Quote:THE PRESIDENT WILL OUTLINE FIVE AREAS HIS TEAM IS FOCUSED ON TO GET MORE AMERICANS VACCINATED. ONE, TARGETED BY COMMUNITY DOOR-TO-DOOR OUTREACH TO GET REMAINING AMERICANS VACCINATED TO ENSURE THEY HAVE THE INFORMATION THEY NEED ON HOW BOTH SAFE AND ACCESSIBLE THE VACCINE IS
I have an issue with the word "targeted", being as their love for words and symbolism.
"targeted by community door-to-door outreach"
Question......
First of all -- those that still do not want to get the shit shot, what will happen? Will they be 'flagged'?
Secondly -- what do they intend to do about those who refuse?
Third --- are they going to insist on "proof" of vaccination?
I just won't answer my door. That simple.
Cameras are a wonderful thing!!
As I said before, they sure are pushing this vaccine, actually appearing desperate.
Kinda spooky how quickly they are wanting people to get vaccinated. NOW.
A little extreme with the government over reach IMO, but then again, that is what the Dems are known for.
@"senona", feels like the CCP has it's hands all over this, right? Forcing vaccinations, targeting people who don't comply, etc. Yeah, the Democrat label is just another name for Communist China now.
Quote:THE PRESIDENT WILL OUTLINE FIVE AREAS HIS TEAM IS FOCUSED ON TO GET MORE AMERICANS VACCINATED. ONE, TARGETED BY COMMUNITY DOOR-TO-DOOR OUTREACH TO GET REMAINING AMERICANS VACCINATED TO ENSURE THEY HAVE THE INFORMATION THEY NEED ON HOW BOTH SAFE AND ACCESSIBLE THE VACCINE IS
I have an issue with the word "targeted", being as their love for words and symbolism.
"targeted by community door-to-door outreach"
Question......
First of all -- those that still do not want to get the shit shot, what will happen? Will they be 'flagged'?
Secondly -- what do they intend to do about those who refuse?
Third --- are they going to insist on "proof" of vaccination?
I just won't answer my door. That simple.
Cameras are a wonderful thing!!
As I said before, they sure are pushing this vaccine, actually appearing desperate.
Kinda spooky how quickly they are wanting people to get vaccinated. NOW.
A little extreme with the government over reach IMO, but then again, that is what the Dems are known for.
Yeah, I saw BidenHarris himself on TV this evening talking about his "neighborhood by neighborhood outreach" and a door to door campaign. I thought then - and I may have thought it out loud, but who the hell listens to me anyhow? - "You tryin' to get a lot of people shot? 'Cause that's a great way to get shot around here!"
I'm getting worn out with the goddamned Health Service spamming my phone with text reminders to "get the jab, buddy", and I'm pretty sure I'd lose my ever-lovin' shit if they started coming around and knocking at my door, too.
Maybe I just need to put a sign up that says "COVID quarantine, and if you can read this, you've already been ranged in for defensive measures." Do you think that might discourage them as the look at the thick forest surrounding them on their way up my drive? maybe give 'em second thoughts?
.
Diogenes was eating bread and lentils for supper. He was seen by the philosopher Aristippus, who lived comfortably by flattering the king.
Said Aristippus, ‘If you would learn to be subservient to the king you would not have to live on lentils.’ Said Diogenes, ‘Learn to live on lentils and you will not have to be subservient to the king.’
07-07-2021, 12:42 PM (This post was last modified: 07-07-2021, 12:47 PM by Michigan Swamp Buck.
Edit Reason: For Clarity
)
From BIAD's post . . .
Quote:As well as overt warnings about the danger of the virus, the Government has been accused of feeding the public a non-stop diet of bad news, such as deaths and hospitalisations, without ever putting the figures in context with news of how many people have recovered, or whether daily death tolls are above or below seasonal averages.
I've noticed how certain information has been omitted from the reports, like the immunity of those who recovered should be added to the total number of herd immunity but aren't, it's just those vaccinated who count. I've also noticed that reports made by scientists and other professionals that do address missing information are censored and accused of being false or misleading.
Even some official sources like the NIH, CDC, WHO, and FDA have information that is buried, information that they make up excuses for why it is irrelevant. Not like that makes any difference, many reports that have used official sources for this missing information are still characterized as false and misleading and censored from the public.
