Vaccine Passport - Plan B

[Kid in the Riot]

4 minutes ago, big p said:

Not sure I said I would, perhaps you want to twist this aswell?

Post me a link where it states that 170k people have died "from" COVID and not "with".

I would like to see what you think the correct numbers are...provide them please. If they are not from the ONS, where are they from?

I said the 170k was "with". It seems reading is not a strong point for you, along with numbers. 

[big p]

5 minutes ago, Kid in the Riot said:

I would like to see what you think the correct numbers are...provide them please. If they are not from the ONS, where are they from?

I said the 170k was "with". It seems reading is not a strong point for you, along with numbers. 

I'm not the one spreading misinformation. You originally said 130k had died "of " COVID. Which is wrong! They died "with" COVID. It's completely different and you know it.

 

Edited December 11, 2021 by big p

[IAmNick]

11 minutes ago, LoyalRed said:

My concern is the decision or phases will get worse and people will either get used to it or happy to accept it going forward.  How can we live in a world where someone that doesn’t want a vaccine can only visit a shop ffs ?!  This is not where I want us heading as a country and it is not what I want for my kids going forward.  

Why, out of interest? They've got better since the start (full on lockdown multiple times) up until now in general. If anything I think people are getting less happy with them and they're coming under increased scrutiny as time goes on as well, rather than being more accepting.

At what point do you think someone's personal decision, which can impact society around them, should affect their ability to access it? It's a difficult question for sure. We already have many rules in our society and things you have to do to be able to live and work in it - we just take them for granted as they've always been here.

[pillred]

1 hour ago, James54De said:

No, it is not

Go on then where are your 600% increase figures coming from then? over how long a period? and from which source? and believe me you had better have your sensationalist facts right  because I WILL pull you up on it believe me. 

Edited December 11, 2021 by pillred
punctuation

[BTRFTG]

Let's just a few things clear:

If you're of the persuasion to not have an inoculation because......(insert excuse here other than that provided for sound reason by a medical professional)... it's absolutely nothing to do with that excuse and everything to do with the fact you're little more than a functioning amoeba, thick as pig shit, holding little or no intellectual capacity. And whilst in the bigger scheme you aren't a danger to yourselves (for what loss might you be,) you are to the wider community and thus you deserve to be marginalised. Maintain your position by all means but be aware you wear your stupidity as a badge of faux honour. Note, too, that the vast majority of folks who die have recently seen or been under the care of a medical professional. So using your iatrogenic logic next time you feel unwell, suffer worrying symptoms or through accident require emergency assistance, do us and yourselves a favour and steer well clear of informed and educated help. You know they don't have your best interests at heart, there's no infallible proof they'll be able to help (else why do folks keep dying) so, as with vaccines,  take your own chances. Leave getting ill as a result of undertaking Stage One drug trials whilst appreciating the wider human benefits they deliver to the likes of me. Promise us that, won't you?

If you're of the persuasion that wearing a face mask or showing a vaccine passport is an imposition to which you should not be subject, be aware most think it reasonable that Her Majesty should not provide you the convenience of her having sorted out arrangements for your free passage beyond these shores, that you should no longer be facilitated to quaff foul keg beers in Benidorm or contract sexually transmitted diseases in Ayia Napa. Those things you can arrange yourself in gutteral discussions with foreign powers (not I suspect you'd remotely know where to start.) As Law prescribes your conscience, freedom and security may be excused as 'absolute human rights'. It also prescribes that your ridicule, ostracization and marginalization are permissible should you not conform to those 'conditional rights' you desire to ignore.

 

[Mr Popodopolous]

While I don't want to take the thread off the topic of football- there's a thread for that- but those who are determinedly against the vaccine eg can make a notable impact, see the poll tax. A sizeable minority caused a big issue.

I won't bother to list the ways but I can certainly think of a few, not that I'm that way inclined.

[Mr Popodopolous]

4 hours ago, IAmNick said:

But there are already non MRNA vaccines aren't there? As far as I know the AstraZenica one isn't. Neither is the Johnson and Johnson one - that's a standard viral vector I think.

Why would Valneva be any different? Sounds a bit like you've just picked one that isn't in the current plans to me.

It's the same people saying they're safe in each case. The individuals to be "won over" have no special knowledge of vaccines they could use to form a reasoned opinion - they're not experts.

https://www.bmj.com/content/375/bmj.n2551

Not saying it is the be all and end all but there might be some preferable aspects of Valneva as set against the other ones.

