Global Protests Against Social Distancing, Lockdown, Vaccine Mandate

[Nielsen]

Yyyesssss? Is this some kind of cryptic idiocy on your part or is it more overt?

I’m offended, again.

 

[TexRex]

I’m offended, again.

Default state.

 

[UKMikey]

Yeah - throw your freedoms and friendships away for there only to be another massive wave straight after. Don't really see the point in going through the motions this time around.

Nothing would kill a friendship for me like someone deciding they didn't care about restrictions, but each to their own. That's freedom, and I'm exercising mine to steer well clear of refuseniks.

 

[AbsoluteBarstool]

Nothing would kill a friendship for me like someone deciding they didn't care about restrictions, but each to their own. That's freedom, and I'm exercising mine to steer well clear of refuseniks.

But that's the problem I have with it. We'll never achieve zero cases and keep it there, and our vaccine program can never be fast enough to achieve a level of herd immunity that would do this for us. I'm not saying that restrictions are universally wrong - just that we're consistently choosing the wrong ones, with terrible medical and economic consequences.

 

[Scaff]

But that's the problem I have with it. We'll never achieve zero cases and keep it there, and our vaccine program can never be fast enough to achieve a level of herd immunity that would do this for us. I'm not saying that restrictions are universally wrong - just that we're consistently choosing the wrong ones, with terrible medical and economic consequences.

Then chose the right ones and do them yourself.

I'm supposed to be going to my works Christmas party this weekend, it's within the rules, but I don't think its a good idea given the current situation, so I have chosen to do what I think is the right thing and not go. In doing so I'm reducing risk to myself, my wife and my family I will see over Christmas.

It's the similar to Flu, we will never reach zero cases with that, ever, but by following the annual protocol around that we can massively reduce the number of cases and help, as a society, to protect those who are most at risk to the greatest degree we can. It's not about he total removal of risk (as that's simply impossible), but we can, by our own personal actions, do a massive amount to significantly reduce that risk.

Piss poor, hypocritical government doesn't help, but it's also not, in my mind, a valid reason to say 'screw-it' and just do whatever you want.

Be the change you want to see.

 

[05XR8]

I don’t ming restrictions. We’re at a state where it’s here to stay. Just like the flu.
I mean, if it comes to a point where work places require employees get a COVID test if they call out sick, so be it.

Just had a double whammy. A Workmate’s roommate tested positive Monday morning. My workmate came in and went into one room in our lab. Loaded up a work Ute and went out on site. Found out his roommate tested positive. Took a COVID test 7pm that Monday night. Positive result Tuesday 11am.
My lab had a meeting. Everyone agreed we should all get tested, even though no one came in direct contact with the positive worker.
After lunch, I get a text from my building. A tenant tested positive! Well, I immediately told everyone at work. Left straightaway, pulled my daughter out of school, picked up my wife and we went to the testing facility 1:30pm. 6am notified result was negative.

Messed up thing is, the new outbreak in my neighbourhood was from a night club, last week Wednesday night. My workmate’s roommate may have got it from contact with his friend that attended that night club. But, my workmate also had a visitor on Saturday from Sydney. Could have come from that person. So, he’s not sure how he contracted it.

If 90% are double vaxed and people are still testing positive, lockdown and restrictions aren’t a resolution. I go for walks and food shop. That’s it. Haven’t been inside any place other than work and the supermarket. I’m definitely speaking as one of the fortunate, where restrictions haven’t effected me, as my work been ongoing throughout COVID.

 

[AbsoluteBarstool]

Then chose the right ones and do them yourself.

I'm supposed to be going to my works Christmas party this weekend, it's within the rules, but I don't think its a good idea given the current situation, so I have chosen to do what I think is the right thing and not go. In doing so I'm reducing risk to myself, my wife and my family I will see over Christmas.

Be the change you want to see.

I can't possibly change the safety nets for vulnerable people in aid of getting those of us with a higher survival rate to achieve immunity by any means necessary, nor can I personally see to it that vaccine passports are never implemented, for example.

What kind of response even is that?