Add to that the contradictions and flip flopping of officials (Fauci, politicians, experts, etc.) and these organizations and I can't bring myself to believe any information I haven't researched and dug deeply for on my own.
Quote:THE PRESIDENT WILL OUTLINE FIVE AREAS HIS TEAM IS FOCUSED ON TO GET MORE AMERICANS VACCINATED. ONE, TARGETED BY COMMUNITY DOOR-TO-DOOR OUTREACH TO GET REMAINING AMERICANS VACCINATED TO ENSURE THEY HAVE THE INFORMATION THEY NEED ON HOW BOTH SAFE AND ACCESSIBLE THE VACCINE IS
I have an issue with the word "targeted", being as their love for words and symbolism.
"targeted by community door-to-door outreach"
Question......
First of all -- those that still do not want to get the shit shot, what will happen? Will they be 'flagged'?
Secondly -- what do they intend to do about those who refuse?
Third --- are they going to insist on "proof" of vaccination?
I just won't answer my door. That simple.
Cameras are a wonderful thing!!
As I said before, they sure are pushing this vaccine, actually appearing desperate.
Kinda spooky how quickly they are wanting people to get vaccinated. NOW.
A little extreme with the government over reach IMO, but then again, that is what the Dems are known for.
This whole door-to-door thing is astounding. Who is going to do it? Who pays them to do it? What happens when someone going door-to-door gets shot at or harmed in some way?
When was the last time the government went door-to-door for anything? Yes I know the census but that is Constitutional.
07-07-2021, 04:45 PM (This post was last modified: 07-07-2021, 04:46 PM by BIAD.)
(07-07-2021, 12:42 PM)Michigan Swamp Buck Wrote: From BIAD's post . . .
Quote:As well as overt warnings about the danger of the virus, the Government has been accused of feeding the public a non-stop diet of bad news, such as deaths and hospitalisations, without ever putting the figures in context with news of how many people have recovered, or whether daily death tolls are above or below seasonal averages.
I've noticed how certain information has been omitted from the reports, like the immunity of those who recovered should be added to the total number of herd immunity but aren't, it's just those vaccinated who count. I've also noticed that reports made by scientists and other professionals that do address missing information are censored and accused of being false or misleading.
Even some official sources like the NIH, CDC, WHO, and FDA have information that is buried, information that they make up excuses for why it is irrelevant. Not like that makes any difference, many reports that have used official sources for this missing information are still characterized as false and misleading and censored from the public.
Add to that the contradictions and flip flopping of officials (Fauci, politicians, experts, etc.) and these organizations and I can't bring myself to believe any information I haven't researched and dug deeply for on my own.
That's the thing that astonished me, the scale of the scheme and the amount of organisations involved. Google suppresses any counter
-information about the Coof and the different medical suggestions to help the public. The news media all sing the same song, yet totally
change last week's assurances without a care that this week's tune conflicts with what they previously said and the Governments speak
gravelly about concerns for the public, yet flaunt their disregard to that same public.
Science -the firebrand they were so proud of, is now a joke and even though the payments will continue to maintain the narrative,
the public have stopped fearfully worshipping at their alter.
They know the realities of the scheme they've concocted, they know of the benefits of maintaining the social control and they know
that the damage they're doing to the eternal perception that was created to put such people on pedestals, will be sold once again to
the public at a later date.
Take the first one. Kay Burley works as a Presenter for Sky News in the UK. I think we can say she would have access to the facts
of the Covid and if they aligned with the crap they sling at their viewers daily, one would find it difficult to rationalise why this woman
would organise a birthday party in the middle of a lockdown and Tier-2-related curfew in England.
Yet there she was with fellow Sky Journalists, drinking in the Century Club -London until 11.00pm, then a late-night meal at the
fashionable 'Folie' restaurant and then back for some more booze with a small group back at her five-bedroom West-London house.
(Not her cottage in the Cotswolds).
Social-distancing...? No. (neither was any of the other patrons in the exclusive nightclub) Masks...? Don't be silly.
Hugging...? Of course. Adhering to any of the other warnings the thousands of TV Presenters shout at the public every day...?
Are you for real?!!
It's a virus that is mutating to stay alive, it's poorly duplicating itself and adapting to its situation. On the mainland, we older-folk used
to call it flu and for those already with ailments, it can add to their respective dilemmas. But it doesn't warrant the fear-porn that is
vomited to us... unless that fear-porn itself has another reason for be disseminated.