You talk of other non MRNA- but this line in this piece is interesting. Not that I've fact-checked it in full or anything- but it's an interesting line. Johnson and Johnson might be one, I'll go with your point in that- based in USA isn't it?

Quote

The Valneva vaccine, which is the only adjuvanted, inactivated, whole virus vaccine being tested in Europe, will be manufactured in Scotland and Sweden.

As to your 2nd line- questionable with respect. Valneva was suddenly pulled from the UK in mid September 2021- unsure why, not looked into it in depth but it was suddenly cancelled in mid September. There may have been a good reason for it but don't think it was ever fully explained- commercial disputes or?

It is also suggested by those well known conspiracy theorists at the Independent that Valneva contains more traditional qualities than Astrazeneca. Could be wrong of course but at the same time not a fringe source?

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/covid-vaccine-valnev-astrazeneca-oxford-b1940170.html

It will be interesting to see if this vaccine is a success elsewhere, how it plays out etc.

Edited December 12, 2021 by Mr Popodopolous

[frenchred]

12 hours ago, LoyalRed said:

Is this your new normal now then ? 

After what I've been through over the last 12 months, believe me, this is a very small price to pay, so yeah my new normal, don't cause me any hardship

[Red-Robbo]

16 hours ago, LoyalRed said:

As I mentioned earlier, if this variant ends up being milder then we would all expect this vaccine passport measure to be stopped wouldn’t we?  If that is the case then I have no issues with it.  I would assume you wouldn’t want the passport in place indefinitely from now on.  You just agree to it as a precautionary measure until we know more about the variant ?  What are your thoughts on Plan C ? 

 

Most indicators are Omicron is a bit less virulent but a hell of a lot more infectious.

If a lot more people catch a slightly less dangerous variant that still equals more in hospitals.

@LondonBristolian made an excellent point on the politics board when he said the only real endpoint of these continual crises is ramping up UK hospital capacity so we can cope with repeated coronavirus waves caused by mutations, as well as winter flu surges. Running NHS hospitals at 92-96% bed capacity isn't sustainable. We had wintertime capacity worries even before Covid.

Of course, this isn't a quick fix and requires the political will to reverse the various changes that make it difficult for the UK to recruit student nurses and doctors. But it's something to think about when people cast their votes.

[Red-Robbo]

16 hours ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

R-R, not the first time you've posted it- pretty sure it's an LFT as the alternative to a vaccine passport.

 

Good point, Mr P.  I speed-read the new regulations and got the PCR thing stuck in my head after reading the foreign travel rules.

[Mr Popodopolous]

58 minutes ago, Red-Robbo said:

 

Good point, Mr P.  I speed-read the new regulations and got the PCR thing stuck in my head after reading the foreign travel rules.

Easily done tbh RR after nearly two years of this!

[Mr Popodopolous]

Little more on the actual topic, I wonder if we have sufficient stewarding capacity etc to seal with it, let alone this combined with regular security checks. For us also read a lot of clubs probably.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/article-10300275/Premier-League-Football-fans-warned-expect-HUGE-delays-Covid-passes-introduced.html

Granted headline probably worse than story, Daily Mail but anyway what do we think?

[Eddie Hitler]

1 hour ago, Red-Robbo said:

 

Most indicators are Omicron is a bit less virulent but a hell of a lot more infectious.

If a lot more people catch a slightly less dangerous variant that still equals more in hospitals.

@LondonBristolian made an excellent point on the politics board when he said the only real endpoint of these continual crises is ramping up UK hospital capacity so we can cope with repeated coronavirus waves caused by mutations, as well as winter flu surges. Running NHS hospitals at 92-96% bed capacity isn't sustainable. We had wintertime capacity worries even before Covid.

Of course, this isn't a quick fix and requires the political will to reverse the various changes that make it difficult for the UK to recruit student nurses and doctors. But it's something to think about when people cast their votes.

 

Uni places were increased in the summer for doctors and dentists; with funding.

https://www.gponline.com/9000-medical-school-places-available-2021-cap-lifted/article/1724173

Then there are the many new Nightingale hospitals.

[Red-Robbo]

1 hour ago, Eddie Hitler said:

 

Uni places were increased in the summer for doctors and dentists; with funding.

https://www.gponline.com/9000-medical-school-places-available-2021-cap-lifted/article/1724173

Then there are the many new Nightingale hospitals.

