On 12/02/2024 20:23, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
> On 12 Feb 2024 19:10:53 GMT
> TimS <tim@streater.me.uk> wrote:
>
>> We don't actually give a flying fuck about that. There was never any
>> justification for these weapons to be in private hands anyway.
>
> Questionable justification for them to be in any hands IMHO.
>

I think what is happening in Ukraine fully justifies their existence and
use. Because if the other side has them, you are going to be walked all
over unless you have them, too.

Unless you have access to the 'weapon shops of Isher' :-)

--
“Ideas are inherently conservative. They yield not to the attack of
other ideas but to the massive onslaught of circumstance"

- John K Galbraith

On 13/02/2024 07:09, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
> On Fri, 9 Feb 2024 13:51:29 +0000, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>
>> There is an old Latin quote. "Quis custodiet ipsos custodes"?
>>
>> It means "Who will guard the guardians?".
>
> This is why we have things like “checks and balances” and “rule of law”,
> to govern how we live together with others who may disagree with us, in
> peace.
>
> Online misinformation is a whole new can of worms.

Well it was only a matter of time after we had built the Internet, that
it would become a whole new medium for the propagation of carefully
crafted bullshit. And a lot of it outside of governmental control for
the first time.

Which is why democratic governments are busy passing laws to limit its
use for anything except the carefully crafted state mandated bullshit.

It won't end well, and it will remind people of why there used to be a
balance between their Lord's temporal - the judiciary - their Lords
Spiritual - the Church, and the actual pragmatic government, which was
electable, in charge of keeping the peace and protecting the realm, not
of engaging in moral dictatorship.

--
“Ideas are inherently conservative. They yield not to the attack of
other ideas but to the massive onslaught of circumstance"

- John K Galbraith

In article <uqf4g0$1vsp3$4@dont-email.me>,
Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
> On Fri, 09 Feb 2024 09:45:56 +0000 (GMT), Bob Latham wrote:

> > I read what he posts and see what he blocks and what he
> > doesn't.

> And yet when I give you information about that, you somehow
> disbelieve it.

Clearly he's not perfect, he has faults eg. he's an advocate of
netzero nonsense. He has (or twitter did) in my opinion suspended the
accounts of people who were not guilty of anything but holding the
"wrong opinion". That seems to have diminished of late and many now
have their accounts back.

Your evidence comes from a source I have no experience of and it all
came from the same source. As I've learnt that pretty much all media
lies continuously in order to subvert public opinion I'm sceptical to
say the least.

Bob.

In article <uqf4j8$1vsp3$5@dont-email.me>,
Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:

> Online misinformation is a whole new can of worms.

Who decides which is misinformation and which is censoring the truth?

During covid we were continuously told this and that were
"misinformation" or a conspiracy theory. Someone decided.

Since then, drip by drip so much of that misinformation turns out to
be true.

Fancy that.

Bob.

On 13/02/2024 09:45, Bob Latham wrote:
> As I've learnt that pretty much all media lies continuously in order
> to subvert public opinion I'm sceptical to say the least.

Amen to that.

One has to ruthlessly apply Cicero's question to *anything* one reads or
sees or hears:

Cui Bono?

And since everything is monetised (except Usenet, and my websites) it is
pretty clear in most cases 'cui' gets the 'bono'.

"Never underestimate the power of carefully crafted bullshit".

--
"Nature does not give up the winter because people dislike the cold."

― Confucius

On 13/02/2024 09:50, Bob Latham wrote:
> In article <uqf4j8$1vsp3$5@dont-email.me>,
> Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
>
>> Online misinformation is a whole new can of worms.
>
> Who decides which is misinformation and which is censoring the truth?
>
> During covid we were continuously told this and that were
> "misinformation" or a conspiracy theory. Someone decided.
>
> Since then, drip by drip so much of that misinformation turns out to
> be true.
>
> Fancy that.
>
Indeed. Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?

It's just another example of the cat-belling principle*.

In theory practice is the same as theory, in practice it isn't.

Governments world wide were frightened out of their wits by the
internet. The race is on to control it to only give the 'on message'
narrative.

From Tehran to Beijing, to Moscow, the firewalls are up.

While in the West it is open season for carefully crafted bullshit and
conspiracy theories, with as much coming from government as from other
interests.

We may yearn for the innocent days when we thought we knew what was the
truth, and real, but today anyone who believes in anything without
massive critical assessment is a gullible idiot.