By the way, to make sure I spelled 'disseminated' correctly, I Googled it. What do you think the meaning is now?
To spread something? To import a meaning? To widely proclaim? No...
Google says: "disseminated = adjective MEDICINE having spread throughout an organ or the body. "symptoms vary from mild localized disease to severe disseminated infection"
Strange, huh?!
The media are dying and for many not in the cyber-world, that will come as a shock. Trump carried them for four years and the
'rona helped them for almost two years more. If the Ufo-scare fails -and it will, the MSM will struggle to not only maintain their
hold the reality they've displayed for a very long time, they will lose something they've held dear for the same duration.
Power.
Statistics are great, they're neutral and have no smarmy face. Nobody argues with numbers, to not understand basic math
means you're a dummy... somebody who should be told what to do and not tell others.
Enter TV Pundits and Journalists, stage-left.
(07-07-2021, 01:22 PM)ABNARTY Wrote: This whole door-to-door thing is astounding. Who is going to do it? Who pays them to do it? What happens when someone going door-to-door gets shot at or harmed in some way?
When was the last time the government went door-to-door for anything? Yes I know the census but that is Constitutional.
1934, I believe.
In Germany.
.
Diogenes was eating bread and lentils for supper. He was seen by the philosopher Aristippus, who lived comfortably by flattering the king.
Said Aristippus, ‘If you would learn to be subservient to the king you would not have to live on lentils.’ Said Diogenes, ‘Learn to live on lentils and you will not have to be subservient to the king.’
07-08-2021, 09:30 AM (This post was last modified: 07-08-2021, 10:01 AM by BIAD.)
This week (5th July) the usual pundits were rolled out on television to convince the public that by agreeing with the media
in supporting the idea of eternal face-nappies and hanging onto every word the media says, the world will be saved from
the trending -but fading, flu.
In the UK, there's always a mixture of ethnicity within these panels, but there's one thing connects them all.
A pushed assumption that these confident, accentuated voices belong to experts.
During the recent society-controlled scare-demic, it has been medical officials assuring an assmed terrified public that the Coof
is a killer (when in reality, it can be a serious contributor to death by negatively effecting prevailing physical conditions) and as
time moved on, other medically-orientated cerebs appeared on the screens around Britain to advise them on this mysterious
bat-related virus. (Except no bat has ever been found with this virus.)
The only problem is -when dealing with the ongoing ratings-squabbles between broadcast companies, is the urgency to have
authoritative figures admonishing the public of their ignorance can sometimes draw less-advertised beliefs from the person
who tells you that a mask isn't just for Christmas.
On the British ITV television channel, there's a morning news/entertainment programme titled 'Good Morning Britain' (GMB),
where two Presenters offer debatable topics relevant to current news. Piers Morgan was one of the hosts until he walked-off
during a racial discussion. Now the show has a weekly guest-host who accompanies the regular other-half of the presentations.
As said, this week it was someone familiar to British television audiences and had his own long-running series of interviewing
programmes. However, Richard Madeley asked a question to a Professor that is normally kept away from the public's perception
of academic autocrats.
Quote:GMB row ensues as Richard Madeley asks professor about communist beliefs
'GMB'S Richard Madeley wanted to know whether Professor Susan Michie's views were influenced by being a member
of the Communist Party.
Richard Madeley & Susan Michie.
Richard Madeley spoke to Professor Susan Michie on Good Morning Britain yesterday about whether or not ditching face masks
was a sensible idea. The expert questioned the idea and the presenter wanted to know whether her judgement might be influenced
by her membership in the Communist Party or whether her views were based on “the science”.
Professor Michie shut down Madeley and explained she had been invited onto the programme in her capacity as a professor of
psychology and not to talk about politics. Madeley began: “There’s a point I really have to put to you and you’ll be aware of this because there’s been a lot of commentary about this in the British media about you and it’s to do with your politics and you know what I’m going to ask you.
“You’ve been a member of the Communist Party for about 40 years now, you’re still a member, and we know that they’re statist. “We look at Communist countries around the world and we see that they are tremendously top-down dominant and controlled societies that they rule over.
