China again

[carmanmemoranda]

He was simply warning that the system is being manipulated to take control, as is what happened.

People like me are not preaching to anyone, in fact I wish nothing but the best for all people, shame the person directly above this comment has no such grace.

-

BTW I was out protesting about the civil right not to be locked inside your house when the police were there hitting innocent people with clubs.

Then I see the people that were blocking the M25 given coffee and the whole situation used to bring in the Public Order Bill (taking away even more of our rights).

But I suppose that is misinformation as well?

So he didn't produce any facts to support his beliefs?

Do you seriously believe that we (as individuals, a country, the world) would be better off without the vaccines? Just let the virus run its course and see who died and who lived? If so, why do we ever bother with vaccines?

Yes, unless there are any facts to support the guys opinions (that is all they are) then it is misinformation.

Lockdown was tough, but until the medical world understood the situation I personally think it gave us all breathing time. Whether you like it or not there were deaths and hospitals were getting overwhelmed, and with no real idea of how to treat it (in its early days). What we do going forwards is another matter entirely. But lets not confuse then, with now.

 

[noseall]

Noseall has admitted to making figures up; and I exposed lies by both Denso and John D, so don't take too much notice of anything they come out with.

Please, don't. Listen to andy

 

[gas112]

Please, don't. Listen to andy

why ? are you scared of people knowing the truth . Perhaps it not lies on purpose and just senility setting in old man

 

[IT Minion]

What is your response to the information given in the first 3 minutes
Is it true that previous vaccines have been pulled for far lower adverse reports or not ?

Did he give examples?

I can imagine it could be true. Imagine a vaccine for a strain of the common cold. The benefit there is low so virtually any adverse effect would make it worthless.

A vaccine for Ebola will accept far higher levels of adverse effect.

 

[Brigadier]

Do you seriously believe that we (as individuals, a country, the world) would be better off without the vaccines? Just let the virus run its course and see who died and who lived? If so, why do we ever bother with vaccines?

Yes, unless there are any facts to support the guys opinions (that is all they are) then it is misinformation.

Lockdown was tough, but until the medical world understood the situation I personally think it gave us all breathing time. Whether you like it or not there were deaths and hospitals were getting overwhelmed, and with no real idea of how to treat it (in its early days). What we do going forwards is another matter entirely. But lets not confuse then, with now.

I post this as a double-jabbed person, and not an anti-vaxxer.
As someone who believes in the scientific method, I believe in evaluating evidence. And what we knew then, know now, and will know in years and decades to come will all likely be different. Perhaps fundamentally so.

But lets not confuse then, with now.

You are, with the following strawman:

If so, why do we ever bother with vaccines?

There is a world of difference between:
- researching and implementing a vaccine for a disease with known (and, presumably, unacceptable) symptoms and morbidity/mortality rates, that has circulated for years, decades, or centuries even, and:
- doing the same for a disease which has only just emerged, about which we know very little.
IIRC, mortality rates at the start of the pandemic were guesstimated at anything from 0.5 to 5%, which is scary.
However, that was based on the infected cohort at the start of the pandemic, which may not have been reflective of the cohort which ultimately have been infected, given enough time and lack of controls.
We'll never know now what the ultimate morbidity/mortality rate would have been without vaccines.

Reductio ad absurdum, would we vaccinate the world against the sniffles?

.........until the medical world understood the situation........

The medical world still doesn't understand the situation fully, and will keep learning and updating its knowledge for decades to come no doubt.

 

[Brigadier]

Currently on R5L,

Dr Sarah Pitt (IBMS chief examiner of virology, and from University of Brighton) said that the WHO are still calling on China to be more transparent about Covid, and their current outbreaks.
More than three years into the pandemic.

 

[robinbanks]

If so, why do we ever bother with vaccines?

Because we're sentimentally wedded to this idea that no one must ever die until some ripe old age?

Survival of the fittest worked really well for hundreds of thousands of years. Striving to save them all carries with it a cache of weaker individuals that we're emotionally invested in already, and will likely have to watch suffer, which hurts more

I'll touch on it again below but in essence vaccines allow us to control rates of infection to prevent overwhelming of limited resources. Keeping a lid on a scared, enormous population of sheeple is difficult but vital because the mob is incredibly destructive

guesstimated at anything from 0.5 to 5%, which is scary.

But survivable, viewed from the lens of the species as a whole

What is really scary is what that mob of 5% could do in terms of swamping the health system, riots at hospitals, having been terrified by outrageous media reporting

"Stay in your homes, and limit the spread of this infection until we can work out how to perform global infection at a rate we control" is a much more palatable message in terms of minimising social unrest than something like "We're deploying the military to protect the hospitals; if you turn up with a sniffly nose and act like a idiot you'll get shot, which is a good way of ensuring you die from this infection. Don't be a knob"

 

[IT Minion]

We'll never know now what the ultimate morbidity/mortality rate would have been without vaccines.

We don't really know a useful mortality rate for any disease. Ironically COVID is probably one of the most thoroughly studied.

There are loads of studies that tried to get a snapshot of COVID, they covered different countries, treatment regimens and time periods. All of that gives a detailed, but complex, understanding of the danger of COVID.

After all, the mortality rate was high at the beginning when we had no specific treatment, then higher if you were being given Hydroxycholoquine (remember that), then lower once we discovered Dexamethasone, then lower when we realised the prone position saved lives. Lower still with the later therapies.

But some people, no necessarily you, try to hold COVID research to an impossible standard that can never be met.

 

[IT Minion]

Because we're sentimentally wedded to this idea that no one must ever die until some ripe old age?

But survivable, viewed from the lens of the species as a whole

So is Ebola, the black death and nuclear winter.

 

[Brigadier]

So is Ebola, the black death and nuclear winter.

False equivalence.

 

[IT Minion]

False equivalence.

Why? They weren't/aren't threats to the entire species dying out, but were/are major worries for individuals.

If the only thing you care about is a threat to the species then you're setting the bar so stupidly high it's irrelevant.

 

[IT Minion]

Amusingly the 'survival of the fittest' argument implies that the unvaccinated by choice are less fit as they die so much more than the vaccinated.

 

[denso13]

The medical world still doesn't understand the situation fully, and will keep learning and updating its knowledge for decades to come no doubt.

Yes, that's how science works. Trouble is that some people on here argue that Covid was one big scam, only invented to give Big Pharma more money and is "just the cold". Some believe vaccines were only invented to reduce the population by 6 billion, by Bill Gates.

It's dangerous nonsense.

 

[denso13]

Is it true that previous vaccines have been pulled for far lower adverse reports or not ?

Who knows, he didn't say where he got this information.

How do deaths from rotavirus and swine flu compare with Covid?

 

[gas112]

Amusingly the 'survival of the fittest' argument implies that the unvaccinated by choice are less fit as they die so much more than the vaccinated.

really would you like to put the latest figures up to back up your statement that the unvaccinated are dying more