 

[Scaff]

I can't possibly change the safety nets for vulnerable people in aid of getting those of us with a higher survival rate to achieve immunity by any means necessary, nor can I personally see to it that vaccine passports are never implemented, for example.

What kind of response even is that?

Good job I never claimed you could do either of those things then Isn't it.

 

[AbsoluteBarstool]

Good job I never claimed you could do either of those things then Isn't it.

No - but by the extra content you've edited in, I can see that you got my point. I fully believe that combining both vaccination of as many people as possible and otherwise returning the NHS to its pre-COVID priorities is the best way to avoid living with years of massive waves of infection and cycling through these invasive, performative restrictions. it's the only feasible way I can see that allows us to fully adapt.

 

[Scaff]

No - but by the extra content you've edited in, I can see that you got my point. I fully believe that combining both vaccination of as many people as possible and otherwise returning the NHS to its pre-COVID priorities is the best way to avoid living with years of massive waves of infection and cycling through these invasive, performative restrictions. it's the only feasible way I can see that allows us to fully adapt.

That was added in before I even saw you're post (and as the edit times are visible to any member of staff that can be easily confirmed).

I honestly have no idea at all why you think the attitude is required, but I can assure you it's not.

My point was clear at every stage of edit, we are able to take our own actions, and can either chose to set personal standards that will minimise the risk to ourselves and others, or not. I'm at a loss to understand how that could be read as thinking you have control over areas I didn't even mention at all?

 

[AbsoluteBarstool]

That was added in before I even saw you're post (and as the edit times are visible to any member of staff that can be easily confirmed).

I honestly have no idea at all why you think the attitude is required, but I can assure you it's not.

My point was clear at every stage of edit, we are able to take our own actions, and can either chose to set personal standards that will minimise the risk to ourselves and others, or not. I'm at a loss to understand how that could be read as thinking you have control over areas I didn't even mention at all?

In fairness, I was in the process of writing my reply while you were editing your post, so didn't see the current version at the time.

Ultimately, the principle that underlies my ideal approach to this is that everyone who steps out of their door every day acknowledges and agrees to the personal risk that they're taking. Most of my colleagues are now working remotely, but I personally insist on going into the office every day. I've had one of the original strains of COVID with two weeks of immense discomfort and I really have no problem with getting infected again. It all keeps my system up to date.

I do apologise for coming across in a bit of an abrasive way, but that kind of control over tone is something that I've always struggled to improve.

 

[Danoff]

Ultimately, the principle that underlies my ideal approach to this is that everyone who steps out of their door every day acknowledges and agrees to the personal risk that they're taking.

That's definitely the case, but only to an extent. You could use this to justify absolutely ANY behavior, ANY recklessnesss toward others.

Most of my colleagues are now working remotely, but I personally insist on going into the office every day. I've had one of the original strains of COVID with two weeks of immense discomfort and I really have no problem with getting infected again. It all keeps my system up to date.

Uh... guess what else keeps your system "up to date"?

 

[AbsoluteBarstool]

That's definitely the case, but only to an extent. You could use this to justify absolutely ANY behavior, ANY recklessness toward others.

I'm not saying that I'd deliberately hop on a busy train and start coughing and spitting on everyone. It's just the case that freedom from all disease isn't a right in the way that many people seem to say that it is. We can only be thankful for the privilege that we can seek treatment when things get really bad.

Uh... guess what else keeps your system "up to date"?

No denial there. That's why I'd personally only facilitate the vulnerable staying at home while the rest of us gain immunity via vaccines and otherwise.

 

[Danoff]

I'm not saying that I'd deliberately hop on a busy train and start coughing and spitting on everyone. It's just the case that freedom from all disease isn't a right in the way that many people seem to say that it is. We can only be thankful for the privilege that we can seek treatment when things get really bad.

Freedom from disease isn't a right. Freedom to infect isn't a right. Where does that leave you?

 

[AbsoluteBarstool]

Freedom from disease isn't a right. Freedom to infect isn't a right. Where does that leave you?