“I just wonder – and I’m putting this question on behalf of those who wonder about your politics – if your politics actually informs your sense of control? "It’s not just the medical arguments, but you have a kind of a political bent to want the state to tell people
what to do?” He wondered.
Professor Michie replied: “I’ve come on your programme as a scientist, as do all people who come on to your programme as scientists. “They come on to talk about the evidence, relevant theories, how we approach our scientific disciplines, and you don’t ask other scientists about politics so I’m very happy to speak about science which is what my job is and to limit it to that.”
The presenter added: “So you’re saying that your politics doesn’t inform your opinion on this subject?” “I’m saying that I agreed to come on this programme as a scientist,” Professor Michie reiterated. “And I’m very happy to talk to you about the issues that you’re raising as a scientist which is the same for other scientists that you invite on to the programme.”
Those watching the interview took to Twitter to complain about Madeley’s line of questioning.
“If you missed Richard Madeley’s McCarthyite questioning of Professor Susan Michie, around 7.25am, do try to find it on catch up
TV. It may scare the hell out of you,” someone Tweeted.
Another wrote: “I try not to use profanity on here, struggling now as I have just witnessed the most pompous pathetic & rude Richard
Madeley talking to a medical expert & equate her science knowledge with her politics.”
A third mentioned: “That ‘question’ from Richard Madeley was basically to challenge Susan Michie’s scientific credentials and
accuse her of wanting to live in a dictatorship, she put him in his place, he is a dangerous man.”...'
What I'm wondering is why this woman is a member of the Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (SAGE) that supposedly
recommends to the British Government appropriate ways of dealing with national medical problem? The Coof is a physical
disease, isn't it...? What needs does Susan Mitchie serve as a Behavioural analyst in a time when fully-untested drugs are
being pumped into the arms of the frightened? And a keen Communist -to boot!
Just food for thought.
Quote:Michie is Professor of Health Psychology and Director of the Centre for Behaviour Change at UCL, so prima facie she has the
credentials to be a scientific advisor. What is never mentioned at any point to give context to her many media appearances,
in which she usually launches a tirade at the government, is that she has for 40 years been a member of of the Communist Party
of Britain.
All this has not precluded her from using family wealth to financially support the Labour Party under the Corbyn leadership.
In March 2018, it was Michie who said that the Communist Party would no longer stand against Labour in general elections
and she should be “working full tilt” for the election of Corbyn as PM.
Hardly surprising given her daughter was appointed under him to Labour HQ and her ex-husband was Corbyn’s close adviser.
That illustrates the level of her dedication to far-left politics.
07-09-2021, 04:23 AM (This post was last modified: 07-09-2021, 04:31 AM by Ninurta.)
(07-08-2021, 09:30 AM)BIAD Wrote: As said, this week it was someone familiar to British television audiences and had his own long-running series of interviewing
programmes. However, Richard Madeley asked a question to a Professor that is normally kept away from the public's perception
of academic autocrats.
...
What I'm wondering is why this woman is a member of the Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (SAGE) that supposedly
recommends to the British Government appropriate ways of dealing with national medical problem? The Coof is a physical
disease, isn't it...? What needs does Susan Mitchie serve as a Behavioural analyst in a time when fully-untested drugs are
being pumped into the arms of the frightened? And a keen Communist -to boot!
Just food for thought.
Quote:Michie is Professor of Health Psychology and Director of the Centre for Behaviour Change at UCL, so prima facie she has the
credentials to be a scientific advisor. What is never mentioned at any point to give context to her many media appearances,
in which she usually launches a tirade at the government, is that she has for 40 years been a member of of the Communist Party
of Britain.
On another note, the Bots are busy helping the narrative!
So.
You know, that sounds suspiciously like a propaganda campaign. It appears to me to be an effort to "normalize" communism and make it more palatable to the general public. Humans are herd beasts, and if they believe everyone else is going to run off the cliff...
In other news, since when is a "Professor of Health Psychology" qualified to speak on MEDICAL matters? Since when are they even a scientist? There is little to nothing in psychology that is related to science. Psychology is mostly voodoo trying to masquerade as science. My first wife was a PhD in Psychology (got her PhD after we split, was only at Masters level before), and did at times attempt science in doing animal experiments, but her experiments were much more closely related to Neurology than to Psychology. She was trying to figure out how brains work. Brains, NOT minds, which are much more insubstantial than brains. You can poke a brain with your finger, but you can't poke a mind with it.
