Might be right wing but not far right
Might be right wing but not far right
What you talking about its the most Right wing newspaper in the UKOriginally Posted by aot871
https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics...uks-newspapers
The problem is that TheGuardian is so beholden to far-left, Marxist, members of our benighted opposition that you always have to be aware of an "angle". Its reporters are embedded in the wider political environment that works for Corbyn, as well as shadow ministers themselves, and so stories which reflect current controversies are inevitably suspect.
goji (October 27th, 2020)
The Guardian is at least one newspaper you can read on line at no cost. Having done so for a time, I find a description of it as being beholden to the "far left" ridiculous! It is certainly left wingin comparison to the Daily Mail. Hard left? Again I say rubbish. Besides, is not the present government right wing? And did not The Guardian unequivocally quote this right wing government's chief scientific advisor?
Sir Patrick Vallance, the government’s chief scientific adviser, told MPs and peers that a vaccine would not be available in the UK until the spring.
Brad the Impala (October 27th, 2020), Khor tose (November 9th, 2020), Moggy (October 27th, 2020), snotface (October 27th, 2020)
In fact it was reported by the Guardian in July, based on research from Kings College London, that it is the antibodies that go into a steep decline after infection and that immunity may only last a few months.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...study-suggests
Yes, and again today in a different report.
“The fact that people get reinfected regularly throughout their lives with seasonal coronaviruses [that cause some common colds] suggests that the immunity, whether or not it is antibody mediated and/or T-cell mediated, probably isn’t very long-lasting,” said Barclay, who added that the team suspect the body reacts to infection with the new coronavirus in a similar way.
However,the article goes onto say;
But she said the new results do not necessarily mean that immunity arising from vaccination would be short-lived. “A good vaccine may well be better than natural immunity.”
https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...len-study-says
A very good question. Whilst it is obviously the Conservative party in charge, it's not entirely obvious if their policies are to the right or left of the Blair Labour government.
I have yet to see any evidence of right wing policies from them. For example, where are all the cuts in social security and taxes ?
Also, compared with all of the world and all of history, we have relatively high taxation and wealth re-distribution.
Of course UK politics belongs in a different thread.
Antibodies are not the only part of the immune system. There are other features such as T-cells, memory-B cells etc.
I haven't seen anyone report that T-cells have a short life, but I have seen reports that people still have T-cells from the Sars-Cov-1 outbreak 17 years ago.
I suppose the question would be are T-cells etc sufficient to turn Covid-19 from a life threatening disease into a minor one ?
The Guardian, with its false allegations, far from supporting the Labour Party, encouraged the defeat of Corbyn. Jonathon Freedland in particular. No one who reads it now believes it to be left-of-centre. And "Marxist"? a comically bizarre suggestion.
The best that can be said of it now is that it isn't as bad as The Torygraph or Murdoch's Times. Some good football writers though.
In the past couple of days I've dug out the WHO data on SARS, which lists those countries that had some person to person transmission of the SARS virus 18 years ago.
Looking at the Covid cases for each of those countries reveals a high degree of resistance to the bug, the only country having a significant number of Covid cases being Canada. Even then, the Covid infection rate for Canada per 100,000 people is only a third that of the USA.
I'm increasingly convinced that the route to becoming post-Covid is not vaccination with dead virus, but a very light encounter with the live virus, to sufficiently stimulate our immune responses, but without causing an infection.
I am not sure what you mean by 'light brush". China had the most cases of SARS by far. Others with significant numbers of deaths were Hong Kong, Taiwan, Canada, Singapore and Vietnam. If you mean that this was a light brush, then you are correct. Canada was hit harder than most other western countries partly because of Chinese returning home after the New Year holiday with relatives in China..
I suggest you are not correct in assuming from those statistics some sort of resistance to covid19 in those countries. Far more likely, I believe, is that because those countries were unprepared and hit hard by SARS, they established government departments specifically to spring into action as soon as the next virus appeared on the horizon. It was recognised that since SARS was a result of a virus crossing the species barrier from animals to humans, other viruses would eventually do the same. And China would almost certainly be the source.
Thus all the countries in the list above were prepared. Almost immediately they put into place a number of measures that took the rest of the world many more weeks. Taiwan banned travel from many countries, including Hong Kong, in mid-February. Those arriving had to have temperatures taken, provide details of where they would be staying, phone numbers and contact persons. Mask wearing was also all but mandatory. Vietnam soon made mask wearing and the use of hand sanitiser mandatory.
Another reason for suggesting there was no resistance centres is Thailand. It only had 9 deaths from SARS. So it is highly unlikely the population had any sort of natural immunity to covid19. Yet its death rate this year is still one of the lowest in the world.
You mention evidence for your theory. It would be nice to see it.
Brad the Impala (October 28th, 2020)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote