It's shady that twice now the Feds have announced WA's zero cases before McGowan has to diminish his moment in the spotlightThat would reduce his amount of TV appearances - not going to happen.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
LIVE: Sydney v Port Adelaide - 7:40 / 7:10 Fri
Squiggle tips Swans at 57% chance -- What's your tip? -- Teams on Thurs »
LIVE: Geelong v Brisbane Lions - 7:30PM Sat
Squiggle tips Cats at 54% chance -- What's your tip? -- Teams on Thurs »
Weekly Prize - Join Any Time - Tip Prelim Finals
The Golden Ticket - MCG and Marvel Medallion Club tickets and Corporate Box tickets at the Gabba, MCG and Marvel.
AFLW 2024 - Round 4 - Chat, game threads, injury lists, team lineups and more.
It's shady that twice now the Feds have announced WA's zero cases before McGowan has to diminish his moment in the spotlightThat would reduce his amount of TV appearances - not going to happen.
I think your pretty decent poster postman and fairly switched on (obviously RW)but I always remember you stating you d happily vote for trump (in last election) if you were US citizen.... be interested to know if you still hold that view now?Right - so did he say 'Drink bleach' - which is what you are being called out on. Taylor has said that he was poor in his ramble but challenged you on that one point.
While he said inject or introduce did he say 'Drink Bleach?'
Now as you are demanding taylor answer a ridiculous question I will ask again 'If someone disagrees with you are they automatically stupid, or a conspiracy theorist or something sinister?
I have asked other questions on this thread that need to be answered long and short term in relation to locking down and the other effects on the community locking down causes.
Are you in favour of a lockdown each and every time there is one case in the community? Over what period of time would you be happy for that to occur - for example, if in 2023 there is one case would you still want us to lockdown?
I don't have strong opinions on this - in my opinion, the WHO has ruined its authority and reputation. We know that politicians will not always automatically do what is best for the people (on all sides) but weigh political factors into decisions. We also know the media is sadly now barely trustworthy as the model they use to make money in the internet age has and does plague the industry. I do have lots of questions - questions that not many are asking and that will not be answered well if when there is a disagreement the conversation doesn't move forward in good faith but instead resorts to name-calling or accusations.
WHO have now said that ongoing lockdowns are not a sustainable answer to the ongoing problem. Now as the have also proven to be politically motivated are trustworthy? Do we throw away all they have done or question everything? I tend to sway towards questioning and investigation. I do think they need an overhaul and leadership needs to change. Having said that, I also think if functioning well they are a valuable international resource.
To pick up from my last longer post - The client we are trying to get a machine in for from overseas in a last-ditch attempt to save her voice has deteriorated further this past week. In her instance as a 59 year old widow, she will more than likely lose the use of her voice and become more socially isolated than she was previously. While I am working on the machine side, there are now plans being put in place around ongoing support, interventions etc to help her in what will more than likely be an outcome of loss of voice. This would have more than likely been avoidable (nothing is certain in health care) if the lockdowns from early last year weren't in place. I am not saying we shouldn't have locked down, I am saying that locking down does have other severe consequences.
As mentioned previously management at scale is incredibly difficult. This is one case being measured against the health and well being of the broader society... Is there a way to tranche treatment and restrictions to protect the vulnerable?
There are other costs (not even starting on broader economic issues) to society for each lockdown. While it is popular and easy to take an extreme position, they are very rarely useful unless applied to the WCE Scum up the road... ( I kid... mostly!)
I think that the current media situation and Trump made this thing far more politicised than it should have been. It would be nice if we took the partisan stuff out of the conversation.
You mean like our own liberal party/system where josh fraudenberg couldn’t do with regards to acknowledging libs stimulus during Covid lockdown was fundamentally no different to labour’s stimulus package given out during GFC which the pontificating neo political Libs ragged on relentlessly snd still did right up till .. u guessed it they realised they had to introduce their own “social “ stimulus ??Remember when the assassination of a terrorist leader was given the headline of a scholar killed? It's so unhealthy for their system where they can't give a single win to their political opponent.
If ever there was a time for people to realise that politicians are servants, not leaders - it's now.You mean like our own liberal party/system where josh fraudenberg couldn’t do with regards to acknowledging libs stimulus during Covid lockdown was fundamentally no different to labour’s stimulus package given out during GFC which the pontificating neo political Libs ragged on relentlessly snd still did right up till .. u guessed it they realised they had to introduce their own “social “ stimulus ??
