Karen’s going to have to catch COVID

I wanted to write about this one last week but lost the time. At SMH:

The Premier was also probed about incentives to encourage Australians to get the COVID-19 vaccination, with the rollout to begin as early as next month.

One of those incentives includes refusing anti-vaxxers entry to certain high-risk venues such as pubs and clubs or other hospitality businesses.

“It’s important for the community to start thinking about the vaccine and how they feel about it,” the Premier said.

“These are conversations for the next few weeks but already airlines have indicated you can’t travel overseas (unless you get jabbed), which will be an incentive for a lot of people.

“We will also consider whether we allow venues to do that.”

We should add the latest kurfuffle about the Australian Open to leaven the discussion, at News:

Australian Open tournament director Craig Tiley has rejected accusations from disgruntled tennis stars that organisers changed the rules about hotel quarantine at the last minute.

After positive COVID-19 cases were detected on three flights carrying players to Melbourne for the year’s first grand slam, 72 competitors were deemed “close contacts” and forced into 14 days of isolation, unable to leave their hotel rooms.

Kayo is your ticket to the best sport streaming Live & On-Demand. New to Kayo? Get your 14-day free trial & start streaming instantly >

The hard lockdown sparked backlash among many stars as they raged against the strict conditions.

OK, so what is this post about? This: Australia is still the envy of the world vis COVID. But that little privilege is wearing thin and for good reason. The vaccines are on the march. For instance, by mid-year 100m Americans will be vaccinated. All of Israel will be. By year-end, everyone will be.

So, Australia is about to go from envy to laggard real fast (for at least a brief time given the likelihood that COVID will return).

We should therefore be looking at measures along the lines of that proposed by the Virgin Premier. We need to achieve herd immunity and re-integrated states ASAP. A divided country is a weak country and we have enemies enough to exploit it.

The Berejiklian position makes perfect sense. High-touch activity most at risk of spreading COVID needs to be immunised in the collective good. The corollary is that all sorts of community gatherings should be based upon jab first, activity second. Other high-touch stuff includes going to church, catching public transport, eating out etc. All of it should be no jab, no play.

Once we’ve deployed this policy we can open the borders everywhere. And those that refuse will just have to catch COVID. Too bad.

Now, I have written a lot about the pathetic game of mates that appeared to be at the heart of the Morrison Government’s selection of the Astra Zeneca vaccine. That poses a major credibility problem. Thanks to ScoMo the idiot. So, it’s not especially fair or appropriate that we are forced to shove that into our veins.

But the alternative Pfizer vaccine is shaping as a better choice. And others are coming fast.

We need to get it done. Frankly, we should be doing it right now. ScoMo is wasting many billions buggerising around, at The Australian:

Employees working for the nation’s worst-affected restaurants, cafes and hotels would continue having wages subsidised by taxpayers on a monthly basis after JobKeeper ends, under a detailed rescue package being pitched to Josh Frydenberg to help save the hospitality industry.

“HospoKeeper” would replace JobKeeper from April for six months as part of a “short-term, targeted” scheme, with eligible businesses paid the current fortnightly JobKeeper rate of $1000 for full-time staff or $650 for employees who worked fewer than 20 hours a week. The payments would be available to all accommodation and food services businesses but only if they were “substantially affected” by government-imposed restrictions, such as venue density limits, caps on event numbers, working-from-home directions for CBD workers or interstate and international travel bans.

What about MBKeeper? We could do with a pay rise  If that’s too much to ask then how about DavidKeeper just for me?

We can’t have the country held hostage by a pack of Karens that refuse to take functional vaccines. It is both a  community and economic imperative.

David Llewellyn-Smith
Latest posts by David Llewellyn-Smith (see all)


  1. I don’t want the vaccine either to be honest. Rushed through, will wait to see side effects first. Then decide. No jab no travel? Fine.
    In fact not eating out, even better less money spent.

    Once enough people have the jab Covid will die off anyway.

    • Me too, calling me a Karen is not going to change that.
      The whole “Karen” thing is racist anyway, having a crack at white women.
      If it was Shanice it would be condemned and you would be ostracised.

      • Haywood JablomeMEMBER

        Yes – a stupid label with some quite misogynistic origins that dilutes its own point by using a specific name used by a specific gender of a specific race.

        Now most commonly used to put a white woman standing up for herself in her place.

        You should know better DLS.

        • Macquarie Dictionary defines a Karen: “(a term used predominantly to refer to a middle-class white woman, often of generation X, who is regarded as having an entitled, condescending and often racist attitude.)[Karen being a common name of this generation]”

          • Haywood JablomeMEMBER

            Well aware of that definition. Most aren’t though, hence why it is used out of that context. Good to see the Macquarie dictionary rising to meet the esteemed standards of the Urban dictionary anyways.

        • billygoatMEMBER

          Yep agree 100% and it’s ageist.
          Women under 40 generally shut their mouths & tow the line:
          1. Work: Hours cut, restricted promotion, ostracised.
          2. School: ostracised, child neglect etc.
          3. Relationships: not so much but will be labelled ball breaker, (although some blokes sooy boys like that) demanding and end up single divorced poor etc.
          After 35 women generally invisible by 40 can move through world unseen.
          Many silent or no one to share thoughts with cos who gives a f? No more kids at school so doesn’t matter. At work resigned to glassT ceiling & happy to take a pay cheque each week and get on with life.
          Sure some make out like bandits in divorce and their lawyers are happy to hear them out.
          At 40 women can go against the grain, have differing opinion which as can be seen from Karen label is labelled ranting, hysterical & clearly an insane trouble maker.
          For me I pick my moments, don’t wear a mask, never will, no interested in being syringed with misc vax concoction by underpaid furrr rain nurse or lay person at chemist warehouse. Can shove international travel..as for eating out..the pleasure has long since gone from Melbourne ‘foo die’ cult Ute’
          Tested or untested (whatever that means?
          My personal health & well being is miles ahead of the collective in my priorities. Label me selfish I DONT CARE
          F herd immunity..I’m not a cow..

        • So now “Haywood Jablome” is standing up against misogyny in all its forms? Satire truly is dead.

    • The Penske FileMEMBER

      I think we’ll be fine eating out. Imagine how good the tracking system of who’s had it etc will be. Just like the current restaurant photo on your phone (or work’s) and put in Dan’s name like I do. I won’t get anything that’s less likely to fend this off than my immune system.

