Open mike 10/11/2021

Written By: notices and features - Date published: - 163 comments
Categories: open mike


Open mike is your post.

For announcements, general discussion, whatever you choose.

The usual rules of good behaviour apply (see the Policy).

Step up to the mike …

163 comments on “Open mike 10/11/2021”

Comment numbers have changed to permanent references. Older quoted numbers may no longer identify the same comment.

  1. 1

    Looks like we are getting a rerun at 1984; agents of the state are taking over the personal identities of private citizens. The method involves voluntary yielding of the right to share identity, authorised by bureaucratic form.

    Police are trying to assume the online identities of suspects and defendants by taking over their social media and email accounts to gather information. Defence lawyers concerned about their young and vulnerable clients alerted RNZ to a form the police are using, titled 'Consent to Assume Online Internet Identity'.

    The New Zealand Bar Association and the Auckland District Law Society have written to Police Commissioner Andrew Coster, expressing their concern about police trying to assume people's online identities.

    "Given the nature of the form and the concerns it raises, we are hoping for an urgent response," Queen's Counsel James Rapley said.

    Criminal Bar Association president Fiona Guy Kidd said she was also concerned about the police tactic. "It is often very vulnerable people who are being asked to sign these." Auckland District Law Society president Marie Dyhrberg QC has also put her name to the concerns expressed to the Police Commissioner.

    https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/455331/police-try-to-assume-people-s-online-identities

  2. 2

    I was reading 'Snowcolour and the 7 little people' to my grandchild the other day,and it dawned on me that they faced a completely different world ,than what I had experienced growing up.

    This brave new world of transformation, where people are offended,made uncomfortable or find words inappropriate means a reset of historical literature and the arts.

    Batperson & Robin

    Person of La Mancha

    Superperson

    Wonderperson

    'Peoplekind' have alot to look forward to.

    At least we can put…..'mansplaining' to…bed.

    cue Cathy Areu..masters degree,she's a treasure..

    https://youtu.be/byn0fBCVeHA

    1. 2.1

      She's not a treasure, she's a fucking disgrace for going along with the disingenuous crap that Tucker Carlson is spouting…

      Manhatten, Goldman Sachs!

      What next? Manawatu?

      1. 2.1.1

        Also, don't link to Tucker Carlson. He is a racist and a white supremacist, you shouldn't give him any more exposure than he already has.

              1. 2.1.1.2.1.1.1

                No black list.

                But if you don't want to help youtube throw money at racist fucks, now you know.

                Aren't you the one who recently linked to OAN? Now Tucker Carlson? Ever thought of linking to someone who doesn't have a far-right extremist fan base?

                  1. 2.1.1.2.1.1.1.2.1

                    Nah mate, but if you find someone interesting, give 'em a quick google to see if nazi-adjacents are amongst their biggest fans.

                    That's my rule of thumb. Looking at a source helps figure out if they're publishing something because it suits their agenda, or if they're well out of their lane.

                    Then, if there's a claim of fact, check that – not with their links, with your own searches. Find items as close to original sources as possible. 99% of the time the most outrageous bits of a story have been over-egged.

                    And if there's no specific claim of fact, what good is the opinion in the real world? It affects nothing.

                    1. 2.1.1.2.1.1.1.2.1.1

                      Interesting over view.Quite a depressing one if you subscribe to the lies,damn lies and statistics faction.

                      Or even the 'opinions are like arseholes …everyone has one'.

                      'don't try…no one cares'-Charles Bukowski.

                    2. 2.1.1.2.1.1.1.2.1.2

                      Media opinion pieces are like someone approaching you in the street, or knocking on your door. Very few people are doing it to advise you of an emergency or problem you need to know about. And most of them will be actual official "news".

                      But most people want something from you. They want money, or your name for a contact list they'll use to sell you stuff later, your soul, they want something. It's not about you, there's something in it for them. Sometimes it's something I'm prepared to go for, mostly it's not.

                      If I sign a petition, my contact number will often go onto a list for me to be sold something related to the petition later on.

                      These days, many media opinionators do the same thing – they get outrage clicks, but that still counts as "engagement". So more of that drivel gets made, and more of it gets targeted at you. The'll give you less John Oliver, more fucker carlson. And you'll begin to accept as normal some of the less extreme views, and the next thing you know you're a 5g antivax nutter believing Ardern is wearing a home detention ankle strap so she's under the control of the lizard people.

                      Check the basics, check your sources, you can avoid being a conceptual dumpster fire.

          1. 2.1.1.3.1

            100% PR. Yes Cinder if yu are going to make claims that someone is a white supremicist please link.

            I have no idea who he is althugh I have heard his name.

            2. 2.1.1.3.2.2

              This is a good site to check the bias etc of news media sites

              https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/

              The listing for Fox News states in part

              'These media sources are moderate to strongly biased toward conservative causes through story selection and/or political affiliation. They may utilize strong loaded words (wording that attempts to influence an audience by using appeal to emotion or stereotypes), publish misleading reports and omit reporting of information that may damage conservative causes. Some sources in this category may be untrustworthy. See all Right Bias sources.

