estimated the effect of mask mandates on R to be in 2% range. And as for lockdowns, they were routinely introduced well AFTER the infection numbers have already started falling. That is also why there is no credible data whatsoever that they did any good in limiting the pandemic. Today you can watch how a de facto lockdown works for halting omicron right now – in Germany.

It takes a lot of brainwashing indeed to believe that these measures work against all evidence to the contrary.

rational
4 years ago
Reply to  rayc

Seem to be focussing on mask mandates alone? Why?
How to you separate confounding factors?

Proveritate
4 years ago
Reply to  rational

Have you not noticed that in the UK, for example, restrictions were imposed AFTER the peaks of transmission.

Don’t then try to claim some effectiveness for restriction in a cause-and-effect argument.

It is you who are not looking at the ‘actual evidence’.

rayc
rayc
4 years ago
Reply to  rational

Here, some nice graphs for you to look at… and a lot of evidence to dig through:

https://swprs.org/face-masks-and-covid-the-evidence/

rational
4 years ago
Reply to  rational

I guess none of you looked..

amanuensis
4 years ago
Reply to  Julian

One would be deaths from accidents / incidents. I’m pretty sure these have gone down with lockdown in the younger age groups. Eventually we’ll have the evidence (as deaths by cause are published); you’d think that they’d be keen to produce these important data monthly (say), but instead they’re slow to release it. As it stands we can see a reduction in spring 2020 (latest data). The absolute value of lives saved by this aspect of lockdown appears to be rather low.

realarthurdent
4 years ago
Reply to  rational

I was about to reply but then I read your last sentence.

I’m here to debate with people about the issues, not respond to personal attacks. If you can’t debate in a civil manner, you’re not worth talking to. Goodbye.

David Beaton
David Beaton
4 years ago
Reply to  realarthurdent

Don’t feed the trolls – he has diverted so many on here into his prepared blind alleys ( see above!)

artfelix
4 years ago
Reply to  rational

Which would be fine; if you applied the same diligence to the data supporting lockdown. You seem to insisting on a much higher level of scrutiny for data concerning one side of the case than the other, which is of course classic confirmation bias behaviour.

I’ve not seen one shred of statistically sound evidence that supports the lockdown action, and as it extraordinary and unprecedented action never recommended before for a pandemic the onus is significantly more on your side to prove it works than our side to prove it doesn’t.

HelenaHancart
HelenaHancart
4 years ago
Reply to  rational

Here’s a “throw away line”. My elderly father died as a result of the lockdown. I’m not giving you details but all I will say is that his health and state of mind detoriated rapidly after he was suddenly denied access to the healthcare he’d received previously. All cause mortality went right up after lockdown. Do your own research.

realarthurdent
4 years ago
Reply to  rational

Official government estimates indicate more than 200,000 people could die as a result of lockdown and Covid’s impact on the NHS, it has been reported.

Forecasts made in April calculated that 12,000 to 25,000 people could die from delays to treatment in the first six months of the pandemic, with another 185,000 deaths in the medium-to-long term.

Meanwhile it warned there could be 500 extra suicides during the first wave of coronavirus cases, and between 600 and 12,000 additional deaths per year in the event of a severe recession.

The estimates included in a report whose existence was revealed by Chief Scientific Adviser Sir Patrick Vallance only last week, and disclosed by The Daily Telegraph on Monday.

The estimates were put together by the Department of Health, Office for National Statistics (ONS), the Home Office and the government’s Actuary Department in an effort to quantify the collateral damage of the government’s response to the virus.

https://metro.co.uk/2020/07/20/coronavirus-lockdown-cause-200000-extra-deaths-13014848/

July 2020.

You’ll need to quantify that argument. How many, why and with evidence.”

200,000. About 70,000 more than died “with COVID” in the UK. And orders of magnititude more than died “of COVID”.

Goodbye, troll.

David Beaton
David Beaton
4 years ago
Reply to  realarthurdent

“Game. set and match – out of the Court” I think!

amanuensis
4 years ago
Reply to  realarthurdent

We need both.

Actually, we should really have data broken down into:

Deaths from covid
Deaths with covid.
Deaths likely to be caused by lockdown.
All other deaths.

realarthurdent
4 years ago
Reply to  amanuensis

Yes.
I’m sure the government will get round to working this out eventually.
Back in July 2020 they did model how many people would ultimately die as a result of lockdowns, and came to the conclusion it would be around 200,000.
Considerably more than even the most pessimistic record of how many people died “with COVID”.

This report didn’t get much publicity though…

“Metro – Coronavirus lockdown could cause 200,000 extra deaths”

https://metro.co.uk/2020/07/20/coronavirus-lockdown-cause-200000-extra-deaths-13014848/

karenovirus
4 years ago
Reply to  amanuensis

As mentioned yesterday

Deaths where Covid was mentioned on the Death Certificate

which could include
“Covid is not regarded as significant in this instance”.

Julian
4 years ago
Reply to  rational

Well, those who believe that NPIs make any difference to COVID can feel free to move away from England, and make room for refugees from the other home nations and fascist Europe.

rational
4 years ago
Reply to  Julian

Do you want some more fascists to keep you company?

Julian
4 years ago
Reply to  rational

No, the refugees would naturally be the ones who are resisting fascism.

loopDloop
loopDloop
4 years ago
Reply to  rational

Really, do fuck off.

jeepybee
4 years ago
Reply to  rational

Ah yes, insinuating that we are facists! Very good.

Because facism is arguing for freedom of rights and truth.
Because facism is being fair to both sides of a scientific debate, wanting nothing but the truth.
Because facism is being sceptical to what a failed government is saying and wanting to hold them account for their actions.