    • To be clear I’m not anti vaxxer, but I am also not 100% convinced these vaccines are proven safe and effective yet. Wilful compliance over forced compliance is more my style anyway.

      • kierans777MEMBER

        I agree with you. As DLS pointed out, credibility is a major problem thanks to #scottyfrommarketing propping up his mates. I’d consider getting the Pfizer vaccine, but I’ll wait and see for now.

    • Me either. Having lectured in physiology and biochem I understand how the mRNA jab works. I don’t mind not going into pubs or clubs or crappy coffee bars and am a great cook of organic food which don’t find in restaurents.
      I am happy to support those who choose to take the injections, I am not arguing or disagreeing, their body their choice.

  2. When all you are good at is digging holes and making houses, mRNA vaccines are a bridge too far. So game of mates it is.

    What a sad revelation.

  3. Shades of MessinaMEMBER

    Who are the airlines to dictate you can’t fly if you haven’t had the vaccine ?. Do they run public health policy in this country now ?!.

    • SoCalSurfCreeperMEMBER

      They are private businesses and if they deem it is in their or their customer or staff interests then it is their right to require vaccination. Not being vaccinated is a choice, not an immutable characteristic like race, sex or orientation.

        • MountainGuinMEMBER

          This may be a factor and it is in the airlines interest to have high vaccination levels that help keep borders open. But airlines may also be worried about court cases if folk get infected and duty of care to employees.

          • This – it is all about the airlines trying to make travel seem safe and get people moving again.
            To my knowledge there is no evidence that the vaccine prevents transmission, it just stops you getting really sick. (To be fair, there is no proof to the contrary either). Therefore there is no evidence-supported justification to requiring people to get vaccinated to be able to travel.
            If it is proven to stop transmission, then it should 100% be a government decision whether vaccination is required for travel (similar to how you need proof of yellow fever vaccination to enter some countries). Governments shouldn’t be able to hide behind self-interested private companies’ decisions – there needs to be a societal debate around it before implementing.

          • There isnt even any proof that it stops you from getting really sick, since they only gave it young healthy people who wouldnt have gotten really sick with Covid even if they caught it. Just like all the hundreds of Covid infected travellers who arrive in NZ, not a single one of them has required medical treatment.

        • Want to fly, simple, get the vaccine. if you dont want the vaccine then get your pilots licence and buy a plane. simple…
          You have the choice, why should the owners and operators of the airlines not have the choice to enforce vaccines so people can fly covid free… everytime some pack of racket wackers gets covid on a flight it impacts the entire business as well as a lot of ancillery businesses..

        • No one is forcing domestic travel via air on you. You can drive, if you don’t like the terms of carriage.

          • Thanks for proving my point. Don’t like the terms of service until it impacts YOU. Classic normie thinking but that’s standard MB cosmopolitan.

            Now bake my cake, bigot.

          • It impacts me now. Because of the virus, and border closures, I haven’t seen mother or brothers in over a year.

            With a vaccine, I can fly to see them. My choice, eh. (Or take the 1800km drive, when borders open).

            Without the vaccine, again, my choice, I’m down to driving instead of flying.

            There are many things about the terms of service on airlines that “impact” me. There are many things about a civilised society that “impact” me.

            It sounds like you are conflating some sort of ideological, or otherwise, issue with some off the cuff comments from the Premier, with a specific use case vis a vis airlines.

            Play the ball, not the man.

          • And then you get in your car and you get refused entry to that state/town/premises because you aren’t vaccinated. Then your licence is cancelled, and on and on it goes. Thin edge of the wedge.

            The ‘private business’ argument carries no weight when you have a corporate hegemony and no freedom of choice now arbitrarily dictating health policy – ie especially a country with 2.1 national carriers. If the Big Tech purge of the last month hasn’t taught anyone anything then it’s probably too late.

      • Sexual orientation may not be a choice, but it is not immutable. Deeply held beliefs are not choices either. They are an articulation of what appears to be true. One does not choose such beliefs for their utility.

        • Apparently sex is far from immutable these days as well…or so I am told.
          Race is also fairly fluid, at least from an indigenous Australian perspective.

      • Shades of MessinaMEMBER

        Well they can mandate it for their staff no problem so that should take care of it. That is surely not an issue.

        Does this mean then that confirmed HIV, Dengue, Malaria, TB cases are also unable to fly due to the risk of disease ?.

        How long then until you are also forced to show your that ethical/moral standpoint also aligns with these corporate providers ?!.

          • Shades of MessinaMEMBER

            Yes you could argue that any disease poses a risk if you want to go down that route.

            I am not arguing that Covid is not infectious, I just object to a corporate entity dictating health policy seemingly with the backing of the Federal Government. It’s the thin end of the wedge for mine.

          • I am not arguing that Covid is not infectious, I just object to a corporate entity dictating health policy seemingly with the backing of the Federal Government.

            They aren’t dictating health policy.

            They are making a risk judgement.

            If a restaurant can enforce something as arbitrary as a dress standard, then an airline can require you to be vaccinated (/reasonably sober/not carrying on too big or heavy a bag/etc).

        • Thanks for the balanced response, I understand this take.

          I look at kannigets comment above, though, and at least w.r.t to airlines, I tend to agree.

          With flights, they are not dictating health policy, they are saying if you aren’t vaccinated you don’t fly. Terms of carriage. ie can’t carry guns, no aerosols when flying os, etc etc. Pretty clear cut for mine.

          In regard of Berejiklian’s comments, I can see both sides. As a private business, though – eg pub – it’s within my right to assert conditions of entry, no vaccination, no entry etc. Don’t like it, get the vax, or find a pub without those conditions.

          Be interesting to see how it plays out in any case.

          Again, thanks for the reasoned comment. Be good if there was more of it around here.

          • “Terms of carriage. ie can’t carry guns, no aerosols when flying os, etc etc. Pretty clear cut for mine”
            You understand those are Government regulations, right. Not airline policy. Which is the point that was being made.

          • Yes I know that

            The no fly no jab proposal – is that an airline or government idea.

            Actually, it’s immaterial

            The government makes rules all the time that affect your life, to ensure some level of civility, health and so on

            Like, for example, that you can’t take guns on flights
            Or, perhaps, you can’t fly without a jab
            Not withstanding not invalid concerns about vaccine safety, I don’t see the issue here, per Smithy’s and others comments

            Let me put it another way, if the vaccines were safe, would you still have a problem. Is this a problem you have more broadly about government rule setting or about the vaccine per se

            I forgot how difficult social media is. Christmas was a great respite. Jaron Lanier’s book needs a re read

            No need for a response

          • @swampy
            “Who are the airlines to dictate you can’t fly if you haven’t had the vaccine ?. Do they run public health policy in this country now ?!.”
            this is the thread you are replying on.
            I have a problem with the airlines having the power to demand people have vaccines. I have problems with other things as well but this one shouldn’t be anywhere near as contentious as it appears to be.

            Edit: you are clearly ok with airlines having this power. Are you OK with your employer demanding you not travel out of state or overseas due to covid risk? It is the same thing, only varying in degree.

          • Travelling (almost certainly for leisure) is not the same as staying employed.

            There’s a lot of “it depends” involved in the question of whether or not employers should be able to require employees to be vaccinated.

          • “Travelling (almost certainly for leisure) is not the same as staying employed.”
            No, but the question of whether a business has the right to demand or even question health treatments is the issue at hand. And if it is allowed for leisure then surely whs legislation means it is a REQUIREMENT in the workplace.

          • No, but the question of whether a business has the right to demand or even question health treatments is the issue at hand.

            Not all “demands” are the same, and it is straight up dishonest to try and pretend they are.

            An airline “demanding” people are vaccinated to fly (again, almost certainly for leisure) is an entirely different proposition to an employer “demanding” people are vaccinated to work.

          • “An airline “demanding” people are vaccinated to fly (again, almost certainly for leisure) is an entirely different proposition to an employer “demanding” people are vaccinated to work.”
            How about before allowing entry into a pub, or cafe.
            What about a supermarket?
            Where are you drawing that line? And how are you justifying it?

          • The obvious line is between stuff that’s essential to live and stuff that’s not.

            But there’s little point in slippery slope hypotheticals to try and draw out a “gotcha”, and even less in trying to pretend it’s a simple black and white situation where a context-free, universal call can be made without any concerns.

            I wonder if you mount such a spirited attack on the tyranny of driver’s licenses, speed limits and DUI laws ?

      • Sounds like airlines need to have their common carrier status and the legal protections that affords them revoked then. Airlines will then be held liable for all they illegal activity they facilitate such as drug smuggling and people trafficking.

      • Third line forcing
        Third line forcing is a form of exclusive dealing involving the supply of goods or services on the condition that the purchaser buys goods or services from a particular third party, or a refusal to supply because the purchaser will not agree to that condition.

    • Who are the airlines to dictate you can’t fly if you haven’t had the vaccine ?

      Same people who dictate you can’t fly if you’ve had too much to drink.

      Pretty easy to justify from a workplace safety perspective, and that’s before even considering the risk to other passengers.

      (It’d be nice if yous were so keen to get interventionist when it came to things like protecting workers, protecting the environment, addressing carbon emissions, taxation…)

      • Shades of MessinaMEMBER

        Well if all the vaccines do is just reduce the severity of symptoms in yourself giving you a greater chance of survival but doesn’t make you any less infectious to others around you how is that improving OH+S ?.

        • You have moved the goalposts.

          There’s no useful data yet about whether or not transmission is reduced. It is quite reasonable to err on the side of caution and assume that it is.

      • So every workplace is entitled to demand every employee take the vaccine?
        The one that has been so rushed through the trial stage the manufacturers demanded legal protection preventing them being held liable for side effects and issues related to it’s use?

        • RobotSenseiMEMBER

          Is it unreasonable for a boss to ask their employees to have the jab? Numerous hypotheticals:
          – car wash
          – office environment
          – aged care provider
          – home chemotherapy nurse

          Where will we draw the line?

        • SoCalSurfCreeperMEMBER

          There will be plenty of patient data from general populations by the time Australia commits. The discipline of pharmacovigilance is a big deal in the Pharma/Biopharma industry and taken very seriously. The systems and processes are well established as a normal requirement of doing business. When AEs and SAEs happen they will be found, investigated and documented. (Adverse Events and Serious Adverse Events). I would not worry. Get any of the European or US products. Stay away from Russian or Chinese.

  4. The Traveling Wilbur

    Bars, clubs, overseas travel? Won’t make a blind bit of difference. If people really want to effect change on vaccine uptake with ‘Karen’ it needs to be linked to something that’ll matter to Karen.

    Like entry to BCF, KFC on Tuesdays or Weekend Farmers Markets.

        • BoomToBustMEMBER

          The FedGov is already reducing payments if your children are not vaccinated. Interestingly it violates federal law to apply coercive pressure to force medical procedures. Today its a jab, what is the requirement tomorrow?? The willingness of highly intelligent people to surrender free will and individual choice is stunning. If you are unable to see where this ends you are willfully blind. Those willing to sacrifice freedom for security deserve neither and will loose both. Never truer words spoken.

          • RobotSenseiMEMBER

            That’s not entirely true. You don’t have any money taken off you for not being vaccinated; you are eligible for the Child Care subsidy of FTB A if you are.

            Nobody gets penalised for not getting vaccinated. You do, however, get incentivised.

          • “Nobody gets penalised for not getting vaccinated. You do, however, get incentivised.”
            That is a matter of semantics and how they get around the law, but isn’t actually true. Getting penalised for not doing something is equivalent to getting incentivised for doing it. There is no practical difference.

          • RobotSenseiMEMBER

            Well that’s not true. Are the unemployed penalised or incentivised to register with an employment agency to look for work?

          • They are penalised by being denied benefits if they don’t.
            Or would you say they are incentivised by being given payments if they do.
            Both are logically accurate, and indistinguishable.

          • What does a link to a Wikipedia article on slippery slope arguments prove?
            It’s glib and meaningless.
            There is a list of logical fallacies on Wikipedia which is so long and vague that it renders all discussion pointless as you can pick a fallacy for every occasion

    • Farmers markets don’t matter, organic producers deliver to the home. Grain growers of spelt etc deliver to home, Lauke mills were willing to deliver 1 kilo bags of flour to homes in melbourne, during covid lockdown, most women buy 5 or 25 kilo bags but people can’t afford that on a pension.
      And not all your Karen’s are in your socioeconomic level of frequenting KFC etc.

    • You should read more deeply in the comments section of your link- particularly about the limitations of PCR testing and false positives at high cycle thresholds (Ct values). Ct values generally aren’t reported but make all the difference.