              • We rate Fox News strongly Right-Biased due to editorial positions and story selection that favors the right. We also rate them Mixed factually and borderline Questionable based on poor sourcing and the spreading of conspiracy theories.'
          3. 2.1.1.3.3

            I wouldn't know about his views on race but I'm pretty sure that you would definitely disapprove of his economic theories. From the Wikipedia article on him it claims that

            "Carlson has criticized hedge funds (singling out the Republican donor Paul Singer in 2019) and private equity (in criticizing Mitt Romney, former CEO of Bain Capital). He described the business model of firms like Bain as: "Take over an existing company for a short period of time, cut costs by firing employees, run up the debt, extract the wealth and move on, sometimes leaving retirees without their earned pensions. … Meanwhile, a remarkable number of the companies are now bankrupt or extinct." He attacked payday lenders, saying they "loan people money they can't possibly repay" and "charge them interest that impoverishes them" He praised Democratic presidential candidate Elizabeth Warren's economic plan and called her book The Two Income Trap "one of the best books I've ever read on economics".

            What is there for a lefty not to love?

            1. 2.1.1.3.3.1

              So not a moron after all. I'll have to revise my view of the guy. Well, I'll give it a go but I suspect the false assumption will stick like a limpet & I may be unable to winkle my crowbar under the edge of it…

              1. 2.1.1.3.3.1.1

                That was a very selective view from the article. Most of it is not like that at all. However he actually appears to have been reasonably sane in his younger days but his brain seems to have been addled by getting too close to Trump.

                I mean back in 1999 he said

                "In public correspondence in Slate with Texas Monthly's Evan Smith on November 29, 1999, Carlson agreed with Smith's low opinion of Donald Trump, who was then running for president with the Reform Party. Carlson wrote that Trump was "the single most repulsive person on the planet" and that the Reform Party consisted of "a bunch of wackos". Separately, he criticized the party's eventual nominee, Pat Buchanan"

                Also in

                https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tucker_Carlson

                1. 2.1.1.3.3.2.1.1

                  no, it doesn't. If someone wants to make an argument based on quoting something off site, then a link is required, so that people can look at the argument and quote easily in context. Don't expect other people to do your work. The reason for that is because some people like to misrepresent arguments and cherry pick. Linking means people can pull them up on it easily.

    2. 2.2

      The book "Politically Correct Bedtime Stories" has been around for 30 years.

      Politically Correct Bedtime Stories : James Finn Garner : 9780285640412 (bookdepository.com)

      It includes:

      – Snow White's relationship with seven vertically challenged men,

      – Little Red Riding Hood, her grandma and the cross-dressing wolf who set up an alternative household based on mutual respect and cooperation,

      – The Duckling Who Was Judged on her Merits Alone, and

      – The Emperor who was not naked but was endorsing a clothing-optional lifestyle.

      It's fun, nothing more.

      1. 2.2.1

        fun, depends …..

        https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/lgbt-activists-get-word-mother-axed-from-government-policies-q6q6bxtf6

        The term “mother” was removed from Scottish government maternity policies after they were lobbied by a leading LGBT+ charity, it has emerged.

        Stonewall urged ministers to remove gendered terms from policy documents and replace them with “gender neutral equivalents”.

        lol. But yeah, shit ain't happening at all, no one is being erased, and when that erasure happens its to be 'inclusive' or its 'fun'.

        Non Males, are they even human?

        Luckily it is now time for the men to be erased. Cause why the fuck not. Vote "Left", when we are done with you guys, you all be 'people' the 21st century equivalent of 'peasant'.

        Non Females, are they even human?

        Good grief, the left has become a parody of everything that it ever stood for.

        Vote left peasants, cause only the "left" knows what is good for you. Vote, peasant.

        Also, it seems that alot of people read the Grimms stories and understood nothing.
        The emperor did not promote alternative clothing, the emperor got fleeced by a conman and it took a kid to call him and his cowardly entourage and fearful citizens out on it. Just saying. But then vote left peasant, its all just fun and games.

        1. 2.2.1.1

          That's not quite true, I wonder why you would misrepresent what actually happened. 🙄

          "removed from policy documents regarding MATERNITY LEAVE".

          https://www.scotsman.com/news/opinion/columnists/scottish-governments-deletion-of-the-word-mother-from-maternity-leave-documents-after-advice-from-stonewall-is-lunacy-brian-wilson-3429706

          If you stilled your outrage for a moment and thought about it you might understand.

          If this sort of thing went to the courts and the word mother was existant then male same sex adoptive couples would be unable to claim maternity leave. Same for an intersex parent if they had male on their birth certificate.

          And if you think a shitty employer wouldn't argue the case then more fool you.

          Its about inclusion, not erasure.

          1. 2.2.1.1.1

            You mean this

            https://www.scotsman.com/news/opinion/columnists/scottish-governments-deletion-of-the-word-mother-from-maternity-leave-documents-after-advice-from-stonewall-is-lunacy-brian-wilson-3429706

            Incredibly, it appears to be true and the word “mother” no longer appears in Scottish government documents relating to maternity leave. On a pedantic note, you can’t really have “maternity” leave if you don’t have “mothers” since they both have the same derivation.

            or this https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2021/10/15/scotlands-civil-service-deletes-mother-maternity-policy-stonewall/

            or this https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2021/10/15/scotlands-civil-service-deletes-mother-maternity-policy-stonewall/

            In one of several changes aimed at climbing the rankings, the Scottish government removed the word “mother” from its maternity policy, replacing a passage that included the term with “you must be the spouse or partner (including same-sex partner) or the pregnant woman”.

            Honey, i will never still my outrage, being a good obedient submissive doormat ain't my stylez…sorry.

            Secondly, Women – and only Women – and that includes trans identified women and 'Non Males' of all pronouns, are the ones to give birth. Only them. And the word means nothing more then women giving birth. Freddy McDonald might want to pretend they are a man getting IVF for their second child, but frankly no.

            but because you don't actually seem to know what the word maternity means:

            maternity

            /məˈtəːnɪti/

            noun

            1. motherhood.