 

We need to re-entice back the EU doctors and nurses we've lost - and that means allowing their families to settle and work as well (many aren't single); we need to re-introduce the nursing bursary, despite Johnson's lies, the scheme that replaced it is nowhere near as generous; we need to increase NHS pay-rates at junior rates.  France gave the health-workers involved in fighting Covid generous above-inflationary increases; granted citizenship to foreign health-workers involved in this work and introduced extra pensions and provisions (such as scholarships for children) for the families of health-workers who died due to Covid.  Here there had to be a major fuss kicked up to get them to exempt nurses and junior doctors from the 1% state employee wage cap. 

Nightingale Hospitals are just big useless buildings unless they have sufficient staff. As both doctors and nurses need 4 years to qualify, this year's increased placements are going to take a while to filter in. 

[BTRFTG]

2 hours ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Little more on the actual topic, I wonder if we have sufficient stewarding capacity etc to seal with it, let alone this combined with regular security checks. For us also read a lot of clubs probably.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/article-10300275/Premier-League-Football-fans-warned-expect-HUGE-delays-Covid-passes-introduced.html

Granted headline probably worse than story, Daily Mail but anyway what do we think?

As with the security checks (sic) any review of NHS apps or negative covid tests is utterly meaningless given there's no way of tying the data to the individual presenting.

Best thing they might do is to enforce mandatory face coverings in stadia, perhaps those who claim exemption should be placed in their own section of stand, then enforce wearing throughout. No covering = ejection. Close the concourses and concessions for food and beverage.

At least then you'll aim to control the spread of the virus.

[BTRFTG]

34 minutes ago, Red-Robbo said:

 

We need to re-entice back the EU doctors and nurses we've lost - and that means allowing their families to settle and work as well (many aren't single); we need to re-introduce the nursing bursary, despite Johnson's lies, the scheme that replaced it is nowhere near as generous; we need to increase NHS pay-rates at junior rates.  France gave the health-workers involved in fighting Covid generous above-inflationary increases; granted citizenship to foreign health-workers involved in this work and introduced extra pensions and provisions (such as scholarships for children) for the families of health-workers who died due to Covid.  Here there had to be a major fuss kicked up to get them to exempt nurses and junior doctors from the 1% state employee wage cap. 

Nightingale Hospitals are just big useless buildings unless they have sufficient staff. As both doctors and nurses need 4 years to qualify, this year's increased placements are going to take a while to filter in. 

Save all that costs and as elections have shown for decades the only thing that really matters to folks is the bottom line in their pockets. Everybody demands a better health service, very few are prepared to cough up the sums required (which presently would be around £780 for every man woman and child each year just to stand still.)

And no, there isn't a mythical pot of super wealthy to pick up the pain. They should teach the tax/pub analogy such kids leaving school understand how the tax system operates.

[Red-Robbo]

33 minutes ago, BTRFTG said:

Save all that costs and as elections have shown for decades the only thing that really matters to folks is the bottom line in their pockets. Everybody demands a better health service, very few are prepared to cough up the sums required (which presently would be around £780 for every man woman and child each year just to stand still.)

And no, there isn't a mythical pot of super wealthy to pick up the pain. They should teach the tax/pub analogy such kids leaving school understand how the tax system operates.

 

First line - absolutely correct. Second line - not so. Even if you simply looked at billionaires, the UK gained 24 new ones in 2020. The combined wealth increase of the UK's billionaires last year was 22%. If even half that amount was taxed away, you could raise the budget of the NHS by 60%.

Of course, it's not easy. Taxing the super-rich and multinational corporations requires international co-operation, which is difficult when the super-rich control the levers of power in many countries. In fact, some entire countries economy is twisted to allow them to be the sink depository of hidden trillions.  See the excellent film The Laundromat for an example of how at least $36tn - nearly half the world's GDP - is entirely hidden from any fiscal reckoning.  It annoys me that I see a bigger percentage of my income taxed away than Roman Abramovitch does and my company sees more of its income taxed than Amazon. 

[A Horse With No Name]

17 hours ago, Kid in the Riot said:

I would like to see what you think the correct numbers are...provide them please. If they are not from the ONS, where are they from?

I said the 170k was "with". It seems reading is not a strong point for you, along with numbers. 

The only true figures are the total deaths for the year, as opposed to the average for, say, the previous five years. That will tell you how many have died , either directly or indirectly from Covid. Those figures come from the ONS.

