binman

And the sight of 30, 000 adults going bananas!

My point is that whilst on an individual case by case level this might true, on a community wide level it isn't. I might be wrong (paging webber). but this excerpt from the info referenced seems pretty conclusive that the impact of influenza is not as bad as covid: 'when compared with seasonal flu, covid was associated with an increased risk of extrapulmonary organ dysfunction, death, and increased health resource use, such as a fivefold higher risk of admission to intensive care and longer stays in hospital.' In short, a flu outbreak won't overwhelm our health systems. Covid will - as Europe is tragically about to discover. Agree though we need more people have flu vaccines to avoid dealing with both diseases simultaneously.

The impact of Influenza is not as bad as or worse than covid 19, or at least that is my understanding. From the BMJ (a medical journal) on this very point: Which is more dangerous, flu or covid? 'Research published in The BMJ last December, which was based on an analysis of US Department of Veterans Affairs data on more than 3600 patients admitted to hospital with covid-19, found that, when compared with seasonal flu, covid was associated with an increased risk of extrapulmonary organ dysfunction, death, and increased health resource use, such as a fivefold higher risk of admission to intensive care and longer stays in hospital. Deaths from covid-19 were most pronounced in people over 75 with chronic kidney disease or dementia and in black people with obesity, diabetes, or chronic kidney disease. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimated that in the US there were 1.8 deaths from flu per 100 000 population between 1999 and 2019.8 The estimated death rate from covid was 217.54 per 100 000 in the US and 206.73 per 100 000 in the UK. The global figure for the covid-19 death rate is estimated at 279 per 100 000 population. In the UK the Health Foundation has articulated the difference in impact between flu and covid in terms of life years. “In a bad flu year on average around 30 000 people in the UK die from flu and pneumonia, with a loss of around 250 000 life years. This is a sixth of the life years lost to covid-19,” it noted.

Except in its impact.

Its got a fair bit whiter!

That's where i always sit when i go the G (but to be clear i have no idea, was joking. I suspect they will only have the Olympic stand and perhaps part of the southern stand open - and of course the members area)

Not where I'll be sitting - top of the Ponsford

I think it's like going to the cricket at the G in the 70s - you can bring your own esky

What a coincidence. That is exactly the rule I apply to anyone wanting to handle me!

Where we will unfurl our flag!

Melbourne 28-Day Rainfall Forecast Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat 18 Med 19 Low 20 Med 21 Low 22 Low 23 Low 24 Low 25 Low 26 Med 27 Low 28 Low 29 Low 30 Dec 1 Low 2 Low 3 4 Low 5 Low chance of no tears 6 Low 7 Low 8 Low 9 Low 10 Low 11 Low 12 Low 13 Med 14 Med 15 Med 16 Med

No.

Sorry Andy, i have to protest - no footy in this thread. Wait a minute......

Yes, a good distinction. Agree.

I have heard the same. Top bloke - but a woeful special comments person. I watched the first half of the first GWS game last night, and geez Dermie is out there. Can't time his comments to sync with the play by play call, clearly hasn't done his research ('Leigh, do the demon's always hold their defender back') and says some off the wall things. An example of the latter was saying he didn't like Max dropping back into defence (which in of itself is ok - although the strategy is actually a key element of our system) and preferred him to always follow the ball. Ok. But then later when maxy went forward and took a strong mark Dermie says max should go forward more often.

Sure. But whilst all protests might get infiltrated by extreme views, this current scenario feels different. Less infiltrated, more hijacked.

Yes, you are right. But in the normal run of things most protests have not been infiltrated, or even organized, by so many people with very extreme views and support for the use of violence.

Have you ever been in the same room as Elise?

I agree with this daisy and i 100% support the right to protest. Opposing the pandemic bill, or even the process by which it has been developed and communicated (which is an issue i have with it) is absolutely appropriate. But i would suggest, the issue that the lawful and peaceful demonstrators need to consider is whether by attending a protest with extremist minorities they are in effect being coopted by those extremists. Because that is exactly the strategy of the extremists - create a false sense of support for their extreme views. It is worth noting in this context who actually organized the current protests. It would appear the organizers are disparate extreme groups communicating via encrypted messaging services, as was the case with construction worker 'protests' ('wear hi vis') Perhaps the lawful and peaceful demonstrators opposing the pandemic bill could organise their own protest at a completely different site (eg the Exhibition Building - where in 1901 the first Federal Parliament was opened, and continued to sit until Canberra became the capital) so it is clear they do not support the views and actions of the extremist minorities.

https://www.theage.com.au/national/victoria/melbourne-s-conspiracy-movement-is-traumatised-incoherent-and-potentially-dangerous-20211117-p599qk.html

This is what scares me, and to paraphrase Shane Crawford, this is what I was talking about - Far-right protester charged by counter-terror police amid talk of killing Premier Counter-terrorism officials have charged a Victorian man who encouraged anti-lockdown protesters to take firearms to State Parliament and execute Premier Daniel Andrews.

I respect your opinion LH, and will take it on board. Hyperbole? Too emotive? Perhaps, but I guess they are subjective concepts. I have a genuine concern for what is happening. And i admit to being emotional about. Scared mainly. We have crossed a threshold with the threats politicians (from a range of parties) have received in the last few months . This was not something that happened two years ago. But i will disagree with a couple of your points. I did not name call. In fact i consciously avoided name calling. Unhinged is perhaps the strongest word. But it is hard to argue that some in the crowd are unhinged. Not all, some. And i also disagree that i leveled any accusations of perfect strangers in a protest. I'm not painting those who are protesting the mandate laws with the same brush as those i refer to as bad actors. I merely pointed out such people are choosing to be tainted with the brush of people who bring galllows to a 'protest" and believe our politicians are part of a satanic cult of pedophiles. As you say the rent a crowd aspect is in full force. Yet that same group seem to be given a platform and with it an outsize influence. Which i of course they love and the amplification of their views distorts how much support there is for them (which is radicalization 101) I didn't mean to imply those protesting atm desecrated the shrine. Other 'protester's' did that. But i'll guarantee there is a cross over. The bad actors i'm referring to. I agree that many people are angry. My concern is that a key plank for radicalization to work is anger. Another is the normalization of violence. Both exist in this circumstance and current point in time. Is radicalization hyperbole? I don't think so. Intelligence agencies in both America and Australia have identified home grown terrorism as the greatest threat to our security. We are seeing the seeds of that on our streets and online. The odds of an event like Parliament house being stormed or a politician being killed here have never been higher. Still unlikely to happen of course, but it was unthinkable not long ago. After 9/11, Australia, like many other countries, increased surveillance and imposed any number of restrictions on our 'freedoms'. These restrictions were justified on the grounds that they were necessary tools in the war on terror. Most such restrictions remain in place. If there is home grown terrorist event here, as night follows day, the government will surely move to impose similar actions that will impact on the freedoms we currently enjoy.

A Chinese athlete accuses high ranking politician of sexual assault. And promptly 'disappears' Which is how dictatorships roll.

