-
@Winger said in Coronavirus - UK:
@Victor-Meldrew said in Coronavirus - UK:
The vaccines showed real-life effectiveness pretty much in line with the clinical trials. A sample group/study of 15 million people over 2 years showed 77.6% and 93.2% effectiveness against hospitalisation and death respectively. link .
In some ways I wish I still had as much faith in these Govt reports produced by their hired (or employed) experts. Experts who are almost obligated to produce the 'right' figures especially if they ever want future work. Or promotion or a future high paying job with a big pharma company.
But these vaccines were initially sold as if you take one of these (so-called) vaccine then you will be protected. Then when this proved to be bullshit it was changed to 'but you would have been worse without the vaccine'.
And If it was this effective why effectively force people who don't want to be injected with a 'no liability' new experimental drug to have it.
"Serious side effects (mainly inflammation of the heart muscles) are/were very, very rare. My neighbour - a Cardiology Professor - tells me the figures are tiny at about 15 in a million doses with only 1 in a million needing medical intervention."
Yet I know three people (and I rarely discuss this with friends or especially workmates) who were ill enough to require hospital attention after having the 2nd vaccine or booster. And are still suffering from the side effects.
And I've heard second hand that doctors just refuse to accept its a vaccine injury. Maybe this factor plus some creative research and analysis results in these low figures.
it really is very hard to argue with someone who refutes all peer reviewed science because it 'comes from the man' and then bases an argument on a three people he knows as though its somehow more reliable. I'm just glad that the people running this country take no advice or notice of people such as yourself.
-
@Dodge said in Coronavirus - UK:
@Winger said in Coronavirus - UK:
@Victor-Meldrew said in Coronavirus - UK:
The vaccines showed real-life effectiveness pretty much in line with the clinical trials. A sample group/study of 15 million people over 2 years showed 77.6% and 93.2% effectiveness against hospitalisation and death respectively. link .
In some ways I wish I still had as much faith in these Govt reports produced by their hired (or employed) experts. Experts who are almost obligated to produce the 'right' figures especially if they ever want future work. Or promotion or a future high paying job with a big pharma company.
But these vaccines were initially sold as if you take one of these (so-called) vaccine then you will be protected. Then when this proved to be bullshit it was changed to 'but you would have been worse without the vaccine'.
And If it was this effective why effectively force people who don't want to be injected with a 'no liability' new experimental drug to have it.
"Serious side effects (mainly inflammation of the heart muscles) are/were very, very rare. My neighbour - a Cardiology Professor - tells me the figures are tiny at about 15 in a million doses with only 1 in a million needing medical intervention."
Yet I know three people (and I rarely discuss this with friends or especially workmates) who were ill enough to require hospital attention after having the 2nd vaccine or booster. And are still suffering from the side effects.
And I've heard second hand that doctors just refuse to accept its a vaccine injury. Maybe this factor plus some creative research and analysis results in these low figures.
it really is very hard to argue with someone who refutes all peer reviewed science because it 'comes from the man' and then bases an argument on a three people he knows as though its somehow more reliable. I'm just glad that the people running this country take no advice or notice of people such as yourself.
Is that the same people who said it came from a bat in a wet market?
-
@MiketheSnow said in Coronavirus - UK:
@Dodge said in Coronavirus - UK:
@Winger said in Coronavirus - UK:
@Victor-Meldrew said in Coronavirus - UK:
The vaccines showed real-life effectiveness pretty much in line with the clinical trials. A sample group/study of 15 million people over 2 years showed 77.6% and 93.2% effectiveness against hospitalisation and death respectively. link .
In some ways I wish I still had as much faith in these Govt reports produced by their hired (or employed) experts. Experts who are almost obligated to produce the 'right' figures especially if they ever want future work. Or promotion or a future high paying job with a big pharma company.
But these vaccines were initially sold as if you take one of these (so-called) vaccine then you will be protected. Then when this proved to be bullshit it was changed to 'but you would have been worse without the vaccine'.