Interview with Leigh Sales, 7.30, ABC | Treasury Ministers
LEIGH SALES: Treasurer, thank you very much for racing up from the House. JOSH FRYDENBERG: Nice to be with you Leigh. LEIGH SALES:ministers.treasury.gov.au
Except it's not highly speculative therapeutics as Prof Clancy's summary shows. IVM, Zn and antibiotics are available in Australia and not in short supply and anyone who is diagnosed can receive them from a Dr. You're making an incorrect assumption that IVM, which was originally researched and recommended by an Australian as you should know, is not recommended by the vast majority of medical professionals.I read and understood all of it. My Honors Degree in Microbiology helps...
He's still advocating vaccinations (which are not currently available in Australia - if they are, please let me know where I can get one) and highly speculative drug treatment, that the vast majority of medical professionals do not recommend.
He may be right, but as of today, in Australia, it's virtually impossible to follow his recommendations - hence we're having lockdowns/masks/testing/tracing etc.
I think your pretty decent poster postman and fairly switched on (obviously RW)but I always remember you stating you d happily vote for trump (in last election) if you were US citizen.... be interested to know if you still hold that view now?
Thank you - kind of - I have been fairly consistent in being all over the center politically for at least the last decade. I don't know how anything in this debate (COVID) would or should have anything to do with Right/C/Left.
I am not sure if I said I would happily vote for Trump. If you can find the quote then I will willingly reply to that. Perhaps I did but my stance was and is the following: (perhaps previously I didn't communicate it well? Who knows)
I would have voted for Obama in 08' (I was actually in the states and was very excited by his then unifying approach, which changed dramatically leading up to 12). By 12 I wouldn't have voted for either party. 16 I would have voted for Trump. 2020 democrats are so extreme left that I couldn't vote for them, nor would I now. Biden is not strong enough, nor in my opinion (which doesn't mean much) is he durable enough to hold off the power base of the party which more and more seems to be AOC and others. Does that make me RW? My thoughts are that the Dems, led by Obama went way left and left me behind. I had never previously or since been as encouraged as I was when Obama was elected.
If my vote was purely about personalities, while I think that both Biden and trump are rubbish and have a lot of major issues, I would not have voted. I fear (I hope wrongly, so no point going at me for this one as if you are correct I will be very happy) that there will be a stronger push left and Socialism has and will never work. It is a scourge on every system that has implemented it and has had devastating results. So I would vote against that again even if the option was someone as bad as Trump.
My question for you: Why is a discussion about COVID where I state that it shouldn't be partisan as it is a flu/pandemic/emergency is if I said I would or wouldn't vote for Trump important?
Given the way, the media operate - sensationalist around their opposition (Fox - against Dems, CNN, MSNBC, ABC against GOP) I find it far more useful to discuss policy rather than personality. I read a fair bit of Substack these days.
For example - People here have made claims about Scomo that are deplorable based on a handshake without ever knowing the guy because... he is a Liberal. I am sure people think the same of McGowen or have done the same for Rudd etc. I don't think any of it is helpful. For example the comments here about the bloke (Zac?) wearing the mask with the tips for exercise etc. It didn't affect me much at all, but the strength of some comments make little sense to me outside of partisanship. I have met Mark M three times. The first time as a student and then two more times since. Two of the times he was a nice guy and the third he came across as a jerk. Does that mean he is a jerk or there is an underlying nefarious or sinister reason behind his rudeness? I don't think so. He was probably very busy or under stress or may have just been having a rotten day. At the end of the day, he was still nice 2/3 occasions. Does that make him a saint? No, he is a professional who I am sure feels he is doing his best to serve people. I will endeavour to assesss his policy and comments based on their substance rather than a tribal need to win. After all - if he turns into the greatest premier in WA's history it will be good for us all... even then your definition of what is great may differ to mine... But I hope I am being clear?
