Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 16, 2023 8:13:37 GMT
Not to me-and of course it will get worse. I'll try and explain it briefly. I get pissed off with all the hyperventilated angst about "climate change" by people who never seem to acknowledge that our species has already destroyed and continues to destroy so much of the earth's biodiversity. Never seem to comment on the selfish destruction of rain forests , wetlands , natural habitat of every description in order to grow our food , build our cities and enable our lives of never ending consumption of unnecessary stuff. Never talk about the pollution of our oceans and seas and the very mountain tops with plastic . Never talk about the shit heaps of our detritus which despoil the planet , to the beaches of the remotest island on earth. Never acknowledge that we are in such numbers on this planet now that we cannot feed ourselves already. And yet get oh so upset about the prospect of all this plunder and exploitation being compromised because we did all this. . it could also be true that humans could learn to moderate our ridiculous population growth IMO it does mean that the current version of profit-driven capitalism has to go - to take a topical example, we shouldn't be mining the seabed and destroying yet another ecosystem in pursuit of profit. A form of egalitarian green-socialism is the only viable survival strategy (for a much smaller number of humans). You should join up comrade colin  . Could-but wont. What difference is green-socialism going to make ? Will it reduce the population; or the food and houses we need-or all the stuff that the era of tech has made us addicted to and reliant upon ? Human beings can now see at a click how comfortable life can be. And that's what they strive for. If its not working out where they are -they change the government or move somewhere else that looks better. The fact is that our numbers and our chosen way of life is incompatible with a viable natural world. Look no further , just recently, than Holland where the country's courts stopped 18,000 building projects in an overcrowded country , under the EU Habitats Directive in order to reduce nutrient release. A country in which the realisation that most emissions come from cows led to attempts to halve the number of cattle in the one of the world's biggest exporters of meat ! Actually Natural England has done the same thing here, halting 145000 houses across 74 council areas. I'm with the Habitats Directive -but it isn't sustainable. If a government cant house and feed its people they will find a different government. One which allows a bit more environmental destruction and a bit less climate tyranny. And so it will go on. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 16, 2023 8:16:38 GMT
|
|
pjw1961
Member
Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one.
Posts: 8,601
|
Post by pjw1961 on Jul 16, 2023 8:46:23 GMT
Interesting approach from the Tories in Selby. Their propaganda doesn't mention the conservatives, is often printed in green and has been formatted as if it's actually a local free newspaper. It does however feature Sunakered prominently because for some bizarre reason the local Tories think he's an electoral asset. Presumably as MP for Richmond, Yorkshire he is thought of a dyed-in-the-wool Yorkie from ... err ... Southampton. |
|
pjw1961
Member
Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one.
Posts: 8,601
|
Post by pjw1961 on Jul 16, 2023 9:05:45 GMT
. it could also be true that humans could learn to moderate our ridiculous population growth IMO it does mean that the current version of profit-driven capitalism has to go - to take a topical example, we shouldn't be mining the seabed and destroying yet another ecosystem in pursuit of profit. A form of egalitarian green-socialism is the only viable survival strategy (for a much smaller number of humans). You should join up comrade colin . Could-but wont. What difference is green-socialism going to make ? Will it reduce the population; or the food and houses we need-or all the stuff that the era of tech has made us addicted to and reliant upon ? Human beings can now see at a click how comfortable life can be. And that's what they strive for. If its not working out where they are -they change the government or move somewhere else that looks better. The fact is that our numbers and our chosen way of life is incompatible with a viable natural