Bijou Drains
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
As you say the article you cite, it is not exactly an anti vaxer article, it is saying that herd immunity is both possible and distributing vaccines on the basis of the likely outcomes of having Covid infection, i.e. give the vaccines to the most vulnerable throughout the world population, rather than give it to younger healthy people with very low chance of having serious and life threatening illness. I doubt that any Socialists would argue against that, however as we know fair distribution on the basis of need is unlikely to occur in a capitalist Society.
However the evidence that the paper presents about the level of protection offered by natural infection to Covid is, to my mind, nowhere near as clear cut as they present. For example the authors state that “Among the millions that have recovered from COVID19, exceedingly few have become sick again”, citing the study “SARS-CoV-2 reinfection in a cohort of 43,000 antibody-positive individuals followed for up to 35 weeks”. As the title of the study indicates this is a follow up study lasting 43 weeks, and stated that rates of re-infection had not shown any change at that point. So what we actually know is that it is uncommon for those who have had Covid to show signs of re-infection at the 7 month point. What happens after the 7 month period, is not at that known.
Similarly the authors also state that “While natural infection may not provide permanent infection-blocking immunity, it offers anti-disease immunity against severe disease and death that is likely permanent. “ However the study they cite to support this assertion states in its conclusion states “To our knowledge, the current study provides the first direct evidence for the induction of antigen-specific BMPCs after a viral infection in humans. However, we do acknowledge several limitations. Although we detected anti-S IgG antibodies in serum at least 7 months after infection in all 19 of the convalescent donors from whom we obtained bone marrow aspirates, we failed to detect S-specific BMPCs in 4 donors. Serum anti-S antibody titres in those four donors were low, suggesting that S-specific BMPCs may potentially be present at very low frequencies that are below the limit of detection of the assay. Another limitation is that we do not know the fraction of the S-binding BMPCs detected in our study that encodes neutralizing antibodies.”
The “Herd Immunity Hypothesis” also ignores very serious issues. For example the high level of infection amongst the healthy population who are supposedly at low risk of infection includes those young people with serious health conditions who do not know it. The levels of underdiagnosis of type 2 diabetes and also of monogenic Diabetes are well reported as conditions such as cardiomyopathy. Those considered healthy, may not actually be that healthy. Similarly the long term impact of long covid is not discussed. The ONS reported that :
• Self-reported long COVID symptoms were adversely affecting the day-to-day activities of 674,000 people in private households in the UK, with 196,000 of these individuals reporting that their ability to undertake their day-to-day activities had been limited a lot.
• Of people with self-reported long COVID, 697,000 first had (or suspected they had) COVID-19 at least 12 weeks previously, and 70,000 first had (or suspected they had) COVID-19 at least one year previously.
• Prevalence rates of self-reported long COVID were greatest in people aged 35 to 69 years, females.Another factor that has not been addressed with the hypothesis is that a higher number of infections leads to a higher number of mutations, offering the virus the chance of escape from immunity from the very people that the writers suggest that it is important to vaccinate.
There is also an argument (and I am not saying I support it) that the process of creating areas that are more or less vaccinated and clear from Covid (as it appears is likely to happen in Western Europe, North America and possibly South America) is a more effective strategy than vaccinating the world population of vulnerable people before moving on to the less vulnerable people. The argument runs that creating areas of the world that are infection free and then spreading that infection free zone, is a bit like putting out areas of a fire and then consistently increasing the fire free zone, as opposed to the approach of trying to put out the most flammable parts of the fire and then working through the less flammable, with the risk of the bits you have put out are going to reignite. To be fair to that approach, historically, the eradication of small pox and the near eradication of polio followed the approach suggested.Clarkson is now hosting “Who wants to be a Millionaire” with a new option of asking the host (i.e. him). When he has been asked to help the contestant to answer a question, he has unsurprisingly revealed himself as having a practically non-existant store of general knowledge. Why he thinks that anyone should turn to him for advice, information and guidance is beyond me. I have met several journalists through work and other situations and have been surprised how ill informed and lacking in insight they generally are, but Clarkson trumps them all.
Here’s a link to Stewart Lee’s put down of Top Gear, which sums up the whole of Clarkson, et al.
MustaphaMond – “Thank you for your detailed responses, MovimientoSocialista – what do you mean by “we don’t have the subjective conditions”? Are you referring to the idea that the people are not ready for a socialist revolution?”
Our Party have consistently explained that Socialism is only possible in a situation where the economic circumstances exist, i.e. a developed capitalist economy, and where a majority of workers understand and want a socialist society.
In the case of the 1917 Russian revolution, objectively neither of those situations was possible. The Russian economy was generally pre capitalistic (there were pockets of capitalistic production but by and large Russia was a feudally based economy) and as was demonstrated by the outcome of the constituent assembly there was not a majority of workers who understood what socialism is and wanted it.
