How can it be called illegal or a border crossing, as China has always said Taiwan is part of China.
They were intercepted 45 miles southeast of Hong Kong. Leaving Hong Kong waters at any point involves entering Chinese waters. There is a maritime border encircling Hong Kong: going clockwise, it starts at the eastern extremity of the HK/China land border, and meets the land border again at the western extremity. Almost nowhere in Hong Kong is more than a few kilometres from the land or sea border with China.
2 ( +2 / -0 )
Now most people will not be travelling during the holidays, we will surely stamp out this virus.
Yes. A pity then that we didn't bother in any of the last 11 months, when infection numbers were lower. Is it just that it would have been too easy?
-1 ( +0 / -1 )
The CCP claims all of these waters and Taiwan are an integral part of China... so how, exactly can these people be arrested for crossing any border?
Very easily. There's a strictly enforced border between Hong Kong and China. Moving out of Hong Kong by sea involves crossing an undisputed maritime border into Chinese waters. Crossing the border in either direction without authorization is illegal (Hong Kong people have no doubts on this), and know that if caught, arrest is probable rather than possible. It's always been this way, both pre- and post-handover.
0 ( +1 / -1 )
What are you talking about wipeout?
It's in my earlier comment. Were you too busy downvoting to pay attention?
Have another look: "I've never seen that claim in her words". Fairly simple, I'm suggesting that you put some substance behind "She did not renounce any supposed American citizenship as she claimed she did". That's your basis for saying Osaka is being dishonest. If you can't demonstrate she claimed it, which you haven't, then you're not in a good position to "discuss" her dishonesty on that question.
"As she claimed she did". It's your statement. Aren't you willing to actually back it?
I already checked the Congressional Record of people renouncing citizenship all the way back to 2019. You can check it yourself.
Yes I've seen it, months ago, and commented on it, months ago. But it was a different context. They don't publish information on what people say or didn't say about their citizenship. You need a quote from Osaka saying she had renounced her American citizenship. Why on earth you think the Congressional Record would....do you really need to have this explained to you?
-2 ( +0 / -2 )
Nothing turned up yet?
Baffling, ain't it.
-1 ( +0 / -1 )
I hope you're not implying that herd immunity can only be achieved by vaccination.
I am saying directly that buying COVID herd immunity (an unknown percentage developed in an unknown timeframe) by allowing the disease to spread uncontrolled is absolutely the crappiest way to achieve it.
And I'm saying it's no surprise at all that you think that's the best method.
2 ( +4 / -2 )
Good one, did you see the one where they used an empty syringe:
That's not very bright. It seems you haven't progressed much since your "vaccines are injected directly into the blood" days.
0 ( +1 / -1 )
I suspect that the real infection numbers are about 100 times greater than the confirmed numbers (maybe higher). At this rate, we'll reach herd immunity before they start administering vaccines in Japan.
Based on an unfounded assumption that herd immunity just "kinda arrives".
1 ( +5 / -4 )
Let's discuss her dishonesty about renouncing American citizenship.
I suggest that first you provide some evidence of how she has been dishonest.
She did not renounce any supposed American citizenship as she claimed she did to represent Japan in the Olympics.
I've never seen that claim in her words. Do you have anything to hand?
-7 ( +0 / -7 )
You love to pretend you have all the answers, but when pressed for an answer....
It's clear that while saying you understand the science "at least as well as" virusrex, you don't.
A path to some kind of understanding for you (by removing an important obstacle that prevents it) would be not to misinterpret the conclusions of a paper - a massive blunder that simply underlines your faulty comprehension and faulty reasoning. There's a reason that conclusions are generally short and expressed in plain English. A competent layman should be able to work through them and understand what was said. An honest layman should be able to admit if they are unable to follow the reasoning contained in the conclusion The worst option of all is to cook up a conclusion that was not in the paper and present that as the conclusion reached in the paper. That's the line you're trying to work.
Those conclusions may be incorrect. While that's completely feasible, you'd need to present an argument showing why you believe so: for example, faulty data, faulty methodology, faulty reasoning. You haven't done any of that.
3 ( +5 / -2 )
Whenever I have sold household items to Hard Off, they offered about ten percent of the item's value...
Value is subjective. Why should they give you more? They provide the convenience of an instant sale, and they'll also take almost any old crap off your hands. If you have a different price in mind, you'll have to put in the work to find the person in Japan who will pay it. That would take you considerable time and trouble, with no guarantee of success.
0 ( +0 / -0 )
So you are calling me a liar?
"No one is being exposed to anything" is the kind of thing everybody says. It's not an actual judgement of risk, just an assumption and a demonstration of special pleading. It's the same assumption that has spread COVID widely in the United States, killed many, and harmed many more.
Would you say that you're being called a liar? I'm not seeing it.
0 ( +0 / -0 )
mRNA-based vaccines have great potential in the future, but I would not want to risk taking it now for a disease like covid19, which has a very low death rate if treated appropriately
We don't only vaccinate against death. That would be pretty stupid.
4 ( +6 / -2 )
You can probably still get the virus and pass it on even after being vaccinated so I don't see the point. Natural immunity from contracting it seems far better
Don't see the point? Seems? How persuasive.