Well done, chuckles! 🙂 Get back in that clown car of yours.

realarthurdent
4 years ago
Reply to  jeepybee

What upsets me most is the idea that our taxpayer money might be paying for such poor quality trolling. Such poor value for money. If I’m going to pay for trolls, I expect them to be top drawer.

Imagine joining a British army unit tasked with tackling enemy propaganda and then discovering your actual work involves attacking innocent members of the public who are on your own side and are innocently and peacefully questioning government policy.

Anyone with any sense of shame would quit from a job like that.

Doom Slayer
4 years ago
Reply to  rational

More then 10% in the 2 peaks when we were all doing the same things. so what does that tell you irrational? can you work it out?

rational
4 years ago
Reply to  Doom Slayer

In the 2 major peaks, the difference was more like 30-40%.

The main point is the evidence cited by the author of this blog does not support what he writes. He gets way with it because his readership is too dim to look carefully.

Nearhorburian
Nearhorburian
4 years ago
Reply to  rational

Why was there that huge difference?

rational
4 years ago
Reply to  Nearhorburian

I don’t have evidence on that, so I can’t say.

Nearhorburian
Nearhorburian
4 years ago
Reply to  rational

Why hasn’t the UK government investigated?

Isn’t it vitally important to establish why there was such a difference?

David Beaton
David Beaton
4 years ago
Reply to  Nearhorburian

Tell him to ask his Government friends – it is obviously above his pay grade.

PatrickF
PatrickF
4 years ago
Reply to  rational

Couldn’t you model it?

loopDloop
loopDloop
4 years ago
Reply to  rational

Still here? Don’t slam the door on your way out.

amanuensis
4 years ago
Reply to  rational

Yes. And in the first wave the biocontrol measures across the four nations were similar; as the second wave differential appears to be similar it suggests that the differences in biocontrol measures weren’t doing anything significant.

It certainly is interesting data — it offers little support to lockdowns etc.

Proveritate
4 years ago
Reply to  rational

You hardly come across as the sharpest tool in the box yourself, and self-deluded to boot.

rational
4 years ago
Reply to  rational

thumbs down but no comments on the actual charts.

Boomer Bloke
4 years ago
Reply to  rational

Is that deaths with covid, or deaths from covid, reported and certified by whom?

amanuensis
4 years ago
Reply to  rational

But it was also worse in spring 2020, when the biocontrol measures were similar across the four nations.

Thus It is likely that this reflects fundamental differences in the populations rather than any differential response in 2021.

Nearhorburian
Nearhorburian
4 years ago
Reply to  amanuensis

“fundamental differences in the populations”

If covid deaths were mainly of children , perhaps, but above the age of 70 the populations are ethnically very similar.,

ComeTheRevolution
ComeTheRevolution
4 years ago
Reply to  rational

This is what these criminal scumbags have created via this scam. You people supporting this need to have a word with yourselves. From latest UK Column

comment image

UK Column News – 24th January 2022
https://www.bitchute.com/video/FXgN1q2t13x0/

David Beaton
David Beaton
4 years ago
Reply to  rational

“Death rates” ? “Worse?” Wake up!

17,000 Covid deaths from the beginning of his scam – fact; less than a bad flu season – fact! That’s the only real figure you need!

Why are you nit picking over Government issued stats about death rates? Over 700,000 people in the UK die every year!

This Government has an agenda and the stats used to feed the sheep, echoed by the BBC and SKY, are always made to fit it!

Wait for the rising ‘death rates’ from cancer, strokes, circulation issues and heart disease to reveal the consequences of experimentally jabbing the whole population ! One projection in the US suggests as many as 30,000,000 deaths ( (over time) directly attributable to the experimental injection .

But then we don’t even know the truth about the “variation” in the shot batches do we?

Stop swallowing the Javid- Johnson narrative pill!

JaneDoeNL
JaneDoeNL
4 years ago
Reply to  David Beaton

It’s not swallowing a pill, it’s swallowing a pay cheque.

Proveritate
4 years ago
Reply to  rational

Oh, does it ‘look like’ it? Your previous mantra was ‘look at the data’, not eyeball some squiggly charts. So – look at the data. The claim is about rates ‘over winter’, which we can take as starting in December conventionally, not the solstice, and comparing England’s death rates against two other countries that had lockdowns, Wales and Scotland. Taking the published data from death certificates and date of death and comparing England with the combined populations of Wales and Scotland, and their respective numbers of deaths, we see that death rates in England over the period were around 3.5% higher than Wales and Scotland taken together. Given that there are certain confounders, the claim based on that data for lockdowns that there is ‘no evidence they have “really done very much”’ is entirely reasonable. You are certainly not going to disprove the null hypothesis (i.e. lockdowns are ineffective) based on that death rate data. To make a claim that lockdowns work you have to overcome the null hypothesis – if you want to be taken seriously. So it seems you only like to ‘look at the data’ (as you claim) when it suits your narrative. Otherwise you can throw… Read more »

Jaguarpig
Jaguarpig
4 years ago
Reply to  rational

Piss off 77 your time is up.

karenovirus
4 years ago
Reply to  rational

Despite the lack of clarity, from the chart leading the article Englands current slightly (10% ?) worse position follows July-November with lower mortality than the other three parts of our Disunited Kingdom so, as usual, it’s just nature catching up.

But the overwhelming main point of that chart is that, whatever relatively minor differences in restrictions, this years Covid season is uniformly way less death inducing than the previous two

This is only to be expected because that’s the way that virus (ok viruses) work as has endlessly been pointed out here at DS and elsewhere since Covid was revealed as just another seasonal virus in Summer 2020 when they had to introduce Lockdown Lite since not enough people were dying to remotely justify extending Full Lockdown Proper (and the vaccines weren’t ready).