I would rather discuss what they are or are not doing. Some of it will matter far less to me than you or vice versa. That is fine. It should be ok for me to care less about something than you without it being a stain against my character and vice versa. Most of all on here and in my personal life I advocate robust discussion that should lead to strong probing and uncomfortable questions. those conversations cannot happen if the most important thing about the person you are talking too is a label surrounding a political leaning/ideology. I would rather the conversation happen on its merits. That type of conversation is only possible if we think well of the other participant. Which is impossible if we label them a Bigot, racist, (insert desired) phobe etc with no proof other than a feeling of their sinister intent based upon our interpretation of their political ideology.
I don't think any of that makes me RW. It may - personally I have met some amazing people who deeply care about their community on both the right and left.
I am sure there are some here who will not read all I just wrote but who instead will come at me regarding the above voting point where I hope I am clear in saying I think voting is less about the person at the top and more about the party and policies down the ticket. There is some evidence that was representative of people who voted in the 20 election. As it seems many voted Biden top of ticket and GOP down the ballot.
Anyway - back to COVID and for me personally back to looking after the wife and baby.
If you think 2020 Democrats are extreme left wing, that is because of where you are standing. From the viewpoint of the extreme right, everyone appears to be left wing. The RW media has painted the “Squad” and Bernie Sanders (a minority of the party) as socialists when they are advocating for conditions that Australians already have - universal Health care and an acceptable minium wage. They are also advocating for a Green new deal, which is a way of reducing carbon emissions without having a collapsing economy. Unless you are a climate change denier, you would understand that we need to reduce coal, oil and gas emissions. If you are a climate change denier, you should find another planet and duck off to that one.
If you think Trump’s presidency was anything but a total disaster to the world and to his nation, you have been damaged in the the way you view the world.
Anyone who excuses the racist, bigoted, dishonest and dangerous actions of the Trump era has jumped on board with his ideology - not as much as the QAnon and Proud Boys, but they are on the same bandwagon. I could never understand how the fascists came into power in Europe in the thirties. It’s pretty clear from Trump’s time that people know that a leader is lying (and reject what they feel too uncomfortable with), but accept a lot of the stuff that they should feel uncomfortable with. And as a result the unacceptable becomes acceptable. And the fascist ideology becomes more extreme.
No I didn’t say that. Nor did I mean it. Stop getting offended by things that weren’t said. If you continue to deny climate change with the overwhelming evidence of its existence and cause, then you can flick off to another planet, as far as I’m concerned. From what you said subsequently, this does not apply to you. The Green New Deal has aspects that Biden has already indicated he is willing to implement. If you disagree with the method that’s fine. I’m pretty sure not all aspects of the GND will be implemented and I wouldn’t want them to, either.So if I disagree with the Green New Deal I am a denier and shouldn't live on earth?
Re: Trump presidency being a total disaster - Here are a few things surely everyone can agree were good even if you hate the guy. No new wars. First president in decades not to start a new war. End of critical race theory being taught - massive positive. The peace deals in the middle east. I am not sure what about those things could be horrible or a total disaster for the world or the US.
COVID chat as was the original purpose:
My previous questions still apply - how is Trump important or L/C/R in the discussion on COVID. Surely we have to be able to admit that as no one is perfect no political wing or party will be perfect. Therefore how they deal with something shouldn't be viewed through a partisan lens but on a case by case basis?
I think asking questions about what the plan is for the next 2-3 years are relevant. Do we keep locking down?
That would reduce his amount of TV appearances - not going to happen.
I’m happy with the proposed new restrictions post Friday night other than the mask wearing which is still too strong but I also think the authority’s will be a bit more relaxed with their policing. Crowded areas like shops and shopping centres and public transport is understandable but out in the open air is just bullshit.
I hate working from home so will be looking forward heading back Monday. We're a small office though so I doubt anyone will bother with wearing a mask in the office.the mask wearing is insane. Noone is going to open their offices in the CBD with masks required.
Short, sharp lockdowns lasting for a week are much more preferable than the alternative, which would involve terrible health consequences and a lack of economic activity.
he loves to get on TV and grand stand. its pathetic.
These new restrictions are an absolute joke. THERE ARE NO CASES. Why are we dealing with this bullshit. Insanity.