And then straight to a link to an article by a libertarian wackjob. What a surprise.
6 ( +8 / -2 )
There are numerous reports that the vaccines only prevent the development of the virus to a serious disease in people who have taken it. Whilst this is a very good thing and the vulnerable need to be vaccinated, it does not stop people getting the disease asymptomatically or still spreading it to others.
It certainly does not say that in the report you linked. The report quotes a vaccine researcher, commenting on the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine: "That remains one of the biggest unknowns – whether these vaccines will interrupt transmission" and the journalist states "It remains an unknown for all the vaccines now under development, with a definitive answer many months away."
If you don't understand the difference between those words and your own interpretation of them, that "the vaccines only prevent the development of the virus to a serious disease in people who have taken it", how about rephrasing it in unmistakable terms: there is a vitally important difference between "we don't know whether it does", which is a common and correctly cautious standpoint in science, especially in the early days of something, and "it doesn't".
We saw the same at the beginning of the COVID outbreak in China, where human-to-human transmission was not reported as confirmed until around January 19.
What might seem blindingly obvious now was not obvious then, and in infectious disease outbreaks the difference is crucial. It is not good to wrongly state it one way or the other, simply basing a conclusion on "what it looks like".
4 ( +6 / -2 )
Metal storage sheds sold in snow zones are spec'd for 1m of snow on them, houses can take much more.
Not a reasonable assumption. There's a lot more area on a house roof - and people living under it - you can't just extrapolate from a shed.
It varies depending on the pitch of the roof, age of the roof and building, and the wetness, ice content, and age of the snow. Those are all factors that affect the loading or the ability of the roof/building to withstand the load.
Two feet of snow left on a roof for too long is considered a lot. Many areas of Honshu and Hokkaido routinely get far more than that.
1 ( +1 / -0 )
Just because my mom is a woman and is old does not mean she lacks the ability to ascertain the situation, assess the risk. and make a decision.
I think I just left it at "people" being poor at assessing actual risk. As you feign not to understand that, allow me to put it in more precise terms for you: by people, I mean any adult (seeing as children aren't considered legally competent or liable), and as a person from a country where we get pretty much our full set of rights on turning 18, I define adult as any person of 18 or older.
3 ( +4 / -1 )
My mom lives about 20 minutes from my "kiddies" by car. No one is being exposed to anything.
So everyone says.
3 ( +5 / -2 )
Of couse, I will remain in Japan. I guess my mom is contributing to the spread of the virus by her actions per your logic.
Definitely. "She just wanted to see the kiddies for Christmas" is an appeal to sentiment, not logic, and has nothing to do with infection control, so yeah, people travelling around contributes to the spread of the virus. So does the stubborn refusal to accept that it's not simply a matter of accepting risk to yourself (something that people are actually pretty poor at judging), but of putting others in danger by exposing them to the risk from yourself.
Saying "Yeah I'll take that risk", which just about anyone can do, is not necessarily the same as understanding the risk, and is a long way from accepting the actual consequences of COVID-19, which can be brutal. And even that doesn't amount to taking responsibility, as few people have to find out how many others they've infected, who they were, or what happened to them.
6 ( +6 / -0 )
Why vaccinate the elderly and dementia patients?
Humanity aside, keep them out of ICU maybe? Costly to treat, that kind of thing? You might need one of those units yourself but you won't get it if it's already full.
5 ( +5 / -0 )
"Obakata" --- Obokata (yes, it was unintentional)
3 ( +3 / -0 )
It is unfortunate but Montagnier is no longer a respected scientist
Very fortunate for science though.
Respect is conditional on the quality of a person's contribution to science. Montagnier's contributions are still respected where appropriate, but no respect is due to bad science, and he's far from the first scientist to be or become a crackpot. Montagnier's been out on the fringes for a good while now. He joins numerous other Nobelists afflicted with the same disease: an attraction to terrible science, quackery, mysticism, or conspiracy theories. Montagnier seems to have ticked all those boxes so far except for mysticism.
I still find (non-Nobelist) Haruko Obakata's case fascinating. Based on her pattern of behaviour, most of which came to light after her great discovery, she's an unoriginal and absolutely typical fraud artist: always buying time, always on the verge of a big revelation, always unfairly victimized. But she also took down Charles Vacanti, who had a long and distinguished career, and was both famous and respected. He staked his reputation, very unwisely it turns out, on Obokata's honesty, and doubled down when more doubts about her became public. None of the things that subsequently happened to Vacanti were officially acknowledged as directly connected to the Obokata case, but he announced a one-year "sabbatical" (which seamlessly became his retirement), his lab was closed by his university, and he seems to have had no presence online representing either his academic institution or himself ever since. That's a pretty huge fall for someone so prominent in his field.
But again, this is ultimately better for the credibility of science. His actions were far from blameless, and some were such a violation of academic rigour that they would get an undergraduate into trouble.
2 ( +5 / -3 )
So I guess 2021 will be the same like 2020....probably.
Sounds like a fair bet, especially for the first half of the year, so "will get better soon" depends strongly on what "soon" means to you.
1 ( +2 / -1 )
I thought they started vaccine already. So it should get better soon.
It should get better when a sufficient number of people have been vaccinated to seriously dent the infection rates. Something that obviously takes time.
Note that infection rates themselves are not static, but have been on a steep upward curve for the last few weeks, and that deaths are running at about 500 a day in Britain. So better means better than whatever the figures are at the point where mass vaccination is fully under way, which could be months away, and with the worst part of the annual cycle for infection still to come.
Also, as the vaccine is new, predictions are possible but results aren't guaranteed. Among other things, they're dependent on vaccine uptake, so it will take a while to see if vaccination alone delivers herd immunity and whether it brings a return to normal life quickly, slowly, or not at all.
We've been warned that vaccines will not bring a sudden end to mask wearing and other measures.
5 ( +6 / -1 )
just to see if they really dare to expose themselves to that allergic cocktail and its other severe side effects
4 ( +4 / -0 )
People might feel a little more assured if the CEO and other top executives of the pharmaceutical companies get the vaccines (not just saline), as well as the researchers that designed them, and those who compile all the clinical trial data.
Yeah, that's not exactly going to be the fearsome prospect for them that you imagine.
6 ( +9 / -3 )
Where is the snow!! I want some snow. I live in view of Mount Fuji, and there is not much snow up there at the moment.
In most of Japan, even the areas considered "snow country" and some of the northern prefectures, winter doesn't really get going until late December, and in the case of snowfall, sometimes not until January. Winter temperatures and snowfalls are about a month behind what you tend to see in much of Europe. Go to the right parts of Japan at the right time of year, though, and the snowfall is very heavy indeed.
With its altitude and location, Fuji makes its own rules.
0 ( +0 / -0 )
Is this a mutation? (most likely) What is the deal? It does not make sense as the lifestyle in the U.S. is not as "compacted" as it is here in Asia. People are spread out there more.
It makes perfect sense. Hundreds of thousands of visitors from across the US swamp a small town in South Dakota. Their contempt for mask-wearing is a badge of honour; social distancing is non-existent. Some bring COVID with them, others catch COVID while there, everyone disperses across the US, and those who have it pass it along to more people. A month or two later, the Dakotas have a serious COVID problem - a really serious one - despite its less "compacted lifestyle" than Asia.
Millions of Americans fly or drive to spend Thanksgiving with their families in the midst of a rapid, in fact disastrous, increase in COVID infections and fatalities. Several weeks later, both infections and fatalities are out of control, as Americans discuss their plans for Christmas, and some of those who got the infection at Thanksgiving are set to die over the Christmas period.
Is this so baffling for you that you have to dream up a special America-only mutation to explain it? COVID passes easily from people who are infected but non-symptomatic. That applies to Americans and to Asians. It passes in ways that to the average person are non-obvious compared to, say, being coughed or sneezed on. So when people screw around by ignoring the advice, guidelines, and rules - and loudly claim their rights - it doesn't take long for the consequences to make themselves apparent.
And the more people become infected, the harder it gets to put the lid back on. It's going to be a long winter, especially for the hard of understanding.
5 ( +6 / -1 )
Japan NEVER tires of playing the victim status over them, never mind they started WWII
Er, maybe for America they did. Perhaps it hadn't come to people's notice that a huge international conflict was already well under way? Ask a Canadian, maybe.
WWII started a couple of years earlier, in Europe. The usual starting date is reasonably given as 1 September 1939 when Germany invaded Poland, with Britain and France declaring war a couple of days later. That brought in numerous countries on each side, and can be considered the key event, an unwelcome return to war with the nation that precipitated the Great War 25 years earlier.
Any alternative dates, including those marking Japanese military expansion in China prior to 1939 (brutal as it was), are pretty spurious. Events in Europe are what dragged the world back into war, and it was Germany that did it. By the time of Pearl Harbor, Germany had forcibly invaded Poland, Holland, Belgium, France, Norway, Denmark, Greece, and the Soviet Union; and the Battle of Britain was over, holding off the imminent threat of German invasion. Many of the remaining countries in Europe had either been annexed or occupied by Germany directly, were puppet states, or, like Italy, close allies of Germany.
3 ( +4 / -1 )
Meanwhike the UK has racked up 30 freectrade deals, 30 deals that would have been impossible without Brexit.
With the new deals, they're trading with Japan and Singapore under the same terms that the EU does...and that Britain also did was when it was a member of the EU.
So all they've done is placed themselves outside the old EU deal, and then persuaded those countries to agree a treaty that moves Britain back onto the same terms. Without that, Britain is at a severe disadvantage in every major country with which the EU already has a deal. It's getting those countries back one by one.
And where the EU has deals pending, it has to wait until those are finalized or in force before it can make its own deal. The EU's preference for MFN clauses will ensure that Britain doesn't achieve better terms than the EU did.
Britain will be constantly waddling along behind the EU, relying on it to negotiate the terms of trade deals, then getting the same for itself months or years later. Few countries are going to put Britain first if they have a chance of hashing something out with the EU. It's a bigger market.
0 ( +1 / -1 )
Posted in: Korea Town