It was partly to disguise the drastic decline in mortality at the end of ‘wave one’ that the press dug up “cummingsgate” to dominate the front pages for three weeks or more.

rational
4 years ago
Reply to  karenovirus

So why did the seasonal virus start surging in summer?

Is is an all-year seasonal virus?

stewart
4 years ago
Reply to  rational

Define surge.

You keep using these vague meaningless terms.

karenovirus
4 years ago
Reply to  rational

Because it was new, arrived out of season and took a couple of years to settle down into s normal pattern.

rational
4 years ago
Reply to  rational

Look at all the foaming-at-the-mouth abuse from stating a simple observation from the chart presented.

stewart
4 years ago
Reply to  rational

Pleased with your work?

You’re not here to engage in meaningful discussion, you’re here to push buttons.

Why do you bother?

RickH
4 years ago
Reply to  rational

Not to yhe statistically literate.

Hugh
Hugh
4 years ago
Reply to  rational

In any case we have the all cause mortality for Belarus up to March which suggests that they have not lost a lot more lives than neighbouring countries, compared to the many deaths (and misery), both short and long term, that have come from these inhuman lockdowns.

Cecil B
Cecil B
4 years ago

Are you seriously suggesting that the dictators do not have a jar of glue?

jeepybee
4 years ago

As a man who swallowed too much imodium once said; “no shit”.

A Y M
4 years ago

Disappointing that SAGE is still refusing to recognise…”
Really? Shouldn’t that read “Predictably…”

The narrative is being forced to change because the facts are becoming all too clear. But all truths are being partially accepted 1 year or so after we skeptics have settled the science. And even then it will be with some unlikely and largely unprovable hypothesis about how much worse things would have been had we not done these dumb ass things like inject people with totally untested and untracked poisons.

mka1221
4 years ago

The ‘they got lucky’ excuse is for piss poor football managers that can’t comprehend how their decisions have resulted in a poor performance from the team. When it’s used in science, it shows how utterly clueless these ‘experts’ are.

rational
4 years ago
Reply to  mka1221

Ban football

stewart
4 years ago
Reply to  mka1221

It’s the scumbaggy way that ‘scientists’ have of trying to continue to be right when they are clearly wrong.

“I’m wrong, but he’s only right because he got lucky. Based on the evidence at the time, I was right and he was wrong.”

That was exactly the tactic that grotesque Israeli scientist / government advisor interviewed on Unherd used when he was asked about the Great Barrington Declaration. He claimed that they were reckless and simply got lucky. The possibility that they considered something that he didn’t and that he was wrong clearly didn’t cross his mind.

He also didn’t want to get into politics – not the politics that he’d influenced and had led to so many mistakes – but was more than happy to get stuck into Bolsonaro.

A total douchebag. Like so many scientists who brandish their titles and positions and status as ‘scientists’ to try to elevate themselves and win arguments by default.

Backlash
Backlash
4 years ago

Irrelevant wannabe tinpot dictators clinging onto every last bit of power over people.

AndyPandy
AndyPandy
4 years ago

‘England got lucky’ – Prof. McLean

That’s not science, it’s politics.

Hypatia
Hypatia
4 years ago
Reply to  AndyPandy

Remember the TV programme The Gladiators, on in the early 1990’s? A sort of chase over various obstacles. One of the Gladiators, a character called “Wolf” would always say “He was lucky!” in the event that the contestant out ran him. It was part of his persona, given that it was an entertainment show; particularly popular with children.

Maybe the venerable Prof is modelling himself on Wolf?

DevonBlueBoy
DevonBlueBoy
4 years ago
Reply to  Hypatia

He’s certainly not

DevonBlueBoy
DevonBlueBoy
4 years ago
Reply to  DevonBlueBoy

modelling himself on an immunologist

DevonBlueBoy
DevonBlueBoy
4 years ago
Reply to  AndyPandy

No it’s blind ignorance

Mumbo Jumbo
4 years ago

There are so many confounding factors that trying to draw any conclusions from that graph is pretty pointless. Omicron hit England first and spread out from London. It is not done yet so we need to wait until levels have dropped everywhere to come to a sensible analysis of the so-called protective measures.

rational
4 years ago
Reply to  Mumbo Jumbo

Actually your comment is correct.

Mumbo Jumbo
4 years ago
Reply to  rational

I thought it was pretty rational.

David Beaton
David Beaton
4 years ago
Reply to  Mumbo Jumbo

Mumbo jumbo.

Mumbo Jumbo
4 years ago
Reply to  David Beaton

Really? Could you explain what is wrong with it?

BS665
BS665
4 years ago

An ‘objectively real illness’ that requires widely divergent policies to counterract it?

Policies that change day by day, week by week, in different contexts, times, places, and with levels of authority? Enforced here, ignored there?

And when those varied measures all have the same result: nothing, which one was correct?

The only correct one was the one NEVER tried: ignore it, make all treatment voluntary and optional, and go back to normal FOREVER, NOW!

huxleypiggles
4 years ago
Reply to  BS665

I have said repeatedly on here – every single NPI had only one aim and that was to undermine public health.

Boomer Bloke
4 years ago

SAGE advisers say the Omicron wave fizzled out on its own because of behavioural changes that led to people being more cautious,”
Nothing to do with it being the common cold then, because that would upset their narrative.

David Beaton
David Beaton
4 years ago
Reply to  Boomer Bloke

Sage = Marxist propaganda and BS.