world. Look no further , just recently, than Holland where the country's courts stopped 18,000 building projects in an overcrowded country , under the EU Habitats Directive in order to reduce nutrient release. A country in which the realisation that most emissions come from cows led to attempts to halve the number of cattle in the one of the world's biggest exporters of meat ! Actually Natural England has done the same thing here, halting 145000 houses across 74 council areas. I'm with the Habitats Directive -but it isn't sustainable. If a government cant house and feed its people they will find a different government. One which allows a bit more environmental destruction and a bit less climate tyranny. And so it will go on. The point of the "socialism" part is a much more equal distribution of available resources. At the moment the distribution is wildly skewed with tiny elites consuming a vast proportion of the worlds resources. A major redistribution would indeed provide more food and housing for the masses, at the expense of a lot less for the elite, but also less for the relatively privaleged like citizens of developed countries. www.oxfam.org.uk/media/press-releases/richest-1-grab-nearly-twice-as-much-new-wealth-as-rest-of-the-world-put-together/You are correct that the Western lifestyle is unsustainable. For humans and nature to survive it needs to end. We need to live more simply and with less "stuff" - most of which is pretty useless anyway and we are driven to purchase by the consumerist lifestyle promoted by the owners of capital. This means developed countries need to be significantly poorer and developing one somewhat richer until equality is achieved (which will also remove the driver for economic migration incidentally). That's the "Green" part. Will we do this? Probably not. Democracies won't vote for it and dictatorships are run by despots who tend to have other self-aggrandising priorities. Therefore I agree humans will likely choose to walk into disaster and let nature do the cull for us. Hence why I said you and I are among the gloomier people on his site. Optimists are hoping technology will solve everything - I don't believe that - while most people simply ignore the whole thing - until their house is flooded or goes up in flames. |
|
|
|
Post by bendo on Jul 16, 2023 9:13:56 GMT
Rodney Starmer was so loaded but he appears to have traded as a sole trader as there is no evidence anywhere that he ever incorporated as a LTD company. Granted these days it's had to find as Companies House delete records after 6 years when a company is wound up, but no references to any planning for factories, no historical addresses for a mythical factory etc...
Better tell all these sole traders around the country that earn far less than minimum wage that they are all doing great.
Perhaps the reason Starmer paints a picture of not being loaded as a kid is simply because he wasn't.
|
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,716
|
Post by steve on Jul 16, 2023 9:15:38 GMT
Utter bollocks from the mathematical geniuses at the express lying to their hard of thinking brexitanian readership. The Express says the regime has just signed a " 12 £trillion trade deal" referring to the CPTPP agreement. Sorry brexitanians firstly it isn't a trade deal anyway secondly and I know this might come as a shock but it isn't worth £12 trillion The £12 trillion figure that the express pulled out of its rear end is actually the total combined annual GDP of all too member states. On that basis we just threw away a trade deal worth £16 trillion when we left the European union. The actual value of CPTPP membership for the UK over a decade is going to be in the region of 0.08% of the UK GDP but given we already have bilateral trade agreements with 9 out of 11 members already the actual figure is lower. The regime estimate a somewhat higher fraction but still a tiny fraction of the already observed adverse impact on GDP by the implementation of national village idiots day. youtu.be/7Cj-B_NlrnY |
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,716
|
Post by steve on Jul 16, 2023 9:21:26 GMT
bendoFirstly welcome. It's a bit akin to the right wing media rage when Emily Thornberry posted a picture of a white van. Out of touch with reality champagne socialist they spewed. Actually Thornberry was brought up on a council estate and her brother at the time of posting the photo was you guessed it a van driver.
