• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
  • Hey Guest. Check out the NeoGAF 2.2 Update Thread for details on our new Giphy integration and other new features.

Coronavirus Global Pandemic |OT| Wuhan!! Got You All In Check

GamingKaiju

Member
Oct 24, 2014
1,178
1,432
580
All thanks to a Prime Minister who was terrified of looking like the bad guy.

Boris a lib so no surprise he didn’t want to lockdown. He is definitely hoping that the vaccine will get us out of it hence the aggressive roll out and will probably be the quickest and largest roll out of a vaccine in British history, I just hope it works.
 

BadBurger

Gold Member
Nov 6, 2019
2,496
4,077
535
Boris a lib so no surprise he didn’t want to lockdown. He is definitely hoping that the vaccine will get us out of it hence the aggressive roll out and will probably be the quickest and largest roll out of a vaccine in British history, I just hope it works.

Yea, despite the slow initial response the UK government is really steaming full speed ahead on getting people vaccinated.

January 20th can't come soon enough for us here in the US .......
 
  • Like
Reactions: GamingKaiju

GamingKaiju

Member
Oct 24, 2014
1,178
1,432
580
Yea, despite the slow initial response the UK government is really steaming full speed ahead on getting people vaccinated.

January 20th can't come soon enough for us here in the US .......

The logistics are crazy just to vaccinate 70mil people but for 300mil it'll take a lot longer but you guys have got a massive military industry complex that could help with the roll out. Let's hope it works and we can return to normal practices and ditch the masks, social distancing and all the other stuff rona but with it.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: FunkMiller

Game Analyst

Member
Feb 10, 2009
5,746
1,609
1,295
soundcloud.com



Video: Surge in cases, new virus strain and UK’s vaccination strategy // Covid-19 Vlog #31 (1/17/21)
Fireside chat with Dr Steve Jenkins (Respiratory Consultant) about the surge Covid-19 in cases in the Essex area, the new virus strain and the UK government’s delayed second dose vaccination plan.


Edited
 
Last edited:

GreenAlien

Member
Jun 11, 2016
780
828
470
Well.. as a somewhat undecided "lockdown sceptic", it's obvious that there will be more deaths without the lockdown. That's not the point. The real question is if saving those lives justifies all the side-effects like suicides, domestic violence & child abuse, destruction of the economy, impoverishment... I'm just glad I don't have to make those decisions.


Unfortunately it's increasingly clear that there will be no natural immunity, apparently reinfection rates with that mutated covid virus are high, which pretty much means vaccination is the only viable path forward.
 
Last edited:
  • Thoughtful
Reactions: sinnergy

OSC

Member
Jun 16, 2018
3,616
3,449
515
Unfortunately it's increasingly clear that there will be no natural immunity, apparently reinfection rates with that mutated covid virus are high, which pretty much means vaccination is the only viable path forward.
If a person that got covid19 can be reinfected the vaccine will likely not help.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Mihos

BadBurger

Gold Member
Nov 6, 2019
2,496
4,077
535
If a person that got covid19 can be reinfected the vaccine will likely not help.

I'm sorry, not trying to be insulting, but you have a fundamental misunderstanding of how the immune system works and how (and why) vaccines come into play. Therefore you're unknowingly spreading public health misinformation.

So anyways, it's actually the opposite of what you suggested. We already understand the natural immune response to most coronaviruses (there are many that cause the common cold, we have a lot of experience with them). They have a well-documented ability for reinfection, and it looks like SARS-CoV-2 shares that same trait. A person catches it, they get sick, their immune system fights it off, those antibodies stick around for a few months, then go away. The person is now vulnerable again. The immune system has learned nothing. But it got lucky that time. It may not the next.

This ability to be reinfected within a few months actually means worse chances of reaching herd immunity through community infection. Nearly impossible with many coronaviruses, truthfully. It insures that vaccination is the only path forward.

NOW - contrast this to how vaccines work. The two COVID-19 vaccines equip the immune system to fight the virus down the road. They train our immune system to know this virus, how to effectively defeat it, perpetually. Immune memory cells, once trained by the vaccine(s) to mobilize as soon as the virus is detected, allow the body to target and clear out the virus in a matter of days rather than weeks. This is how vaccines (including those for mumps, the measles, and polio) mimic a natural immune response. Once the immune system is trained to fight the virus it will do so in the future.

