Another global wave of lockdowns coming early 2023?

a reply to: AaarghZombies

Well I would say Moderna's cash on hand has grown substantially, but then again, so has their liability called, Customer Advances.

a reply to: Ophiuchus1

Everyday, they're plummeting to new lows!

Well the U.K. has seen sense

England to require negative test for arrivals

This Tory government has gotten just about everything wrong that it possibly could over the past few years. So I imagine the thought of being blamed for a new covid wave and lockdowns eventually swayed tptb.

This won’t prevent a surge of some kind filtering through in time, along with any new variants. Recent history’s proven that this virus is impossible to stop entirely. But this is the best we can do to hamper the speed of spread as much as possible and to not make the best possible move is negligent.

I wonder which countries are yet to bring in negative test criteria for entry - I think Australia is still not budging. Be illuminating to compare numbers post Chinese New Year.

To give an idea of how many infections this will help to avoid, according to the latest Dr Campbell video Italy has already been test incoming flights from China - one had around 38% positive, a letter one around 50%. Like the ‘weather bomb’ that’s currently hitting the US, this would’ve been a ‘covid bomb’.

originally posted by: Silcone Synapse
a reply to: McGinty

Oh thank god they finally lifted the travel restrictions just in time for the worst part of their pandemic.
That sounds real sensible.

Tedros must be in full support I guess?

Nothing shady about this at all.
They are not trying to spread it to the whole world again,and force upon us the next round of authoritarian controls-honest.
And all our governments in the west are not in on the whole plan-honest.

Oh I have a theory on that one. China claims their version of BF.7 has a R0 of 18. When BF.7 has been global and in the U.S. for months and no other country has a R0 of 18 for BF.7.

All versions of Omicron have a R0 of roughly 5, EXCEPT China. So China's recent outbreak can't be Omicron. The only disease with a R0 of 18 is measles.

How does Covid suddenly have a R0 of 18 like measles?

Back during SARS 2002, they were trying to develop a vaccine for SARS (the original strain) using the measles virus as a vector virus. It's similar to the way that Oxford was developing a COVID vaccine using a monkey virus as the vector virus.

Soooo...

If SinoPharm was developing a vaccine to multiple strains of COVID, using the measles virus as the vector virus, and a live-virus version of this measles vector COVID vaccine got out of the lab, what would China do? How fast would it spread?

If measles virus is the vector virus, it would spread as fast as measles with a R0 of 18.

The Chinese government would end lock downs because they would perceive the virus to be a live-virus vaccine. They would infect their people on purpose.

And China would end all travel restrictions trying to infect the world with SinoPharm's measles-Covid creation.

Problems?

1. China has one fourth the world population, it will mutate since it's a live virus.

2. Measles virus is a bad choice for a vector virus because the measles virus wipes out IMMUNE MEMORY. Even if the people become immune to this specific measles-Covid vaccine virus,.they could lose their immune memory to other viruses and could lose their immune memory to other diseases that they were vaccinated for.

3. There will be idiots in our government that might do like China and try to infect people on purpose.

Soooo ..we can only look at death tolls in a more honest country like Japan, to keep tabs. China will continue to lie.

a reply to: MapMistress

That’s an interesting theory!

If there’s any truth to it I’d add a wrinkle…

I believe the scientists attempting something like this would be no less aware of the risks of immune-wipeout than you. Therefore, if using a measles vector does indeed do this then immune wipeout is the intended outcome.

Would it wipe out immune memory for the particular variant it’s vaccinating against (that would make it the opposite of a vaccine)?

…Or would it wipe out the memory of all covid variants?

…Or wipe out immune memory of everything?

This is all entirely hypothetical, but ‘no accident’ is where this train of thought ultimately leads to imo

originally posted by: McGinty
Well the U.K. has seen sense

England to require negative test for arrivals

This Tory government has gotten just about everything wrong that it possibly could over the past few years.

You mean that they didn't want to lock down, didn't want to bring in mask or vax mandates, and didn't want to close the schools.