As is anyone who still thinks in terms of Boolean logic - Truth or
falsity. The better bullshit is a subtle blend of both: Enough truth to
get you to believe the bullshit, as well.

Example: Covid was real, and it was and still is a killer. But was
lockdown the appropriate reaction? Who made money selling masks whose
effect seems mainly symbolic? And just why was the 'free' vaccine deemed
ineffective or unsafe and the massively profit making ones deemed de rigeur?

Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater.

*https://www.longlongtimeago.com/once-upon-a-time/fables/from-aesop/the-mice-in-council-or-who-will-bell-the-cat

--
"When one man dies it's a tragedy. When thousands die it's statistics."

Josef Stalin

On 13 Feb 2024 at 09:29:08 GMT, "The Natural Philosopher"
<tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:

> On 12/02/2024 20:23, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
>> On 12 Feb 2024 19:10:53 GMT
>> TimS <tim@streater.me.uk> wrote:
>>
>>> We don't actually give a flying fuck about that. There was never any
>>> justification for these weapons to be in private hands anyway.
>>
>> Questionable justification for them to be in any hands IMHO.
>
> I think what is happening in Ukraine fully justifies their existence and
> use. Because if the other side has them, you are going to be walked all
> over unless you have them, too.
>
> Unless you have access to the 'weapon shops of Isher' :-)

The way round that is to start encouraging people to have supervised weapons
training in a military context. Six months compulsory at age 18, with 4-week
refreshers every few years. Or you do the six months as litter picking on the
motorways with pocket money and found, your choice.

Or some variation of the above. This is essentially what the Swiss do.

--
Tim

On 13 Feb 2024 at 09:50:25 GMT, "Bob Latham" <bob@sick-of-spam.invalid> wrote:

> In article <uqf4j8$1vsp3$5@dont-email.me>,
> Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
>
>> Online misinformation is a whole new can of worms.
>
> Who decides which is misinformation and which is censoring the truth?
>
> During covid we were continuously told this and that were
> "misinformation" or a conspiracy theory. Someone decided.

Well, you figure it out. We were told the vaccines were coming, and they did,
and I've taken every one that has since been offered, and guess what, I've
never had Covid. Meanwhile we were also told that the vaccines didn't work,
caused millions of fatalities, were the spawn of Satan, were an attempt to
control us all with microchips, etc.

So no prizes for guessing which viewpoint I support.

--
Tim

On 13 Feb 2024 at 10:12:08 GMT, "The Natural Philosopher"
<tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:

> Example: Covid was real, and it was and still is a killer. But was
> lockdown the appropriate reaction? Who made money selling masks whose
> effect seems mainly symbolic? And just why was the 'free' vaccine deemed
> ineffective or unsafe and the massively profit making ones deemed de rigeur?

While these are good questions, some can only be answered in hindsight.
Lockdown? Not sure. It was damned expensive and who knows whether on the one
hand it was necessary or on the other should have been brought in sooner. The
masks turned out to be less necessary than was feared, but it took a while to
understand the transmission pathways and how long the virus was transmissible
on surfaces such as paper and metal.

At least the gumment chose to enable the vaccine makers and then stay out of
their way.

--
Tim

On Tue, 13 Feb 2024 09:29:08 +0000
The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:

> On 12/02/2024 20:23, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
> > On 12 Feb 2024 19:10:53 GMT
> > TimS <tim@streater.me.uk> wrote:
> >
> >> We don't actually give a flying fuck about that. There was never any
> >> justification for these weapons to be in private hands anyway.
> >
> > Questionable justification for them to be in any hands IMHO.
> >
>
> I think what is happening in Ukraine fully justifies their existence and
> use. Because if the other side has them, you are going to be walked all

Yes that's always the justification - "the bad guys have them",
therein lies the problem.

> over unless you have them, too.

The ideal (almost certainly unreachable) state is that nobody has
them. I can't help feeling that there should be a better solution to some
people having them than everyone having them - because that's not a
solution.

--
Steve O'Hara-Smith
Odds and Ends at http://www.sohara.org/
For forms of government let fools contest
Whate're is best administered is best - Alexander Pope

On Tue, 13 Feb 2024 09:25:29 +0000
The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:

> On 12/02/2024 19:10, TimS wrote:

> > We don't actually give a flying fuck about that. There was never any
> > justification for these weapons to be in private hands anyway.
> >
>
> The problem with that, is where do you draw the line?