ComeTheRevolution
ComeTheRevolution
4 years ago

More evidence that this whole affair is nothing more than an ideologically driven scam with no basis in fact. Its all a result of their fake pseudo science or what these agents of deceit would call the “New Normal”. They made a bioweapon – the spike protein – then they created a scam to give them an excuse to inject it into people. The last two years have been that scam put into action. Spike protein is the ultimate slowkill bioweapon which is set to claim the lives of hundreds of millions of people – maybe more – via a multitude of different mechanisms like immune system disorders ie VAIDS, blood disorders, cancers, heart issues, organ failure, autoimmunity, vascular issues and more. That so many believe it is somehow beneficial to be injecting this crap in response to something which has no validated science to back it up and which is essentially impossible to differentiate from already in circulation illneses is a measure of how far down these deceivers have dragged the human race. The game of dumbing down has paid off. But they cannot squash the human spirit (although maybe they are trying as there are widespread reports of… Read more »

Free Lemming
4 years ago

One advantage of being married for 30 years!

ComeTheRevolution
ComeTheRevolution
4 years ago
Reply to  Free Lemming

Not if your other half took the spike – not saying yours has, but there will be countless examples of this

Free Lemming
4 years ago

It was a joke

stewart
4 years ago
Reply to  Free Lemming

I laughed.

Mumbo Jumbo
4 years ago
Reply to  Free Lemming

I laughed and had to explain it to the Mrs of 35 years. She was not amused!

David Beaton
David Beaton
4 years ago

i know of one straight away. where serious marital strife has broken out – there must be thousands.

Mumbo Jumbo
4 years ago
Reply to  Free Lemming

Some of us still manage it regularly, if you call once a year regular

ImpObs
4 years ago

Kevn McCairn (PhD neuroscientist) did these experiments live on stream, with multiple vaxes from different manufacturers, they’ve been replicated 8 times so far. He also highlighted a LOT of contamination.

You can view the streams here: https://www.mccairndojo.com/past-episodes/

David Beaton
David Beaton
4 years ago
Reply to  ImpObs

This one they will be desperate to keep under wraps – watch out for the “rational” attack and a stream of low level ad hom abuse!!

huxleypiggles
4 years ago

Excellent comment.

David Beaton
David Beaton
4 years ago
Reply to  huxleypiggles

Yes …and terrifying. A copy ought to be sent to all MPs and to the Supreme Court so they all canny claim they did not know what was going on.

This finding ( probably from a different German source) has of course been around for months now – with no coverage by any MS media outlet or any attempt at any independent evaluation of the shocking findings – wide-scale criminality is abroad – in the mouths of lying politicians!

Free Lemming
4 years ago

Mr Drakeford accusing England of being a “global outlier”’ – when most the globe appears to be running off the edge of a cliff, being an ‘outlier’ is hardly an insult is it?

I also don’t understand why anyone is still obsessing about only Covid hospitalisations/ deaths – ‘with Covid’, ‘for Covid’ or ‘happened to look at a Covid PCR test’. We know those figures are grossly inaccurate and completely ignore the dire collateral damage of lockdown policies. This is utter madness… unless, of course, it isn’t – rather a kind of orchestrated madness.

GlassHalfFull
4 years ago

Evidence from around the world clearly shows that lockdowns and jabs have no effect on the trajectory of the virus whatsoever.

It is only natural immunity from exposure that halts the virus making it mild and endemic.

Omicron is acting like a vaccine for everyone.

Strange how the genetic sequence of Omicron is NOT from the same family as all the other variants.

It’s almost as if it too was created in a lab and released to end all the hysteria.

rational
4 years ago
Reply to  GlassHalfFull

Evidence = things you read from forums like this.

jeepybee
4 years ago
Reply to  rational

The clowns are out in full force today. 😀

Aleajactaest
4 years ago
Reply to  jeepybee

they’re not clowns, they’re seriously damaging propaganda merchants who’s paid job it is to psychologically damage blog commentors

don’t engage with them once you know they’ve infested a post.

jeepybee
4 years ago
Reply to  Aleajactaest

Not at all! If it is a paid misinformation merchant, then I have merely given any neutral person extra reason to doubt the post in question.

If it isn’t a paid misinformation merchant, then I am hoping that the misguided, angry person behind it has had their mood altered negatively by constant berating from us. And that their entire day has been tainted by being called a clown, over and over again.

Meanwhile, I (and I assume many others) have just had a giggle and moved on at this CLOWN’S expense. Don’t take it too seriously.

stewart
4 years ago
Reply to  rational

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/us/

Order by ‘deaths per 1M’.

New York: 3,288
Florida: 2,980

Just the classic goto examples. But really, no correlation between measures and deaths per million.

I think you know this, though.

DevonBlueBoy
DevonBlueBoy
4 years ago
Reply to  rational

Excluding your inane commentary

Cecil B
Cecil B
4 years ago

Birthday celebration for PM sparks new party row – BBC News

As Princess Nut Nut organised this shouldn’t she be locked up in line with police/dictatorship actions at the time

Bellingcat
4 years ago

Yawn, Covid is a once in 10-year event and in years gone by apart from the initial peak and winter resurgence largely ignored. This is another example of what statisticians call chasing noise.

rational
4 years ago
Reply to  Bellingcat

When was the last Covid event?

stewart
4 years ago
Reply to  rational

MERS? H1N1?

Go on, tell us.

jingleballix
4 years ago

Take a look at Australia.

Almost the whole nation has been jabbed twice in the past 2-3 months.

‘Cases’ – and I don’t like using it as a metric – have absolutely sky-rocketed. So too have deaths.

The first C-19 wave took 910 Australians, this figure remained stable from October 2020, until July 2021 when the Australian jab programme took off. It then began to creep up a little.