Asking a Psychologist a medical opinion is like getting an estimate to have a new roof put on your house from an auto mechanic. The mechanic may be great at what he does, but roofing is NOT what he does, so his opinion carries quite a lot less weight in roofing and carpentry matters than it would in automotive matters.
"Science" used to start with a question, and then through experimentation come to a conclusion that answered it. Since the Left took over science, now it starts with the answer, and tries to find enough supporting evidence - even if they have to make it up - to confirm that preconceived conclusion. It's exactly bass ackwards now...
... but Psychology has ALWAYS been like that.
I will also note that there is an old saying regarding Professors - "Them that can, do. Them that can't, teach."
Under Socialist and Communist regimes, EVERYTHING is colored by the edicts of the Party. "Scientists" must find "conclusions" that support the edicts of the Party. Therefore, the politics of a communist "scientist" are ALWAYS relevant to their conclusions. Especially the fakest scientists, Psychologists. It was entirely proper to question just how much the Party had colored Ms. Michie's conclusions. Personally, I would have also gone even further, and questioned her credentials and expertise to assess concrete questions when her "science" is not a concrete science.
Instead, the person questioning her politics and qualifications got dog piled by commie-bots, all in an effort to make the general public think that it thinks other than how it does. Classic.
So who would go to that kind of effort to normalize communism and make it more palatable? What government is composed of communists with deep pockets? What does the middle "C" in "CCP" stand for?
It's a patently transparent attempt to promote communism using presumed "science" as a smoke screen, science that is not science at all, but since we call it science, the unfaithful dare not question it's conclusions...
,,, because The Party has spoken!
.
Diogenes was eating bread and lentils for supper. He was seen by the philosopher Aristippus, who lived comfortably by flattering the king.
Said Aristippus, ‘If you would learn to be subservient to the king you would not have to live on lentils.’ Said Diogenes, ‘Learn to live on lentils and you will not have to be subservient to the king.’
Any of the radical political ideologies influence EVERYTHING their followers do. That is why I can't trust Merkel and I didn't trust Ratzinger (the Pope who was a former Hitler Youth). That is why I reject the agenda of globalists-progressives.
OF COURSE this "scientist" believes in state control of everything. She has lived and breathed that system of belief for forty years. For Christ's sake.
07-09-2021, 10:45 AM (This post was last modified: 07-09-2021, 11:24 AM by BIAD.)
(07-09-2021, 04:23 AM)Ninurta Wrote: "Science" used to start with a question, and then through experimentation come to a conclusion that answered it.
Since the Left took over science, now it starts with the answer, and tries to find enough supporting evidence - even if they have
to make it up - to confirm that preconceived conclusion. It's exactly bass ackwards now...
... but Psychology has ALWAYS been like that.
I will also note that there is an old saying regarding Professors - "Them that can, do. Them that can't, teach."
Under Socialist and Communist regimes, EVERYTHING is colored by the edicts of the Party. "Scientists" must find "conclusions"
that support the edicts of the Party. Therefore, the politics of a communist "scientist" are ALWAYS relevant to their conclusions.
Especially the fakest scientists, Psychologists. It was entirely proper to question just how much the Party had colored Ms. Michie's
conclusions. Personally, I would have also gone even further, and questioned her credentials and expertise to assess concrete
questions when her "science" is not a concrete science.
Instead, the person questioning her politics and qualifications got dog piled by commie-bots, all in an effort to make the general
public think that it thinks other than how it does. Classic...
It's a terrible realisation when you see the whole chess board and have to decide whether some people have been duped
into believing the words of today's version of 'Polito-science' or are small deliberate cogs in the scheme to bring the public
to heel.
I've seen such behaviour in my past and it's a real eye-opener. People that you accept as fairly trustworthy, who you work
with and occasionally spend time with outside of the employment realm. Many years ago, the company I worked for decided
to use a business called 'Winning Edge' an agency that explains stuff that I'd expect any average adult would already understand.
£300 ($413)-per-head bought you a couple of hours of one's employees sitting in a room listening to some dick-head asking
stupid questions whilst pointing at a whiteboard. Questions like: if there were a million bucks on the other-side of a ravine and
the only way across was a four-inch wide plank, would you dare cross and what would sort of mind-set would you require?!
