Coronavirus: when do we reach the bottom of the dip?

If you are not an epidemiologist, just follow the procedure from the competent authorities. The risk/reward ratio has been calculated for you by experts in their fields…

Asking for health advice in a forum infested with preppers, anti-vaxxers and anti-gouvernement ideologues is a ticket to an early grave.

The Bogdanoff brothers salute you! :headstone:


Not trying to downplay things but just putting into emphasis (emphasis mine in the quotes above and below) that you are using your own experience to judge the harshness of the situations @Gesk has pointed, and not some measure of normality that can objectively be attributed to the broader society based on your sole discourse.

So, on that basis:

My own personal feeling of the impact the measures have on my own personal life is that I haven’t had to show my Covid pass or ID on a daily basis and certainly not for doing almost everything. I’ll be damned if I have had to show it more than 20 times since the pandemy started.

You can call me as not having a normal life but I could say that travelling, renting cars and purchasing alcohol is also part of a normal life if we’re going that way.


Czech singer dies after catching Covid intentionally. No comment…

1 Like

Never gone to a casino before?
Never been at a night club?
They even could ask for ID at every restaruant/bar/Shop before (if you ask to consume alcohol or tabac)

t was just not enforced that much, but it could be.
What was your solution before?



I haven’t been asked for an ID when buying alcohol in 15 years. Hotel, car rental yes. But that’s not something you do every week.

Anyway, this isn’t my main issue. I want to figure out if I should get the booster or wait.

Do you even have one or just try to make an argument for arguments sake?


Not trying to convince you, but only explaining my experience.

I have the 2 shoots (5 months old). We assume that our kid got covid at the school (her teacher was positive).
Then I got it (2 days with headache and nothing else) then my wife got it (4 days with fever) and then my other kid was positive but without any symptoms.

My colleagues that had the vaccine (booster <4 month old) that were in contact with positives they have not got the COVID the other they did.

1 Like

You sure are happy if everyone would threat you with that attidude right?

1 Like

Pretty sure they pay more in premiums no? Also you touch a sensitive question in my opinion: choice. Regardless of the rest: you chose to drive, what you drive, how (fast) you drive, if you maintain you car or not…you don’t choose genetics. So dangerous précédant to have sick people pay based on risk of being sick. Sensitive Topic alert: should people be prioritised in emergency rooms based on their choices or chances of survival?

Agree about risk for job = higher pay, but unfortunately sometimes this also comes back to earlier choices…sometimes only and not always linked but if you drop out of school and can only find risky jobs - how much can you negociate?

I agree with you in principal but the difference is checking visually and recording. I personally am fine with it since I choose to go where its required (linked to your point I think) but privacy is a valid argument - I know i am just not important enough to worry too much :slight_smile: . I think browser cookies and apps track way more on me than anything but again, principal of privacy/choice of privacy is valid for me. But if thats the « rule » to participate, there must be a choice to participate or not.

How should this work, if they do? How do you define a smoker? Through self-declaration? How many cigarettes is enough to qualify? Does passive smoking count? I’m not aware of any health insurance that takes any of this into account.

Isn’t tobacco tax something equivalent (As far as I know at least 50% of the price is tax).


Agree, excise tax / sin tax is meant to cover the negative effects of certain activity. I wonder if the excise e.g. on cigarettes fully covers the potential future treatment costs. Let’s say you smoke 1 pack per day for 30 years, which is around 10’000 days. 1 Pack costs 10 CHF, of which 5 CHF is excise. So you would spend 100’000 CHF, of which 50’000 is excise. How much would a potential cancer treatment cost? Of course, not everybody gets cancer after 30 years of smoking. An interesting consideration nonetheless.

Do you smoke? Yes/No. If you then ask: what if they lie, how may cigarettes/day, social smoker or not, how long have you smoked, do cigars count etc, you over complicate the question. In the event you get sick with something associated to smoking, pretty sure they will check and you risk to literally have no coverage then. So, choose to smoke, pay the premium, choose to lie, pay the penalty. All the rest, I consider redundant: you either smoke or you don’t.

This is an excellent point…this is the dissuasion of the government and arguably/subjectively their attempt at prevention through tax…if you still want to smoke, we will try to limit with financial penalties. Its of course a source of revenue for the gov’t, same as the jobs the big tobacco companies represent in Switzerland, so I get why its hard to be systematic and 100% logic…

True in a lot of ways, but since we don’t have public health care in Switzerland, the tax will not pay the health care. In Canada this is indeed the case and similarly used in other areas like tax on gas going for highways.

The extra premium on health insurance is needed to covering the risk of a consequence of someone choosing to continue to smoke even with the tax…like you say, not everyone gets sick based on their lifestyle and quantity/style of smoking. And for the record, I definitely think that the health care is too expensive in Switzerland but I do not have any expertise to back up that opinion.

Next vote also has the “tobbacco to kids” question…should the government make it illegal to advertise tobbacco period…again, subjectively prevention by limiting exposure to glorification of smoking when health impact is proven…no conspiracy theories there I hope.

P.S. We may have hijacked a bit this thread from the financial aspects of the dip…sorry…I’ll stop replying now that I’ve attracted the troll :slight_smile:

Are you saying that it’s not fair to have health care available to everyone? Or not fair that you have to pay for it through taxes since you feel you are in “less risk” than the average person? Just curious, since the later is through a pretty selective filter…what about people who play extreme sports? Where does your “fair” meter go? Health care isn’t just for chronic issues, a lot of other lifestyle choices would play a role. Both systems have their +/- but to say its “fair” or not is pretty subjective.

Actually “you/we” don’t. But I understand why this can be frustrating. If its binary, its simply easier to enforce. Doesn’t mean its fair. Doesn’t mean its perfect. If someone has “me-sydrome” and constantly reverts to society’s impact on the individual, I keep smiling. If you don’t like being penalised, either don’t do whats being penalised or complain.