[Red-Robbo]

6 minutes ago, The Horse With No Name said:

The only true figures are the total deaths for the year, as opposed to the average for, say, the previous five years. That will tell you how many have died , either directly or indirectly from Covid. Those figures come from the ONS.

 

13th chart down in this stat-fest gives you that number.

At the end of November, we were 1,100 deaths a day above the average for the five years before the Pandemic.  Worth noting that some months in spring/summer 2021 were actually below average death rates, so that shows how these infection spikes really affect things.

https://data.spectator.co.uk/category/national

[RedReynard]

1 hour ago, BTRFTG said:

As with the security checks (sic) any review of NHS apps or negative covid tests is utterly meaningless given there's no way of tying the data to the individual presenting.

Best thing they might do is to enforce mandatory face coverings in stadia, perhaps those who claim exemption should be placed in their own section of stand, then enforce wearing throughout. No covering = ejection. Close the concourses and concessions for food and beverage.

At least then you'll aim to control the spread of the virus.

Exactly this!  I went to the Wales v Belgium game and had to show Covid passport. Took screen shot as signal not usually up to much round stadiums. Steward looked at it and in I went. Could have been anyone's.  A work colleague who supports Swindon and hasn't been vaccinated went to the Newport game a few weeks back. Scanned a LF test and reported it as negative so had email to show he was negative though hadn't done test. Bloody annoying but that is the flaw. He has continually broke Covid rules and there will always be a way round them if that is what you choose I suppose.

 

[BTRFTG]

39 minutes ago, Red-Robbo said:

 

First line - absolutely correct. Second line - not so. Even if you simply looked at billionaires, the UK gained 24 new ones in 2020. The combined wealth increase of the UK's billionaires last year was 22%. If even half that amount was taxed away, you could raise the budget of the NHS by 60%.

Of course, it's not easy. Taxing the super-rich and multinational corporations requires international co-operation, which is difficult when the super-rich control the levers of power in many countries. In fact, some entire countries economy is twisted to allow them to be the sink depository of hidden trillions.  See the excellent film The Laundromat for an example of how at least $36tn - nearly half the world's GDP - is entirely hidden from any fiscal reckoning.  It annoys me that I see a bigger percentage of my income taxed away than Roman Abramovitch does and my company sees more of its income taxed than Amazon. 

You bizarrely conflate wealth and income as well as UK and international jurisdiction, but as the running costs of the NHS must be met by Direct UK taxes (for obvious reasons,) let's stick to those.

41% of adults pay nothing in Income/NI (that's around 23.1m who don't presently care about tax take as it doesn't impact them.) They include the likes of me, somebody who's paid a fortune in tax over the years but who in taking a sabbatical these past two years before retiring hasn't paid direct tax to the Chancellor during that period;

Of those contributing the bottom 50% contribute 9.3% of the total take;

The next 40% contribute  29.9% of the take;

The 90-99th centiles contribute 31.6% of the take;

The top 1% earners, they contribute 29.2% - less than half of one percent of the UK population pays nearly a third of income and NI. Few are billionaire oligarchs as like our own Chairman it's all too easy to move directly taxed wealth from these shores. Of course elections matter not to them as they can't vote anyway. Of that top 1% only one quarter of their income comes from dividends and defined benefits, so raising rates, as historically proven, doesn't proportionally raise monies raised.

So the NHS' running costs are mostly paid for by a small subset of middle and higher income earners, like many on this forum. The problem being marginalise them further and there's no incentive to pay tax at all. 

Take the wealthy retired, those who've exceeded their lifetime allowances (that includes many long serving public sector workers, hence the mass exodus of doctors, teachers and Civil Servants in their late 50s.) Rather than crystalise money purchase assets which would see somewhere between 95-100% of that asset go to the Chancellor, they'll leave where they are, not touch them, leave to their kids if dead before 75, or beyond IHT at kids marginal rates thereafter.

The problem for Governments, even those who shout loudly in opposition, is they know that ordinary folks know it's them who'll be picking up the tab, not somebody who's fled the country taking their assets with them, or some far flung oligarch sipping cocktails in the BVI. Ever was thus and that's why stated voting intention and that which happens in the booth rarely accord.

 

 

 

 

[BTRFTG]

1 hour ago, The Horse With No Name said:

The only true figures are the total deaths for the year, as opposed to the average for, say, the previous five years. That will tell you how many have died , either directly or indirectly from Covid. Those figures come from the ONS.