When my Manager (I was working at a desk then) came to me and told me it was my turn to listen to this foolishness, I told him no.
I'd known him for years and even though I'd accepted his incorrect perception about me when I was emptying trash, etc during
my time as a Janitor, I'd always thought he'd never considered me as a ignoramus.
Then other work colleagues appeared and ask me why I refused to go. It was time away from work -usually a notion that would
cater for the most reluctant of employees. Was the concept to high to grasp..? one guy asked me and again, I put his question
down to to his preconceived assumption that anyone who cleans out toilets and empty trash cans is somehow feebleminded.
At one point, four people -a quartet of folks I'd considered as amicable co-workers, stood around me with requests to explain
my refusal. So I told them.
I explained that I didn't enjoy wasting my time on fundamentals that -really, any decent parent would have already given to their
offspring during their growth. I explained that during this time that the company was uncertain of its future -and even though this
may indirectly or directly effect my own time with them, I believed it was an avoidable waste of resources that may impact all
of us in that department.
There were other reasons, but my main concern were their concerns on my veto to attend the in-house venue.
I asked them why they put so-much store in my unwillingness to 'join in' with their group-think, why a business like 'Winning Edge'
would cater for them individually or as a group and what possible knowledge I could gain at my time of life that would enhance
my position in a company on the edge of selling itself to another or even just closing.
It arose later that this 'success-orientated attitude' business was denied by the company that eventually purchased us.
The reasons...? because those who'd heavily invested in the newly-purchased newspaper found it a waste of time and money. Go figure!
But that one question remained unanswered. Why did these work-colleagues look at me as an outcast from their thinking in
a situation that didn't -in my opinion, require such examination?
I can only thank BIAD for his wise words that he once imparted to me: "The likelihood of one individual being right increases in direct proportion to the intensity with which others are trying to prove him wrong." ............................................................................................
Keeping with the idea of a a single-voice singing a united narrative, I'll use Ninurta's comment of: 'In other news'!
In other news, The BBC interviewed someone from the directorate -that used to fund them, on the latest news about
the sniffles-plague. I don't have a cell-phone (gah!) and therefore unfamiliar with its uses. But I do know its generally
used as a camera. (I'm talking about you, TikTok)
I had heard about some miracle software program called an 'App', but I had no idea how invasive they can be.
The article below told me that the National Health Service App (that's not what it is, but that's the bullshit-name they're
going with) is to be altered due to the 19th July lifting of the Covid-connected restrictions in England.
But the explanation to what this computer program does left me speechless...! I mean, it's basically a dog-collar that
a user voluntarily fastens down their liberty with! The Mitchie-psychologist-woman must be rubbing her thighs in
excitement at the Pavlov-esque experiment!
Take a read.
Quote:NHS Covid app may change as rules change, Grant Shapps says
'The NHS Covid contact tracing app used in England and Wales may need to change as coronavirus restrictions change,
Transport Secretary Grant Shapps said. England ending the 1m-plus rule on 19 July may mean the app's sensitivity needs
to be reduced, he said.
Grant Shapps... Secretary of State for Transport. Which makes him a Covid expert.
The app detects the distance between users and the length of time spent in close proximity - currently 2m or less and more
than 15 minutes. It comes amid a huge rise in alerts as infections surge.
The system allows people who test positive to anonymously share their test result, triggering alerts for those detected as close
contacts in the days before the test. Under current rules, those who receive an alert are asked to stay at home for up to 10 days,
although the Department of Health said the app "is, and always has been, advisory" - unlike the requirement to isolate if you are
contacted directly by NHS Test and Trace.
Coronavirus restrictions are set to end on 19 July but the requirement to self-isolate if you have had both vaccine doses will only
stop on 16 August, raising fears that millions of people would be asked to self-isolate this summer as people mixed more.
The hospitality industry and NHS trusts have warned MPs the knock-on effect for the economy and workplaces could be huge.
An explanation how the App works. Thank you BBC, yes... we're all ten years-old.
(Gawd, I love the running 'diversity' narrative that is endemic in the state-owned broadcaster!
Ginger-haired, 'people of colour', only one woman wearing a dress and no rendering of an old
person!)
One possible solution could be to change the sensitivity of the app, so it would tell people to self-isolate only after closer and
more prolonged contact. But sources at the app developers told the BBC they have not yet been asked to do this, although
they are planning a change from 16 August when people would be able to record that they were fully vaccinated to turn off the
self-isolation alerts.