They then unlocked early, and dropped as many mandates as was possible, despite the left demanding that stricter restrictions be brought in.

They literally did everything to prove that there wasn't some great conspiracy to reduce people's freedom by trying not to do any of these things, and then giving people back their freedom as soon as they possibly could.

If anything, their biggest mistake was to give in to pressure from the left.

a reply to: MapMistress

You may want to read this.

It shows why the situation that you're suggesting wouldn't happen Link

originally posted by: InachMarbank
a reply to: AaarghZombies

Well I would say Moderna's cash on hand has grown substantially, but then again, so has their liability called, Customer Advances.

The vast majority of big pharma has absolutely nothing to do with vaccines, if Moderna and the like were pulling some kind of con then their non-vaccine-producing competitors wouldn't just be sitting by doing nothing.

From my perspective, I have absolutely no involvement with vaccine research, production or distribution, so I make absolutely zero bucks off of any deals or conspiracies to vax everyone. If I had any evidence at all that there was some kind of conspiracy involved it would be worth more to me to reveal it than to hide it.

a reply to: AaarghZombies

I'm not saying that big pharma isn't making money form the vax, I'm saying that if covid hadn't happened big pharma would have made significantly more money selling things like cosmetics.

Pfizer made nearly $37bn (£27bn) in sales from its Covid-19 vaccine last year – making it one of the most lucrative products in history – and has forecast another bumper year in 2022, with a big boost coming from its Covid-19 pill Paxlovid.

And lipstick would still be used because people socialize on zoom.
And think of all the extra women there are now...... people are turning into them all the time...... that's more lipstick and makeup.

originally posted by: AaarghZombies
You mean that they didn't want to lock down, didn't want to bring in mask or vax mandates, and didn't want to close the schools.

It’s not as black & white as you make out. You’ve left out the timing.

As I said in a previous post: not introducing restrictions early on leads to longer and more draconian restrictions later. This is exactly what happened in the U.K.

Suggesting that introducing restrictions too late shows that they didn’t want them is a conveniently naive way to look at it.

If you want to talk about a conspiracy that’s pro lockdown, then refusing to introduce restrictions until the virus is well established is exactly how to do it.

a reply to: McGinty

not introducing restrictions early on leads to longer and more draconian restrictions later. This is exactly what happened in the U.K.

And yet England was the last country in the UK to introduce restrictions, and had the softest restrictions. England's restrictions were also far less draconian that those in the EU despite coming later. They were also among the first to unlock.

Suggesting that introducing restrictions too late shows that they didn’t want them is a conveniently naive way to look at it.

The official UK policy at the beginning of the pandemic was to do the bear minimum. They caved to public pressure to bring in any real restrictions at all. This wasn't a "delay" it was them changing the plan from no lockdown to having a lock down.

refusing to introduce restrictions until the virus is well established is exactly how to do it.

It's also the dumbest way to do it because it would make you look weak for changing your mind, and the political opposition look strong for forcing you to change.

The UK's government didn't need to wait until covid was endemic in order to lock down, the opposition parties were already demanding lockdowns before then, the UK government could easily have put restrictions in place and avoided the additional costs to the economy from both the lock down and people being seriously sick.

Scotland, for example, brought in restrictions while Covid was still largely a London problem, and was demanding that England lockdown too. There was absolutely no need for an elaborate conspiracy. The could just have gone ahead and done it anyway.

This is further debunked by the fact that England unlocked early on in order to save its economy. If the plan was to place restrictions on people why remove them as early as possible?

originally posted by: AaarghZombies

originally posted by: McGinty

originally posted by: DaMouse
a reply to: McGinty

I haven’t bothered to read your OP or anyone else’s comment’s. I’ve come here to say what people have said on many platforms across the world…lockdowns don’t work against a virus.

And I live in one of the most lockdown countries in the world. People where I live, won’t do it again.

So I will tell you now, lockdowns will not be happening in 2023.