However, from late-November deaths have also sky-rocketed*. Today the figure is 3,255, which is a 400% increase from when the jabbing began – and a 200% increase in two months since most became double-jabbed.

Seems that no part of MSM in Australia is asking the government about it though.

*Australia still have very few deaths relative to other Western countries.

Jo Starlin
4 years ago
Reply to  jingleballix

Look at the graph for deaths in Vietnam. They suddenly took off post-vaccination rollout in July last year having been absolutely flat throughout. The graph is quite startling.

rational
4 years ago
Reply to  Jo Starlin

Same scenario as Australia.

jingleballix
4 years ago
Reply to  Jo Starlin

Yes. All of SE Asia was flat 2020-21…….until the jab rolled out.

I believe that that part of the world had significant natural immunity to coronaviruses, built up from 2003 onwards.

Judy Watson
Judy Watson
4 years ago
Reply to  Jo Starlin

Same here in Thailand

rational
4 years ago
Reply to  jingleballix

Ok lets look at Australia properly.

Due to a severe isolation policy, they prevented the first years’ infections to a great extent and the corresponding deaths. Along come vaccination, followed by Omicron and opening the borders. Infection rates peak at 100K. cf. UK at 220K. Roughly the same rate per unit population. Deaths are similar rate to UK also.

Looking at the situation in total.. They have done massively better than the UK.

UK has had 2249 covid deaths/million population.
Australia has had 124 covid deaths/million population.

That’s a a factor 18 better.

So a total vindication of their policy, is it not?

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/australia/

jingleballix
4 years ago
Reply to  rational

Lockdowns don’t work against viruses you muppet.

Australia had broad natural immunity………the jabbing has affected this negatively.

That’s all there is to say.

rational
4 years ago
Reply to  jingleballix

Where did they get this broad natural immunity from?

stewart
4 years ago
Reply to  rational

Hundreds of thousands of years of evolution.

rational
4 years ago
Reply to  stewart

That only happened in Australia?
Come on try harder..

stewart
4 years ago
Reply to  rational

Who said it only happened in Australia?

stewart
4 years ago
Reply to  rational

So a total vindication of their policy, is it not?

Nope.

First, as you point out a few posts above this one, you have to wait until it’s over.
Second, depends on the economic and social cost of the policy, which also hasn’t been tallied up yet.

Then there is the small matter of what are one’s priorities. Freedom and personal autonomy or saving lives at whatever the cost. We all have different measuring sticks for that. You have yours, which, assuming you aren’t just trolling, seems to be rather skewed towards the saving of lives. But who is to say you are right?

So no, not a total vindication, by any stretch of the imagination.

rational
4 years ago
Reply to  stewart

OK. Come back when it’s over and present your findings.

stewart
4 years ago
Reply to  rational

It’s ok, You come back and present your findings. Like you, I know it’s much easier and more fun to take shots at what people present.

Aleajactaest
4 years ago
Reply to  stewart

please do not feed the sealion

rational
4 years ago
Reply to  stewart

Do you accept the 18x better on deaths?
If not, why not.

stewart
4 years ago
Reply to  rational

I have no idea. Give me all cause mortality per country per year for the last 5 years, we’ll see where Australia sits in the rankings and take it from there.

rayc
rayc
4 years ago
Reply to  rational

Frankly, if I had the choice of living in a free world (for a very lax definition of “free” such as “like it was in 2019”) while having 18x more deaths in my country and a choice of living a death-free country which is governed like Australia, I would choose the risk of death. Because some things – freedom among them – are worth the risk… even worth dying for.

What is your argument against that?

rational
4 years ago
Reply to  rational

6 disapprovals for this comment, but nothing that amounts to an argument against.

Could is be that you have to accept this fact?

rayc
rayc
4 years ago
Reply to  rational

It’s only a “vindication” if you discount the terrible social and economic costs. How much is having two years of life and liberty taken away from you worth? If not much, then maybe you don’t have a life to begin with – and that’s something to ponder.

David Beaton
David Beaton
4 years ago
Reply to  rayc

The Emergency Powers are still in place supported by the majority of MPs- even though there is no “Emergency” they can still do whatever the like- this is not over.

Where are the Courts to restore our Freedoms? ( All locked into Common Purpose meetings perhaps?)

rational
4 years ago
Reply to  jingleballix

Clear case of extreme confirmation bias, leading you to support your mad original assumption, with data that in no way agrees with you.

Innocent bystander
4 years ago
Reply to  rational

The only reliable number is all cause mortality. This does not indicate neither a pandemic nor anything else, whether in OZ or elsewhere. It is business as usual, if it where not for fake tests. People are not dying in their millions “of Covid”. Anyone who has been paying attention knows this.

Jo Starlin
4 years ago

“SAGE advisers say the Omicron wave fizzled out on its own because of behavioural changes that led to people being more cautious, as opposed to natural immunity causing the outbreak to peak. …”

The utter refusal to acknowledge that respiratory viruses rise and fall in their own way remains startling even as we enter the third year of this criminal psychosis.

“There was too much unknown about Omicron at the time the measures were put in place… I think England got lucky.”

The disappointment is palpable.

DevonBlueBoy
DevonBlueBoy
4 years ago
Reply to  Jo Starlin

What do behavioural psychologists and mathematical modellers know about immunology? The square root of sweet fuck all.

Star
4 years ago

You can hear the rabid SNP nutters saying the English “b***ards” would call the tighter restrictions in Scotland a failure, purely because they’re English and they feel a need to do the Scots down. This is called “projection”, also known as “lying to yourself because you’re a stupid prejudiced retard”. The reality is that most people in England don’t have massive chips on their shoulders where the Scots are concerned.

itoldyouiwasill
itoldyouiwasill
4 years ago

Professor Gary McLean, an immunologist at London Metropolitan University: “There was too much unknown about Omicron at the time the measures were put in place… I think England got lucky.”