Mr Shapps told BBC Breakfast: "As our restrictions change, of course the app needs to change. Things like replacing the 1m-plus
rule on 19 July might well lead to a review of the way the app itself needs to function." But he said the app was still "very important
as one of the tools in our armoury".
He said there were still large numbers of people downloading it and said he had not seen any data showing people were deleting it.
The most recent figures for the last week of June show an extra 300,000 downloads, bringing the total to more than 26 million, but it
is not known how many people are active users.
"It's in our interests as a society to carry on doing the things that protect each other," Mr Shapps said.
Dr Jenny Harries, the head of the new UK Health Security Agency, told MPs on Thursday that she was "aware that people are choosing
not to use the app" when asked about concerns people have been deleting it to avoid being "pinged". "We are seeing a rise in cases
so this is not an inconvenience, it's actually to alert people to the fact that they have been in close contact and that they may be at risk
of being infected themselves and passing that infection on to other people," she said.
Hinting at a change, she added there was "work ongoing at the moment because it is entirely possible to tune the app to ensure that
it is appropriate to the risk". A source close to Health Secretary Sajid Javid told the BBC "we are looking at the sensitivity of the app"
and pointed out the sensitivity had been changed before.
But they did not say exactly what would change. At present, if two phones running the app are close for long enough, and one of the two
users later shares a positive coronavirus test via the app, then the other will receive an alert. You can also use the app to "check-in" to
venues so you can be notified of any positive cases you may have encountered there, although the requirement to check-in will be lifted
in England when lockdown rules ease further on 19 July.
Just 496 venue alerts - which use the check-in data to alert people to potential contact with a positive case - were sent between 24 June
and 30 June. But alerts for people coming into close contact with someone testing positive soared by more than 60% in the last week of
June to 360,000.
At the end of May, there were only 16,000 alerts in a week.
A BBC analysis has estimated 4.5 million people could be asked to self-isolate between this week and 16 August, as the number of
infections continues to rise. The NHS Covid-19 app is used in England and Wales. Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland have their
own powers to set coronavirus regulations and separate test-and-trace programmes...'
Quote:But that one question remained unanswered. Why did these work-colleagues look at me as an outcast from their thinking in a situation that didn't -in my opinion, require such examination?
The herd always bleats nervously when the collective realizes there is an individual among them.
"dick head", yeah. My favorite were all of the damn schemes to improve efficiency; six-sigma my foot. What a bunch of bullshit and a huge waste of money. But people loved getting the certifications and the management loved making it a requirement to do so.
07-09-2021, 05:53 PM (This post was last modified: 07-09-2021, 05:54 PM by Mystic Wanderer.)
@"BIAD"
Quote:I can only thank BIAD for his wise words that he once imparted to me:
"The likelihood of one individual being right increases in direct proportion to the intensity with which others are trying to prove him wrong."
I'm going to print this out and share it all over social media. Who said that, so I can give credit?
(I know it wasn't BIAD, but don't tell him I'm on to him.)
Heaven Can Wait (1978), screenplay by Elaine May and Warren Beatty, based on a play by Harry Segall.
Quote:I can only thank BIAD for his wise words that he once imparted to me:
"The likelihood of one individual being right increases in direct proportion to the intensity with which others are trying to prove him wrong."
I'm going to print this out and share it all over social media. Who said that, so I can give credit?
(I know it wasn't BIAD, but don't tell him I'm on to him.)
Heaven Can Wait (1978), screenplay by Elaine May and Warren Beatty, based on a play by Harry Segall.
Was it Elaine, or Warren, or someone else?
It was James Mason's character and friend to BIAD, 'Mr. Jordan'
This guy paints a not so very rosy picture for those who took the jab. This makes me very sad for my friends here, and in my family who took it.
Quote:Jim Stone- "if you get exposed to the virus after getting the jab or get a third jab your immune system is going to eat your veins and you'll totally clot out. Your veins contain a clotting agent that gets released when they get injured (to stop the bleeding) and when your immune system starts eating the veins from the inside out, you'll clot up and that will be the end of that."
![[Image: 14sigsepia.jpg]](https://i.ibb.co/9yxWwxj/14sigsepia.jpg)