|
|
|
|
Post by shevii on Jul 16, 2023 9:25:40 GMT
Could-but wont. What difference is green-socialism going to make ? Will it reduce the population; or the food and houses we need-or all the stuff that the era of tech has made us addicted to and reliant upon ? I was going to comment on your post yesterday and how that squares with you mostly voting for Tory or soft Labour governments (Blair once and perhaps Starmer) but felt it would be over personal without really achieving anything. So your fatalist quote about human nature to some extent covers this, even though I would still argue that doing what you can is better than doing nothing and that alternative governments would be doing more- just as New Labour was putting money into some Green projects and giving grants out for insulation as well as healthcare and education having a similar effect on a smaller scale to the solution for Africa. But taking a few of your points- an overseas aid budget under "Green socialism" or just the Green Party might be wasted but seems less likely to be used as a political tool to keep regimes friendly to us, and more likely to get to the heart of the problem, which, as has been explained, is about empowering women, healthcare and education in the third world. Net zero in a short space of time (as is the Green Party policy) will certainly help delay mass extinction while other policies take effect and even if the Labour commitment is wobbly it is hard to see it being worse than the Tory one. Greens would undoubtedly take action on "all the stuff we are addicted to" by taxes, regulations against inbuilt obsolescence and encourage a repair culture. Plastics would likely disappear very quickly. I would agree with you though that no party seems to be that bothered about population control as a key target and this remains a key issue to saving the planet. I hate the Tory hostile atmosphere on refugees and the way this is carried out, but I am set apart from most on the left in my opinion that we need controls on immigration to keep our population down and preserve our green spaces. Even if this doesn't change the world situation we can still protect our own green spaces beyond a few biodiversity projects. The Green Party policy, basically to let any refugee in who wants to come, would be dangerous in my opinion and that applied equally to Corbyn's messaging on this. People leaving the country (even if these are the best and brightest) and births v deaths does still give us some flexibility though to develop a humane policy. Others have pointed out trends on population which suggest, once a country gets comfortable, births v deaths will trend downwards so that's where the effort needs to go, just going to be too late for our current crisis I think. The human race has the answers now which no species had in the past. We may even have the ability to have prevented or mitigated previous mass extinction events, so it's a tragedy that because of greed those solutions are not being enacted when we are so close to being a force for good. I do actually agree with your fatalism but I don't think that means that individuals should stop trying with their lifestyles or pushing governments or their own political party to do the right thing. |
|
neilj
Member
Posts: 6,498
|
Post by neilj on Jul 16, 2023 10:01:30 GMT
With people struggling to pay their rent/ mortgage and put food on the table the tories have identified the key issues...
Although not sure being sent to remote Scottish Island is the vote winner they think it is
|
|
Mr Poppy
Member
Teaching assistant and now your elected PM
Posts: 3,774
|
Post by Mr Poppy on Jul 16, 2023 10:03:24 GMT
Rodney Starmer was so loaded but he appears to have traded as a sole trader as there is no evidence anywhere that he ever incorporated as a LTD company. Granted these days it's had to find as Companies House delete records after 6 years when a company is wound up, but no references to any planning for factories, no historical addresses for a mythical factory etc... Better tell all these sole traders around the country that earn far less than minimum wage that they are all doing great. Perhaps the reason Starmer paints a picture of not being loaded as a kid is simply because he wasn't. There were great tax advantages to operating as a 'sole trader' (self employed) rather than an employee in a factory. Keir should be proud of his father's actual story rather than the story he keeps telling factory workers on his trips to factories. 4kids, nice house in Surrey. Rodney did well for himself and his son should be proud of that. I don't know how much pocket money Rodney used to give his kids but Keir went to Uni once he became and adult (back when the fees were paid for by taxpayers, not rich parents) and has done very well for himself since (again, something he should be proud of). Other stuff that Sir Keir should be proud of is passing his 11+ and getting a bursary to attend a fee paying school. Why does he not mention the things he should be proud of rather than bang on about his dad being a toolmaker (giving the impression he had a tough childhood and hence can 'empathise' with people working in factories on low wages, struggling to make ends meet)?? LAB are so far ahead in the polls that Starmer doesn't need to bother with policy but some in LAB are getting a bit pissed off with the lack of ambition*: "“The caution at the top of the party is so extreme that we’re even watering down or rejecting the policies we’ve already announced,” said one figure involved in the process.“Under Blair, we established Sure Start, led a global debt-cancellation programme and increased health and education spending. Where’s the ambition now? If we win the next election, we’re going to inherit an economy in far worse shape than in 1997 – if we don’t invest and offer some real solutions, we’re just creating a rod for our own back.”www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/jul/15/keir-starmer-we-cant-spend-our-way-back-to-powerIIRC it is accepted that CON-LDEM austerity was a political choice and pretending that 'reform' will be some miraculous cure is going to become an issue when it turns out that we've tried that before and simply reupholstering the deck chairs on stuff like NHS Titanic in LAB red colours isn't going to stop the ship sinking. * Same in CON and the view of CON has spread to gen.pub generally as CON as the current HMG. Usually it is the HMG who have to be pragmatic and opposition who can be more 'ambitious' but at the moment we have a 'zombie' govt so petrified of inflation that they won't do anything and an AWOL opposition removing any ambition that they ever had from LAB under Starmer-Reeves management. |