      From one of the comments
      Ben Wouters
      Dutch RIVM says otherwise after a literature study
      Sensitivity between 67% and 98%
      Specificity between 96% and 99,5%.
      Meaning that out of eg 100.000 PCR tests up to 4000 false postives would result.
      See also https://academic.oup.com/ci
      Gives the culture results of positive PCR samples with different Ct values.
      Ct = 25 up to 70 % confirmed
      Ct = 30 20% confirmed
      Ct = 35 < 3% confirmed.,

      What we have is a total mess. The only real certainty we can say is someone who is both PCR positive for SARS-CoV2 AND symptomatic has a high probability of having the COVID-19 disease, particularly if the Ct value is <25. This can be confirmed in hindsight, post infection with blood antibody testing, weeks or months later. Even worse, a death soon after a PCR positive won't have had time to generate antibodies. We will never know if they were a true COVID-19 death or not.

      PCR positive with unreported Ct value without symptoms all does not confirm COVID-19 disease. We cannot even calculate the true Infection Fatality Rate (IFR) & Case Fatality Rates (CFR).

      Almost certainly we will still be debating the true IFR & CFR rates in 20 years time, just as we currently do with Influenza.

          • Your right, he didnt, but I never said he did either.

            His assertion was that from the comments attached to the link, the high rate of false positives with a high rate of testing was the reason behind the numbers. So I asked if this also meant that this explained the 17% of ICU patients regardless of vaccinations….

            IF the high post vaccination numbers were due to false positives then ICU numbers would have dropped due to false positive people not actually being sick..

          • Entrance to ICU is based on symptoms such that they are verging on life threatening, you presumably chose to omit knowing that. With a symptomless false positive then it’s off to self isolation. With a positive with mild symptoms it’s off to self isolation. If symptoms worsen but not severe, then off to hospital but not the Intensive Care Unit.
            There spelled out what is obvious to all. Those whinging tennis players are not in the ICU, no.

    • Line up all those that you care about, all your relatives, age descending order. Report back.

      • A little dramatic?

        The numbers don’t suggest we get hysterical. Look at the numbers of those who have died of (not with) covid. Look at co-morbidities and ages. Look at excess death numbers. Look at places like Belarus that didn’t have lockdowns.

        Get some perspective and critical thinking, then you report back.

        • It’s not just death rate, though that alone is sufficient.. Have you not heard of long covid for those who are otherwise healthy. Plus, those countries that have let it rip perform worse economically. So, line ’em up and tell me what they think of your plan.

  5. working class hamMEMBER

    Why swallow the Govt coolade now? At what stage has the Govt shown enough backbone to make sound, medical expert backed decisions, that have opposed their agenda?
    The decision to accept an unproven vaccine, that was rushed, will not be mine. As the sole income provider for my family, I will be forced to.
    But, it will be a cold day in hell, before my children are used as guinea pigs by the likes of these shiv sandwich eaters.

  6. Survey an advantage of having low cases like we have is that we don’t need to be Guinea pigs to the most rushed vaccine. Alex Berenson an x new york times journalist on joe rogan gives the real data on vaccine side effects. Let’s just wait a bit hey.

  7. The only “Karens” I can see are the ones bullying everyone else into taking it, based on some MSM morning show fears pumped non-stop 24/7.

    I’m not taking it, the whole thing is a pharma cartel botch with some profit motives and not serious enough to warrant it. It’s clearly being used a prescursor for overt social credit scores so be very careful what you wish for. Australians begging for authoritarianism is something I’ll never understand:


    • Arthur Schopenhauer

      The culture was founded in the country’s origin as a Penal Colony, reliant on the Mother Country, run by a Navy man. Hard to shake the cultural shackles.

      • But the huge number of Irish political,, Irish impoverished and then famine and post famine immigrants have an effect. The 7 million bloodline Irish before the last 10 years of dilution have 900 years behind them of tyranny and survival.
        This is without mentioning paranoid Europeans. Not everyone is English bloodline who embraced colonialism and post like Gillard with her makeover by Hillary Clinton, nor American

  8. IF an individual gets vaccinated – against anything – then in theory they have protection from the illness, right?
    So what’s the problem if a number of individuals don’t take the vaccine? Those that took it will be immunised against those who didn’t, and so have got what they wanted. Those that are unvaccinated have chosen whatever outcome they wanted and can adapt as necessary to any future outcome.
    It’s like the madness of ‘no jab, no play’ in kindergartens. Those children who have been jabbed are protected against those who haven’t been, so why ban those who haven’t, for whatever reason?
    So what’s the problem with those who chose not to be jabbed?
    And let’s not even get onto the history of that ‘safe’ drug, thalidomide.

    • Being logical, making sense, will be a crime in days soon to come.

      To answer your last two questions, you’ll be unpersoned, bared entry everywhere, not spoken to, not looked at, autonomous vehicles will not sense, nor detect you when crossing a road.

    • Thats not exactly how immunisations work. I dont quite fully understand it myself, but without herd immunity, the disease still circulates, i think even amoung the vaccinated. Something about we get the strength of the vaccine from collectively being vaccinated. Being 1 vaccinated person out of a room full of people unvaccinated doesnt do anything. I think. Again, i dont quite get the epidemiology here but thats what I gather from reading about other vaccination programs before. Plus you have those that cannot get it because it isnt suitable due to allergies or other issues. The vaccine’s base might contain egg and all people with egg allergies are out of scope. You need the rest to vaccinate to make up for it.

      • Divya is right. Most vaccines are only 80-90% effective. Their greatest strength is the creation of herd immunity so that the virus/bacteria no longer circulates in the community.

        • RobotSenseiMEMBER

          ^^^ thank you!

          Your average Joe doesn’t die of measles, mumps, Varicella or any number of transmissible viruses anymore, but there are some people out there who don’t stand a chance if they catch it. The vaccination program isn’t just about them as an individual; it’s about the group.

          And fair enough, the difficult sell with the vaccine roll-out will be convincing people they are safe on an individual level. My thoughts on this is to sit tight and see how the vaccines work in the high endemic areas of Covid; if they are successful roll them out, if they don’t we sit tight.

    • WHY?
      Because any back down to let it rip after a year of strict lockdowns and restrictions on peoples liberties will be politically difficult.
      Having the virus widespread throughout the community is also likely to make a lot of people angry about the restrictions and lockdowns that they were forced to endure that were pointless and now acknowledged as not required.
      The longer it goes on, the greater these effects become.
      The problem with taking actions without a long term plan is you end up backing yourself into corners you don’t see coming.

      • Arthur Schopenhauer

        Give it up Bozo. The reason you don’t let it rip is because you make your population a giant disease incubator for nature to test the most effective mutations.

        Diseases can get less virulent, usually over the span of 100s of years, or they can become more virulent. The new UK, SA and Brazilian strains are all more virulent, with the Brazilian P1 strain being more deadly.

        The Brazilian let it rip policy has produced a much deadlier version of the disease. And it’s currently reinfecting people who had Covid early last year.

        The second year of the Spanish Flu was much deadlier in the first, in the US.

        Use your noggin, and don’t be a ignorant bozo, the country has enough of them already.

        • So what’s the plan then? Keep current versions out for years until a more virulent one incubated overseas leaks in a few years from now? We will not keep it out FOREVER. It is not possible without unacceptable restrictions.
          But I am open to having a LONG TERM practical plan explained to me other than “Nuke it from orbit”.

          “Diseases can get less virulent, usually over the span of 100s of years,”
          Not really, evolution leads to humans becoming more resistant to them, but you need exposure for that to happen. For proof, see what happened to the natives the world over when exposed to diseases that had become “less virulent” within the european population. They were decimated by these diseases.

    • Understand what you are saying re the Covid vaccine in particular given we still don’t know a lot about it. However the no jab no play call is to protect those too young to be vaccinated – so your last point doesn’t quite stack up. Some one decides not to get vaccinated can infect and harm/kill a 6mth old – therefore no jab no play makes sense.

    • With daycare there is a certain age limit before you can receive the vaccines. So the older kids whose parents chose not to vaccinate them are putting at risk the younger children who can’t receive the vaccine yet.
      Additionally there will always be a subset of the population who can’t receive the vaccine due to medical reasons, by achieving herd immunity we protect them as a society

    • Exactly Janet. It’s a confounding doublethink constantly pushed out by atheist vaxxers..
      Vaccinate a baby, vaccinate a toddler three jabs of one mixture before two years old at which age the child can produce antibodies on one jab.

    • “It’s like the madness of ‘no jab, no play’ in kindergartens. Those children who have been jabbed are protected against those who haven’t been, so why ban those who haven’t, for whatever reason?”

      Because if the virus is circulating in the community then even those who have been vaccinated can still bring it home to their baby brothers and sisters who are too young to have gotten the jab. Just like the covid vaccine can (apparently) stop you getting the disease (SARS-CoV-2), but won’t necessary stop you from catching/carrying the virus (coronavirus disease-19) the triggers the disease.

      Or in the case of covid, even if the vaccination did stop the virus from getting into your body, presumably if it is still circulating in the community (ie, no herd immunity) you could still even just get it on your hands or whatever and then take it home to someone who can’t get vaccinated for whatever medical reason.

    • Stewie GriffinMEMBER

      Yeah – you can only use pejoratives like “Karen” when they are directed at wippo’s, they are MultiCult’s white negros.

        • Stewie GriffinMEMBER

          No my friend – apparently I have 1/128th Indigenous Australian ancestry. From now on I identify as one of Australia’s first people.

          I look forward to my election to the third Chamber and use the special blood that I have been born with to rule over the rest of you white negros (Leon Trotsky’s words not mine).

          • You don’t need 1/128th, you just need to be accepted as a member by an existing member of the “tribe”

          • For a $500 investment to the right elder, you can guarantee yourself a lifetime of taxpayer subsidised victimhood. Saw that many a time in the NT.

          • You only need to wish that you were indigenous, like transgender people. If you think it, it shall be so. Transracial is the new Transgender.

          • Stewie GriffinMEMBER

            Actually under intersectional theory there appears to be a precedent for this – Multiracial Whiteness:

            One of the organizers of the “Stop the Steal” movement is Ali Alexander, a Trump supporter who identifies as Black and Arab….. What are we to make of Tarrio — and, more broadly, of Latino voters inspired by Trump? And what are we to make of unmistakably White mob violence that also includes non-White participants? I call this phenomenon multiracial whiteness — the promise that they, too, can lay claim to the politics of aggression, exclusion and domination.


            Thanks to this type of thinking all the African Americans and Hispanic people who voted for Trump were actually racist white people, because they were really just thinking ‘white’. All those passionate black supporters of Trump? Obvious rac!sts.

            The corollary of this proposition is that if coloured people can be identified as white, then white people must be capable of being identified as black!

          • Was told 30 years ago by a friend newly teaching at La Perouse that I shoukd shoukd find a bit of indigenous in my family tree or beside it because of the benefits scruing and my children woukd reap big benefit. Despite my father of psychopathic English transmitted perfectly for 190 years that my mothers line had some bong in them, due to no freckles, good tanned skins. I did not find it. Possibly there, the original French man who jumped ship at Pyromt lived with aborigines as named then, at one stage in 1830.

          • Stewie GriffinMEMBER

            Rac!sts Bolsheviks are at work to systematically ensure that our collective future will be determined by quotas and regulations, as opposed to achievement and merit.

            Make sure you can fit yourself into one of the categories that they choose for ‘success’ otherwise, no mater how bright you are, how hard you try, you will be denied access because of the colour of your skin and the lack of availability in that particular quota or category.

  9. Reus's largeMEMBER

    Are they testing anyone to see if the already have immunity before taking the vaccine, if not then the vaccine is a con as, according to the research so far you more immune from having had WhuFlu than the vaccine that the masses are going to get.

    • I have wondered whether there has been any effort into researching and identifying who is susceptible other than statisticians.

  10. reusachtigeMEMBER

    I tell you what, if I was in contact with any of my kids I wouldn’t let any fcker near them with any of these Covid jabs. They’re young and healthy (I think) and no doubt very good looking so they’re fine without it!

  11. BirdynumnumMEMBER

    Do they prevent transmission? If they don’t prevent transmission how do you achieve herd immunity?

    • Reus's largeMEMBER

      So apparently if you have the vaccine you are still infectious and can pass it on, so will still have to quarantine for 14 days, all that is does is reduce the symptoms, being that most of us are healthy and would not die / need ICU treatment if we get WhuFlu I really don’t see the point of getting a rushed through the system vaccine.

      I am sure that this is part of plan “The great reset”

    • You don’t, if it doesn’t.
      But there is literally no Plan B.
      So they have to BS that it will work, and then whocouldanode? when it all blows up in their faces, or lockdowns and restrictions forever.

  12. You guys are always too early to make such bold calls. Remember when QLD was the nutter and should have opened borders to Victoria? All in hindsight but at some point you gotta have the initiative to learn a bit from the calls you get wrong and maybe reserve judgement until you have the data you need to make a call. Too early again.

  13. Jevons ghostMEMBER

    Charles MacKay put his finger on it all back in the 1840’s. Followed by Edward Bernays back in the 1920’s. Now, sadly, with COVID, its déjà vu all over again.

  14. BoomToBustMEMBER

    Here are the facts we know about:
    -Vaccines take 10-20 years to develop and test using the traditional method
    -The “new” type of vaccines using mRNA technology have zero long term testings for side effects and have been deployed in 12 months
    -If they are so safe, why have all governments granted 100% exemption of liability for side effects?
    -If it wasnt for mass media hype, you wouldnt know Covid-19 existed
    -Writers for financial articles should stick to finances and leave medical opinions to those with medical degrees
    -Vaccinations wont allow a return to normal, borders wont open, travel wont resume (they have stated this), so why get it?
    -There are valid alternatives to a vaccination, for something with a 99.96% survival rate, the side effects of the vaccination appear worse than the virus itself
    -Flu infection rates have dropped 98%. According to Dr’s, this is statistically impossible. Figures are being fudged.

    • 100% this.

      Too many one-step thinking idiots afraid to dissent because of the fear of being painted as Pete Evans. As I said above it will start with travel and then be extended outwards, being enforced by insurance companies who will make a killing (See below). Australians love authority too much so they won’t see it coming until it’s too late. I don’t particularly want corporate tossbags like Alan Joyce imposing their will anymore than they already do.


    • “you wouldn;t know it existing”

      That’s an interesting take, I wonder what the counterpoint might be to that.

    • Stewie GriffinMEMBER

      Yup – no way my kids are going to be taking any mRNA vaccines. I may relent on the more traditional ones after 12 or 18mths, but as you say for a diseases that has a 99.999% survival rate for kids, I think the risks are currently higher than the benefits.

    • RobotSenseiMEMBER

      Vaccines take 10-20 years to develop and test using the traditional method
      If they are so safe, why have all governments granted 100% exemption of liability for side effects?

      Well you’ve answered your own question there. The pharmas know the testing and post-market surveillance component of development is not complete, but governments worldwide are crying out for a solution. Therefore if the government want a product rushed to market, the pharmas (quite rightly) want a liability waiver. It reads as conspiracy theory 101, but apply this to whatever line of work you’re in and it makes perfect sense.

      If it wasnt for mass media hype, you wouldnt know Covid-19 existed
      That’s a ridiculous take

      Vaccinations wont allow a return to normal, borders wont open, travel wont resume (they have stated this), so why get it?
      I don’t know; why bother getting treated for anything with that logic.

      There are valid alternatives to a vaccination, for something with a 99.96% survival rate, the side effects of the vaccination appear worse than the virus itself
      100% rubbish. There are no alternatives at the moment. There *are* hundreds of thousands of dead bodies and the count is climbing. Which right-wing government are you part of?

      • “100% rubbish. There are no alternatives at the moment.”
        Sure there are. How many covid cases in australia in the last 3 months? How many deaths? We trade off safety for convenience all the time.
        We say we want to end all road deaths, but the reality is they could all be stopped tomorrow. It merely requires reducing the speed limit to something ridiculous like 10Km/h and STRICTLY enforcing it. The reality is this is a price people aren’t willing to pay to save a few hundred lives.
        The problem is that [email protected] is a new risk and people are notoriously bad at overestimating the impacts of a novel risk while underestimating the impact of risk they are accustomed to experiencing everyday.

        • RobotSenseiMEMBER

          The problem is that [email protected] is a new risk and people are notoriously bad at overestimating the impacts of a novel risk while underestimating the impact of risk they are accustomed to experiencing everyday.
          That’s a fair point. Risk assessment of our current situation is difficult depending on what you think the true “risk” is.
          But if you jump back to March, we were convinced the end was nigh. Now, we’ve probably exceeded expectations in terms of local response (even with Melbourne – frankly, it was bound to happen somewhere). So now that we sit on our island of safety and vaccines may well be months away from a dataset supporting roll-out, I say we sit tight and see what happens around the rest of the world before a full-blown “vaccine hysteria” develops. I’m more cavalier than most with regards to vaccination, but also appreciate we are going to have one chance to sell this, and have vanishingly little faith in our federal government to execute it correctly.

          • “But if you jump back to March, we were convinced the end was nigh.”
            We were told the end was nigh. Quite a few thought it was just the flu.
            If it’s a flu but 10 times worse, and vaccines are less than 80% effective does that mean we have to continue as we are now forever, or do the deaths not matter at that point? I’m really trying to figure out what all the just keep doing what we are doing people think the end point they are headed to is? OR do they not have one?

          • RobotSenseiMEMBER

            Dirty confession: I don’t know what the end point is.

            The optimist in me says that the vaccines work in some capacity. They don’t necessarily need to be 100%, or even 90% efficacious, just enough to institute a series of firebreaks throughout the population such that if it gets out, it is contained without turning into a wildfire. The realist in me says that one of the vaccines will work; we just don’t know which one yet.
            Given that the “let it rip” arguments being put forward last year were all centred around an economic ruin which is yet to show any signs of manifesting, I see now downside in waiting to see which (if any) of these vaccines work. The endpoint is then international travel with either a) proof of vaccination or b) vaccination and quarantine on arrival until such time as worldwide cases start to reduce markedly.
            In terms of risk (mentioned above), context today: one in every thousand Americans has died in the last 12 months from Covid. Covid has in one year killed as many Americans as the flu has killed in 10. And that’s without any mitigating steps, social isolation, dedication of almost the entire health system to stopping it.
            The pessimist says that a mutated strain gains further virulence, rendering current vaccines useless. I can see why there is the push to get vaccines in bodies ASAP from that perspective. Given Australia’s geological advantages of no land border and population concentrated in major cities, I don’t see any upside in rocking the lifeboat we’re currently in. Nobody is starving, nobody is out of water, I say we wait and see what the global response is over the next six months and either open slowly if things looks good, or ride it out if nothing changes or it gets worse.

          • ” around an economic ruin which is yet to show any signs of manifesting,”
            Many people would disagree on that one. The can has been kicked by record breaking stimulus and government debt. At some point that will come home to roost. Continuing that support to effected industries for years more of restrictions isn’t going to make that easier.