I don't really think that that's the right way of framing it. Deliberately infecting people who don't want to be infected is uncivil, sure - but as you can see from the lockdowns taking massive amounts of time to bring daily new cases down, it still happens regardless. In my view, it means that you can't remove everyone's rights to everything else based on the idea that something unpleasant happens as a matter of chance.

 

[Danoff]

I don't really think that that's the right way of framing it. Deliberately infecting people who don't want to be infected is uncivil, sure - but as you can see from the lockdowns taking massive amounts of time to bring daily new cases down, it still happens regardless. In my view, it means that you can't remove everyone's rights to everything else based on the idea that something unpleasant happens as a matter of chance.

It's not entirely a matter of chance. To put it quite simply, you do not have the right to pass covid to another person. That's the end of that statement. If you do so, it could be considered an accident, it could be considered intentional, or it could be considered reckless (just as with any other rights).

You seem to only recognize the intentional and the accidental. There is an in between, where it is reckless. Think of it like driving. You can accidentally hit someone despite taking all of the precautions (this would be akin to accidentally infecting someone despite taking all of the precautions). Or you could intentionally hit someone (this would be like intentionally infecting people). But there is an in between, where you were driving like a crazy person and you absolutely knew that you'd probably get someone killed. That would be like waltzing past mask restrictions and ignoring vaccination pleas and getting someone infected.

It's not your right to refuse to consider the safety of the people around you. Doing so, in every area of law and human rights, is reckless or negligent behavior. What is reckless or negligent changes depending on the state of the environment (like refusing to use headlights at night), the state of technology (like speed limits changing), and the state of public knowledge (like driving even though you know your car is on fire). That's why sometimes the threshold during a pandemic is entering certain public spaces at all and other times it's not.

Edit:

This is what a lockdown looks like on the road:

...and this is what people who think they can somehow not pass covid along despite taking zero precautions looks like:

 

[Joey D]

We'll never achieve zero cases and keep it there, and our vaccine program can never be fast enough to achieve a level of herd immunity that would do this for us.

While achieving zero cases is unlikely, we very much could reach herd immunity in certain areas if there wasn't so much misinformation and vaccine hesitancy. I assume like the US, most countries in Europe had the means to vaccinate 80%+ of the population in less than six months. If that would've happened, those areas would be in a different situation right now. While international travel restrictions would still be in place, you could still freely travel around your own country without much of an issue.

Now, because of ignorant people, we're going to have a six months vaccine schedule for the next few years. Eventually, COVID will likely mutate to be something similar to the common cold since several of the viruses that cause the cold are coronaviruses. At worst, it mutates to be something like influenza and pretty much just stays there and we get a yearly COVID shot alongside our flu shot.

 

[UKMikey]

...and this is what people who think they can somehow not pass covid along despite taking zero precautions looks like:

Black ice would perhaps be a better metaphor. You can't see it, but most folks trust the weather people when they tell you it's there.

 

[AbsoluteBarstool]

We're talking past each other, and from incompatible states of mind. I'd be fine going through this in the summer, but now I don't really have the energy to continue.

 

[UKMikey]

An article from October:

Eric Clapton Isn't Just Spouting Vaccine Nonsense--He's Bankrolling It

Eric Clapton went from setting the standard for rock guitar to making ‘full-tilt’ racist rants to becoming an outspoken vaccine skeptic. Did he change? Or was he always like this?

web.archive.org

 

[VBR]

GP's and various other healthcare workers speak up for informed consent, bodily autonomy, and freedom from coercion.

GP 1...


GP 2...


Full playlist:

 

[Scaff]

GP's and various other healthcare workers speak up for informed consent, bodily autonomy, and freedom from coercion.

GP 1...


GP 2...


Full playlist:

As an Autistic adult I don't want an unvaccinated care-worker anywhere near what is a vulnerable group.

She (as the others almost certainly do) wants freedom of choice (which she has) with freedom of consequences (which she has no right to at all).

It's nothing to do with 'dictator states' and everything to do with yet more ******** and nonsense.

 

[eran0004]

GP's and various other healthcare workers speak up for informed consent, bodily autonomy, and freedom from coercion.

So basically they are demanding rights that they already have?