|
|
|
Post by alec on Jul 16, 2023 10:07:33 GMT
One more solution for the problem of masking, this time for those with hearing difficulties -
|
|
Mr Poppy
Member
Teaching assistant and now your elected PM
Posts: 3,774
|
Post by Mr Poppy on Jul 16, 2023 10:21:56 GMT
Could-but wont. What difference is green-socialism going to make ? Will it reduce the population; or the food and houses we need-or all the stuff that the era of tech has made us addicted to and reliant upon ? I was going to comment on your post yesterday and how that squares with you mostly voting for Tory or soft Labour governments (Blair once and perhaps Starmer) but felt it would be over personal without really achieving anything. So your fatalist quote about human nature to some extent covers this, even though I would still argue that doing what you can is better than doing nothing and that alternative governments would be doing more- just as New Labour was putting money into some Green projects and giving grants out for insulation as well as healthcare and education having a similar effect on a smaller scale to the solution for Africa. But taking a few of your points- an overseas aid budget under "Green socialism" or just the Green Party might be wasted but seems less likely to be used as a political tool to keep regimes friendly to us, and more likely to get to the heart of the problem, which, as has been explained, is about empowering women, healthcare and education in the third world. Net zero in a short space of time (as is the Green Party policy) will certainly help delay mass extinction while other policies take effect and even if the Labour commitment is wobbly it is hard to see it being worse than the Tory one. Greens would undoubtedly take action on "all the stuff we are addicted to" by taxes, regulations against inbuilt obsolescence and encourage a repair culture. Plastics would likely disappear very quickly. I would agree with you though that no party seems to be that bothered about population control as a key target and this remains a key issue to saving the planet. I hate the Tory hostile atmosphere on refugees and the way this is carried out, but I am set apart from most on the left in my opinion that we need controls on immigration to keep our population down and preserve our green spaces. Even if this doesn't change the world situation we can still protect our own green spaces beyond a few biodiversity projects. The Green Party policy, basically to let any refugee in who wants to come, would be dangerous in my opinion and that applied equally to Corbyn's messaging on this. People leaving the country (even if these are the best and brightest) and births v deaths does still give us some flexibility though to develop a humane policy. Others have pointed out trends on population which suggest, once a country gets comfortable, births v deaths will trend downwards so that's where the effort needs to go, just going to be too late for our current crisis I think. The human race has the answers now which no species had in the past. We may even have the ability to have prevented or mitigated previous mass extinction events, so it's a tragedy that because of greed those solutions are not being enacted when we are so close to being a force for good. I do actually agree with your fatalism but I don't think that means that individuals should stop trying with their lifestyles or pushing governments or their own political party to do the right thing. There are quite a few things CON HMG have done WRT to funding R&D etc. Nowhere near enough but I'm hopeful that the 'crowding in' of pension/insurance money will boost projects in UK. CON's 'dither+delay' on projects does make me  though and I hope Miliband will be a lot better than Shapps on granting approval for a load of stuff that just needs signing off on. I wouldn't be opposed to some extra taxes to help boost the state side of things. Anyway, Green Party (of E&W) have some good ideas that LAB could copy if they wanted to (quite a few of which have been covered on UKPR 1 or 2 many times - one example being a "beef tax" along with 'education' on a more healthy diet) policy.greenparty.org.uk/our-policies/long-term-goals/climate-emergency/The 'markets' won't like unfunded spending promises but stuff like 'insulation' (notably of public buildings) is an investment and would just need the fiscal 'rules' (which are not rules) to be tweaked. WRT to the two pieces I highlighted. Greens have a 'Population' policy: policy.greenparty.org.uk/our-policies/long-term-goals/population/and I'd agree with you about the contradiction of a/their "let everyone in" immigration policy The dinosaurs couldn't stop their extinction but IMO humans do possess the ability to save Plan(et) A, slow down, then hopefully reverse the damage our species has caused. Whilst at 1% of the global population then I'm not as gung-ho "unilateralism" as Green Party but there is certainly more we could be doing and whilst I don't agree with all their policies then I hope Greens get a bit more 'press' to push their views (and the 'Just Stop Oil' eco-idiots stop alienating the very people they need to win over). |
|
|
|
Post by pete on Jul 16, 2023 10:35:24 GMT
I agree with Trevs. Keir didn't have as tough a childhood as Cammo, Boris, Rees-Smug, fishy Rishi. He should stop banging on about how his dad, who made thousands a week as a toolmaker, was just a working-class bloke struggling to survive.