            You say it has killed as many people as the flu has in 10 years. We seem to be taking it a lot more seriously than 10 times what we do for the flu. No doubt the deaths in future years will be reduced as some will merely have been brought forward a few years.

  15. If the ‘vaccinne’ for COVID was to undertake a flight on a Boeing AirMAX (with no changes to the model that crashed) and in order to scale up production they absolved Boeing of all legal liability and increased the price AirMax’s such that they involved huge margins and told them to make enough AirMax’s so the world’s population could take 2 flights each over 2021 regardless of side effects, consequence or production quality, would you take the flights?

    In relative terms, I have more faith in Boeing than Pfizer and Astra Zeneca in such circumstances (less negative faith).

    • Reus's largeMEMBER

      Great analogy, I for one will make sure that I hold out as long as possible to get the zombie injection

  16. The problem with Pfizer is, at least from my quick reading, there aren’t enough doses available in Oz (though I heard one of the Scandi countries simply ordered more).

    So it’ll be the more efficacious Pfizer for healthcare, RACFs, quarantine workflow, emergency personnel, then AZ for everyone else.

    Just a quick note on the AZ – DLS you keep bringing up the links between Scrotumo and AZ person but it doesn’t diminish the fact that it (appears to) maybe efficacious.

  17. Some people want Tim Paine to go on Keeper Keeper after losing another home test series to India.

    • To lose one series, Mr Worthing, may be regarded as a misfortune; to lose both looks like carelessness.

  18. I have no problems with a vaccine in theory but I have a few caveats.

    Firstly I’m unhappy that I’d be lumped with the inferior AZ vaccine. Isn’t it interesting how the goalposts have shifted and health officials are desperate to spin things? The vaccine will stop you from getting covid!! Well maybe not in fact there’s a one in three chance it won’t work with you but at least you won’t have to go to the hospital! Long term ramifications of mild covid? tough luck!

    And herd immunity. Remember that? the govt isnalready downplaying it. Well there mightn’t be herd immunity but less people will die! Better than nothing maybe?

    The fact is ScoMo made a decision based on sucking up to local industry rather than putting voters’ interest first. My guess is that the govt had the dream that CSL would be the local suppliers of the AZ vaccine into S.E. Asia (eg Indonesia and Malaysia) which would be a foreign affairs boost and good for CSL. But with efficacy no bette than the Chinese vaccine, not going to happen.

    A few fearless predictions/fears (feel free to tell me these are wrong)

    1) The govt will relax borders as soon as they can for students/tourists. Mild covid and continual outbreaks will take off in the under 65s.
    2) Foreign govts will distinguish by vaccine. Eg if you want to travel, if you got the AZ vaccine you’ll need to quarantine, with the Pfizer vaccine you won’t (or worse some vaccines like AZ and Chinese will be deemed sufficiently ineffective to allow entry at all)
    3) It’s already suspected/known that the AZ vacc is self-inoculating. That’s why the half-dose full-dose trick worked. My paranoid fear (and this is probably logically wrong I know) is that the AZ vacc would impede efficacy of other vaccines

    • It’s either this, or we continue with quarantine. lockdowns, restrictions forever. Or someone invents a magic pill that stops it in it’s tracks. People have been trying for decades with the flu without success so I wouldn’t be holding your breathe.

    • The Oxford Institute is testing its AstraZeneca vaccine in conjunction with the Russians’ Sputnik V vaccine from the Gamaleya Institute. It is suspected that the problem with AstraZeneca is the adenovirus vector that this type of vaccine uses to get the instructions for the coronavirus spike protein into the nuclei of your cells. Once this is done, the infected cells exhibit the protein fragments on their cell membranes and alert the immune system. The problem is that the immune system reacts to the vector as well as the coronavirus proteins. This can be an issue if people have been previously exposed to the vector, so that the immune system mops up the vaccine before the vector can get into the cells. That is why the AstraZeneca vaccine uses a chimpanzee adenovirus that has been disabled, so that it can infect cells but not replicate in them. The Sputnik V uses different vectors for the initial shot and the booster, but AstraZeneca doesn’t, so people’s immune systems could be primed to mop up the vaccine when the booster is given, making it ineffective. The better success with the half dose might be because the immune system isn’t set off as much by the initial shot.


      If the research works out, you could be given the two vaccines instead of using AstraZeneca for both the initial vaccination and the booster, and the efficacy could be very much greater.

  19. Not enough silly conspiracies in this comment section, Covid19 is just one part of a two virus package that will be delivered in a couple years and will take out all those that had the first virus.

  20. “Once we’ve deployed this policy we can open the borders everywhere. And those that refuse will just have to catch COVID. Too bad.”

    With an attitude like this I hope DLS both (i) gets the vaccine and then (ii) catches Covid. He can then tell us what the implications of mild covid are.

    Until we understand (ii) then the borders stayed closed …

    • Until we understand (ii) then the borders stayed closed …

      It may take decades to understand the long term implications. Is that what you are really saying, because it isn’t just closed border, but all the other restrictions as well, or no point to a closed border.

    • While “borders stay closed” delivers a longer quiet period for immigration, accidentally delivering an outcome MB has sought for ages, DLS is right to note the trend is clearly for vaccine and then reopening. I think for Australia, the Pfizer vaccine that we import will only go to the high risk folk, and after that it will be the Oxford/AZ vaccine that we will be making here. Competition for various vaccines is already pretty stiff, so we can’t rely on getting more Pfizer vaccine in the short term at all. We are fortunate that we can watch a month or so of Northern Hemisphere experience, but then we will have to get rolling to get our at risk population covered before our winter, like an over-sized distribution of flu vaccine. On the plus side, with Tokyo Olympics coming up, I would be very surprised if all competitors and spectators were not vaccinated as precondition, competitors would have to notify authorities which vaccine taken.

  21. Herd immunity is not understood well and can even be a false narrative in some cases. What usually happens is that the disease spreads rapidly through the population until there is finally an equilibrium between those who have been infected and have either recovered or died and those that are still susceptible. There is a natural depletion of susceptible that occurs where the disease/virus can no longer spread. During this stage hygiene measure are usually adopted to reduce the spread and manage the rate of infection. Eventually the susceptible people keeps reducing down to zero. I should also point out that there is always a group of people that are unaffected by the virus. Usually as the susceptible people drops over time a vaccine might be introduced. As you start to vaccinate, there is a massive overlap of people who have already been infected and recovered who are getting the vaccine. In this case the vaccine has little use. As rollout of the vaccine goes on over time and as the rate of susceptible people decreases, the overlap increases. So the real effectiveness of the vaccine is much lower than people think especially as time goes on.