            Your emperor is naked dear.

                1. 2.2.1.1.1.1.1.1

                  oh my god!

                  Do you honestly think that study looked across the entire planet? You're not the first ideologue to make that mistake.

                  You are stating that a minority are not entitled to similar protections and privileges you enjoy.

                  Cool, cool. 🙄

                  1. 2.2.1.1.1.1.1.1.1

                    Oh Sorry Cindy

                    I forgot that the very rare occurrences in nature are the new norm and female mothers don't actually give birth as a rule.

                    I don't see why , for true inclusivity, the word mother cannot be used in the term maternity leave. Mothers most often will be applying.Simply because they earn less, and have the anatomy for breast feeding.

                    So we could have "mothers and others providing primary care"

                    Why get rid of the term "mother "when that is the very person most often being the prime carer

                    2. 2.2.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.2

                      Gotta say that you and Sabine are incredibly patronising and passive aggressive, not exactly motherly traits 😁

                      And starting with a strawman argument is a good way to demonstrate you are not coming to this issue in good faith.

                      If you had read and listened, you would understand.

                      Scottish intersex person gets pregnant & applies for maternity leave.

                      Shitbag employer points out that the policy and legislation states mother.

                      Points to the definition of mother.

                      Employment court requests policy documents to determine intent of legislation.

                      Court only sees the word mother in policy documents, ties it to definition.

                      Finding = not a mother, no maternity leave.

                      Intersex parent fucked over because people like you want to determine who is and is not mother.

                      Why do I feel that the link to that study is a bit of a Galileo moment for the GC dogmatists here? Oh yeah, because it proves their "only women" argument is wrong, that's why.

              2. 2.2.1.1.1.1.2

                "Intersex can get pregnant and give birth". Of course they can if they have ovaries and a womb.

                These very rare intersex people have both male and female genitalia. I don't know what you case (closed) is.

                I think the issue is that a small minority of very vocal people are trying to change language and many people don't agree with that. As well as language a small minority who believe in a certain ideology are trying to change how we categorized men and women. This has implications for all sorts of things particularly for women…… spaces such as changing rooms to protect women and girls privacy and decency, level playing field sporting competitions just to name a couple are areas where many biological women want to preserve their separte categories. I always smell a rat when people are telling me I have to accept their view or else I am a bigot aka a really bad person. I am not the type to go along with endorsing the emperors new clothes just because of group think. Or the spin line the emperor is not naked he is just endorsing a new clothing optional life style (funny, maybe but I also think of other euphemisms aimed at disguising truth)

                Many who comment on this site fail to acknowledge the validity of this and piss around with links such as you have about a very, very very very rare biological abnormality that has allowed an infitesinal number of people to fertilize their own ovas. It proves nothing. Biological sex is real and immutable.

                1. 2.2.1.1.1.1.2.1

                  Maybe you should type less and read more.

                  You have repeatedly stated there are only two sexes. You state this above as well as acknowledging there are intersex people. These are mutually incompatible statements.

                  Sabine stated that only women can give birth. That was incorrect. CASE MOTHER FUCKING CLOSED.h

                  Those pregnant intersex individuals DID NOT impregnate themselves. And, to repeat this for the cognitively challenged IT IS NOT A STUDY OF EVERY INTERSEX INDIVIDUAL IN THE WORLD.

                  You have never acknowledged these errors and still refuse to. This makes you the ideologue. If you think this makes you a bigot, that's on you.

                  Can't be bothered with the rest of your screed, you will never acknowledge your mistakes so its pointless.

                  1. 2.2.1.1.1.1.2.1.1

                    Cinder please don't use shouty caps.

                    I have to say I am one of the few people on this site who do acknowlegde my mistakes. On occassion people have use this against me. So be it.

                    The vast majority of the small minority of people who are intersex are either xx or xy chromosome. The information about intersex people is often used by trans activist to muddy the waters about the issue of biological men identitfying as women and their demands for above and beyond the human rights we all have. These activists demand that we suspend our reality and treat them as if they had the biology of a woman not a man. This includes feeling entitled to demand that biological men who identify as women should be allowed to conduct intimate examinations on women for example women have been raped.

                    The issue for me is gender ideology and some of its proponants claim that biological sex is irrelevant and gender identity trumps it. I strongly disagree with this position. Women like myself are being shut down with cheap shots like accusing us of biogetry or transphobia. The fear of being accused of this mean many people fall into line with the demands of the trans activists. I don't

        2. 2.2.1.2

          If the word mother is to be erased from Scottish maternity public documents, where does that leave the word "mater-nity?" Mater = mother.

            1. 2.2.1.2.1.1

              I'm male & usually critical of the alphabet soup tribe, but I get that you seem to be making a valid point.

              Scottish intersex person gets pregnant & applies for maternity leave. Shitbag employer points out that the policy and legislation states mother. Points to the definition of mother. Employment court requests policy documents to determine intent of legislation. Court only sees the word mother in policy documents, ties it to definition. Finding = not a mother, no maternity leave.

              So this intersex pregnant person cannot be a mother legally despite being a mother in biological reality. Am I right?

              If so, the law is an ass (as usual). It will have to be changed to encompass relevant minority rights. Natural justice!

              1. 2.2.1.2.1.1.1

                Yes Dennis, you got it in one.

                Although the intersex person would have to have male on their birth certificate – thus not a mother despite giving birth.