Wherever you can that works. I'm quite happy with the Irish
approach - if it delivers more than a joule in a projectile it is a firearm
and you need to show good reason when applying for a license (self defence
is *not* on the acceptable list). You will also be required to use it only
for the declared reasons. There are a lot of limits to what you can get
even when you've jumped through the hoops - mainly because it has been
decided that there's no acceptable reason for some classes of weapon.

> Is this a sensible place to draw the line?

If it keeps the killings down and lets people who actually need a
gun get one then I'd say yes.

> And whilst gangland shootings may be scarce, our middle eastern friends
> have brought with them a culture of knives, the larger and more vicious
> the better.

The good thing about a knife is that if it kills the wrong person
it's usually the person who's wielding it and not someone uninvolved, guns
are all too good at unintended consequences, often lethal.

--
Steve O'Hara-Smith
Odds and Ends at http://www.sohara.org/
For forms of government let fools contest
Whate're is best administered is best - Alexander Pope

On 13 Feb 2024 at 12:14:57 GMT, "Ahem A Rivet's Shot" <steveo@eircom.net>
wrote:

> On Tue, 13 Feb 2024 09:29:08 +0000
> The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>
>> On 12/02/2024 20:23, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
>>> On 12 Feb 2024 19:10:53 GMT
>>> TimS <tim@streater.me.uk> wrote:
>>>
>>>> We don't actually give a flying fuck about that. There was never any
>>>> justification for these weapons to be in private hands anyway.
>>>
>>> Questionable justification for them to be in any hands IMHO.
>>
>> I think what is happening in Ukraine fully justifies their existence and
>> use. Because if the other side has them, you are going to be walked all
>
> Yes that's always the justification - "the bad guys have them",
> therein lies the problem.

It's usually a single bad guy. WW2 only happened because of Adolf, Ukraine
only happened because of Putin. If we get trouble in the Pacific, it will be
because of Xi.

It only takes one to make war; it takes two to make peace. After 1991, we all
thought Russia was on a peaceful/democratic trajectory, and we were encouraged
by the Chinese changing leaders every ten years. Thats all gone by the board
now, and we have to adapt accordingly, just as we eventually did in the 1930s.

--
Tim

On 13 Feb 2024 at 12:14:57 GMT, "Ahem A Rivet's Shot" <steveo@eircom.net>
wrote:

> On Tue, 13 Feb 2024 09:29:08 +0000
> The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>
>> On 12/02/2024 20:23, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
>>> On 12 Feb 2024 19:10:53 GMT
>>> TimS <tim@streater.me.uk> wrote:
>>>
>>>> We don't actually give a flying fuck about that. There was never any
>>>> justification for these weapons to be in private hands anyway.
>>>
>>> Questionable justification for them to be in any hands IMHO.
>>
>> I think what is happening in Ukraine fully justifies their existence and
>> use. Because if the other side has them, you are going to be walked all
>
> Yes that's always the justification - "the bad guys have them",
> therein lies the problem.
>
>> over unless you have them, too.
>
> The ideal (almost certainly unreachable) state is that nobody has
> them. I can't help feeling that there should be a better solution to some
> people having them than everyone having them - because that's not a
> solution.

Sure it's a solution. You may not like it, but it's a solution. All you're
doing is belling the cat.

--
Tim

On 13 Feb 2024 11:51:59 GMT
TimS <tim@streater.me.uk> wrote:

> On 13 Feb 2024 at 09:50:25 GMT, "Bob Latham" <bob@sick-of-spam.invalid>
> wrote:
>
> > In article <uqf4j8$1vsp3$5@dont-email.me>,
> > Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
> >
> >> Online misinformation is a whole new can of worms.
> >
> > Who decides which is misinformation and which is censoring the truth?
> >
> > During covid we were continuously told this and that were
> > "misinformation" or a conspiracy theory. Someone decided.
>
> Well, you figure it out. We were told the vaccines were coming, and they
> did, and I've taken every one that has since been offered, and guess
> what, I've never had Covid. Meanwhile we were also told that the vaccines
> didn't work, caused millions of fatalities, were the spawn of Satan, were
> an attempt to control us all with microchips, etc.
>
> So no prizes for guessing which viewpoint I support.

Perfectly reasonable and I did the same for the same reasons and
with the same results. There does seem to have been a recent upswing in
heavily polarised viewpoints of late though and a lot of putting people
into buckets neither of which fill me with happy thoughts.