And If it was this effective why effectively force people who don't want to be injected with a 'no liability' new experimental drug to have it.
"Serious side effects (mainly inflammation of the heart muscles) are/were very, very rare. My neighbour - a Cardiology Professor - tells me the figures are tiny at about 15 in a million doses with only 1 in a million needing medical intervention."
Yet I know three people (and I rarely discuss this with friends or especially workmates) who were ill enough to require hospital attention after having the 2nd vaccine or booster. And are still suffering from the side effects.
And I've heard second hand that doctors just refuse to accept its a vaccine injury. Maybe this factor plus some creative research and analysis results in these low figures.
it really is very hard to argue with someone who refutes all peer reviewed science because it 'comes from the man' and then bases an argument on a three people he knows as though its somehow more reliable. I'm just glad that the people running this country take no advice or notice of people such as yourself.
Is that the same people who said it came from a bat in a wet market?
Yes, they could have said "OK, lets not take any action and ignore advice from people until they are absolutely, 100% clear where it came from." Not too sure that would have been a sensible approach, though.
-
@Victor-Meldrew said in Coronavirus - UK:
@MiketheSnow said in Coronavirus - UK:
@Dodge said in Coronavirus - UK:
@Winger said in Coronavirus - UK:
@Victor-Meldrew said in Coronavirus - UK:
The vaccines showed real-life effectiveness pretty much in line with the clinical trials. A sample group/study of 15 million people over 2 years showed 77.6% and 93.2% effectiveness against hospitalisation and death respectively. link .
In some ways I wish I still had as much faith in these Govt reports produced by their hired (or employed) experts. Experts who are almost obligated to produce the 'right' figures especially if they ever want future work. Or promotion or a future high paying job with a big pharma company.
But these vaccines were initially sold as if you take one of these (so-called) vaccine then you will be protected. Then when this proved to be bullshit it was changed to 'but you would have been worse without the vaccine'.
And If it was this effective why effectively force people who don't want to be injected with a 'no liability' new experimental drug to have it.
"Serious side effects (mainly inflammation of the heart muscles) are/were very, very rare. My neighbour - a Cardiology Professor - tells me the figures are tiny at about 15 in a million doses with only 1 in a million needing medical intervention."
Yet I know three people (and I rarely discuss this with friends or especially workmates) who were ill enough to require hospital attention after having the 2nd vaccine or booster. And are still suffering from the side effects.
And I've heard second hand that doctors just refuse to accept its a vaccine injury. Maybe this factor plus some creative research and analysis results in these low figures.
it really is very hard to argue with someone who refutes all peer reviewed science because it 'comes from the man' and then bases an argument on a three people he knows as though its somehow more reliable. I'm just glad that the people running this country take no advice or notice of people such as yourself.
Is that the same people who said it came from a bat in a wet market?
Yes, they could have said "OK, lets not take any action and ignore advice from people until they are absolutely, 100% clear where it came from." Not too sure that would have been a sensible approach, though.
They had a pre-prepared plan which they totally ignored when they copied China
-
@MiketheSnow said in Coronavirus - UK:
@Victor-Meldrew said in Coronavirus - UK:
There was a lot of social pressure and safety issues, sure, but no employer could sack anyone for not being vaccinated - not even those working in social care.
True
But once we were allowed out, if you didn't have the 'passport' you were treated like a second class citizen / barred.
You needed a Covid pass for international travel to enter other countries - just as you needed to do a few decades ago for things like yellow fever. They were used internally for a few months as a way to end lockdowns as soon as possible and allow people to attend large venues like rugby matches.
-
@MiketheSnow said in Coronavirus - UK:
@Victor-Meldrew said in Coronavirus - UK:
@MiketheSnow said in Coronavirus - UK:
@Dodge said in Coronavirus - UK:
@Winger said in Coronavirus - UK:
@Victor-Meldrew said in Coronavirus - UK:
The vaccines showed real-life effectiveness pretty much in line with the clinical trials. A sample group/study of 15 million people over 2 years showed 77.6% and 93.2% effectiveness against hospitalisation and death respectively. link .