                Lollipop for you

                1. 2.2.1.2.1.1.1.1

                  So we get rid of the word mother that best describe the very vast majority of people who give birth. We like the word mother. Its part of our identity as women.

                2. 2.2.1.2.1.1.1.2

                  Can you point to a link of any news organization that would have written about the story that you are trying to peddle here, cause i can find nothing. Unless you do, i consider your story to be not valid.

                  And contrary to some, i don't refuse news organizations just because they might not be 'my type of ' news. So feel free to link and let us all read up on the Story of the Intersex person who was refused maternity leave by an employer for reasons.

                  1. 2.2.1.2.1.1.1.2.1

                    100% agree Sabine. Part of this problem is people including journos get cancelled unless they are right think………….

                    Not sure there is a link from Cinder cause I have a feeling it was a hypothetical example. But maybe I will be proved wrong.

              3. 2.2.1.2.1.1.3

                Isn't that because the intersex person has identified as a man?

                Anyway, change the shit head employer not the word mother. Take him to court. Afterall people like Maya Forstatar had to go to court to defend her GC views.

            2. 2.2.1.2.1.2

              Are you saying that the word "mother" has not been deleted from the maternity policy document of the Scottish Civil Service, which is what I see that Sabine was writing about.

              You're linking to some other unit.

              I totally agree about the shitbag employer, but that isn't fixed by getting rid of the word "mother"

              How about "mother or other primary caregiver"

              Language is for clarity , not obscuration in the name of inclusiveness.

              1. 2.2.1.2.1.2.1

                Nope, maternity is still there.

                https://www.gov.scot/publications/delivering-maternity-neonatal-services-through-covid-19-pandemic-beyond-level-zero/

                Although you could have checked that yourself.

                Think of a Venn diagram, not all women are mothers and not all mothers are women. Venn diagrams are an excellent way of measuring inclusion / exclusion.

                As for 'language is for clarity"- "other primary caregiver" is pretty vague and open to interpretation and abuse as the NZ Family Court has demonstrated.

                You should recognise this if you're so keen on clarity.

                Speaking of which, want to explain why you called me "Cindy"? Its Cinder, or is there a Cindy that you were directing that question to?

                Just kidding, I know you were just being a patronising dick.

                Right Franny?

                1. 2.2.1.2.1.2.1.1

                  "not all mothers are women"

                  You appear to have a very different definition of "mother" and "women" than the one I am used to, unless you are looking outside the human race.

                  Oh well "Vive la difference"

                  1. 2.2.1.2.1.2.1.1.1

                    Jesus fucking christ, have IQ's plumetted around here recenty?

                    Read the fucking study, those intersex individuals are not women. Especially according to some of the more dogmatic individuals on this website.

                    Fuck my life, has Covid rotted peoples minds or something?

                    1. 2.2.1.2.1.2.1.1.1.1

                      Cinder, with respect to your opinions in response to those of others, as far as I'm concerned your comments are coming through as being quite aggressive and rude. Shouting is not necessary. Tone it down a bit.

                    2. 2.2.1.2.1.2.1.1.1.2

                      Can intersex people have children or get pregnant?

                      The short answer is: maybe. Like any person, it depends on body parts. (And sometimes, help from technology.)

                      Making an embryo requires sperm from testes to meet an egg from an ovary. After that, the fetus needs a place to grow—usually that’s a uterus. These days, there are many ways for all of that to happen, even for non-intersex people. It is not possible for any human to reproduce without another person, including with donation and medical technology!

                      Can intersex people reproduce?

                      If an intersex person has a penis and testes that make sperm, they may be able to cause a pregnancy. Some intersex people have a vulva, vagina, and internal testes. Those testes might contain tissue that could be used to reproduce, with technology’s help in the future.

                      If an intersex person has a uterus, they may be able to carry a pregnancy. If they have ovaries or ovotestes, that tissue could be used for reproduction in some cases. Some intersex people do have ovaries, a uterus, and a vagina, and could get pregnant by contact with sperm.

                      Fertility is different for each intersex person. Many, but not all, intersex variations do result in infertility. Plenty of other intersex people have had their fertility taken away by non-consensual surgeries to make their bodies appear “normal.” Examples include when internal testes are removed, or when other genital surgeries create scar tissue that makes penetrative sex painful or impossible. This is a sensitive topic. Let intersex people share at their own pace, if they choose.

                      from here https://interactadvocates.org/faq/

                      Now frankly i think you made up a bit of a story, to bolster a point you never had. But i am happy to see you link to your support your story.

                      But for a bit of fun lets play with the removal of words to be properly excluding of the female body (who gives a fuck about our emotions and needs anyways) who ejected a non female child some two thousand and 21 years ago.

                      Hail Mary, full of grace, the Lord is with thee; blessed art thou among persons and blessed is the fruit of thy incubator, Jesus. Holy Mary, Ejector of God, pray for us sinners, now and at the hour of our death. Amen.

                      Would that work for your and all others who would like to remove any mention of women from the reproductive cycle?

                      And let me remind you again, just in case you forgot or have a hard time understanding, men don't birth children, trans identified men don't birth children, non of the male pronoun punters will ever birth a child. The ones birthing children on this planet are the women, trans identified females, and female pronoun punters. And just for some basic decency leave intersex people out of this discussion as they have a very different live compared to most of us.

        3. 2.2.1.3

          The New Zealand legislation (from 1987) refers to parental leave (including in the title) and partner leave. One reason for that is it can be shared between the parents.