If they do, I will not comply.

Maybe you should’ve read the OP, then. Had nothing to do with the effectiveness of lockdowns!

So, it must have been the masks and hand washing on their own that decimated the normal influx of winter flu cases?

You can't get sick from someone if you're both in separate houses.

That is what we are told by the media. The same source that spouts looming threat by way of vast numbers. Apply fear then for those that don't follow, add shame. But it starts with our handheld-master, or the PC. It comes down to a choice. Do you believe the media, the government and careerism-infected top medicos that love to dictate? COVID to me is but a mere mechanism and the objective appears to be in a needle. 98 symptoms for COVID. 98. They've covered everything sans korns....and variant XXVIII might just include it. By then I'll still be doing 5-plus miles of roadwork per day, dodging discarded masks and NOT stepping over any bodies. Just angling around the fearful, the programmed, the self-righteous and watching vehicles with one occupant, masked-up to the eyeballs.

COVID has one personal upside for me, though. Its made clear who is easily duped and lacking in critical, logical thinking, academic achievements and standing in this life, aside. Its been a grand IQ test of sorts.

God help us all.

a reply to: BiffTannen

I don't know much about this guy. From what I was able to find around the internet, it looks like he is a shock jock, that has developed some level of fame over the internet. I could be wrong as two left shoes, but this has the feel of theater about it. I would not be surprised if this ends up being contrived.  Especially with the Greta thing. It just does not have the feel of truth about it, and is too over the top. If the authorities were really looking for him, I think they wouldn't need a tweet and a pizza delivery to find him. I believe it is just more internet theater because they know what draws the attention of the masses, and they know how to play for the traffic and how to make something go viral. Just my personal opinion.

There were many lessons that we should have learned from our journey with COVID.

God help us all.

Is a prayer that will be echoed because the one thing that we should have learned is being missed by way too many of us. We are not only destined to repeat our mistakes, it is inevitable that it will only get worse.

originally posted by: AaarghZombies
And yet England was the last country in the UK to introduce restrictions, and had the softest restrictions. England's restrictions were also far less draconian that those in the EU despite coming later.

However you want to define the restrictions, if they’d been brought in just weeks earlier then tens of thousands of lives would’ve been saved and the lockdown would’ve been far shorter.

originally posted by: AaarghZombies
They were also among the first to unlock.

Indeed… And then after moronically launching the ‘help out to eat out’ campaign, asking everyone to eat out at restaurants to help the economy in the run up to Christmas 2020 we saw a new covid wave after Christmas that was bigger than the first. It was obviously too soon for such PR exercises with covid infections still too high. So, if they wanted a second lockdown, then ‘help out to eat out’ was a great way to help it happen.

originally posted by: AaarghZombies
The official UK policy at the beginning of the pandemic was to do the bear minimum.

That may have been the ‘official line’ at the time, but it’s now in the public domain that the reason for delay was Boris Johnson’s failure to engage with the problem, instead preoccupied with the travails of his collapsed marriage and pregnant mistress. In cobra meetings he was asked to impose restriction by his medical advisors and refused.

originally posted by: AaarghZombies
They caved to public pressure to bring in any real restrictions at all. This wasn't a "delay" it was them changing the plan from no lockdown to having a lock down.

No, as above the desire of science in the U.K. was to lockdown. We’ve since had enquiries and cross examinations that have clarified this. It was Boris’ refusal to engage, his publicised refusal to read his briefings and his focus being on the bad press covering his affair. He was also infamously preoccupied with having number 10 redecorated at vast expense to the tax payer in an effort to keep his mistress/new wife happy. It was a sh!t show.

The fact it was a sh!t show was increasingly pointed out in much of the UKs media and entertainment. It was so bad, so farcical and ludicrous that it was almost beyond satire. However it was indeed a constant source of satire. The fact that you’d so oddly call that cabinet’s chaos a ‘plan’ leads me to think that you are most definitely not resident in the U.K.

originally posted by: AaarghZombies
It's also the dumbest way to do it because it would make you look weak for changing your mind, and the political opposition look strong for forcing you to change.