|
|
|
|
Post by alec on Jul 16, 2023 10:37:00 GMT
Research here into T cell exhaustion - www.pennmedicine.org/news/news-releases/2021/july/penn-medicine-discovery-clarifies-the-problem-of-t-cell-exhaustion#This study was not specific to covid, but T Cell exhaustion (for the T cells specific to covid) is an observed phenomena now. The question of the longevity of the effect is really what is under consideration now, and this study doesn't bring good news. In this case (for a non covid infection in mice) they found long term 'reprogramming' of T cells, so the exhaustion appears more or less permanent. If this translates into a more general finding and is applicable to covid, then it would potentially explain the rather curious epidemiological observations we now have (from several studies) that show having covid makes individuals more likely to have reinfections. These data were surprising, as it was initially expected that infection -> hybrid immunity -> better protection against reinfection. However, the data shows the reverse. This was initially thought to be linked to behavioural considerations - once someone has survived a 'mild' infection they may be less concerned, those with initial infections are more risk taking anyway, etc etc, but the latest findings suggest the higher reinfection rates for those already infected may be more related to an impaired immune response to the specific pathogen. It may also explain why in a surprisingly high number of cases reinfections can be substantially worse than previous episodes. We are now seeing increasing cases of lymphophenia and low lymphocyte counts in covid patients. CD4 counts of <200 are generally taken to be the threshold marker of AIDs, and increasingly cases of counts close this are being registered post covid, against a healthy norm of 800 - 1500. These findings will probably ultimately explain why we're seeing such a raft of elevated general infections, and so may people are experiencing so many non covid infections. Unlike AIDs, it doesn't look like these counts are permanent (although they appear long lasting in long covid patients) but having 3 - 6 months where you are highly vulnerable to a range of pathogens with a virus likely to infect you at least once a year really isn't a great place to be. And of course, we have no idea yet what the effects of 10, 15, 20 infections will be, but there is no evidence currently to suggest this would be benign. |
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,716
|
Post by steve on Jul 16, 2023 10:47:35 GMT
@trevor
"Other stuff that Sir Keir should be proud of is getting a bursary to attend a fee paying school. Why does he not mention the things."
Probably didn't mention it because it didn't happen.
Starmer went to a state Grammar school, while he was there it moved into the independent sector, in common with all the other students already there because of the requirements of the conversion his family didn't have to pay, it wasn't a bursary and he wasn't sent to a fee charging school.
Apart from that spot on.
|
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,716
|
Post by steve on Jul 16, 2023 11:10:22 GMT
The Sunday Times has just named Andrew Rossindell as the Tory mp who has been under investigation for serious sexual offences for over a year.
Rossindell wasn't suspended from parliament but voluntarily agreed not to attend.
It's very difficult to see how his Romford constituents are being properly represented.
Despite not attending Rossindell has continued to spout anti wokery and xenophobic b.s. from outside the house.
|
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,716
|
Post by steve on Jul 16, 2023 11:23:40 GMT
Btw Trevor
Starmer sold the field that he had bought so his mother could use it as a Donkey sanctuary after she and his father had died. In common with many people in such circumstances he sold it.
On a smaller scale I bought my father a car as his mobility declined, when he died I sold it.
I'm not quite sure why either of us should be proud of selling it but I suppose we get some credit for gifting it in the first place.
If any labourites feel inclined to defend their leader please feel free!
|
|
pjw1961
Member
Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one.
Posts: 8,601
|
Post by pjw1961 on Jul 16, 2023 11:34:08 GMT
neilj - if the Tories are looking for further ideas, there is the well known National Front poster from the 1970s: "The poster, emblazoned with ‘Vote National Front’ and ‘Put Britons First’, outlines what the right-wing party wanted for Britain: STOP immigration REJECT Common Market RESORE capital punishment MAKE Britain great again SCRAP overseas aid REBUILD our armed forces" The Tories are ticking most of those boxes but they haven't tried the capital punishment one yet.
|
|
pjw1961
Member
Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one.