Data tells nothing. Interpretation of data, that's of interest but is, of course, subjective.

It's also untrue to assume any difference in year to baseline is attributable to an identified factor. It might be, might not be.

Take suicide. Read the press and you'd think there was an epidemic, that there must be a reason for all the tragic stories we daily encounter (and tragic they most certainly are.) Yet in truth the suicide rate is pretty much at an all time low, an 80% reduction on what was observed in Victorian Britain and they didn't have Covid. Or Cancer, there is an epidemic of that but it's primary cause in most cases is something whose identification really doesn't help - we live longer, far longer than biologically we've evolved to last. On the one hand that's a brilliant thing, but comes quid pro quo with an inevitable downside.

If you look at improvements in healthcare, nutrition and lifestyle over the past 50 years there's an uncomfortable conclusion to be drawn. For the past few decades, statistically at least, not enough of us have been dying. In the UK that's been running at around 180-200k deaths avoided each year. Problem being, we're not immortal and inevitably, even if we do great things, the death rate must and will increase. It's how such things work.

[Red-Robbo]

1 hour ago, BTRFTG said:

You bizarrely conflate wealth and income as well as UK and international jurisdiction, but as the running costs of the NHS must be met by Direct UK taxes (for obvious reasons,) let's stick to those.

41% of adults pay nothing in Income/NI (that's around 23.1m who don't presently care about tax take as it doesn't impact them.) They include the likes of me, somebody who's paid a fortune in tax over the years but who in taking a sabbatical these past two years before retiring hasn't paid direct tax to the Chancellor during that period;

Of those contributing the bottom 50% contribute 9.3% of the total take;

The next 40% contribute  29.9% of the take;

The 90-99th centiles contribute 31.6% of the take;

The top 1% earners, they contribute 29.2% - less than half of one percent of the UK population pays nearly a third of income and NI. Few are billionaire oligarchs as like our own Chairman it's all too easy to move directly taxed wealth from these shores. Of course elections matter not to them as they can't vote anyway. Of that top 1% only one quarter of their income comes from dividends and defined benefits, so raising rates, as historically proven, doesn't proportionally raise monies raised.

So the NHS' running costs are mostly paid for by a small subset of middle and higher income earners, like many on this forum. The problem being marginalise them further and there's no incentive to pay tax at all. 

Take the wealthy retired, those who've exceeded their lifetime allowances (that includes many long serving public sector workers, hence the mass exodus of doctors, teachers and Civil Servants in their late 50s.) Rather than crystalise money purchase assets which would see somewhere between 95-100% of that asset go to the Chancellor, they'll leave where they are, not touch them, leave to their kids if dead before 75, or beyond IHT at kids marginal rates thereafter.

The problem for Governments, even those who shout loudly in opposition, is they know that ordinary folks know it's them who'll be picking up the tab, not somebody who's fled the country taking their assets with them, or some far flung oligarch sipping cocktails in the BVI. Ever was thus and that's why stated voting intention and that which happens in the booth rarely accord.

 

 

I'm actually not conflating wealth (which may be held overseas) with income, but corporations and UK-based multi-millionaire and billionaires make a lot of income on UK-based transactions. The UK generates a lot of cash. I generate and derive cash from UK-based commercial activity; Richard Branson derives even more.  This income is reachable and calculatable and much of it, in the case of Branson or Apple or Amazon or whoever, is currently untaxed because of arrangements in British overseas territories that HM Government is quite happy to continue.

It is just rubbish to conclude no more money can be raised from super-profits made within the UK and the cost of developing the NHS into a fit-for-purpose system has to by necessity fall disproportionately on the average Joe. You need only to have experienced the state health services in numerous northern European countries - or even just across La Manche - to conclude that a better-funded health system needn't financially cripple the inhabitants. 

[Rebounder]

2 hours ago, BTRFTG said:

Data tells nothing. Interpretation of data, that's of interest but is, of course, subjective.

It's also untrue to assume any difference in year to baseline is attributable to an identified factor. It might be, might not be.

Take suicide. Read the press and you'd think there was an epidemic, that there must be a reason for all the tragic stories we daily encounter (and tragic they most certainly are.) Yet in truth the suicide rate is pretty much at an all time low, an 80% reduction on what was observed in Victorian Britain and they didn't have Covid. Or Cancer, there is an epidemic of that but it's primary cause in most cases is something whose identification really doesn't help - we live longer, far longer than biologically we've evolved to last. On the one hand that's a brilliant thing, but comes quid pro quo with an inevitable downside.

