The Oxford vaccine failed to impart immunity to rhesus macaques, which prob ably means the same will happen for people. The monkeys did acquire enough resistance to lessen the severity of disease, and they're hoping this will hold for humans too. Most importantly, the Oxford vaccine will do nothing t o stem the spread of contagion because people will still become infected an d infectious. Despite this, government are charging ahead full speed, makin g plans to invest a ton of money into mass producing this inferior product.
Boris's premiership seems to be increasingly characterised by throwing vast amounts of (borrowed) money at every problem that arises. That's not normal for a Conservative government. Not normal at all. And indeed it shouldn't be the norm for *any* government IMV.
Psst, that's because he's head of a despotic banana-republic government, not a Conservative government. Thatcher was head of a Conservative government.
probably means the same will happen for people. The monkeys did acquire eno ugh resistance to lessen the severity of disease, and they're hoping this w ill hold for humans too. Most importantly, the Oxford vaccine will do nothi ng to stem the spread of contagion because people will still become infecte d and infectious. Despite this, government are charging ahead full speed, m aking plans to invest a ton of money into mass producing this inferior prod uct.
It was an inferior vaccine development approach to begin with. There are ma ny others moving into human trials with demonstrated performance of total i mmunity. About all the Oxford vaccine is good for is to prevent you from ca tching a cold virus from a chimpanzee.-- maybe.
Thatcher wasn't in the least conservative. She was a radical right-winger w ho was happy to adopt every new way of ripping off the working classes she could find. She was pretty clever about it - if not clever enough to notice that what she was doing was wrecking the long-term economic prospects of t he UK.
Perhaps that's because voters are fed a diet of lies by the mainstream media which completely misrepresents the qualities (or lack thereof) of the prospective candidates (the range of which is already narrow anyway). None of us know, from first-hand experience, *anything* at all about these people we elect. We have no choice but to rely on press and TV reports to learn what we need to know about them and we are very badly served in this regard.
Sorry, non-sequitur. All the time the majority of voters are not aware they're being manipulated, through no fault of their own, we will continue to see a succession of sub-standard individuals being 'democratically' elected to govern us.
What Cursiotr Doom means by "a diet of lies" is - in fact - accurate factua l reporting that doesn't include the distortions and misrepresentations tha t Cursitor Doom wants and gets from the fringe media that caters to his pec uliar tastes.
The candidates do present idealised representations of themselves, but so d oes everybody else.
Speak for yourself. You don't know much about anything, and reject factual knowledge in favour of fantasies served up by the right-wing media who know what you want to be told, and deliver that instead of facts.
You are very badly served. You want a steady diet of comforting fantasies - or at least the kind of fantasy you like - and resent being palmed off wit h accurate and realistic reporting, which tells you what you ought to want to know, rather than feeding you your preferred delusions.
The rest of us do get more or less what we want - and pay for.
Cursitor Doom likes to think that it is the majority of voters who are being manipulated. It isn't true, Most people are much less gullible than the likes of Cursitor Doom who are manipulated by being fed the kind of right-wing drivel they lap up.
Part of the mental defect that lets them lap up this twaddle is the idea that they alone really know what's going on, and it's everybody else who is being mislead.
In advanced cases this presents as frankly paranoid delusions.
We are manipulated in elections in the same way we are manipulated by adver tising to influence the products we buy. We are being influenced, but that is only a slight effect, easily overcome by conscious thought. We have fr ee will, but seldom do people understand how base we all really are and how easily we can be manipulated.
A magician, Justin Willman has a show on Netflix called Magic for Humans. A couple of times he has demonstrated how easily and subtly people can be m anipulated. He simply talks to them and perhaps has some visual aids aroun d and asks them a question like the name of an actor. By planting names of movies titles, events and items associated with that actor, he can get peo ple to name the actor which he has "predicted" on a sealed card.
In the same way elections are influenced by the various forms of "planting" thoughts in our minds. Accusers of sexual improprieties decades ago do ha ve an impact on an election. Using names like "Sleepy" or "Carrot Top" doe s have an impact. Referring to candidates by various labels like "socialis t" or "fat cat" does have an impact. Each of these things plants a seed wh ich grows in each of us whether we want it to or not. It happens because w e are all human.
That's not to say any of these things will change any individual's mind abo ut who they will vote for, but often elections are decided by a small numbe r of votes. Those are the people the candidates are trying to influence, e ven by a tiny bit. Remember, the last election could have been changed by just a few thousand votes. That's why they spend so much money in the batt leground states and completely ignore the states with few electors or even the states with many electors but are not at all close. All or none electo rs from the states is not a good idea and leads to highly focused campaigni ng... the opposite of what we should be looking for.
None of this matters though. People aren't aware of how they are manipulat ed and so don't see the need for change of any sort.
Whatever.
--
Rick C.
- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
ertising to influence the products we buy. We are being influenced, but th at is only a slight effect, easily overcome by conscious thought. We have free will, but seldom do people understand how base we all really are and h ow easily we can be manipulated.
A couple of times he has demonstrated how easily and subtly people can be manipulated. He simply talks to them and perhaps has some visual aids aro und and asks them a question like the name of an actor. By planting names of movies titles, events and items associated with that actor, he can get p eople to name the actor which he has "predicted" on a sealed card.
g" thoughts in our minds. Accusers of sexual improprieties decades ago do have an impact on an election. Using names like "Sleepy" or "Carrot Top" d oes have an impact. Referring to candidates by various labels like "social ist" or "fat cat" does have an impact. Each of these things plants a seed which grows in each of us whether we want it to or not. It happens because we are all human.
bout who they will vote for, but often elections are decided by a small num ber of votes. Those are the people the candidates are trying to influence, even by a tiny bit. Remember, the last election could have been changed b y just a few thousand votes. That's why they spend so much money in the ba ttleground states and completely ignore the states with few electors or eve n the states with many electors but are not at all close. All or none elec tors from the states is not a good idea and leads to highly focused campaig ning... the opposite of what we should be looking for.
It matters quite a lot. People running for election spend all they can on a dvertising themselves.
In most advanced industrial countries this is severely limited, but in the US the judicial system has decided that the right to "free speech" allows b illionaires to spend as much as they like on "expensive speech" selling par ticular candidates and ideas to the electorate.
The Koch brothers were able to spend millions on funding the Tea Party Fact ion to take over the Republican Party, which meant that none of Republican Party nominees to become the Republican Party nominee for president in 2016 were attractive enough to compete with Donald Trump, creep though he is.
d for change of any sort.
Quite a few of them are well aware of how they are being manipulated, and d o see the need for a change in the US system, but not enough to make it hap pen - or at least, not so far.
ElectronDepot website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.