In some ways I wish I still had as much faith in these Govt reports produced by their hired (or employed) experts. Experts who are almost obligated to produce the 'right' figures especially if they ever want future work. Or promotion or a future high paying job with a big pharma company.
But these vaccines were initially sold as if you take one of these (so-called) vaccine then you will be protected. Then when this proved to be bullshit it was changed to 'but you would have been worse without the vaccine'.
And If it was this effective why effectively force people who don't want to be injected with a 'no liability' new experimental drug to have it.
"Serious side effects (mainly inflammation of the heart muscles) are/were very, very rare. My neighbour - a Cardiology Professor - tells me the figures are tiny at about 15 in a million doses with only 1 in a million needing medical intervention."
Yet I know three people (and I rarely discuss this with friends or especially workmates) who were ill enough to require hospital attention after having the 2nd vaccine or booster. And are still suffering from the side effects.
And I've heard second hand that doctors just refuse to accept its a vaccine injury. Maybe this factor plus some creative research and analysis results in these low figures.
it really is very hard to argue with someone who refutes all peer reviewed science because it 'comes from the man' and then bases an argument on a three people he knows as though its somehow more reliable. I'm just glad that the people running this country take no advice or notice of people such as yourself.
Is that the same people who said it came from a bat in a wet market?
Yes, they could have said "OK, lets not take any action and ignore advice from people until they are absolutely, 100% clear where it came from." Not too sure that would have been a sensible approach, though.
They had a pre-prepared plan which they totally ignored when they copied China
Pre-prepared plans rarely survive their first contact with reality though....
-
nz had a pre-prepared Pandemic Response Plan issued by the Ministry of Health after the swine flu in the early 2000's. I know because I based our own Pandemic Plan around it.
It was helpful in terms of recognising early January what looked to be happening in China so we were able to purchase all the PPE etc we needed way ahead of it reaching NZ.
It was also a guide for social distancing etc so we were able to do staff education from mid Jan onwards but although the government reaction followed the plan the accelerated response blindsided me. Basically, we went from DefCon 3 to 1 in two days whereas the plan anticipated a more gradual and regional response.
In the governments defence, the MoH plan also talked about things like public parks being turned into large scale emergency public cemetaries. Clearly what looked good on paper became unpalatable to the government when faced with the possibility of the health system collapsing and large scale casualties.
-
@Victor-Meldrew said in Coronavirus - UK:
@MiketheSnow said in Coronavirus - UK:
@Victor-Meldrew said in Coronavirus - UK:
There was a lot of social pressure and safety issues, sure, but no employer could sack anyone for not being vaccinated - not even those working in social care.
True
But once we were allowed out, if you didn't have the 'passport' you were treated like a second class citizen / barred.
You needed a Covid pass for international travel to enter other countries - just as you needed to do a few decades ago for things like yellow fever. They were used internally for a few months as a way to end lockdowns as soon as possible and allow people to attend large venues like rugby matches.
pretty sure you still need a vaccination passport to get into several african (east african) countries, yellow fever, rabies and several other shots, took some planning over the months before going. I think thats why we were pretty casual about them when they came in the for COVID, we'd needed them before and whilst it took planning wasnt that big a deal
-
@Dodge said in Coronavirus - UK:
who refutes all peer reviewed science
I don't refute it all. I'm just not naive enough to accept it without question. As a lot (the majority) seem to.
This 'don't think for yourself just trust the experts' is an elite created harmful mind virus that serves them not us. It's very effective though.
Propaganda works best when those who are being manipulated are confident they are acting on their own free will.
Think of the press as a great keyboard on which the government can play.
