Blah Blah

The individual bikeaway lockers seem more secure. Given that these hangers are used when people are at home, would it not be better for those with expensive bikes to look at secure ways of keeping their bikes indoors or immediately outside? Even when I was a student living in a dingle room way back, I would keep my bicycle indoors at night.

Surely you are not comparing Aaron Bastani, whose only crime is holding a very left wing perspective, to someone who has literally done time for assault and hooliganism Uncle? Giving a speech, at the Oxford Union does not suddenly make Tommy Robinson credible. He is still a law breaking rabble rouser who thinks giving someone a thump at the drop of a hat is acceptable!

She is a strange woman. But she has sailed close to the wind so many times that censoring her was inevitable.

Tommy Robinson is a rabble rousing hooligan. Truth is not his strong point, nor is any respect for the law. That you respond to being called out for who you really are by posting a link to a Tommy video, says it all. You really are the gift that keeps giving Uncle.

keano77 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Of course you can have different methods. > > One shed as now. Second shed different feed. Third > shed layers. Online sales. Dog food and cat food > market etc > > That?s the problem with CAP. It subsidises > inefficiency and stifles competition No you can't. This would be a nightmare to regulate and causes all sort of issues for farmers too. We have regulation around food for all sorts of reasons, including to make sure we don't get ill. As for synthetic meat, that is still some time away as it is still very expensive to produce. Yes it may well be the future and there are lots of benefits to producing meat in this way, but it is not happening yet.

America has one of the worst obesity problems in the world. It is hardly a bastion of good diet or nutrition. Chicken is cheap because the breed of chicken used takes only 12 weeks to fatten. But it is also higher in fat than protein as a result. If we are going to produce meat, this is the wrong kind full stop. There are other varieties of chicken that take six months to reach slaughter point that are higher in protein than fat. This is what we used to farm and eat. So right there is a good example of why the drive for cheaper chicken has been detrimental to health. But forget chicken for the moment. There are a list of ingredients permitted in the USA that are banned in the EU because they are shown to be carcinogenic. So this debate is not just about how chicken is produced, it is also about animal welfare standards and food production as a whole. Would you want to eat a corn fed cow that has never seen daylight let alone a grass field? Want to know why that cow has to be stuffed with antibiotics and other pills when a grass fed cow doesn't need to be? I grew up on a farm. If I were not a vegetarian, I would never eat factory farmed meat or fish from anywhere. None of it is about producing the best quality and healthiest food and never has been. In my opinion, we need a complete overhual in food processing legislation that regulates more, not less.

As a vegetarian the very idea of eating a horse repulses me.

And that is precisely what I mean about letting Uncle expose himself. Eco warriors, G4 protestors and others have been daubing statues forever and a day. But when black protest groups do it? All hell breaks out. Similarly, scuffles at protests are nothing new, especially around Downing Street. Where is Uncle's outrage every time Tommy Robinson supporters kick off? Not a peep. As for UK wages being undercut, that has been going on for decades, as manufacturing and a host of other sectors have been lost to other countries and robots, that can produce what we need cheaper. He like all of us has benefited from affordable technology which millions of people from different ethnic groups work to make for barely enough to get by on. He thinks leaving the EU will change all of that. He doesn't understand that trying to replace EU trade with trade from equivalent in size market places like China and India is going to mean even more jobs undercut. And the higher value goods that we do make for the EU market, will be lost, as the owners of those businesses move their operations back within the EU. We really could be facing a future where we lose car manufacturing. But Uncle does not care one jot about those reasonably well paid jobs, to be replaced with what exactly?

TE44. The research that you think is a big risk is the method by which we create the annual flu vaccine. Hens eggs are used to create that. Are you suggesting we stop doing that as well? By your logic, we should never try and create any treatments that might save or better lives. How do you feel about stem cell treatments for example? You can not have it both ways.

It is a natural mutation because it is organic. The same mutation could easily occur in the hen producing the egg. Synthetic mutations involve directly altering the protein spikes and/or DNA in a lab. There's a clear difference there. On mutations, there is actually a lot that IS understood. And it is understood because of research like this that can be carried out. When presented with a novel virus, it is one thing to identify the zoonotic host carrier. Another to identify the intermediate host and the steps of mutation. We have to find a answer to SARS and there is no other way to do that than to carry out the kind of research you are so worried about.

Much of the anti-vac arguments are unfounded too. Vaccines have to go through rigorous clinical trials before they make it into widespread use. The fastest any working vaccine, deemed safe enough to use, has been developed, is five years. Influenza A mutates easily. This is why we develop a new vaccine every season, with varying degrees of success. There is little we can do to prevent viruses mutating. Part of life I'm afraid.