Ah, thank god for the science! Where on earth would we be without it…

realarthurdent
4 years ago

A lot was known courtesy of South African medics and scientists. Unfortunately this data ran counter to the narrative and to the multi-billion dollar global pandemic industry, so was immediately discounted.

rational
4 years ago

He was right. It was luck.
The only information was from South Africa, with a very different population and not too far ahead of the UK.

stewart
4 years ago
Reply to  rational

Luck is often what losers blame for their loss.

realarthurdent
4 years ago
Reply to  stewart

Gary Player was once accused of being lucky and replied “the harder I practice, the luckier I get”.

rayc
rayc
4 years ago
Reply to  rational

Ok, let’s say it was luck then. But what would you call all those people who, despite massive amount of evidence of omciron’s mildness from UK, US, Israel etc. etc. are still pushing these same useless measures now?

amanuensis
4 years ago

It is very likely that none of the social biocontrol measures make any difference whatsoever.

(excepting complete and utter isolation, which has its own negative consequences).

huxleypiggles
4 years ago
Reply to  amanuensis

A point I have made repeatedly.

Marcus Aurelius knew
4 years ago

These idiots will “get lucky” if they aren’t hung out to dry.

I use the phrase “hung out to dry” metaphorically; although there are many people who would (possibly justifiably) mean it quite literally.

Let’s hope those who’ve done – and continue to do – this to us get a fair trial.

JaneDoeNL
JaneDoeNL
4 years ago

Shouldn’t they be tried according to their own standards? They have thrown aside the rule of law, trampled over fundamental freedoms and rights, completeley silenced and vilified any voices with an opposite view, outlawed genuine debate.

These are their own rules, they should apply to them now. That will help them remember why we have fundamental rights and safeguards in the first place.

FrankFisher
4 years ago

Under SAGE’s understanding of epidemiology, the first virus ever to hit mankind would have finished us off. They should be hung, drawn and quartered.

rational
4 years ago
Reply to  FrankFisher

Really… Why don’t you expand on this theory.
Set it all out in a structured manner.

stewart
4 years ago
Reply to  rational

How many down votes are you aiming for?
What’s your target?

Aleajactaest
4 years ago
Reply to  stewart

50p a downvote. A full shilling if they’re blocked

miketa1957
miketa1957
4 years ago
Reply to  rational

Sealioning. But for the benefit of others: Prior to vaccines, the only defence against viral infection was the human immune system which ended the infection. OK, to be strictly fair, help to keep the person alive until their immune system beat the virus contributed to survival, but nevertheless, it still depended on the immune system. Ultimately, sufficient people would survive the virus and become immune to it, that herd immunity was reached. From this point on, so few people were left susceptible that the virus could no longer transmit, SAGE seem to believe (or claim to believe) that the viral waves peter out because people change behaviour for a period of time, hot because sufficient numbers of people become immune (seemingly, as a result of wildtype or vaccine immunity). However, if viral outbreaks were not controlled by natural immunity, then absentia vaccincs, people would have got the infection time and time again. As more viruses appeared, the infection rates (counted over all viruses) would rise until nobody could survive. The fact that we are here today (and, indeed, mammals – who have very similar immune systems, have been here for 10s of millions of years), shows that SAGE’s position cannot… Read more »

rational
4 years ago
Reply to  miketa1957

Would you, by any chance be, be focussing on one careless statement (if it happened the way it has been quoted) and ignoring their obvious understanding of how an epidemic works?

miketa1957
miketa1957
4 years ago
Reply to  rational

Which statement do you consider to be “careless” ?

Moist Von Lipwig
4 years ago
Reply to  rational

Obvious understanding of how an epidemic works?

According to you, Brian Blessed is obviously clean-shaven.

rational
4 years ago
Reply to  miketa1957

How is this an answer to …..

Under SAGE’s understanding of epidemiology, the first virus ever to hit mankind would have finished us off. They should be hung, drawn and quartered.

Reply

Really… Why don’t you expand on this theory.
Set it all out in a structured manner.

Moist Von Lipwig
4 years ago
Reply to  rational

SAGE are fantasists, not scientists.

Their ‘modelling’ is apocalyptic gibberish that has been extrapolated from false assumptions into absurd scenarios that are painted as predictions by the media.

PatrickF
PatrickF
4 years ago
Reply to  rational

Hanged, drawn and quartered. Not ‘hung’.

David Beaton
David Beaton
4 years ago

Of course there is ‘no evidence’ – it is all a massive scam!

A power-grab by the Elites served by the Lying Media to cow, oppress and beat down the population .

The fight back has only just started.

rational
4 years ago
Reply to  David Beaton

I wonder why you are unable to convince anyone beyond the 10s of people who populate this forum?

David Beaton
David Beaton
4 years ago
Reply to  rational

Who knows?

As usual Trolls go for messenger not the message . You just carry on trying to keep the narrative together!

rational
4 years ago
Reply to  David Beaton

Is it not the case that the sceptics vilify Gates, Blair, Fauci, etc…..

Moist Von Lipwig
4 years ago
Reply to  rational

Fauci is a doctator.

Aleajactaest
4 years ago

I see what you did there.

Have an uptick.

Nearhorburian
Nearhorburian
4 years ago
Reply to  rational

Most jabbed people I have spoken to don’t understand that the jabs only have emergency use authorisation or that the trials were unscientifdic rigged jokes.