The most brilliant propagandist technique will yield no success unless one fundamental principle is borne in mind constantly - it must confine itself to a few points and repeat them over and over.
If you repeat a lie often enough, people will believe it, and you will even come to believe it yourself
But we are getting close to this point now I believe
There will come a day, when all the lies will collapse under their own weight, and truth will again triumph.
-
@Winger said in Coronavirus - UK:
@Dodge said in Coronavirus - UK:
who refutes all peer reviewed science
I don't refute it all. I'm just not naive enough to accept it without question. As a lot (the majority) seem to.
This 'don't think for yourself just trust the experts' is an elite created harmful mind virus that serves them not us. It's very effective though.
Propaganda works best when those who are being manipulated are confident they are acting on their own free will.
Think of the press as a great keyboard on which the government can play.
The most brilliant propagandist technique will yield no success unless one fundamental principle is borne in mind constantly - it must confine itself to a few points and repeat them over and over.
If you repeat a lie often enough, people will believe it, and you will even come to believe it yourself
But we are getting close to this point now I believe
There will come a day, when all the lies will collapse under their own weight, and truth will again triumph.
😂
-
Look at this bunch of absolute c*nts
What an absolute fucking farce this 'enquiry' has been
-
This is concerning
I hope it's all bullshit. I've friends who are adament that excess deaths are not looking good in many countries
https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/pentagon-heart-failure-spiked-1000/
Pentagon data shows heart failure spiked nearly 1,000% among pilots in 2022: whistleblower
Lieutenant Ted Macie says he found major spikes in several heart-related ailments over the previous five-year average among pilots, including heart failure (973%) and cardiomyopathy (152%).
-
@Winger said in Coronavirus - UK:
Pentagon data shows heart failure spiked nearly 1,000% among pilots in 2022: whistleblower
From the article:"Lieutenant Ted Macie says he found major spikes in several heart-related ailments over the previous five-year average among pilots."
False statistics. He's comparing a 5yr average against a single year throughout the entire article and making a case from that. That 5yr average could also show a 1,000% spike. If the numbers are statistically small, the sigma variation (deviation from mean) could be huge. There's also no context of pilots susceptibility to heart failure.
So let's take a sanity check. there are 7.6m people in the UK with heart disease (source British Heart Foundation). If there were a ten-fold increase in heart disease from the vaccine, as the article suggests, 76m people in the UK (110% of the population) would have heart disease.
-
@Victor-Meldrew said in Coronavirus - UK:
@Winger said in Coronavirus - UK:
Pentagon data shows heart failure spiked nearly 1,000% among pilots in 2022: whistleblower
From the article:"Lieutenant Ted Macie says he found major spikes in several heart-related ailments over the previous five-year average among pilots."
False statistics. He's comparing a 5yr average against a single year throughout the entire article and making a case from that. That 5yr average could also show a 1,000% spike. If the numbers are statistically small, the sigma variation (deviation from mean) could be huge. There's also no context of pilots susceptibility to heart failure.
So let's take a sanity check. there are 7.6m people in the UK with heart disease (source British Heart Foundation). If there were a ten-fold increase in heart disease from the vaccine, as the article suggests, 76m people in the UK (110% of the population) would have heart disease.
Thank god for you.
-
Am I missing something?
Sunak grilled yesterday about 'Eat Out To Help Out'
All MSM channels reporting that 'Eat Out To Help Out' caused a spike in deaths
I've read elsewhere that is bullshit, no spike. No difference.
Are MSM telling the truth?
-
@MiketheSnow said in Coronavirus - UK:
Am I missing something?
Sunak grilled yesterday about 'Eat Out To Help Out'
I like what you did there.
People will believe what they want to believe, regardless of any factual evidence. Unfortunately, this also extends to newspaper editors.
Truth will never really be known, but the facts are pretty straight forwards:
- Govt researchers say it had no / limited effect.
- Independent say it did.
Figure it out as you will.
-
Coronavirus - UK