    The reproductive number is important in this calculation because it help us understand how quickly the virus naturally spreads in a population. Norovirus is of the most contagious virus and if NO hygiene measures are adopted the its R0 is 14. Covid 19 without measure is about R0 2-3. That mean for every person affected you should expected about 2-3 other cases. A R0 less than 1 is the aim and usually simple hygiene measures for a virus of R0 2-3 get this below 1.

    Now there is an exception where a vaccine will be most affective and that is in “herds” that have been fenced off from foreign infected “cattle”. This herd which has not been introduced to the virus yet has a susceptible rate close to 100%. This is where a vaccine becomes most effective.

  22. We don’t enforce the flu vaccine on every person even though it kills thousands every year. Like the flu, once the elderly are vaccinated, the deaths will drop, and we can all go back to normal with Covid circulating in the community like just another flu virus. The media will move onto some new hysteria, and the whole “pandemic” will be forgotten.

    • If only. I fear the message that it has to be stopped has been pushed too hard. An about face from forcing business to close for a year to “actually, it really didn’t matter, just let her rip now” is not an easy sell.
      It’s also pretty hard to drop much below the current death rate here for covid.

      • The lockdowns and everything else was only supposed to be a temporary measure until vaccines arrived. So they are here now, the people at risk are no longer at risk, everyone has done their bit, and now things can go back to normal. In a few years when flu kills more elderly than covid (due to less effective vaccines) the Govt isnt going to be chasing up all the non-vaccinated and trying to force them into getting vaccinated when no one is dying anyway. And companies will realise that if they drop their silly vaccination requirements they’ll double their sales and profits, so that will fall by the wayside as soon as the hysteria dies down.

        • “In a few years when flu kills more elderly than covid (due to less effective vaccines) ”
          Given the much longer timeframe developing flu vaccines than covid, that may be a very optimistic expectation. It’s not like covid hasn’t shown a propensity to mutate already.

          • Mutation, yes. I wouldn’t worry too much about it.

            If it becomes more lethal like Ebola, then the outbreak will end quickly after a short spike. If it becomes less lethal like an ordinary flu, then, well, it will be like any other flu.

          • Ebola? If the outbreak became more lethal like ebola (which has a CFR of up to 90%) in a virus that can be airborne transmitted, the results would be spectacularly horrifying.

  23. Most of the people I hear who are in favour of making everyone have the jab, also want to reduce the world’s population. The silence is great when you ask them to explain how they got to their positions.

    • Much like that from those wanting affordable housing, while maintaining or increasing the value of their home.
      People are illogical and stupid. And really bad at dealing with anything complex. Even mildly complex.

    • This. Especially all the climate change fanatics. If you believe that climate change is man made and is caused by too many humans consuming the planet’s resources, then a virus that culls the human population should have been considered a godsend in terms of reducing carbon emissions. Except now we apparently need all those billions of humans, and every life is precious. Ipso facto, then all of their carbon emissions are precious as well.

      • I hate to tell you this, but the truth is that the vaccine is not only the vaccine component but actually has a hidden sequence attached to it that makes the recipient infertile. Having said that, you should keep quiet about it.

      • You can recognise we are overpopulating the planet without wanting to engage in mass murder. But remember, you can’t spell slaughter without laughter!

        • A virus is not mass murder. Its evolution. And basic Ecology. Viruses have a purpose. What we are doing is trying to prevent nature doing its job.

    • Exactly ! I get the same confused looks when people tell me they’re in favour of lower population but against genocide. Totally inconsistent, right ?

      • Actually yes, totally inconsistent. Now if you add in against murder and unnecessary death then possibly more consistent if your level of in favour of a lower population is less than your against for murder.

          • Absolutely not orthogonal. Genocide directly effects population. Being against genocide shows a clear lower priority for reduced population as genocide would directly reduce population.
            Much as affordable housing and lower valuation of existing property are not orthogonal.

          • It doesn’t matter, they are separate considerations.

            Do you think the population should be lower ?
            Do you think the genocide is OK ?

            Answering “yes” to one and “no” to the other is not inconsistent. Kind of like:

            Do you think the population should be lower ?
            Will you kill yourself ?

  24. buttzilla team forever

    this will be extended to auctions. already heard rumblings in the MSM. crash will be blamed on Anti-Vaxxers / Nuts etc…

  25. Rikki StocksMEMBER

    While I agree in the most part to what has been discussed in the comments section, my main concerns, other than rushed and ineffective, or even dangerous vaccines, is the long term health effects following a case of covid19. Apparently scarring on lung tissue has been reported in Covid19 survivors. My 8yr old son has type 1 diabetes and would undoubtedly be at risk, his immune system has already killed off his pancreatic beta cells and I don’t want to see it mount an attack on the rest of him.
    Another concern I have is that after such a long period of time where my immune system hasn’t been challenged by a virus, how am I going to cope with a generic cold & flu virus when they start to spread again.
    I’m lucky to be living in a Perth bubble & won’t be touching a vaccine in the near future.

    • It beggars belief that most of the MB commentariat here are advocating mandatory vaccinations. One of the lone voices of reason.

  26. None of the phase three trials for the Moderna, Pfizer or Astra Zenecca vaccines were tested on children. Also children have next to no chance of dying from covid. Therefore there is no way that children should even be contemplated for vaccination.
    The whole covid hysteria is mind boggling when you put it into context of other diseases. Diabetes and insulin resistance and the host of related diseases that go along with it account for orders of magnitude more years of life lost. The cure is also vastly less restrictive than lockdowns as it could be implemented with stiff taxes on sugar. But instead we get crazy lockdowns for a disease that is essentially only as deadly as most other bad flus and largely only effects the nearly dead. But then again pharma companies are set to make billions from corona virus hysteria, while they would lose money if governments implemented dietary changes to cure diabetes.

    • They were never tested on people with co-morbidities either. Everyone was 100% healthy. No wonder they are all popping their clogs in Norway.

    • Also, despite obesity being the #1 risk factor for dying from Covid have you seen a single health professional anywhere in the world, come out and tell people that they should go on a diet and lose weight? Instead of unhealthy people getting off their fat a55es and taking responsibility for their own health outcomes, healthy people are expected to destroy their own livelihoods and possibly lives so the unhealthy can keep chugging donuts.