Posts: 8,601
|
Post by pjw1961 on Jul 16, 2023 11:48:00 GMT
Btw Trevor Starmer sold the field that he had bought so his mother could use it as a Donkey sanctuary after she and his father had died. In common with many people in such circumstances he sold it. On a smaller scale I bought my father a car as his mobility declined, when he died I sold it. I'm not quite sure why either of us should be proud of selling it but I suppose we get some credit for gifting it in the first place. If any labourites feel inclined to defend their leader please feel free!Well (a) you're doing such a good job steve and (b) Trevor is capable of such an endless stream of partisan tosh it gets tiresome to correct it all. Nickp summed up most people's feelngs on that subject yesterday. After all, what difference does it actually make whether Starmer is working class lad made good or lower middle class lad made good? I'm completely happy if an hereditary aristocrat wants to vote Labour. What is for certain is that his upbringing was much less privileged than that of our Head Boy at Winchester PM. |
|
|
|
Post by Mark on Jul 16, 2023 12:06:06 GMT
*** New polling thread alert ***
|
|
|
|
Post by johntel on Jul 16, 2023 12:31:13 GMT
I was speaking to someone yesterday who recently attended hustings organised in the Selby constituency for the by-election candidates. To say that he was scathing about them would be overstating it - he said the Labour, Conservative and Lib Dem were all equally bad, albeit in different ways. Here they are - www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-york-north-yorkshire-65963453As it looks like Labour will win it I had a quick further delve into the background of their candidate, Keith Mather. He's aged 25, a graduate of Oxford University (BA in History & Politics, MA in Public Policy). His work experience consists of 1 year as a researcher for Wes Streeting and 18 months at the CBI as a 'public affairs adviser' - whatever that is. Couldn't find anything about his schools or family. Somehow I don't think he's likely to rock the Starmer boat. |
|
Danny
Member
Posts: 10,512
|
Post by Danny on Jul 16, 2023 13:07:40 GMT
It's from a southern US burger chain, announcing the banning of face masks from all staff unless they have a medical certificate. The weird thing is, if you read it in full, it says that "patty room associates" - the workers who prepare the burgers in the food prep area - should be wearing masks, for food hygiene reasons presumably, but they are preventing staff from protecting themselves against covid. This is all part of the developing war against anyone who refuses to succumb to the 'infection is inevitable' mantra. Whether it's banning WFH, masking at work, or confiscating CO2 monitors from schoolchildren, the majority in society is actively persecuting those unwilling to be subjected to repeat infection. I had a little insight in to NHS practices at the local Hospital. Visitors are not expected to wear masks, but must make appointments to visit. Staff wore disposable masks when approaching a patient to perform some action. An 80 year old patient in for a problem swallowing said 'I was the fittest person there'. Which tells you how unfit hospital patients typically are, and why of course they are a very high risk group should they catch covid there. So they're not really concerned about introducing covid nor see any point in visitors wearing masks, they are instead concentrating on reducing numbers. That might mean they believe maskwearing wont cut risks, if you have it you will pass it on. Maybe because visitors wont wear them properly anyway. But halving the numbers will definitely also halve the risk. On the other hand, if a member of staff is infected then it might reduce the number of patients then getting it if they mask up. But would do more harm than good to send them home.
You need to understand covid is everywhere. It seems likely it is only doing what it did from the very start, only killing those already sick one way or another. In many ways that is an ideal disease from the evolutionary perspective and evolution might well fall on the side of letting those people die to improve the chance of the remainder. Which fundamentally is what will lie behind the capability of our immune systems to fend it off, they are pitched at the level which optimises racial survival.
The circumstantial evidence argues Hastings had covid winter 19/20, and thats why it didnt have it that spring, it had already passed through, but then did catch it along with everywhere else when the Kent strain came along. Covid doesnt kill many - if any- more people when it passes through naturally than it did with imposed lockdowns. It doesnt kill fit people, approximately those of working age with some adjustement for risk factors they might have. The epidemeological evidence is that where no measures were imposed, the outcomes were much the same.