Again, you don’t live here, do you? ‘Dumb’ has never stopped this government doing anything. There have been countless u-turns before and after covid. It’s now a cliche of comedy to joke about this government u-turning and backtracking because their policies have been so disastrous: lockdown, track & trace, PPE, parties at Number 10, and the apocalyptic-economy crushing budget of September 2022; within the month the brand new chancellor and prime minister had resigned and the budget…yep, u-turned… U-turns have been the Tories MO since before Boris entered office.

And just this week saying they would not restrict travel from China, then after many including that political opposition you mention above calling for restrictions the government has done yet another u-turn and announced restrictions…

So, are the Tories of the past 5 or more years the dumbest government to have ever ruled in the U.K. (perhaps anywhere) ?

Maybe!

Are some of these apparently idiotic decisions designed to fail at their intention but achieve a secondary outcome?

Maybe!

Case in point… that 2022 budget by Truss and Kamikwasi trashed the economy, sending the £ plummeting. The night before kwasi announced that budget he attended a dinner with many high profile city bankers. Those bankers bet against the £ and then made fortunes when the £ plummeted.

So, was that budget a failure or a success? That depends who you had dinner with, doesn’t it?

The Tories have made more u-turns than those bankers have had hot dinners; they’re not perturbed by the thought of looking weak in the face of the opposition when there’s a secondary outcome.

What’s clear is that many of these ‘failures’ have made the Tory chums very rich

a reply to: BiffTannen

That is what we are told by the media. The same source that spouts looming threat by way of vast numbers.

Except, as I've repeatedly said, I'm not American. Our media isn't spouting doom porn. The consensus in the media here is that covid is pretty much just the flu now as we've all either had it or been vaxxed against it.

American media has always dialed everything up to 11 for commercial reasons.

Do you believe the media

The media has been telling us that basic hygiene - such as hand washing and not coughing on people - has been way to go against winter flu for decades. Wouldn't you agree that it's common sense?

My Grandmother said pretty much the same, and she was no fool.

Covid is transmitted in most of the same ways as influenza. So wouldn't it also be common sense that at least some of the things that we know are effective against influenza would also be effective against covid?

COVID to me is but a mere mechanism and the objective appears to be in a needle

Then why not just use regular shots like flu, or measles, or travel vaxxes, that most people get anyway,?

Staging a world wide pandemic is just so ... inefficient. You destroy your own economy in order to do something that could be achieved much simpler and at much lower a cost, another way.

Its made clear who is easily duped and lacking in critical, logical thinking, academic achievements and standing in this life, aside. Its been a grand IQ test of sorts.

Well, it looks like my college education, and knowledge of epidemiology and virology, isn't worth squat when compared to your folksy wisdom.

a reply to: AaarghZombies

You actually kill me 😂 you are thick as fck !!

a reply to: Itisnowagain

And lipstick would still be used because people socialize on zoom.
And think of all the extra women there are now...... people are turning into them all the time...... that's more lipstick and makeup.

I don't have exact figures to hand, but an estimate by the McKinsey group calculated that since 2020 there has been an approximate downturn of 30 percent in revenue from cosmetics. With significantly larger falls in some areas than others. Which equates to a multi billion dollar difference.

People are still basic buying shampoo, but sales of salon products and indulgent products are way down. Companies are being force to streamline to core products so product diversity is declining as well.

a reply to: Scotchjimmy

And yet you haven't been able to put together even the most basic argument against what I'm saying?

To paraphrase: who's the more foolish, or the fool who can't even come up with a reason that the fool is wrong?

a reply to: AaarghZombies

If you want to believe sh*t that’s on you !!

a reply to: AaarghZombies

Everything is a conspiracy...

But in regards to Moderna getting lots of extra cash to blow, this looks like it relies on getting governments to force their vaccines on everybody every year. I hope the pandemic doesn't continue in perpetuity.