Here are some more for you consider Uncleglen. https://www.cps.gov.uk/south-east/news/teenager-jailed-over-unprovoked-racist-attack-brighton https://edition.cnn.com/2020/03/03/uk/coronavirus-assault-student-london-scli-intl-gbr/index.html https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-hampshire-51997378 https://www.miltonkeynes.co.uk/news/people/police-seeking-three-teenagers-who-threw-rocks-children-racist-attack-949293 All of them shocking.

Uncleglen has a track record of dog whistling to a racist/ xenophobic agenda. But personally, I would rather he exposes himself so that others can challenge that. Sweeping it under the carpet does nothing to tackle racism.

To answer your question of gain of function research. Yes it is highly dangerous. Yes some countries have banned it as a matter of course. Yes there are ethical debates to be had, just as with many areas of molecular biology. The point is, why is it an area of research? What is the intent and what might be the potential gain? This link takes a balanced view of the debate as it stands. https://mbio.asm.org/content/5/4/e01730-14 The history of scientific development has always involved elements of risk. What matters is the safety measures put in place to mitigate that risk. We no longer fill our houses (or bodies if we can help it) with poisonous toxins, like the Victorians did, because we place thorough research and safety before use. Sometimes though, there is a compromise between gain and risk. Zoonotic viruses already have the ability to 'shift' in a major way, without the help of a lab. And the more the population grows on the planet, encroaching into areas shared with wildlife, the more likely we are to see future major zoonotic mutations. The idea behind GOF research, is to be able to predetermine shift, and develop vaccines, before it happens, thus potentially mitigating future serious pandemics. It is not beyond the realms of science either, to one day have sequenced every zoonotic virus that exists, and have an array or ready made vaccine recipes to respond with speed to any major pandemic. You only have to look at the chaos, both economic and otherwise, this pandemic has caused, to see why science would want to find a faster way to respond to new pathogens.

TE44. You don't understand the science. That is fine. But I do. Let me put it to you this way. There are people who believe the Earth is flat. They really do believe that and spend a lot of time trying to bend the laws of physics to prove it. They reject all space photography, even though many nations (some of them with strong distrust of each other) have taken space photography for decades. This is the rabbit hole you are trying to argue with me. A minority of people can believe something that absolutely is true, is not. Should we be giving credence to flat earthers and their theories? Absolutely not. Should we be listening to the opinion of one discredited former lab technician over the hundreds of thousands of international experts who say something that is proven through repeated scientific analysis? Absolutely not. A key claim of Mikovits is that wearing a mask activates the virus. This is just completely untrue. She doesn't get away with it because hundreds of thousands of virologists can explain precisely why it is untrue. That leaves only two conclusions. That she is deliberately telling lies, or that she has no understanding of virology. Which do you think it is? And just to emphasize the point further. There are trained biologists who think evolution is a lie. They are strong advocates of creationism. Like Mikovits, they ignore the overwhelming evidence for, and amplify one or two holes that enable them to bend the science. The point is that people who study science are not immune to being sucked into stronger beliefs in other things that conflict with the science, to the point they bend the science to fit their narrative. Mikovits fits into that category. It is dangerous to give these people any credence.

DulwichFox Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- London: The Wuhan Institute of Virology > received a shipment of deadly viruses from > Canada's Microbiology Lab > months before the outbreak of Covid-19, > newly-released documents confirm. > Wuhan has been working on bats virals for a long time, as a specialist area, involving an international team of scientists. Bats are the most virulent species on the planet and labs all over the world work on that. You might want to sensationalise one shipment but there are thousands of these shipments moving between labs all around the world. Level 4 labs are incredibly secure. They have to be. These headlines are indicative of finding something to fit a narrative. In truth, the shipment of virals between labs is commonplace. In addition, the virals created in labs are pseudovirals. In other words, they have had the ability to activate removed. This is also something I have explained before on this forum.

TE44 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Blah blah Assumw what you wish......... Its not about who > know? the most. And imagine a world where people don't get taken in by cranks because they lack any expert knowledge of their own! No-one ever questions the surgeon about to save their life, but expert geneticists and virologists can be questioned because a discredited lab technician who doctored the samples she was working on aligns herself with conspiracy theories. You buy into this stuff because you want to and because you lack the common sense to wonder why millions of research centers and qualified professionals around the world don't share the conclusions of this one discredited worker. Of course she has an axe to grind. She got caught cheating science. And once a cheat, always a cheat.

Now you are posting links to websites that do nothing but peddle conspiracy theories! And you are going to still pretend you don't seek out this stuff? Who next? Alex Jones? Of course Level 4 labs work on pathogens, there would be no vaccines if they didn't. But these are also the highest security level labs because of those biohazards. Again her response plays on your ignorance of how pathogenic science works, because she wants you to think that the Chinese or some governmental power created Covid. Scientists far more qualified and specialised than her can tell from the genome sequence where a virus originates and if it has been synthetically altered in any way. I have covered all of this before so I am not going through it again.