So thats a trillion pounds wasted which might have been handy for something else. But it also indicates how the disease should have been managed. By encouraging the young to get through it as fast as possible so it died down, while isolating the old for the much shorter time needed if it evolved naturally and quickly.
|
|
Danny
Member
Posts: 10,512
|
Post by Danny on Jul 16, 2023 13:18:42 GMT
I have some sympathy with your position, but could I ask how you envisage the transition to a much smaller number of humans could happen? I suppose nuclear war would do it, but that wouldn't be too good for the environment either. I think fortress europe is more likely. Shoot them as they try to arrive here. best if all Europe acts together and forms some sort of united political organisation. Wonder what that could be? We definitely need to be part of it. |
|
Danny
Member
Posts: 10,512
|
Post by Danny on Jul 16, 2023 13:20:57 GMT
There is a ton of evidence that if women have the freedom to choose and have ready access to contraception and abortion they naturally choose to have smaller families. I think its a tiny bit more nuanced. Women need access to birth control, but they also need to believe they will be better off with fewer children. If you believe ten kids is you guarantee of support when you are 80, then you will not be using the birth control. |
|
Danny
Member
Posts: 10,512
|
Post by Danny on Jul 16, 2023 13:32:49 GMT
This study was not specific to covid, but T Cell exhaustion (for the T cells specific to covid) is an observed phenomena now. The question of the longevity of the effect is really what is under consideration now, and this study doesn't bring good news. In this case (for a non covid infection in mice) they found long term 'reprogramming' of T cells, so the exhaustion appears more or less permanent. Is this more evidence you are introducing that actually the mass repeat vaccination program against covid was a bad idea, because it exhausted T cells those people could have used against real covid? |
|
|
|
Post by alec on Jul 16, 2023 14:00:43 GMT
Danny - a couple of wildly stupid posts from you this afternoon. Have you been drinking? Vaccination does not exhaust T cells. Quite the reverse - www.nature.com/articles/s41590-021-01122-wThat's what you don't seem to understand; covid infects your T cells, and other parts of the immune system that work to produce them. Vaccination does not - it stimulates their production. You can be amazingly dense at times, and thoroughly bone idle. It's incredible how you posts such garbage without taking the 90 seconds o google it would take to avoid perpetual embarrassment.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rafwan on Jul 16, 2023 14:13:17 GMT
Btw Trevor Starmer sold the field that he had bought so his mother could use it as a Donkey sanctuary after she and his father had died. In common with many people in such circumstances he sold it. On a smaller scale I bought my father a car as his mobility declined, when he died I sold it. I'm not quite sure why either of us should be proud of selling it but I suppose we get some credit for gifting it in the first place. If any labourites feel inclined to defend their leader please feel free! You’re doing just fine, Steve! Cheers! |
|
|
|
Post by mercian on Jul 16, 2023 14:17:56 GMT
mercian - "You mean that people have views that differ, and that not all of them agree with you?" It's nothing to do with that - that's a peculiarly stupid take. It's about denying people choice. I would have thought that you, of all people, would have been outraged that private and state organisations are enforcing their views on individuals, on a matter so personal as individual health protection? You said that a private firm had told it's employees not to wear masks. Of course they have a choice. If a company had tried to make me do something against my will I'd have just left. |
|
|
|
Post by mercian on Jul 16, 2023 14:23:10 GMT
Biggest popular vote for anything in the history of the country. It's as close to the will of the people as you're going to get. Over 17 million votes. In 1997 Blair got 13.5 million and that was widely seen as a massive vote. |
|
|
|
Post by mercian on Jul 16, 2023 14:31:52 GMT
bendo Firstly welcome. It's a bit akin to the right wing media rage when Emily Thornberry posted a picture of a white van. Out of touch with reality champagne socialist they spewed. Actually Thornberry was brought up on a council estate and her brother at the time of posting the photo was you guessed it a van driver. I believe she should be addressed as Lady Nugee |
|
. 
though and I hope Miliband will be a lot better than Shapps on granting approval for a load of stuff that just needs signing off on. I wouldn't be opposed to some extra taxes to help boost the state side of things. 