The next problem is that viruses mutate. We've already seen this one do it with the so called "UK variant". Sometimes they mutate into a more dangerous strain, sometimes they actually mutate into a strain that is no longer harmful to humans and go away. In this case we're fortunate that the vaccines are effective against both strains. However, if it's like influenza and keeps mutating near annually into something that requires a tailored version of these current vaccines to fight it, we could be looking at yearly COVID shots alongside our flu shots.
 
Last edited:

EviLore

Expansive Ellipses
Staff Member
May 30, 2004
27,943
65,238
2,450
All those Norwegian deaths were nursing home patients over 80 who died to the mild fever/nausea reactions. A slight gust of wind could’ve caused their passing on a different day. Doesn’t lend any credibility to anti-vaxxer ideology and Eric is in the wrong for framing it as such.
 

Belgorim

Member
May 17, 2007
1,358
72
1,120
Sweden
I'm sorry, not trying to be insulting, but you have a fundamental misunderstanding of how the immune system works and how (and why) vaccines come into play. Therefore you're unknowingly spreading public health misinformation.

So anyways, it's actually the opposite of what you suggested. We already understand the natural immune response to most coronaviruses (there are many that cause the common cold, we have a lot of experience with them). They have a well-documented ability for reinfection, and it looks like SARS-CoV-2 shares that same trait. A person catches it, they get sick, their immune system fights it off, those antibodies stick around for a few months, then go away. The person is now vulnerable again. The immune system has learned nothing. But it got lucky that time. It may not the next.

This ability to be reinfected within a few months actually means worse chances of reaching herd immunity through community infection. Nearly impossible with many coronaviruses, truthfully. It insures that vaccination is the only path forward.

NOW - contrast this to how vaccines work. The two COVID-19 vaccines equip the immune system to fight the virus down the road. They train our immune system to know this virus, how to effectively defeat it, perpetually. Immune memory cells, once trained by the vaccine(s) to mobilize as soon as the virus is detected, allow the body to target and clear out the virus in a matter of days rather than weeks. This is how vaccines (including those for mumps, the measles, and polio) mimic a natural immune response. Once the immune system is trained to fight the virus it will do so in the future.

The next problem is that viruses mutate. We've already seen this one do it with the so called "UK variant". Sometimes they mutate into a more dangerous strain, sometimes they actually mutate into a strain that is no longer harmful to humans and go away. In this case we're fortunate that the vaccines are effective against both strains. However, if it's like influenza and keeps mutating near annually into something that requires a tailored version of these current vaccines to fight it, we could be looking at yearly COVID shots alongside our flu shots.
This seems like mostly assumptions as well?

There are many afflictions where a natural immune response is better than the vaccinated kind. And the immune system is trained when naturally infected as well, sometimes not trained enough, but just because antibodies gets low enough to not be measured does not mean the body has learned nothing, it works the same way after a natural infection as it does from a vaccine.

There will be people that do not get a lasting response from the vaccine either so those people will get infected after vaccination also. Those links you present mean nothing in the grand scheme of things.
 

OSC

Member
Jun 16, 2018
3,616
3,449
515
I'm sorry, not trying to be insulting, but you have a fundamental misunderstanding of how the immune system works and how (and why) vaccines come into play. Therefore you're unknowingly spreading public health misinformation.

So anyways, it's actually the opposite of what you suggested. We already understand the natural immune response to most coronaviruses (there are many that cause the common cold, we have a lot of experience with them). They have a well-documented ability for reinfection, and it looks like SARS-CoV-2 shares that same trait. A person catches it, they get sick, their immune system fights it off, those antibodies stick around for a few months, then go away. The person is now vulnerable again. The immune system has learned nothing. But it got lucky that time. It may not the next.

This ability to be reinfected within a few months actually means worse chances of reaching herd immunity through community infection. Nearly impossible with many coronaviruses, truthfully. It insures that vaccination is the only path forward.

NOW - contrast this to how vaccines work. The two COVID-19 vaccines equip the immune system to fight the virus down the road. They train our immune system to know this virus, how to effectively defeat it, perpetually. Immune memory cells, once trained by the vaccine(s) to mobilize as soon as the virus is detected, allow the body to target and clear out the virus in a matter of days rather than weeks. This is how vaccines (including those for mumps, the measles, and polio) mimic a natural immune response. Once the immune system is trained to fight the virus it will do so in the future.