I knew it. That woman spiked her own samples to falsify clinical results. If you can not see why that would be extremely dangerous in clinical research that may go on to be used on millions of patients, there is no helping you. She was no more than a lab technician and was fired and discredited for it and rightly so. Her claims in Plandemic are hogwash and she absolutely knows this. This pretty accurately sums it up. https://www.medpagetoday.com/infectiousdisease/generalinfectiousdisease/86461 She is playing on people like you who have inadequate understanding of biological science to peddle her own conspiracy theories. Please don't insult my intelligence with any more of her tripe. And here is a sobering example for you. https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/the_americas/brazil-bolsonaro-coronavirus-cases-deaths-reopening-second-wave/2020/06/15/3282d27e-ae4b-11ea-856d-5054296735e5_story.html Brazil ignored everything and did little and is now in a complete mess. That is what would have happened across the world had every country ignored the advice of epidemiology.

TE44 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT0017301 > 7 > > An old study on facemasks, pre covid. Oddly enough, this page has been doing the rounds from the pandemic deniers over the last 24 hours. It is rather telling as to the sources you are following TE44 ;) This relates to a particular types of mask, that has many layers and is not really designed for all day use. Surgical masks are much lighter. Hypoxia is something usually experienced at altitude, where the air is thinner and less 02 dense. Different people have different thresholds for hypoxia. This is why not everyone can be a fighter pilot for example. The likelihood of a doctor or nurse suffering from hypoxia from wearing a mask is rare. But should anyone feel nauseous, common sense requires they simply take a break to recover. And that is exactly what nurses and doctors do.

TE44 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Blah blah Can you tell me why people with lung > problems are exempt from wearing one on transport > if there is no problem wearing one. You really have to ask this? Some of those with compromised respiratory conditions may need clearer airways in a way that healthy people don't. They are not being told to not wear masks, only that they do not need to if it compromises their condition.

TE44, we have an excess death count, compared to the year on year average, that can be explained in no other way than being the result of this pandemic. In the winter, if a second wave hits, we will see another excess death count, compared to the figures seasonal flu delivers. We have a moral duty to protect life and the only way that can be effectively done during a pandemic is in the way that governments around the world have responded. The cost to the economy of doing nothing is bigger longer term. Why? because business is equally hit hard when millions of people are too sick to work at any given time, and health resources, unable to cope with the pandemic, can't treat anyone else either. Why do you think Spanish Flu (the last unfettered global pandemic) killed an estimated 40 million plus? Why do you think that had a depressive economic impact? Why do you think Manchester, who did employ what we would now recognise as social distancing and lock down measures, had less than other cities that did not in 1918? And by other doctors/ scientists who have different ideas and experiences, please don't say you mean the discredited voices behind hogwash like 'Plandemic'. Those people are deliberately peddling claims they know are not true, and are a disgrace to science.

No Keano, Sephiroth is spot on. No leave voter has ever been able to demonstrate that we do not have sovereignty, freedom or democracy. And as you are going to learn, ALL trade agreements come with required changes to regulatory frameworks, imposed by the interests of the other trade partner. All that waffle sold to you by the likes of Farage was a red herring. Even trading on WTO terms comes with a set of rules we did not create but HAVE to abide by, especially on tariffs. So you see, it is actually leavers, who never understood the complexity of trade and regulatory frameworks around that, who fell into the trap set for them, by self interested millionaires with little interest in things like employer protections and livelihoods.

snoopy17 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I have no health problems, but after 2 minutes I > can't breathe in those masks, wearing those masks > for a long period of time will make more people > sick as they are breathing in their own breathe. > > > if you have no health problems and you can't > Breath in a mask will they still let you on a bus. This is rubbish of the kind being peddled by conspiracy theorists. Once you have an infection, you can not make yourself more infected by breathing back in the viral particles you shed. It is the antibodies you produce to fight the infection that decide how long you remain infected for and to what degree. The wearing of a mask makes no difference to that, but it will reduce the chance of you infecting others in proximity to you.

TE44 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Blah blah. Carry on like this, where people are > following rules where no questions are answered, > then when they are, they contradict past > decisions. Primarily surgeons wear masks to > protect patients. Yes masks are worn in some > workplaces to protect the wearer. The second wave > is being woven like a threat which divides those > who do not want to hear, give conversation or > platform to the scientist who disagree with the > narrative. An narrative that has not made sense > from the start. The concept of a virus that spreads easily, hospitalises a large percentage of people and kills, by the latest global stats, 9 per cent of confirmed cases, should be an easy enough concept to grasp, irregardless of government messaging. The governments problem is that they have an economy to manage as well as the virus and they are struggling to find the best way forward.