 

[TexRex]

So basically they are demanding rights that they already have?

Sure, except they're crying because they purportedly don't have them and stupid people eat it up.

 

[Scaff]

So basically they are demanding rights that they already have?

What's even more bonkers/ironic/absurd (all apply) is that in the UK, any and all clinical staff who are in direct contact with people (from reception staff upwards) are required to have the following immunisations:

• tetanus
• polio
• diptheria
• measles, mumps and rubella (MMR). This is particularly important to avoid transmission to vulnerable groups. Evidence of satisfactory immunity to MMR is either:
  • a positive antibody test to measles and rubella or
  • having two doses of the MMR vaccine.

With some needing further vaccinations:

• Bacillus Calmette–Guérin (BCG): if they have close contact with infectious tuberculosis (TB) patients.
• Hepatitis B: if they:
  • have direct contact with patients’ blood or blood-stained body fluids, such as from sharps
  • are at risk of being injured or bitten by patients.
• Varicella (chickenpox); if they have direct patient contact and:
  • cannot give a definite history of chickenpox or shingles or
  • a blood test does not show they are immune.

And the annual influenza vaccine offered to staff directly involved in patient care.

So to single out Covid vaccines without objecting to the above is moronic, as everyone on those videos (assuming they are what they claim to be) will already have had a battery of vaccinations.

GP mythbuster 37: Immunising healthcare staff - Care Quality Commission

Advice on which immunisations are recommended for GP practice staff and why.

www.cqc.org.uk

 

[eran0004]

If they were forced to work in healthcare they would have a case, because then they wouldn’t have a choice but to get vaccinated.

But since they aren’t, it’s not a violation against the principles of bodily autonomy, just like your employer isn’t violating the principles of freedom of movement by requiring that you show up for work during office hours. It’s part of what you signed up for and you are free to make the choice to quit.

 

[jjaisli]

So to single out Covid vaccines without objecting to the above is moronic, as everyone on those videos (assuming they are what they claim to be) will already have had a battery of vaccinations.

Well, that's a good point. There is virtually nothing in the title descriptions, full names aren't given, and comments are turned off. I wonder why. What is it I hear all the time from these fringe groups? Ahh yes, perhaps these three are just "paid crisis actors" and none of them are doctors or health care professionals. They're just role playing. In fact, they're probably all fully vaccinated. And happy to be.

 

[Scaff]

Well, that's a good point. There is virtually nothing in the title descriptions, full names aren't given, and comments are turned off. I wonder why. What is it I hear all the time from these fringe groups? Ahh yes, perhaps these three are just "paid crisis actors" and none of them are doctors or health care professionals. They're just role playing. In fact, they're probably all fully vaccinated. And happy to be.

Remind me of the time Target produced an Anti-Union video, using a union actor

Union actor from anti-union video speaks out

The star of Target's notorious propaganda film tells Salon: It was "very awkward"

www.salon.com

 

[eran0004]

Well, that's a good point. There is virtually nothing in the title descriptions, full names aren't given, and comments are turned off. I wonder why. What is it I hear all the time from these fringe groups? Ahh yes, perhaps these three are just "paid crisis actors" and none of them are doctors or health care professionals. They're just role playing. In fact, they're probably all fully vaccinated. And happy to be.

Well, I don’t see any reason to doubt that these people are real. There wouldn’t be any point for this group to fight against vaccine mandates in healthcare if everyone was already vaccinated (not to mention that there wouldn’t be a need for a mandate).

Comments are probably disabled because it would get very ugly very quickly if they weren’t. Same reason why they don’t want to put their full names in the videos.

But even if they were actors, that wouldn’t mean that the opinions they share are wrong. They are wrong for entirely different reasons

 

[Scaff]

There wouldn’t be any point for this group to fight against vaccine mandates in healthcare if everyone was already vaccinated (not to mention that there wouldn’t be a need for a mandate).

The point is that mandates already exist for them for between 4 and 8 vaccines/immunisations, to be doing the jobs they claim to have they must already have these or they would not have the job - these are not optional. Something that utterly undermines the claims they are making about either Covid vaccinations or mandates.