The next problem is that viruses mutate. We've already seen this one do it with the so called "UK variant". Sometimes they mutate into a more dangerous strain, sometimes they actually mutate into a strain that is no longer harmful to humans and go away. In this case we're fortunate that the vaccines are effective against both strains. However, if it's like influenza and keeps mutating near annually into something that requires a tailored version of these current vaccines to fight it, we could be looking at yearly COVID shots alongside our flu shots.
????

The virus infects, the immune system creates antibodies targeting external proteins of the virus, and that's how you become immune.

So far as I know the pfizer vaccine is nothing special, it only has mrna to produce the external spike protein of the virus and no other protein. That's it that's all it does, nothing more nothing less, it has no special training no nothing. The virus spike protein causes an immune response as if it had been exposed to the actual virus, but it's safer since it is only the spike protein molecule and no self replicating virus that gets into your body.

That said given that this spike protein targets a natural receptor all over the body, it is likely many similar proteins exists within the body that also target the same receptor.
However, if it's like influenza and keeps mutating near annually into something that requires a tailored version of these current vaccines to fight it, we could be looking at yearly COVID shots alongside our flu shots.
You know that flu shots are hit and miss, they try to target the most common new variant that will spread but many times they fail and target the wrong strain.
 
Last edited:

Game Analyst

Member
Feb 10, 2009
5,746
1,609
1,295
soundcloud.com
All those Norwegian deaths were nursing home patients over 80 who died to the mild fever/nausea reactions. A slight gust of wind could’ve caused their passing on a different day. Doesn’t lend any credibility to anti-vaxxer ideology and Eric is in the wrong for framing it as such.

I agree. However, Eric is right that there might be cause for concern that this new vaccine is not 100% safe for all people:

Do not know about the other 10. There is also this case that killed a doctor:

Dr. Michael had “absolutely no medical issues” and no underlying conditions, Ms. Neckelmann, who declined to be interviewed by phone as she made funeral preparations, said in a text message to The New York Times. “Never had any reaction to any medication nor vaccines.” Her husband, she added, was a healthy, active person who did not smoke or take any medication.

“He was an avid deep sea fisherman and mostly a family man,” she said. “He never got Covid because he used an N95 mask from the beginning of the pandemic. He was adamant in protecting his family and patients.”

He also believed in the promise of the vaccine, she wrote on Facebook.

For two weeks, doctors tried to raise Dr. Michael’s platelet count, and “experts from all over the country were involved in his care,” she wrote on Facebook.

“He was conscious and energetic through the whole process, but two days before a last-resort surgery, he got a hemorrhagic stroke caused by the lack of platelets that took his life in a matter of minutes,” she wrote.

The planned surgery would have removed Dr. Michael’s spleen, an operation that can sometimes help treat the clotting disorder.

Ms. Neckelmann said she told her husband’s story to make people aware of the vaccine’s possible “side effects,” and “that it is not good for everyone, and in this case destroyed a beautiful life, a perfect family, and has affected so many people in the community.”

Dr. Jerry L. Spivak, an expert on blood disorders at Johns Hopkins University, who was not involved in Dr. Michael’s care, said that based on Ms. Neckelmann’s description, “I think it is a medical certainty that the vaccine was related.”

“This is going to be very rare,” said Dr. Spivak, an emeritus professor of medicine. But he added, “It happened and it could happen again.”
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Gp1 and EviLore

Jezbollah

Member
Jun 14, 2010
12,031
2,026
1,070
Is there any vaccine that is 100% safe for anyone, regardless of age, comorbidities, allergies etc?
 

FunkMiller

Member
Aug 14, 2014
5,463
19,420
840
Is there any vaccine that is 100% safe for anyone, regardless of age, comorbidities, allergies etc?

Nope.

And there are no medicines that are, either. Right down to the Advil (ibuprofen) I’m sure pretty much everyone on this forum has taken at some point.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Jezbollah

pel1300

Member
Jan 11, 2006
2,621
1,263
1,720
I'm pretty sure that is the same argument a lot of people use to downplay the severity of COVID-19.
It's literally what Sweden's health officials were saying about their nursing home deaths. And they were labeled callous for pointing it out.
 
Last edited:
  • LOL
  • Like
Reactions: Ornlu and sinnergy

FunkMiller

Member
Aug 14, 2014
5,463
19,420
840
I'm pretty sure that is the same argument a lot of people use to downplay the severity of COVID-19.