Indeed. An interesting element of the most recent 'protests' is that the media have, in the main, reported the protests are about the bill currently before Parliament. But are they? Sure, some people are protesting about that issue, which is totally fair enough. The right to to peaceful protest is a tenet of democracy. But you only need to read some of the placards to understand that there any number of other issues people are animated about. At the risk of generalising, i would suggest that many of the 'protesters' have not even read the proposed bill or have little sense of what is in it. So people protesting the bill are marching side by side with people with a raft of other agendas, covering concerns about mandates, through to bizarre conspiracy theories and threats of violence. And in doing so are tacitly supporting a range of unhinged, dangerous bad actors. These bad actors are the only ones that will remain soon - perhaps that has happened already. Attention seekers that are getting attention. And the attention gives them oxygen. And it is incredible to think, but it also gives them an international audience of similarly unhinged bad actors (or even more dangerously, not yet unhinged, but ripe for conversion), contributing content and angst to an increasingly dangerous echo chamber. As you suggest LDVC, these bad actors are also ripe for being manipulated by other, even more dangerous bad actors. The tragic irony is that about the only unifying idea these bad actors are rallying behind is a perversion of the concept of freedom. But no matter where we stand on the issue of mandates, vaccination or government overreach, we should all be very concerned about the very real threat to our democracy AND our freedoms these bad actors and the echo chamber they live in represent. And i have no doubt there is an orgasnising force behind that threat. One only needs to see the insidious infiltration of Qanon 'ideas' in Australia to understand that. As anyone who has been to Parliament house knows, if a mob decided to storm it, they would have no problem doing so. Two years ago it was unthinkable that such an event could occur. With people towing gallows and parking in front of parliament house (and being cheered on members of the tiny mob and bad actors around the world via live streaming and encrypted message boards), reporters being chased, mobs marauding though the streets and closing roads (not to mention desecrating the Shrine of Remembrance) and politicians being threatened with violence publicly (and of course online) is it unthinkable now? And what if it were to happen.? Or god forbid a politician came to harm. What would our society look like then? What freedoms would we all lose? Is that what we want? The answer i obviously no - or at the least it is from 99% of us. So the second question is do we really want to be manipulated by the 1% - and more to the point by the bad actors manipulating that 1%. Because that is exactly what is happening. Once example of how we are being manipulated is the coverage of these protests by the media and across social media. Sound bites, noise and fury makes for for great click bait and increased revenue. But there are nearly 7 million people who live in Victoria and even the most generous estimate have the 'protest' numbers at no more than 10, 000 people early this week (and maybe 1000 yesterday?). That's nothing. If anything, given how motivated the 'protesters' are, it is evidence of how little support there is for their issues. Compare these 'protests' to other ones that have got more widespread support. How many people came to the BLM march last year? Or the recent marches about the environment? Or say the Reconciliation marches back in 2000, when a quarter of a million people marched across the Sydney harbor bridge and nearly as many rallied in Melbourne. These are issues that there is widespread support for, hence the turn out.

Agree. I love the fact that i am lucky to live in a country where the overwhelming majority of people are prepared to honor their social contract obligations. Sure there are a very, very tiny minority of people who want to have their cake and eat it too - that's to say enjoy all the benefits of living here (eg universal health care, representative government, opportunity to vote, relatively effective public transport systems, functioning infrastructure, ok education system, etc etc) but not prepared to honour their social contract. But that's part of the price we pay - in any community there will always be such people. I'd add that a related modern phenomena is conflating the views of a very noisy minority with majority public sentiment. The white noise of social media, the targeted trolling, the publicity stunts etc etc serve a specific purpose - to create this very illusion. And i have to say those strategies are very effective at doing just that. But those of us who choose to honor the social contract - the overwhelming majority - should refuse to buy into the illusion. Don't engage. And certainly don't allow ourselves to be fooled by the illusion. The tiny mob don't speak for us. The tiny mob don't even speak for each other - there is no unifying narrative. Just a grab bag of disparate grievances. And for that reason the tiny mob will ultimately dwindle to a sad gathering in a phone box (a non 5g one). Bottom line is we are approaching 90% double vax rate for people over 12 in Victoria, and we will get to that figure nationally early next year. Let's say half of the remaining 10% have not been vaxed - but not because they are anti vax as such (eg apathy, health reasons, religious views, hesitant, cultural, cognitive issues etc etc). That leaves 5% who might genuinely be considered anti vax. So, 5 in every hundred. The very definition of a minority view. The mandate question is harder to quantify becuase we don't have the concreteness of the vax rate as reliable measure of sentiment. We do know from countries like Germany that without mandates double vax rates will plateau in the mid 60s (sadly for a country i love and have people there i love, they are in for a hellacious winter). And becuase of this most people in Australia understand the logic of mandates. And the majority of Australian support mandates. This is evidenced by a number of polls that show the MAJORITY of Australian support mandates. Australia has one of the most effective democratic system in the world. Not perfect of course, but by any measure we have opportunities to influence public policy decisions that people in most other democracies could only dream of - and people in totalitarian countries can't even dream of. The noisy minority have the freedom to take their fight to the ballot box and make their case. And the overwhelming majority can also make their call at the ballot box. And we will.