A lot of those who 'don't care' arrived at that view by consuming misinformation fed to them by thought leaders in their political tribe.
It's highly illiberal not to offer treatment to those that change their mind via the tragic route of a severe infection.
If you don't deny the unvaccinated treatment [maybe even if you do, but leave that aside] you are going to overwhelm care capacity without NPIs to lower the flow of cases, and deny many, vaccinated and unvaccinated, care, leading to more deaths than otherwise.
[Moreover, even for those who haven't changed their mind, you have to weigh the effect on family and friends of simply leaving them to die because they have a particular flawed view of reality].
Those who have decided to protect themselves are not 'safe' if the few of them that will contract severe covid, and the others who have some other random serious hospital problem, are prevented from being treated by an overwhelmed care capacity.
And that capacity is going to be overwhelmed unless you exclude those who did not protect themselves. [And given the numbers involved going through the peak of the epidemic, there must be a reasonable risk that they are overwhelmed anyway.]
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
1. 1998's devolution settlement was popular. And it's at least as possible that support for independence could have been greater and more millitant had England denied it to the nations. Tom presents it as though we are sure it hastened rather than forestalled disintegration.
2. It could be a good thing that there might not exist a single sense of Britishness, and that multiple such identities can /do coexist; and that this can be a sign of national health. The piece's implicit hypothesis is that the lack of a single identity is an illness.
So, no lockdown yet. There's a legitimate debate to be had about what needs to be done and when. If, like me, you think that we ought to have moved, and that eventually the govt do the right thing [more on this in a minute], this just means worse is coming soon.
ie, we are eventually going to have to lock down for more and for longer than we otherwise would. This is for two reasons.
First, locking down later allows the epidemic to spread more, and it therefore takes longer/stronger set of measures to reduce the actual flow of cases to the target flow.
@Samfr@iainmartin1@DPJHodges There’s nothing wrong with what SAGE did, but that tweet is not really correct as it stands.
@Samfr@iainmartin1@DPJHodges Forget the 'complexity' for a moment. That is a side issue. Think of the model, for simplicity, as y=y_1+x+shocks. y is infections, '-1' denotes one period before, x is a policy [like permitted contacts], shocks are good and bad luck.
@Samfr@iainmartin1@DPJHodges SAGE are asking: what will happen to y, for different x's, ie different policy settings for permitted contacts. Try some different x's, and you get different time paths for y. When you see a time path for y you like, then you note down the x's and legislate for them.
If I was an enterprising chair of an extreme Tory whatsapp group I would consider choreographing performative digital rage and an expulsion to try to emphasise the point.
I guess you will have to take my word on that one as this claim is unlikely to be put to the test.
Wait till they hear how angry we are in this group!
Everyone is already saying that they won't take any notice.
OK so let's have an argument and then someone leak it.
Been there done that.
OK let's have an argument, throw out a fake Boris supporter, and then leak it.
OK let's go.
Objections to vaccine passports often stress liberty. But society infringes our liberties all the time to help the collective good. Our access to weapons. What we can do with them. Our ability to drive cars or ride motorbikes or pilot planes. Our rights to privacy.
Vaccine passports should be weighed on their merits. Harm caused to those who feel compelled to get vaccines who wouldn't do it otherwise, or have to avoid venues and services they previously had access to, vs the suffering alleviated by suppressing covid.
The suffering has many components: the regret an unvaccinated person and their loved ones have later when hospitalized or facing death. The illness and death of others fostered by less impeded spread of covid; and the fear of it. Leaning more on other tools like lockdowns.