The point is that they are so old and frail, they would have conceivably died regardless of having a vaccine.

This is not the same as hundreds of thousands of largely healthy people (as healthy as being elderly allows) aged 70 and over dying of Covid.
 
Last edited:

M1chl

Currently Gif and Meme Champion
Dec 25, 2019
8,671
14,990
935
Prague, Czech Republic
Vaccine report so it's 2 weeks since the vaccine, my temperature is still elvated, feeling slightly ill, at around 37.2C. But all in all it's pretty good without much issues. It's expected for me to fight with whatever is in vaccine for 3 weeks. So I am taking it easy to let my body adapt to it. So yeah northing major, was expecting it worse and probably it means, that my immunity is working well, despite the imuno surpressants.
 

EviLore

Expansive Ellipses
Staff Member
May 30, 2004
27,943
65,238
2,450
I'm pretty sure that is the same argument a lot of people use to downplay the severity of COVID-19.
The difference here being that vaccinating them is a proactive measure taken to save their lives, with a small percentage of unfortunate outcomes, vs ignoring the problem entirely and downplaying their deaths as a function of indifference.
 
  • Like
Reactions: FunkMiller

DeepBreath87

Member
Jun 15, 2019
2,778
5,613
595
The difference here being that vaccinating them is a proactive measure taken to save their lives, with a small percentage of unfortunate outcomes, vs ignoring the problem entirely and downplaying their deaths as a function of indifference.
We can weigh the costs of both methods. I think it’s pretty clear we can accept some level of death from the vaccine as long as the numbers remain limited to a very small number of people. We are already accepting pretty large amounts of death and damage from the disease itself. We just need to be honest that the vaccine is likely to cause some bad reactions on some people. This a price we are willing to pay.
 

Zefah

Gold Member
Jan 7, 2007
43,861
23,926
1,805
The difference here being that vaccinating them is a proactive measure taken to save their lives, with a small percentage of unfortunate outcomes, vs ignoring the problem entirely and downplaying their deaths as a function of indifference.

Oh, for sure. I still think it's important to recognize that they died from complications that were caused by the vaccine. They intentionally got an injection and died from it. That's an important distinction in my opinion to having died from being infected by a virus. I think people should be able to understand the potential risks and make a decision for themselves which they prefer (not saying that these elderly folks were injected against their will or anything).
 
  • Like
Reactions: EviLore

EviLore

Expansive Ellipses
Staff Member
May 30, 2004
27,943
65,238
2,450
Oh, for sure. I still think it's important to recognize that they died from complications that were caused by the vaccine. They intentionally got an injection and died from it. That's an important distinction in my opinion to having died from being infected by a virus. I think people should be able to understand the potential risks and make a decision for themselves which they prefer (not saying that these elderly folks were injected against their will or anything).
Totally reasonable, yeah.
 

Gp1

Member
Sep 17, 2019
779
1,109
435
Bloomberg did a good summary of the entire situation

5. What is being done in response to the deaths?​

The Norwegian Institute of Public Health has updated its Covid-19 vaccination guide with more detailed advice on vaccinating the elderly who are frail. “We are now asking for doctors to continue with the vaccination, but to carry out extra evaluation of very sick people whose underlying condition might be aggravated by it,” Madsen said. The evaluation includes discussing the risks and benefits of vaccination with patients and their families to decide whether or not immunization is prudent. Separately, Nordic neighbor Finland has recommended against systematic vaccinations of terminally ill patients whose active treatment (in other words, those being palliated) has been stopped. The reason is that common side-effects such as temporary fever can weaken their condition.

 
Last edited:

Zefah

Gold Member
Jan 7, 2007
43,861
23,926
1,805
Lol trusting RT

Yes, it is fake news, in case you wonder. Is it really that hard to type the same words into your favourite search engine?

It's another conspiracy theory. Is nobody able anymore to look at sources, liable reports and use critical thinking? Track and dispute sources? :(

Have now lost count of the amount of times on this forum that I’ve done a ten second google search to debunk someone else’s posts.

People don‘t want truth. They want their opinions confirmed. They want to feel ‘right’. In a world of no certainties, people are gripping on to the ones they think are solid for dear life - no matter how wrong they are. Dangerous stuff.

About that...


Not that I take anything from RT at face value, but it appears there was quite a bit of truth to this one. RIP Cryptoadam.
 