Despite the romantic daydreaming of Trotsky and the attempts to manipulate, hoodwink and bellicose name calling of Lenin, the reality of material conditions (as any student of Marx will know) cannot be overcome by rhetoric and militancy. Our party knew that in 1917 and as a result the Bolshiviks and their comrades in arms did everything they could do discredit, intimidate and slander us. They failed to silence us in the same way that they failed to turn Marx’s theories upside.
“Donald Rumsfeld has died but why was it so long”
If youre wondering why his life was so long, I’d agree. If you’re wondering why his death agonies were so long, I’d be wondering why you thought they didn’t last an eternity.
Additionally the German Empire established universal male suffrage in 1871. So all German soldiers in WW1 had the vote, whereas all British soldiers did not. The proportion of British soldiers who had the vote would probably have been far less than the 66% quoted by Adam, as the proportion of soldiers who were heads of households would have been much smaller due to their relative youth. So much for “fighting for the cause of freedom”
An oft overlooked song lyric which most Socialists would support is “Walls come tumbling down” by the Style Council (although Weller was a Labourite at the time)
“You don’t have to take this crap
You don’t have to sit back and relax
(You can actually try changing it)I know we’ve always been taught to rely
Upon those in authority
But you never know until you try
How things just might be
(If we came together so strongly, yeah)Are you gonna try to make this work
Or spend your days down in the dirt
You see things can change
Yes an’ walls come tumbling down(Governments crack and systems fall
‘Cause unity is powerful)
Lights go out
Walls come tumbling downYes, they do
(Yes, they do)
Yes, they do
(Yes, they do)The competition is a color TV
We’re on still pause with the video machine
(That keep you slaves to the H.P., yeah)Until the unity is threatened by
Those who have and who have not
Those who are with and those who are without
And dangle jobs like a donkey’s carrot
(Until you don’t know where you are)Are you gonna get to realize
The class war’s real, not mythologized
And like Jericho
Yes, the walls came tumbling down(Governments crack and systems fall)
(‘Cause unity is powerful)
Lights go out
Walls come tumbling(Down) You’ll be too weak to fight it
(Down) [?]
(Down) Oh, will you deny it?Are you gonna be threatened by
The public enemies number ten
Those who play the power game
They take the profits, you take the blame
(When they tell you there’s no rise in pay)Are you gonna try to make this work
Or spend your days down in the dirt
You see things can change
Walls come tumbling down(Governments crack and systems fall)
(‘Cause unity is powerful)
Lights go out
Walls come tumbling down”I’ve put a comment on RT, it might increase/inform the debate, if cdes wanted to either comment and/or join and uptick it, it would help keeping the contribution at the top of the mesage board, you never know someone might do a little further research about the party?
“This is not the Washington Post!”
My mistake, too many father’s day beers were taken. Sill impressive though, considering the Examiner is seen as highly conservative in outlook.
I am always surprised when people expect their musicians to be prophetic, politically insightful or worthy of very hard scrutiny. Generally they are none of those things, they are musicians. They make songs and play instruments.
It’s a bit like when Question Time invite comedians onto their show, most of the time they are full of the same kind of shite that the politicians are, although they might be able to produce it in a slightly more amusing way. It doesn’t mean that I can’t find some of the stuff some comics funny.
In the same way I have low expectations for musicians when it comes to political insight, once in a while one of them does come up with some profound political stuff (won’t get folled again by The Who, or If You Tolerate This Your Children Will Be Next by The Manics, for example), but most of the time the political stuff they produce is horse shit.
I do think it’s a bit harsh to say Bob Dylan has done nowt worthwhile since ’79 though, Infidels had it’s moments, Oh Mercy was another good album, Good as I Been to You was ok and did include a version of “Arthur McBride” (not as good as the version I remember being sung one night after conference though) and I really liked Rough and Rowdy ways.
Ironically in the early years of the Labour Party they were in favour of proportional representation, something that the Liberals strongly opposed. By the time Labour took over as the country’s main opposition party they started to oppose it and th eLiberals began advocating it. Shown how much real political principle either party has.
From school days, I think it works as follows:
Labour – Tweedledum – Adjective
Liberal – Tweedledummer – Comparitive
Tory – Tweedledummest – SuperlativeIf you look at historic elections it shows a massive drop by Labour, I suspect there has been a massive amount of tactical voting, this might be the sign of things to come, i.e. Labour and Tory voters combining as an anti-Tory block.
According to the BBC Andrew Lloyd Webber is determined to defy an extention of lockdown and open his theatres on 21st June, even if he faces arrest.
I do hope they extend the lockdown. Having that talentless, scrotum faced, reactionary fuckwit, locked up would at least be some compensation for having endured the pandemic.