        1. 2.3.1.1

          Doxing who? I replied to Blazer, because they said,

          At least we can put…..'mansplaining' to…bed.

          Read their whole comment, context is everything.

          My moderator (not Admin) suggestion, is that you settle down and pay attention to how things work here. Numbering on replies would be a start, but culture would help too.

              1. 2.3.3.1.1.1.1

                Perhaps you can indulge me and define it then.

                Clearly you are not enamoured with the Australian senators explanation(non male senator)

                    2. 2.3.3.1.1.1.1.1.1.2

                      Same explanation that the non male senator gave.If you accept that definition…you must also accept…womansplaining…agree?

                      No. Mansplaining is a thing because we live in a sexist society. It's specific to men, probably a combination of socialisation alongside the tendency of men to be single point focused and women tending to be collective focused (socialisation is most like the far bigger influence).

                      I didn't bother with the video, stopped watching at the point I realised his probable mansplaining had been edited out (i.e. early on) and so the rest couldn't be judged in context.

                      btw, I think the definition in the Lexico link is limited. Mansplaining is when a man tries to explain to a woman something she patently already understands, especially when it's her area of expertise. But where he fails to recognise her understanding/expertise because sexism. Hence the patronising or condescending tone.

                    4. 2.3.3.1.1.1.1.1.1.4

                      Nope, it's not reliant on toxic masculinity (a term I don't use). It's reliant on observation of how some men function in society. It's not rocket science. It's clear by now that you don't like it being named /shrug.

                    5. 2.3.3.1.1.1.1.1.1.5

                      ' It's reliant on observation of how some men function in society. '

                      Logically we can follow your definition and accept that 'womansplaining' is an equal observation.

                    6. 2.3.3.1.1.1.1.1.1.6

                      please provide three different examples (quotes and links, not just quotes) of womansplaining that fits the definition I gave except it's done by women. And then provide evidence that it's a social phenomenon not just some random occurences.

                    7. 2.3.3.1.1.1.1.1.1.7

                      @weka
                      I could suggest as an example your own untiring efforts this past year or so at explaining – very patiently I must say – that males and females are biologically different and that this has substantial implications on how the two sexes both behave and are treated in society.

                      It's been quite the revelation. devil

                    9. 2.3.3.1.1.1.1.1.1.9

                      for RL-John Gray wrote 'Men are from Mars,Women are from Venus' around 30 years ago.

                      @Weka-the t&c's you demand ,negate any realistic ,subjective acceptance of human nature that is not exclusive to gender.

                      Its a futile argument.

                    10. 2.3.3.1.1.1.1.1.1.10

                      Blazer, you made the claim that there is a social dynamic called womansplaining. I'm asking you for some evidence if this dynamic. That you can't produce any is in no way surprising to me, because it's not actually a thing. My boundaries around evidence are pretty standard and I can easily provide this evidence for the existence of mansplaining.

                    12. 2.3.3.1.1.1.1.1.1.12
                      1. if indeed mansplaining is provable ,so too must be womansplaining.
                      2. Human nature says it must be…so.

                      That's not logic. It's 1) an assertion not supported by evidence and 2) a belief.

                    13. 2.3.3.1.1.1.1.1.1.13

                      'a belief' …..I certainly agree with that!

                      As for evidence'-'physician ,heal thyself'.

                      'I didn't bother with the video, stopped watching at the point I realised his probable mansplaining had been edited out (i.e. early on) and so the rest couldn't be judged in context.'

  4. 4

    Recent protestors have been on about lifting all covid restrictions – going back to 'normal.' We are too conservative they say. We should follow the model of other places, we're dragging the chain. Maybe a report out today could focus us.

    Denmark has a population of 5.8 million. They've had 405,000 covid cases and 2,740 deaths.

    "Two months ago, Denmark was riding high. The European nation lifted all remaining domestic coronavirus restrictions as the government declared Covid-19 was no longer "an illness which is a critical threat to society.”

    With a successful vaccine rollout in their back pocket, Danes essentially returned to pre-pandemic daily life. They visited nightclubs and restaurants without showing a "Covid passport," used public transport without having to wear a mask and met in large numbers without restrictions.

    The optimism of mid-September has been short-lived.

    Denmark, like many countries across Europe, is now considering whether to reinstate restrictions as the continent battles a surge of Covid-19 cases that has pushed the region back into the epicenter of the pandemic.

    Denmark's rise in case comes after a successful vaccine rollout, with 88.3% of its adult population fully vaccinated, according to the European Center for Disease Control (ECDC).

    On Monday the Danish government proposed reintroducing a digital "corona pass" — used as proof of vaccination or a negative Covid-19 test — for entering bars and restaurants, as the country faces a third wave of infections, Reuters reported.

    The measure will be subject to parliamentary approval. But it comes against the urgent new backdrop of steadily rising cases — from a low of just over 200 daily infections in mid-September to around 2,300 in recent days.

    https://edition.cnn.com/2021/11/09/europe/denmark-restrictions-europe-covid-intl/index.html

      1. 4.1.1

        How about we just start to come to grips with the reality that the pfizer jab does not prevent catching the virus, transmitting the virus, and will probably not prevent long term Covid issues either.

        The best we can hope for is that we don't all need the hospital at the same time. And considering the sad state of our healthcare we all should pray that it wont come to the overload and the expected collapse of our health care system.

        The worst, is that we catch Covid despite the jabs, even more then once, and every time Covid will kill us a bit, and our healthcare system collapses.

        It is the plague, and we are in for a ride that will last at least two more years. We have not seen anything yet, i fear.