If you look at improvements in healthcare, nutrition and lifestyle over the past 50 years there's an uncomfortable conclusion to be drawn. For the past few decades, statistically at least, not enough of us have been dying. In the UK that's been running at around 180-200k deaths avoided each year. Problem being, we're not immortal and inevitably, even if we do great things, the death rate must and will increase. It's how such things work.

I'm not really sure you can compare suicide in Victorian times with now. There was a distinct lack of knowledge about mental health then and as far as I am aware no support beyond putting people away. 

There are serious problems with mental health provision in this country, and not all of it results in suicide, but does lead to long term damage to everyone involved. Suicide rates only tell a small part of the story and aren't really a good way to tell how good and effective provision is. There is still a distinct lack of knowledge now too. 

Edited December 12, 2021 by Rebounder

[reddoh]

On 08/12/2021 at 21:41, IAmNick said:

Lots of diseases we're vaccinated against have high survival rates. It also isn't just about that as I'm sure you know - it's about transmission and the healthcare burden.

I guess your last sentence is where we differ. I'd rather not die before my time due to something preventable if I can at all help it!

I'm in my mid 30s and want to see us in the prem ffs..!

possible a bit late but don't hold your breath.

[Riaz]

On 10/12/2021 at 21:42, Harry said:

You’ll have to tell me where I’ve strayed into ‘conspiracy’? 
I think I’ve been very levelled in this actually. I’ve not denied the virus exists, I’ve not denied vaccines work, I’ve not said that nobody should get them, so please tell me where the conspiracy appears? 
I’ve praised the nhs workers, I’ve advocated solutions to help the more vulnerable, I’ve shown concern for citizens and their welfare and businesses. You’ll have to tell me what part of all that is conspiracy. 
Thing is, you’ve just read everything as ‘anti-vaxxer’ and not actually looked at the detail I’ve tried to present.

You are a conspiracy theorist if you think for yourself and dont believe EVERYTHING you are told.

[Riaz]

On 11/12/2021 at 00:49, Kid in the Riot said:

No, mate. No offence but this displays a lack of knowledge of basic epidemiology. You understand that viruses mutate,  so by letting them rip through society you increase their ability to, and likelihood of, mutating and potentially becoming more deadly. Why, as a global community, would we take that risk when we have a vaccination proven to reduce severe illness/death + spread? 

Interestingly, I've just come across this article tweeted by one Jordan Peterson, a man vehemently opposed to mandatory vaccinations and social restrictions (to my knowledge). It suggests the covid vaccine is not just preventing deaths from covid, but from any death (which again, makes scientific sense when you think about it): 

https://www.webmd.com/vaccines/covid-19-vaccine/news/20211025/people-vacccinated-covid-less-likely-die-any-cause-study 

And they are more likely to mutate if you try and vaccinate everyone...

[BTRFTG]

13 hours ago, Rebounder said:

I'm not really sure you can compare suicide in Victorian times with now. There was a distinct lack of knowledge about mental health then and as far as I am aware no support beyond putting people away. 

There are serious problems with mental health provision in this country, and not all of it results in suicide, but does lead to long term damage to everyone involved. Suicide rates only tell a small part of the story and aren't really a good way to tell how good and effective provision is. There is still a distinct lack of knowledge now too. 

Good points all hence my stressing data informs nothing and it's interpretation in subjective.

[Kid in the Riot]

13 minutes ago, Riaz said:

And they are more likely to mutate if you try and vaccinate everyone...

Erm, no. You didn't read the rest of the sentence you highlighted, did you?

If you let a virus go unchecked through a population and a pandemic occurs then if you do nothing about it, it will spread to more people thus increasing the chances of the virus mutating. 

I'm surprised that you actually even believe in the scientific fact that viruses mutate tbh, we are making progress! 

Next week's lesson will be in how viruses, and in particular covid, transmit. You clearly don't know given you were dumb enough to write earlier in the thread "lockdowns don't work" 

[2015]

32 minutes ago, Riaz said:

You are a conspiracy theorist if you think for yourself and dont believe EVERYTHING you are told.

It is rather funny that those who despise the Tories on here and despise Boris Johnson yet still go along with every restriction he puts in place and his 'opposition' support him in doing so. 

I don't believe a word any politician or scientist come out with anymore - they are all corrupted by power, personal agenda's and money in my opinion.