When all around lies are being shouted how do you spot the quiet
voice of truth ? Is it even there ? Remember that every news story where you
know the details at first hand was misreported - the one time I got to
question a reporter about a specific incident he told me that the truth was
too unbelievable and would have damaged the credibility of the paper so
he softened it to make it more believable - I still have a hard time
with that logic but it's not always (ever?) conspiracy driving the lies.

--
Steve O'Hara-Smith
Odds and Ends at http://www.sohara.org/
For forms of government let fools contest
Whate're is best administered is best - Alexander Pope

On 2024-02-13, Bob Latham <bob@sick-of-spam.invalid> wrote:
> In article <uqf4j8$1vsp3$5@dont-email.me>,
> Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
>
>> Online misinformation is a whole new can of worms.
>
> Who decides which is misinformation and which is censoring the truth?
>
> During covid we were continuously told this and that were
> "misinformation" or a conspiracy theory. Someone decided.
>
> Since then, drip by drip so much of that misinformation turns out to
> be true.

Go on - elaborate.

> Fancy that.

joke

On 13 Feb 2024 12:42:59 GMT
TimS <tim@streater.me.uk> wrote:

> On 13 Feb 2024 at 12:14:57 GMT, "Ahem A Rivet's Shot" <steveo@eircom.net>
> wrote:
>
> > The ideal (almost certainly unreachable) state is that nobody has
> > them. I can't help feeling that there should be a better solution to
> > some people having them than everyone having them - because that's not a
> > solution.
>
> Sure it's a solution. You may not like it, but it's a solution. All you're
> doing is belling the cat.

It's demonstrably not a solution to the problem of people getting
shot at.

--
Steve O'Hara-Smith
Odds and Ends at http://www.sohara.org/
For forms of government let fools contest
Whate're is best administered is best - Alexander Pope

In article <l313evF4k5pU1@mid.individual.net>,
TimS <tim@streater.me.uk> wrote:
> On 13 Feb 2024 at 09:50:25 GMT, "Bob Latham" <bob@sick-of-spam.invalid> wrote:

> > In article <uqf4j8$1vsp3$5@dont-email.me>,
> > Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
> >
> >> Online misinformation is a whole new can of worms.
> >
> > Who decides which is misinformation and which is censoring the
> > truth?
> >
> > During covid we were continuously told this and that were
> > "misinformation" or a conspiracy theory. Someone decided.

> Well, you figure it out.

I certainly have a view which is probably different from yours. I
have things I'm very sure of, things probable but not certain, so a
range of confidence in many aspects.

I do remember a tremendous number of people demanding all sorts of
extreme actions against those that didn't want the vaccine. It opened
my eyes to how quickly normal people could become unhinged and
barbaric. People should be able to decide if they want the medication
or not, extreme pressure placed on people was disgusting.

Demands like removing them from society to basically concentration
camps, holding then down and forcibly injecting to the more mild
banning them from work, theatres, restaurants etc.

The government sacked thousands of care workers for refusing the jab,
they were told they would kill granny.

As was admitted in a some sort of tribunal in the EU, (there's a
video) the manufacturer Pfizer if I recall correctly, said that no
testing of transmission was ever done. There was never any basis for
the madness. Some have since apologised most have not, most notably
the unhinged media.

Certainly I can't think of anyone I know that hasn't had covid, not
one. A good proportion have had it twice and some 3 times. I don't
know anyone who didn't have the first 3 jabs at least.

I'm 90% sure that the vaccine does not affect transmission.
They *may* help if you get infected not seen enough data.
Vaccines have caused many people serious injury.
Masks even N95 masks are useless they're just theatre.
Asymptomatic transmission was never a serious factor, I will not
claim it didn't happen but for the most part it was propaganda from
the nudge units.

PCR testing in the UK used double the sensible levels of
amplification cycles. People who should know said you could find
anything in anyone with that level of amplification.

Remember the videos from China of people dropping dead at bus stops.
Total propaganda never happened.

Isolation will prevent transmission where no one in the group is
infected. But the cost, not just in money but in medical issues of
all sorts is horrendous. See current off the scale excess deaths
figures, it's either lockdown or vaccines you decide.

Eventually when lockdown ends, the wave starts again just delayed
which *may* be helpful.

I'm 75% sure the virus was as a result of 'gain of function' work in
a lab and not a natural cross over from Bats.