        1. 4.1.1.1

          I want to know why we have virtually put all our eggs in the pfizer basket. They, like all the Pharma companies, are untrustworthy. Let's see independent research results of the range of vaccines available( and that includes the Sputnik) and make 3 or 4 of them widely available.

          1. 4.1.1.1.1

            Well I'm surprised the Government is recommending Astra Zeneca as the alternative. A number of problems with Australia's version. They are now offering Pfizer.

          2. 4.1.1.1.2

            I think NZ Govt has orders for the Novavax vaccine when it is approved .

            Apparantly it has a different makeup to most existing vaccines.

        2. 4.1.1.2

          Thats why I keep banging on about investigating and getting and using effective treatments for covid before it develops into a serious infection, instead of waiting for hospitalisations.

          1. 4.1.1.2.1

            Thats why I keep banging on about investigating and getting and using effective treatments for covid…

            They have been since the start of the epidemic. There are at least 4 effective treatments currently known. The new antivirals from Merck, from Pfizer, and at least two other ones. A antibody infusion and at least one other antiviral remdesier (or something like that) which was useless on critical cases but ok on preventative after infection. All of these are effective post infection.

            I am not even going to comment on the travesties of self interest with invermectin, chloroquinine and bleach – all of which failed basic testing, even when you include the faked studies.

            But what you are after – a preventative treatment before infection that isn't a vaccine is actually the hardest to get. It is usually a matter of luck and decades before one of those is found. It is also the hardest to prove – just look at how long it took to prove the HIV cocktail. Frequently the side effects make the risk only worth while if you have a grave risk of contracting the disease.

            I suspect that there is a lot of work going on for that kind of treatment. I haven't read of any credible trials yet.

            Typically the best preventative for most disease is any vaccine because it diminishes the chances of beachhead or breakthrough infections. It does it by training your own immune system.

            1. 4.1.1.2.1.1

              yes of course it is the best

              Tell your 14 year old daughter to wait before having sex .Tell her it is the best , safest option

              She tells you you are full of shit and says she's not going to take your advice

              You keep on trying to persuade her

              She digs her heels in

              Eventually you stop your futile insistence and do something else .Like provide a contraceptive.

              You can bang on about vaccines til the cows come home and the horses have bolted the stable, there will be many , by the looks of it , who will still refuse.

              Remdesivir, fluvoxamine perhaps might make up useful treatments

            2. 4.1.1.2.1.2

              all of which failed basic testing, even when you include the faked studies.

              Having followed some of this a lot more closely that you have – there is a lot more to the story than your airy dismissal.

              Ivermectin now has a well described mechanism of action against viral replication, and what a lot of people missed was that it was already being studied for this before COVID came along. It's why it was trialed by the original Monash University team in the first place.

              If the clinical evidence has proven difficult to pin down – and there are many legit reasons why this has been so – the odious torrent of unjustified 'horse dewormer' bullshit from the 'only the vaccines can save us' crowd isn't.

              1. 4.1.1.2.1.2.1

                I suspect that most of the clinical trials have been with hospitalised cases(very easy and convenient sample to source), rather than the just tested positive cases.Its the early intervention ivermectin is being touted for.

      2. 4.1.2

        Not far away from the 90% level from a different perspective.Over the last three weeks the breakthrough cases for fully vaccinated has risen from 4.75 to 8.8% of the positive cases, an increase of around 85%.

    2. 4.2

      The reason/s for the surge in Denmark needs to be answered.

      Are winter viruses, the Delta plus variant, waning immunity, the immune system changing or a combination the cause?

      1. 4.2.1

        It appears they Denmark, did not have any rules once "Freedom" arrived. So no vaccination passes, no masks, and clubs pubs, and concerts for 50 000 took place.

          1. 4.2.1.1.1

            …and Denmark is having around 4-5 deaths per day, which is so far a lot fewer than in the peaks of their previous waves (which were 10-30+ per day for quite long periods). Presumably deaths are lower because of the vaccination rate, but they are also currently creeping up.

          1. 4.2.1.2.1

            herd immunity theory seems to be flawed

            Herd immunity was recognized as a naturally occurring phenomenon in the 1930s when it was observed that after a significant number of children had become immune to measles, the number of new infections temporarily decreased.

            Mass vaccination to induce herd immunity has since become common and proved successful in preventing the spread of many infectious diseases.

            Opposition to vaccination has posed a challenge to herd immunity, allowing preventable diseases to persist in or return to populations with inadequate vaccination rates. The exact herd immunity threshold (HIT) varies depending on the basic reproduction number of the disease.

            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herd_immunity

            Google tells us

            We identified five studies, which estimated the basic reproductive number for Delta. Table 1 shows that the basic reproductive number for Delta ranged from 3.2 to 8, with a mean of 5.08.

            And here

            R-naught estimates are complex and not as straightforward as many assume. The number is constantly changing and is not an exact science. The variables that scientists use to calculate the R-naught can range across populations. The R-naught value is a representation—not an exact number— of how infectious a disease may be. The more time that passes, and the more data that is collected, the more accurate the number will be.

            The R-naught for influenza is two, which means an average person sick with the flu will infect two others. Some people will infect more than two others, and some will infect fewer. However over a long enough period of time, we can estimate that the average is two.

            The R-naught for the original strain of COVID-19 was recently estimated to be three. That is greater than the R-naught for influenza and lower than the R-naught for HIV. Because the Delta variant is more contagious than the original strain of COVID-19, its R-naught is higher than original strains of the virus.