I am talking specifically corona virus with spike proteins. My point was makes it easier to understand when applied to mRNA vaccines that are modeled on the spike protein. A different strain may not have the same spike protein and not produce antibodies at all if injected into a human, where if it was only a different variant the vaccine would have the same protective effect. How is that hard to understand when we're talking about corona virus?It makes no sense for you (or the leading UK infectious disease specialist) to limit the use of the term strain with spike protein, as strains and variants are terms used across virology and the S-protein is limited to the Co-Vid viruses. So no, it doesn't make it easier to understand.
Much of what you have wrote is gobbledegook. Your thoughts on the death data and herd immunity make no sense: How does MERS and CoVid-1 help achieve herd immunity, when neither viruses (fortunately) infected the population in great numbers? The corona cold viruses are hardly "almost identical" to the CoVid-2 virus. Where did you get that idea? You think we are dealing with a nasty cold? Reality and you are clearly not friends.
The UK variant is well documented as being 70% more infectious. Reasons for the virus being more infectious include: evading the immune response, binds to cells better so a smaller dose is needed to get infected, people who are infected produce more virus, or surviving better in the environment. It seems that people are producing more virus.
You claim that lockdowns hurt more than they help. It may be true that in Europe or the USA where the virus is widespread it won't help, but in WA or elsewhere in Australia, it stops the virus becoming widespread and enables contact tracers a chance to be effective. Elsewhere in the world contact tracing has been completely overwhelmed.
I don't know about Prof Clancy, I was asking the question. He is apparently the main source being quoted by MP Craig Kelly, who is a noted purveyor of wild conspiracy theories. Anybody still spruiking hydrochloroquine is ignoring the overwhelming evidence that it is a waste of resources and can actually be harmful. About the time Clive Palmer bought a huge supply of HCQ and Trump started pushing the drug, a large number of scientists started doing randomised trials on its effectiveness. More so than any other drug, and there was no shortage of funding available for this. The results have been in for months. Look it up yourself. Just don't look up Craig Kelly on facebook, which seems to be your main source, since Twitter banned Trump.
Here's a good start for you, a review of some 142 trials: https://www.cebm.net/covid-19/hydroxychloroquine-for-covid-19-what-do-the-clinical-trials-tell-us/
Still have to wear a mask in gyms or treadmill, and while community sport is restricted to 150 players spectators and officials, can't see anything on training numbers.If you don't have to wear a mask for vigorous outdoor exercise, I assume we can start full unrestricted training again?
I am talking specifically corona virus with spike proteins. My point was makes it easier to understand when applied to mRNA vaccines that are modeled on the spike protein. A different strain may not have the same spike protein and not produce antibodies at all if injected into a human, where if it was only a different variant the vaccine would have the same protective effect. How is that hard to understand when we're talking about corona virus?
The analysis of deaths from COVID was looking at the geographic pattern of cases and deaths and comparing them to previous severe flus or other corona virus or MERS. It suggested other reasons based on this analysis why there has been a spike in deaths since last December. There is no evidence that it's 70% more infectious and relying on a single study from Imperial College who are the laughing stock of the scientific world saying it has an R value of between 0.4 and 0.7.
It doesn't match the observational data in Perth when the guard did not infect any of his three housemates or 150 close contact or 30000+ people in the same areas.
The variant — officially known at VUI-202012/01 or lineage B117 — is not thought to be more deadly or cause more severe illness.
But over time, a variant that infects more people will inevitably drive up rates of infection, hospitalisations and death, potentially posing a significant threat to countries already struggling to contain COVID-19.
it's very difficult to work out exactly how much more contagious the new variant is, said medical microbiologist and genomics specialist Norelle Sherry.
"The problem with trying to estimate the transmission value is that we can't do controlled lab studies to work out how much the increase in transmission is due to the virus, versus how much it's due to social factors … things like the mobility of people, how well they're adhering to lockdowns, whether schools are open," said Dr Sherry from The Doherty Institute.
"We have to rely on our observations of what's happening in the UK."
A single study in pre print from researchers at Imperial College London found the new variant increased the virus's reproduction or R number — the average number of people an infected person infects — by between 0.4 and 0.7, said Professor Holmes. https://www.abc.net.au/news/health/...issible-is-new-uk-covid-variant-b117/13053548
You talked about herd immunity only coming from contracting SARS CoV 2, but that is incorrect. Research shows cross immunity from specific T cells responses from the four common coronavirus colds (OC43, HKU1, 229E and NL63), SARS CoV 1 and MERS, all from the same Coronaviridae know to infect humans.
Professor Clancy has no political affiliations and doesn't know Craig Kelly. In his interview with Liam Bartlett this morning says IVM and HCQ are of significant benefit in treating COVID, with an 80% reduction in serious effect or deaths when used early. He says anyone that anyone that doesn't accept that either doesn't know the data or doesn't understand it.
It seems you've let your political views prevent you from accepting safe and effective therapeutics in treating and preventing COVID deaths.
The climate debate is an interesting one.
It's currently at the point where it's used as a political tool in truest sense of the word, action is promised at election time and it's either implemented or it isn't but there isn't actually a goal of resolving the issue - since the action is never sold as a solution, always as a measure for more time, so it can be used at the next election and the one after and the one after.
But I think the governments are actually getting scared with how much traction it's getting in the general public, how much desire for action is simmering away that might require them to make tough choices that still won't resolve the issue but will cause serious harm to their nation's economies - which the opposition that currently says enough isn't being done will then blame the government of the time for.
The dialogue around it is always "more needs to be done", "we aren't doing enough", "better to do anything than nothing" and the like.
Eventually someone will say; "give us the solution, put the plan that will fix this forever on the table and lets do that"
Which leads to the most awkward point of the entire debate that neither side wants to fall into, can anything be done to fix it? Because if that isn't achievable at all then we shouldn't be wasting energy (pun!) on token gestures to buy votes, we need to start heavily investing in enclosed vertical farming etc. Let's assume there is a solution and it can be fixed with a change of lifestyle, that also needs to be quantified and the costs attached to it for us to make that decision. The pandemic reduced emissions by 17%.
The current plan is to maintain a 1.5 degree increase by having no net emissions by 2050. The cynic in me feels like that is a very convenient point as there are not going to be many people currently in politics still working in 30 years, they can push the issue back and point at their commitment to end the discussion and debate, cutting the knees out from the opposition seeking to use it as a political tool. But does it achieve anything other than winning votes?
My solution? I think we need to build a production line that farms bulk seaweed, or otherwise fast growing CO2 consuming organic matter, then throw that into solar powered pyrolysis reactors which will strip away the carbon and stabalise it into charcoal, then we bury it. If we need it to be more efficient then the off gassing from the pyrolysis process can be captured.
I've also been reading some interesting journals on the water/nutrient retaining properties of charcoal in soil, which could mean Australia can enrich the possible farming lands.
Given how many nations are signing up to have net zero emissions by 2050, and there being over 40,000,000,000 tonnes of CO2 emissions a year - then we might be able to make quite an industry from offsetting the entire planet's emissions at their expense. Carbon taxes across the planet are about $100 per tonne. So that industry could be worth $4,000,000,000,000 a year to us. Approximately twice the current total value of our entire economy.
Now the ugly numbers. Carbon capture through pyrolysis yields conservatively 25% stabilised carbon. We need to push 160 billion tonnes of material into the reactors every year to secure the carbon from them to match the emissions. That's 438 million tonnes a day - 18.25 million tonnes per hour.
This log weighs 15.5t
View attachment 1051761
We would need to feed almost 1.2 million of these into the reactors every hour all day, every day.
I do believe the solution is technological, but clearly we aren't there yet.
I think nuclear power is the best reliable and zero emission power available. Especially if it can be delivered in modular, factory built containers. The issue at the moment is that the power plants housing reactors are built insitu which takes time and costs a lot of money, so although the fuel to power cost is miles ahead of the likes of natural gas and way ahead of coal it still takes a long time for that cost to return table to flip the nuclear plant into the black.What are your thoughts on nuclear?
I now realise AOC has on occasion described herself as a democratic socialist. This doesn’t mean she is like an East German. Her policies align more with Scandinavian countries. As I said, many of the policies she has promoted would be looked at as sensible by Australians
I don’t think AOC or Sanders want unlimited immigration. Where did you get that? She did get into strife for calling the immigration detention centres concentration camps.
- Medicare for all - replacing employer medical benefits which mean many Americans are uninsured and don’t receive medical care. The private health system is not comparable to the Australian one.
- Ending privatisation of prisons
- Guaranteed family leave
- Renewable energy sources (open on nuclear power)
- Reverse tax cuts for billionaires
- Gun control