> We were told the vaccines were coming, and they did,

Yes, remarkably quickly, too quickly.

> and I've taken every one that has since been offered, and guess
> what, I've never had Covid.

You're an exception at least you would be here.

> Meanwhile we were also told that the vaccines didn't work,

I'm not saying they didn't but I don't think there is any good
evidence that they did.

> caused millions of fatalities,

At the moment, that looks like overstating things.

I'm sure there have been many serious injuries and that people have
died, I've not seen enough data yet to go beyond that.

> were the spawn of Satan, were an attempt to control us all with
> microchips, etc.

That's not rational.

> So no prizes for guessing which viewpoint I support.

My wife and I had the first 3 jabs. Had we known then what we think
we know now, including what happened to us, we would not have done so.

There are some very interesting graphs from a university about a
month ago showing all cause mortalities and when they happened.
Certainly a surprise to me. Didn't support the narrative.

I CBA to go find them now, didn't expect to need them.

I wouldn't mind betting that the total number of deaths caused
directly by covid are as nothing compares to the results of the
government's actions in response.

Thousands of excess deaths every month, the media is silent and the
government will not debate it in parliament. Draw your own conclusion.

Anyway it's just my opinion.

Bob.

On 13/02/2024 11:51, TimS wrote:
> On 13 Feb 2024 at 09:50:25 GMT, "Bob Latham" <bob@sick-of-spam.invalid> wrote:
>
>> In article <uqf4j8$1vsp3$5@dont-email.me>,
>> Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>> Online misinformation is a whole new can of worms.
>>
>> Who decides which is misinformation and which is censoring the truth?
>>
>> During covid we were continuously told this and that were
>> "misinformation" or a conspiracy theory. Someone decided.
>
> Well, you figure it out. We were told the vaccines were coming, and they did,
> and I've taken every one that has since been offered, and guess what, I've
> never had Covid. Meanwhile we were also told that the vaccines didn't work,
> caused millions of fatalities, were the spawn of Satan, were an attempt to
> control us all with microchips, etc.
>
> So no prizes for guessing which viewpoint I support.
>
As I said, a careful mixture of truth and bullshit.

Vaccinations certainly did work, but we got the ones Big Pharma made the
most cash out of...

--
The New Left are the people they warned you about.

On 13/02/2024 12:41, TimS wrote:
> On 13 Feb 2024 at 12:14:57 GMT, "Ahem A Rivet's Shot" <steveo@eircom.net>
> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 13 Feb 2024 09:29:08 +0000
>> The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>> On 12/02/2024 20:23, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
>>>> On 12 Feb 2024 19:10:53 GMT
>>>> TimS <tim@streater.me.uk> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> We don't actually give a flying fuck about that. There was never any
>>>>> justification for these weapons to be in private hands anyway.
>>>>
>>>> Questionable justification for them to be in any hands IMHO.
>>>
>>> I think what is happening in Ukraine fully justifies their existence and
>>> use. Because if the other side has them, you are going to be walked all
>>
>> Yes that's always the justification - "the bad guys have them",
>> therein lies the problem.
>
> It's usually a single bad guy. WW2 only happened because of Adolf, Ukraine
> only happened because of Putin. If we get trouble in the Pacific, it will be
> because of Xi.
>
No. That is criminally naive. The reasons why Adolf, Putin and Xi became
leaders are rooted in many other economic and geopolitical factors.

They were and are products of their time and place. Just like Donald
Trump is.

> It only takes one to make war; it takes two to make peace. After 1991, we all
> thought Russia was on a peaceful/democratic trajectory, and we were encouraged
> by the Chinese changing leaders every ten years. Thats all gone by the board
> now, and we have to adapt accordingly, just as we eventually did in the 1930s.
>
Putin wont hand in his guns just because you do. That's all I am saying.

And he would regard your viewpoint as that of a useless stupid idiot.

--
The higher up the mountainside
The greener grows the grass.
The higher up the monkey climbs
The more he shows his arse.

Traditional

On 13/02/2024 15:13, Bob Latham wrote:
> Certainly I can't think of anyone I know that hasn't had covid, not
> one. A good proportion have had it twice and some 3 times. I don't
> know anyone who didn't have the first 3 jabs at least.

I am not sure whether I have ever had it or not. As an 'at risk' person
I have had so many bloody jabs I look like a pincushion. But I live in
splendid isolation.

I have never tested positive for it. Can't offhand think of anyone who
hasn't had it other than me though.

--
It is the folly of too many to mistake the echo of a London coffee-house
for the voice of the kingdom.

Jonathan Swift

In article <uqg11c$24ou7$1@dont-email.me>,
The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:

> Vaccinations certainly did work,

Well I'm very sure they do not prevent transmission.

Bob.

On 13/02/2024 15:32, Bob Latham wrote:
> In article <uqg11c$24ou7$1@dont-email.me>,
> The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>
>> Vaccinations certainly did work,
>
> Well I'm very sure they do not prevent transmission.
>
> Bob.
>
They reduce the likelihood of onward transmission.

In article <l2v8ptFomvlU1@mid.individual.net>,
TimS <tim@streater.me.uk> wrote:
>On 12 Feb 2024 at 18:50:58 GMT, "Scott Alfter" <Scott Alfter> wrote:
>> "Buybacks" are nothing of the sort. The government can't "buy back" that
>> which it never owned. Be honest and call it what it is: confiscation,
>> usually at nowhere near what the firearms involved are worth.
>
>We don't actually give a flying fuck about that. There was never any
>justification for these weapons to be in private hands anyway.

....and that is why you're a subject of your country, not a citizen.

--
_/_
/ v \ Scott Alfter (remove the obvious to send mail)
(IIGS( https://alfter.us/ Top-posting!
\_^_/ >What's the most annoying thing on Usenet?

In article <uqg36u$258bd$1@dont-email.me>,
mm0fmf <none@invalid.com> wrote:
> On 13/02/2024 15:32, Bob Latham wrote:
> > In article <uqg11c$24ou7$1@dont-email.me>,
> > The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> >
> >> Vaccinations certainly did work,
> >
> > Well I'm very sure they do not prevent transmission.
> >
> > Bob.

> They reduce the likelihood of onward transmission.

That's a new one, where did you get that from?

Do I take that as a tacit admission that vaccines don't protect you
from infection? Have we also dropped the notion that it helps if you
get infected?

So beforehand we were told - asymptomatic transmission, very
important, anyone, even perfectly well people can give you covid but
now, even people who are ill and infected are safer because of the
vaccine?

Do people cough, sneeze and breath less ?

Why then hasn't covid stopped?

My friends wife had covid for at least the second time a month ago.

My cousin who honestly is a GP somewhere in the Monmouthshire/Bristol
border has just had it for the first time. Fully jabbed of course.
I'll quote what she wrote...

Cousin wrote"
So sorry to be late replying .
I have had Covid for the last week and have actually felt quite
poorly . It‘s amazing that I have managed to dodge it for so long -
my first Covid of the pandemic. Thinking that I‘ve had all the
vaccinations offered and peoples comments that‘s it‘s ‘ like a bad
cold now  lulled me into complacency.
I am starting to improve but along the way I have felt pretty unwell,
breathless and lost my sense taste / smell .
I have had to cancel 3 days of work which I hate as I don‘t like
admitting illness .
To someone who loves their food and adores  eating experiences‘ I am
going to be mighty upset if the sense of taste doesn‘t come back .
Obviously I can‘t moan too much as being left on ITU on a ventilator
is much worse !!
Anyway I do feel I‘ve turned a bit of a corner today but (husband)
has started sniffing and sneezing Œ..Oh dear .
" end quote.

I've seen no evidence vaccines do much good but they do do harm.

Bob.

In article <5b31fc9be8bob@sick-of-spam.invalid>,
Bob Latham <bob@sick-of-spam.invalid> wrote:
>In article <uqf4j8$1vsp3$5@dont-email.me>,
> Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
>
>> Online misinformation is a whole new can of worms.
>
>Who decides which is misinformation and which is censoring the truth?
>
>During covid we were continuously told this and that were
>"misinformation" or a conspiracy theory. Someone decided.
>
>Since then, drip by drip so much of that misinformation turns out to
>be true.

....and much of what governments were spewing out proved to be total
bullshit. Probably the worst offender in this regard was Jacinda Ardern
insisting that the Kiwis only trust her misbegotten regime, but there was
plenty of authoritarian big-government nonsense to go around.

--
_/_
/ v \ Scott Alfter (remove the obvious to send mail)
(IIGS( https://alfter.us/ Top-posting!
\_^_/ >What's the most annoying thing on Usenet?