Richard Austin
Richard Austin
4 years ago
Reply to  Nearhorburian

The problem is one of human nature. A majority never wants to be wrong, they’d rather force everyone to be the same than admit the ones who are not the same are right. It’s a natural “we are all in it together” response allied to a “sod everyone else” attitude.
Therefore they will only, over time, come to think that they never believed in what they fought so hard for. Look at Labour under Tony Blair and then try and find anyone who actually voted for him three times. It seems on political forums nobody ever voted for him. It will be the same with lockdowns; nobody ever agreed with them.

David Beaton
David Beaton
4 years ago
Reply to  Nearhorburian

“Most people “don’t bother to read anything other than the front page of the ‘Daily Mail’ to get their daily opinion .

“Ignorance is bliss!” We shall see .

rational
4 years ago
Reply to  David Beaton

Interesting that Daily Sceptics often quotes the Daily Mail.

stewart
4 years ago
Reply to  rational

Evidence for you statement? How do you know how many people he has convinced?

rational
4 years ago
Reply to  rational

Wow that was hurtful.

You are very mean!

rational
4 years ago
Reply to  rational

Run out of arguments?

Sforzesca
Sforzesca
4 years ago
Reply to  David Beaton

We’ve got 5.9 million unjabbed ( that’s one of their figures). Another is 23.5 million, again from them but includes kids. Another is 4 million first jabbed, but not had the 2nd and 16 million had 2 jabs but overdue the 3rd
In other words, no one’s got a clue as to the exact figure but adding the newly “unvaccinated” adults it may well be in the region of 20 million plus.
Add to that the millions of “fully vaccinated” who disapprove of any mandate and in England we’ve got a pretty healthy (in more ways than one) number for TPTB to try and deal with.

A Mussolini moment may well be giving cause for concern. Cue more activity from the 77th.. Only 3.5% participants usually needed to change events, Chenowith.
I’d be a little bit worried if I were one of them.

Richard Austin
Richard Austin
4 years ago

Anyone who has read Kennedy’s book knows that it was largely Gates who forced lockdowns via his war games scenarios over 10 or more years. I was dubious when I read Italy implemented lockdown because China did and then knew for sure when PantsDown Ferguson recommended it. By then I knew Ferguson was in Gates / Fauci’s pocket.
It is disgraceful that the press has never written a damn thing about what really happened even though the evidence is all there. What happened to the great reporters such as in Watergate?

BillRiceJr
BillRiceJr
4 years ago
Reply to  Richard Austin

“Great reporters” are cynical or skeptics by nature. They don’t necessarily trust the statements of authorities or “public health officials” as infallible. Once upon a time, plenty of reporters possesses this natural skepticism. Not anymore. You could poll editors and journalists in EVERY corporate newsroom and you would find that 100 percent of these journalists accept the pronouncements that form the authorized COVID narrative. There’s not even one token naysayer in these newsrooms. This has to be the scariest development of our times; the skeptical “watchdog journalist” no longer exists.

realarthurdent
4 years ago
Reply to  BillRiceJr

The internet is to blame for this – it’s so much easier for “journalists” to trawl the internet and just copy/paste stuff than go out digging for new stories.

Also the move of news online and the fact that it is “free” at the point of use means good journalism, which is expensive, has become much rarer. Unfortunately we are all getting the quality of journalism that we are paying for.

DevonBlueBoy
DevonBlueBoy
4 years ago
Reply to  BillRiceJr

Sad but true

rational
4 years ago
Reply to  Richard Austin

Anyone who has bought this book is an idiot.
But he is pleased to have your money.

DevonBlueBoy
DevonBlueBoy
4 years ago
Reply to  rational

Takes one to know one

MrTea
MrTea
4 years ago
Reply to  Richard Austin

What happened to the great reporters such as in Watergate?

Bill Gates and governments purchased their loyalty.

Moist Von Lipwig
4 years ago
Reply to  Richard Austin

No, worldwide indoctrination in green ideology for decades paved the way for lockdown.

Lockdown is an ideology and the ideas had been spread for a century before it was implemented.

Your claim is balderdash and mindless, utterly devoid of proof.

By contrast, my claim is easily proved, one need only observe the green ideology in practice worldwide.

Star
4 years ago

Contributors to this thread have mentioned the 77th Brigade.

To those hardworking members of the 77th who are reading this: don’t you get bored stiff when you engage in sealioning and the large majority of your opponents have no defence against your use of that weapon, and no knowledge of what’s happening?

Isn’t it like stealing sweeties from babies?

BS665
BS665
4 years ago
Reply to  Star

Affecting sympathy is no different from real sympathy, apart from the fact that the former is never accompanied by any constructive input or persistence or originality.

I would’ve thought most ‘opponents’ of the 77th on here have plenty of defences, by now., though.

My attitude has always been to say what I really think at the time, and assume any ‘opponent’ either is or is not 77th. Life’s too short to look over our shoulders.

Star
4 years ago
Reply to  BS665

In any reasonable conversation, each person’s choice of what to say is influenced by the person they’re conversing with. If that other person is in the 77th (or one of many other such outfits), they will exert their influence consciously. If I had a pound for every time I’ve seen someone get sealioned, oblivious to what’s going on…

realarthurdent
4 years ago
Reply to  Star

For the uninitiated:

What to know: Sealioning is a harassment tactic by which a participant in a debate or online discussion pesters the other participant with disingenuous questions under the guise of sincerity, hoping to erode the patience or goodwill of the target to the point where they appear unreasonable. Often, sealioning involved asking for evidence for even basic claims.”

ElSabio
4 years ago
Reply to  realarthurdent

What to know: Sealioning is a harassment tactic by which a participant in a debate or online discussion pesters the other participant with disingenuous questions under the guise of sincerity, hoping to erode the patience or goodwill of the target to the point where they appear unreasonable. Often, sealioning involved asking for evidence for even basic claims.”