            The current R-naught for the Delta variant falls between five and nine, according to recent documents from the United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (U.S. CDC).

            So the flaw in herd immunity theory is psychological, inasmuch as it gets promoted in the media & word of mouth as something that works – whereas the extent to which it actually works is context-dependent.

            From an ecological perspective, it makes sense to see it as a dynamic interplay between the evolving Covid strains & the immune systems of people in particular social contexts…

            1. 4.2.1.2.1.1

              The level at which herd immunity for Delta is as yet unknown.

              For figure for polio it is 80% for measles the figure is 95%. I suspect that 95% range is where herd immunity for Delta will be reached.

              The 90% target is a political target not a scientific and medical target.

              With the trouble we are having in reaching the 90% level of vaccination.

              It will take a lot to reach 95%.

              https://www.healthline.com/health-news/how-delta-variant-has-affected-our-ability-to-reach-herd-immunity

              If a surge occurs at 90%, a return to level 4 lockdown as a circuit breaker will be needed.

              A good strategy might be to take the opportunity to use the L4 as a whip to get vaccination up, not lifting the L4 lockdown till the 95% vaccination level is reached.

  5. 5

    So I see the sale of state assets is continuing under this government.

    The Australian inurance giant NIB is acquiring 100% of the shares in Kiwi Insurance Limited, a wholly owned subsidiary of state-owned bank and financial services provider Kiwi Group Holdings Limited.

    I thought a change in government in 2017 was going to end this.

    Again we are left deepely disappointed with this big talk, but little do government.

    1. 5.1

      Got a link?

      Back in the 2014 election we had a policy of KiwiSure, which would have been great but died like the rest of the campaign.

  6. 6

    See that Natz want to make sure kids get covid.

    Education spokesman Paul Goldsmith released a new suite of education policies on Tuesday, arguing schools currently closed, should immediately reopen to make up for lost class time.

  7. 7

    .

    More evidence in favour of Ivermectin … but I'm seriously confused here because I've been led to believe by aggressively assertive Clintonista echo-chamber tribalists that this could only be deliberate misinformation spouted by Trump-supporting anti-vaxxer "deplorables" who never went to boarding-school … yet John Campbell is a doubly-vaxxed leading medic, looking forward to his upcoming booster shot … & almost certainly of a Lab / Lib Dem persuasion. So now I'm scrathcing my head. It’s almost as if – for all their outrageously pompous swaggering – the Clintonista Shill-boys have a tendency to talk complete & utter bollocks.

    https://youtu.be/ufy2AweXRkc?t=1

      2. 7.1.2

        It is useful because of its anti-inflammation effect, it can be given after monoclonal antibodies, and earlier than the steroid is used. Of course it can also be given to the vaccinated alongside anti-viral treatments.

      3. 7.1.3

        Yes, fluvoxamine is looking promising and very cheap!

        Ivermectin has a well-understood safety profile when a recommended course at the recommended dose is used. Unfortunately some people are taking random amounts in random ways, which is not necessarily safe at all.

    2. 7.2

      One of the interesting examples of 'the de-wormer that dare not speak it's name' is it's use prophylactically in Utter Pradesh.

      Their rates of infection have reversed dramatically

      1. 7.2.1

        The Astra Zeneca antibody pill does the same – it can prevent infection and also treat any infection. It's an option for the vaccine hesitant.

      2. 7.2.2

        Gsays
        I know , when I posted the link to that I was told, but ah yes . their deaths would be under reported .Nothing short of a hugely profit making pharmaceutical will do

        Unfortunately, because of the ridiculous linking of ivermectin with dumbasses, it probably won’t get any traction because people have been turned against it

        For some reason, fluvoxamine has escaped the pile on, and might be the better bet .But have we made any moves re this?

        1. 7.2.2.1

          I know , when I posted the link to that I was told, but ah yes . their deaths would be under reported .

          And I recall your excellent response – why would have the reporting rates have changed?

        2. 7.2.2.2

          One Indian medic said they were replacing the malaria drug with it (its use was widespread), because it had fewer health complications when taken, and it might stop the virus attaching to cells.

          https://www.indiatoday.in/coronavirus-outbreak/story/why-hcq-ivermectin-dropped-india-covid-treatment-protocol-1857306-2021-09-26

          https://healthfeedback.org/claimreview/no-evidence-suggests-a-causal-link-between-ivermectin-recommendation-and-the-decline-of-covid-19-cases-in-the-indian-state-of-uttar-pradesh/

        3. 7.2.2.3

          By we, I assume you mean the state.

          My reckons have it that they have gone too far down the path of Pfizer vaccine being the be all and end all. To muddy the communication waters with another prophylactic measure would be too confusing for us.

          Might place them in breach of contract too?

          Funny how when it suits a narrative (lots of covid cases) there is nothing wrong with the reporting, then suddenly, incompetence, under reporting, faulty data etc, come to the fore.

          There is a LOT of money to be made from Covid, Uttar Pradesh is not helping.

          Edit: Ahh snap RL.

    3. 7.3

      If it turns out that Ivermectin is useless the cost for not using it will be nil. If it turns out it was useful all along – how do we count the cost of that?

      Otherwise the dry Scottish /sarc is a thing of joy.

      1. 7.3.1

        That video that swordfish put up is very good It seems that ivermectin has the same modality as the new Pfizer drug

    4. 7.4

      Let's say that ivermectin actually is beneficial against covid:

      The people who jumped at it based on scant evidence still fucked up. They could have as easily jumped on the hydowhatsis, vitamin D, and other bandwagons with the same meagre amount of evidence.