Last edited:
  • Praise the Sun
Reactions: Ornlu

FunkMiller

Member
Aug 14, 2014
5,463
19,420
840
About that...


Not that I take anything from RT at face value, but it appears there was quite a bit of truth to this one. RIP Cryptoadam.

The NY Times article just quotes The Telegraph one.

Give you three guesses where The Telegraph like to pull stories from sometimes 😋

I’d give more credence to this if I could find an original story, unrelated to The Telegraph report - given how awful their journalistic standards are.
 

Zefah

Gold Member
Jan 7, 2007
43,861
23,926
1,805
The NY Times article just quotes The Telegraph one.

Give you three guesses where The Telegraph like to pull stories from sometimes 😋

I’d give more credence to this if I could find an original story, unrelated to The Telegraph report - given how awful their journalistic standards are.

Is Telegraph also banned media? Anyway, Welt is a source for part of the story.


I'm not fluent in German, but it's pretty easy to find out what's being said in that article.
 
Last edited:

FunkMiller

Member
Aug 14, 2014
5,463
19,420
840
Is Telegraph also banned media? Anyway, Welt is a source for part of the story.


I'm not fluent in German, but it's pretty easy to find out what's being said in that article.

Telegraph isn’t banned... just terrible. I don’t speak German and the story is paywalled, so can’t comment on it.
 

prag16

Member
Jul 12, 2012
12,016
4,113
860
We just need to be honest that the vaccine is likely to cause some bad reactions on some people. This a price we are willing to pay.
Well, who is "we"? If it's 100% free choice for each person with full informed consent, then cool. But if it is made mandatory or people are otherwise pressured, then we have a problem in my view. (And people should be allowed to opt out without a de facto ban from society accompanying that choice.)

Nope.

And there are no medicines that are, either. Right down to the Advil (ibuprofen) I’m sure pretty much everyone on this forum has taken at some point.
Every other medication people have a choice to take it or not. With vaccines, people often realistically don't. That is a problem. Vaccines also are a preemptive intervention. Every other medication is to fix an actual ongoing issue. Vaccines are to fix a potential issue that may never come to pass.
 
Last edited:

Game Analyst

Member
Feb 10, 2009
5,746
1,609
1,295
soundcloud.com
"Yesterday on TV Lord Sumption caused huge controversy by saying a stage 4 cancer patients' life was "less valuable" than others. He joined GMB today to expand on his comments and explain what he meant. Our COVID panel also discusses a GMB poll which reveals that half (53%) of UK adults say that the current Coronavirus measures are not strict enough, while just one in six (18%) say that they’re too strict. A quarter (26%) say they’re about right. Our COVID panel debate whether restrictions should be tightened to stop the spread of the virus." (1/18/21)

 
  • Thoughtful
Reactions: Tesseract

DeepBreath87

Member
Jun 15, 2019
2,778
5,613
595
Well, who is "we"? If it's 100% free choice for each person with full informed consent, then cool. But if it is made mandatory or people are otherwise pressured, then we have a problem in my view. (And people should be allowed to opt out without a de facto ban from society accompanying that choice.)


Every other medication people have a choice to take it or not. With vaccines, people often realistically don't. That is a problem. Vaccines also are a preemptive intervention. Every other medication is to fix an actual ongoing issue. Vaccines are to fix a potential issue that may never come to pass.
It’s a difficult thing to weigh. But if we still consider ourselves a free society, we should not believe in compelled vaccination. I think we are require to convince people with rather than force them. Show them this thing is safe and effective and many many people will line up for it.
 

Liljagare

Member
May 8, 2013
2,163
635
745
Sweden
About that...


Not that I take anything from RT at face value, but it appears there was quite a bit of truth to this one. RIP Cryptoadam.

No, that is not what is going on, at all.

Sorry.

I think pretty much everything that "The Telegraph" writes, can be discarded as wanted news, or, wishfull news. Or, directed news?

The directions are not what is stated in the article, at all.

On that note, I wish more people here knew more languages, because seriously, relying on news in English nowadays, is just nuts..
 
Last edited:
  • Thoughtful
Reactions: Tesseract

Zefah

Gold Member
Jan 7, 2007
43,861
23,926
1,805
No, that is not what is going on, at all.

Sorry.

I think pretty much everything that "The Telegraph" writes, can be discarded as wanted news, or, wishfull news. Or, directed news?

The directions are not what is stated in the article, at all.