Um… do you have any evidence for the tactic known as sealioning… other than your comment? Asking in all sincerity for a friend….

Proveritate
4 years ago
Reply to  ElSabio

Very witty!

realarthurdent
4 years ago
Reply to  ElSabio

Congratulations Corporal ElSabio and welcome to the 77th Brigade. You have passed this module of your induction training. Click here for your certificate.

huxleypiggles
4 years ago
Reply to  realarthurdent

Thanks for that.

Aleajactaest
4 years ago
Reply to  Star

once you know them, they can change avatars and targets but their sociopathies shine through.

Over at TCW they are well known and are identified immediately to ensure the rest of the commentators don’t waste their vowels on them

Spud, Telemachus Ass, Nigel Ford, Emoticon….

Bolloxed Britannia
Bolloxed Britannia
4 years ago

“No evidance restrictions have done very much”….
“Don’t be so open minded that your brain’s fall out”
Carl Dagan.
What about the Matterhorn size mountain of evidance that lockdowns have been a fucking disaster for millions!

Bolloxed Britannia
Bolloxed Britannia
4 years ago

Sagan not Dagan 🙄 typo.

rational
4 years ago

There is a very obvious argument against all lockdowns, but the sceptics are too stupid to think of it.

Moist Von Lipwig
4 years ago
Reply to  rational

Yes, lockdown is a mediaeval superstition abandoned centuries ago as policy.

However, you’re too dishonest to say it.

Moist Von Lipwig
4 years ago

Restrictions are an end in themselves to the Branch Covidian cultist.

There, that was easy.

rational
4 years ago

But does it mean anything?

Moist Von Lipwig
4 years ago
Reply to  rational

Yes, it means that Covid has given technocrats the excuse they need to micromanage the individual.

Do learn elementary literacy skills before posting again.

ImpObs
4 years ago

The MSM is encouraging people to enrol in Mercks Molnupiravir “anti viral drug”

https://www.bbc.com/news/health-60117313

In the unlikely event anyone here has declined the jabs because of needle phobia, rather than personal research, and is tempted by this drug, I strongly recomend reading about it first.

In a letter to the BMJ, Johan M van Schalkwyk, perioperative physician, says:Buyer beware: molnupiravir may damage DNA

Leo Goldstein (M.Sc. in Mathematics) from defyccc.com has prepared a pdf submission to the FDA, highlighting the dangers and wider consiquences of this treatment, it can be downloaded here:

Molnupiravir: ineffective, carcinogenic, and a global threat
https://downloads.regulations.gov/FDA-2021-N-0758-0021/attachment_1.pdf

I have to wonder, given the risks highlighted, how this drug got any sort of approval anywhere, only the Indian governments ICMR seems to have declined it’s approval over safety issues:

https://www.businesstoday.in/coronavirus/story/covid-19-the-curious-case-of-molnupiravir-and-why-icmr-is-against-its-use-318116-2022-01-06

iane
iane
4 years ago
Reply to  ImpObs

Well, if England gets REALLY lucky again, the molnupiravir might damage the bits of DNA that got modified in the jabbees by mRNA reverse transcription!

Aleajactaest
4 years ago

do not feed the ir-rational tr0ll

rational
4 years ago
Reply to  Aleajactaest

Meaning…

Don’t present your weak arguments…. You’ll get crushed with logic and facts.

Moist Von Lipwig
4 years ago
Reply to  rational

No, you’ll just bombard people with spam.

Anonymous
Anonymous
4 years ago
Reply to  rational

Good morning Nutcase. At time of writing “rational” has posted 35 of the 189 comments on this article. That’s a whopping 35 percent of the comments so far on this thread that have been made by a chap that weirdly has chosen the misnomer “rational” as his handle. This percentage alone points to fairly severe mental illness.  And every one of his comments have been ridiculed, laughed-at and shown to be rubbish and self-contradictory. But this doesn’t deter “rational” in any way, shape or form. There’s an interesting reason behind “rational’s” burst of inane and attention seeking comments this morning. It’s got to do with the moon, the full moon, that is. In studies done in prisons and psychiatric hospitals it was found that full moons do actually influence people with mental health issues. All nutters, though, were not only affected on the day of the full moon that lasted for a few days thereabouts. Some had massive personality shifts that began just before the full moon and lasted for days afterwards. For quite a few, though, the effects of the full moon only kicked in 7 days after the night of the full moon and lasted for a number… Read more »

Doom Slayer
4 years ago
Reply to  Anonymous

And you call me an a-hole for feeding the troll! Thats enough food for a week of trolling.

Anonymous
Anonymous
4 years ago
Reply to  Doom Slayer

I have experience with people like “rational”. I know how to get inside their heads and live there for a while. 🙂

huxleypiggles
4 years ago
Reply to  Anonymous

That’s nailed it.

Judy Watson
Judy Watson
4 years ago
Reply to  Anonymous

Bloody brilliant. Thank you

Anonymous
Anonymous
4 years ago
Reply to  rational

A young woman was savagely stabbed to death in north London yesterday morning whilst on the school run. Yesterday was 7 days after a full moon.

Crime goes up at the period of a full moon but also rises at the 1-week mark after a full moon.

So, when you reply to or interact with a nutty jerk like “rational” you are actually normalising in his mind the bouts of mental agitation he feels in the periods post full moons. 

Aleajactaest
4 years ago

in other news – Norway scraps all COVID entry requirements except tests

https://www.thelocal.no/20220125/norway-to-scrap-quarantine-for-all-travellers-what-you-need-to-know/