      Meanwhile, they pushed up the price for people who actually needed all those things for uses that had a good evidence base at the time. So, yay. Nutters lucked out.

      And I might say that for real if the evidence base is more than youtube-dude shilling thunkses to the gullible.

      1. 7.4.1

        That youtubedude actually provides links to all the research papers he discusses so yous can go and checkitout for yourselfs. Do your own thunking.

        1. 7.4.1.1

          reread my comment.

          The comment is independent of whether someone finally has a solid evidence base for their youtube claims. And how long has this dude been plugging it? Isn't he the dude with a phd in some sort of online nurse training? what else has he been shilling for clicks?

        1. 7.4.2.1

          Because it's fun. And it separates the hypothetical consequences of the "let's say" from the rest of the comment, while bullet points or blockquotes seemed a bit weird in that context.

              1. 7.4.2.1.1.1.1

                Maybe blue would have worked?

                Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Ut in sollicitudin lacus. Cras augue massa, iaculis vitae condimentum nec, tristique at erat. Sed vel risus turpis. Sed est arcu, accumsan id neque quis, iaculis scelerisque neque. Donec in consectetur nisi. Duis bibendum euismod libero, at semper nulla lacinia ac. Maecenas aliquam lorem non est egestas, nec dictum odio posuere. In ultricies magna eu lobortis tempor. Praesent consequat egestas libero, et cursus lectus mollis in. Vivamus viverra tristique ante, sit amet porttitor eros euismod vel. Nulla aliquam nunc sed enim ultricies egestas. Integer tincidunt ligula orci, convallis rhoncus leo ornare vitae. Nunc at mollis risus. Integer fermentum tincidunt purus, in pulvinar enim dapibus a.

      3. 7.4.3

        What was the initial price and how much has it risen?

        I see a few countries have widely used it for covid with none of the ill effects warned of .Are you saying they drove the price up?Has its wide use in Africa driven the price up ?

        I doubt that people buying veterinary ivermectin have priced it off the market for horse owners

        India makes tonnes of it.

            1. 7.4.3.1.1.1

              Yes. Because I care about snake oil remedies and grasping at straws when they undermine actual knowledge about how to deal with this pandemic.

              It's quackery being shilled by people who are paid for the attention they get rather than the accuracy of their information.

              Pharmac has progressively announced funding for about half a dozen treatments based on their cost and effectiveness. If ivermectin is cheap and has a research base to support it, does pharmac fund it for covid? Quick, send them youtube videos!

        2. 7.4.3.2

          I hate not being able to properly reference this, but the cost of Ivermectin was literally pennies. Cheap as. Mostly used in extremely poor third world countries. Unfortunately Covid has forced the price up (that old supply and demand thing) and I believe some are paying mega bucks. Here in NZ, when it was still able to be prescribed by your GP, I know of one couple who paid about $250 each for enough tablets for their family for prevention and if necessary treatment. And no, was not me. (Although it would be a handy tool to have in the tool box.)

  8. 8

    How does it feel to lose your job to bullying, homophobia and just because 'women' who don't fully submit don't get to have nice things. And yes resigning – aka self selecting to get out of a shitty situation because your employer and your union can't be bothered upholding their own goddamn standards and 'values' is still being fired and i do hope that Kathleen Stock may consider action against her ex employer and the union involved.

    Kathleen Stock at the BBCs Women hour in her own words.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m001153q?at_custom1=%5Bpost+type%5D&at_custom3=%40BBCWomansHour&at_custom2=twitter&at_campaign=64&at_medium=custom7&at_custom4=E0AE9ED4-3C87-11EC-BE34-937496E8478F

  9. 9

    National is demanding that children in Auckland have a month of schooling before the end of the year. It seems that their COVID for Christmas campaign is going up to the top gear.

    The horror of rest of the world standard pandemic management is presumably supposed to drive people back to their cold embrace.

    Back in 2020 the Irish hosted their relatives living in the UK home for Christmas.

    Our risk is young people infected and their grandparents whose vaccine immunity meeting at Christmas (we need a lot of rapid testing before the get togethers).

    2. 9.2

      I really cannot see ANY benefit in sending children back to school this year in areas which are in lockdown.

      I would have supported children in their learning and assisted parents to cope with home schooling.

      If a parent was not coping they could be treated like an essential worker and send the child/ren to school part time.

      I have a lot more to say on this but I am too busy this afternoon.

      1. 9.2.1

        From emails already received from parents regarding attendances, will be 40-60% attendance. So there will be a reduced risk there.

        Feel sympathy towards those school leaders and the prep that has and will be required for next week. It will me messy and for simplistic reasons perhaps primary school would have been best to continue on line, with a visit to pick up work and clear out their desks on a staged basis during the last week of school. Hopefully parents that are keeping their children at home will not expect any on line teaching for the remaining 4 weeks.

        Did I hear correctly that the curriculum changes have been deferred a year ?

        1. 9.2.1.1

          Not just the prep but the logistics of getting them to and from school, explaining the rules and reassuring the children. Children are resilient but they also know when they are being hood winked.

          I collect 2 primary school age children a couple days a week. I have done so throughout the pandemic, I see what goes on.

    4. 9.4

      Haven't Labour just decided they will go back on the 17th of November? Aren't they still the government?
      I wasn’t expecting the young ones to go back until next year.

    1. 10.1

      Mbie haven't got any where enough investigative staff.Allowing these heinous employers to get away with slavery.Since the employment contracts act employer's have been getting away with wage theft.

Comments are closed.