On that note, I wish more people here knew more languages, because seriously, relying on news in English nowadays, is just nuts..

They're sourcing Welt. I linked the article, but it's behind a paywall.

Here's another German source summarizing the Welt story that is not paywalled:


What is it saying if not that quarantine breakers will be rounded up and forcefully confined to centralized detention centers?
 
  • Triggered
Reactions: Tesseract

DeepBreath87

Member
Jun 15, 2019
2,778
5,613
595
They're sourcing Welt. I linked the article, but it's behind a paywall.

Here's another German source summarizing the Welt story that is not paywalled:


What is it saying if not that quarantine breakers will be rounded up and forcefully confined to centralized detention centers?
It’s being reported everywhere now. It’s legit.
 

Liljagare

Member
May 8, 2013
2,163
635
745
Sweden
They're sourcing Welt. I linked the article, but it's behind a paywall.

Here's another German source summarizing the Welt story that is not paywalled:


What is it saying if not that quarantine breakers will be rounded up and forcefully confined to centralized detention centers?

That is not what it says. I think that maybe you should learn to read in another language.
 
Last edited:
  • Thoughtful
Reactions: Tesseract

Zefah

Gold Member
Jan 7, 2007
43,861
23,926
1,805
That is not what it says. I think that maybe you should learn to read in another language.

It does appear that is exactly what it says for certain states in Germany, namely Saxony and Baden-Württemberg, but please point out where the confusion is.

Please point where this translation is incorrect to the point that it's saying something completely different:

According to a report in "Welt am Sonntag," several German states want to take tougher action against persistent quarantine refusers. In addition to high fines, in extreme cases, non-compliance with the current regulations could result in forced admission to central collection centers, clinics or juvenile detention centers. This is already being done in individual cases on the basis of judicial orders.

According to the report, central facilities for repeat quarantine offenders will soon be available in Baden-Württemberg. "These segregation places will be permanently controlled by a guard service," the paper quoted a spokesman for the state social ministry as saying. Two clinics have been selected for this purpose, he said.

Schleswig-Holstein wants to accommodate quarantine breakers already in the coming weeks on the grounds of the Moltsfelde youth detention center, it said, citing the Landkreistag. Prior to this, there is usually a "danger talk" with the participation of the police as a warning.

According to "WamS," Brandenburg wants to set up a central office for quarantine offenders in an initial reception facility. So far, those affected have been housed in a hospital or other "suitable facility," the report said, citing the state's social ministry.

In Saxony, "a shelter" is currently being built for such purposes, according to the Social Ministry. So far, persistent quarantine breakers would be housed "in a locked hospital or other suitable accommodation."

According to "BamS," Bavaria's Ministry of Health stated that it is usually possible to persuade citizens to comply "by emphatic instruction" and by pointing out "compulsory isolation and fines." As a last resort, compulsory admissions to municipalities, for example to "closed hospitals or closed parts of hospitals" remain.

Accordingly, Berlin's health administration also does not rule out forced admissions, "for example, also in a hospital." Hamburg's social services department said that if it came to compulsory admissions, options were available, but did not comment on details. In Hesse, such a facility had been closed again due to low demand.

Translated with www.DeepL.com/Translator (free version)
 
Last edited:

Liljagare

Member
May 8, 2013
2,163
635
745
Sweden
It does appear that is exactly what it says for certain states in Germany, namely Saxony and Baden-Württemberg, but please point out where the confusion is.

Please point where this translation is incorrect to the point that it's saying something completely different:

Länder planen Zwangseinweisungen für Corona-Quarantänebrecher = We will give fines to those that break the regulations.
 
  • Thoughtful
Reactions: Tesseract

Zefah

Gold Member
Jan 7, 2007
43,861
23,926
1,805
Länder planen Zwangseinweisungen für Corona-Quarantänebrecher = We will give fines to those that break the regulations.

Are you claiming that "Zwangseinweisungen" simply means "fine" in this context? Really? Because the rest of that sentence is plenty intelligible for English speakers.
 
Last edited:

Liljagare

Member
May 8, 2013
2,163
635
745
Sweden
Are you claiming that "Zwangseinweisungen" simply means "fine" in this context? Really? Because the rest of that sentence is plenty intelligible for English speakers.

Sprichs du deutsch oder nicht? And, with that, I think I am done with this thread. If you want to continue talking, please PM.
 
Last edited: