![[eBook] The Real Anthony Fauci by Robert F. Kennedy Jr. $0 @ Amazon US](https://files.ozbargain.com.au/n/56/758356.jpg?h=a6a3f2ce)
This post contains affiliate links. OzBargain might earn commissions when you click through and make purchases. Please see this page for more information.
Free for a week thanks to Dr. Robert Malone. Also available
[eBook] The Real Anthony Fauci by Robert F. Kennedy Jr. $0 @ Amazon US
168116
LOakleyL on 21/02/2023 - 20:52 amazon.com (1496 clicks)
Last edited 23/02/2023 - 00:11 by 2 other users
Last edited 23/02/2023 - 00:11 by 2 other users
Related Stores
closed Comments
Issue with product is a valid reason
Disagree isn't a valid issue with content
@TheCunningLinguist: Still needs to fall under 'Inappropriate uses of negative vote' for the mods to remove them.
@TheCunningLinguist: It is actually. Disagree with negative votes on the other hand, isn’t a reason to remove them.
Not a bargain, pdf already available in antivax facebook groups
Still $500 too much for this horseshit.
Amazed that the admins allowed this total troll post.
Some pretty pilled ozbargainers in here. Crazy.
Time seems to be moving slowly, and I thought that they would have received their fifth booster shots by now. However, it appears that they are only on the third booster round.
Funny how they just say how boosters are allowed or offered to over 30's(and under 50) but they aren't recommending it.
Why is that funny?
It sound logical to me.
Because they aren't sure if its worth the risk or why wouldnt they just recommend it?
@ozhunter: Yes, they literally address that in their advice…
Why are you trying to make a conspiracy out of nothing?
They say for those under 65 without comorbidities to consider an individual risk assessment before getting an additional booster.
Is that not reasonable?
Yes, they literally address that in their advice…
Yea, why do you think they would specifically word it that way. They are offering it, but not recommending it.
They say for those under 65 without comorbidities to consider an individual risk assessment
What is this madness!
Yea, why do you think they would specifically word it that way. They are offering it, but not recommending it.
Because they are offering it but not recommending it?
Again, you're trying to make a conspiracy where there is none.
Because they are offering it but not recommending it?
Yea… that's what I just said. I'm asking why do you think they aren't recommending it anymore.
And just checked the gov website and they say Booster doses are not recommended at this time for children and adolescents aged 18 years or under who do not have any risk factors for severe COVID-19.
https://www.health.gov.au/our-work/covid-19-vaccines/getting…
Here they are explicitly not recommending it.
Again, you're trying to make a conspiracy where there is none.
Simply asking you why do you think they worded that way now. After all the effort to get everyone boosted.
Dude, for once, instead of just simplying toeing the line, try give an honest answer.
@ozhunter: Yes they are writing that because they are offering it but not recommending it…
The reason is obvious. They don't believe there is a benefit that outweighs the risk for an overall recommendation for people under the age of 65 without comorbidities.
Is that not reasonable given that pretty much everyone has come into contact with SARS-COV-2 at this point?
Dude, for once, instead of just simplying toeing the line, try give an honest answer.
LOL
They don't believe there is a benefit that outweighs the risk
ay, you said it. Good on you.
That's what I think too. Not worth the risk. Less risky to just get covid. It's like the vaccine's side affects are worse than covid.
Is that not reasonable given that pretty much everyone has come into contact with SARS-COV-2 at this point?
For covid-vaxxers, not at all. Covid is still apparently out there killing people. It's like someone doesn't think the extra protection is necessary.
LOL
😂
ay, you said it. Good on you.
It's been what I've always said - there has always been a risk-benefit analysis though. When the virus was novel to almost the entire population, it was reasonable to recommend it, but 2+ years on, millions of infections, that is no longer the case for many.
For covid-vaxxers, not at all. Covid is still apparently out there killing people. It's like someone doesn't think the extra protection is necessary.
There's zealots on all sides, so best ignore them.
But as I said, don't try and make a conspiracy where there isn't one.
@DogGunn: We know that if you have COVID, you don't need the boosters. We said it a few years ago. Oh no less than a few years ago, big mistake. 😉
@gto21: Okay? When the first boosters were being rolled out, a majority of the population had not had COVID.
When the virus was novel to almost the entire population, it was reasonable to recommend it
It is still recommended for millions of people
millions of infections
still millions that haven't got it though? And you can catch it again. But who cares about cases, it's to prevent serious illness and death, right?
Just funny to offer something to people but not wanting to recommend it even when the virus is still around.
Maybe it's just not safe or effective anymore(or never was in the first place)
It is still recommended for millions of people
Yes because the data shows it is helpful, and the benefit provided outweigh the risks for those groups.
it's to prevent serious illness and death, right?
At this point, yes.
Maybe it's just not safe or effective anymore(or never was in the first place)
No evidence to support such a claim that it was never safe or effective.
At this point, yes.
Lol, it was argued multiple times by people here that it was never meant to stop transmission.
No evidence to support such a claim that it was never safe or effective.
Maybe it is just now that all of a sudden it is neither safe enough or not effective enough that they don't want to recommended it anymore.
As you said before, They don't believe there is a benefit that outweighs the risk for an overall recommendation for people under the age of 65 without comorbidities.
They just don't make vaccines like they used to I guess.
Lol, it was argued multiple times by people here that it was never meant to stop transmission.
Well yes, the primary end point in the trials did not include transmission.
However it did reduce transmission substantially with the initial variants.
Maybe it is just now that all of a sudden it is neither safe enough or not effective enough that they don't want to recommended it anymore.
Or because people have built up immunity, hybrid, natural, whatever you want to call it, that the risk / benefit profile has changed.
It's like you think things are exactly as they were in 2020 or something.
@DogGunn: I'm just agreeing with your conclusion. That this "safe" and "effective" vaccine just isn't worth the risk to your health.
They just don't make vaccines like they used to I guess.
More likely you don't understand the complexities of vaccine manufacture or the hugely complex and varied nature of viruses. Just a wild guess.
@ozhunter: I concede that may be the case for people who are scientifically illiterate, and/or can't be bothered informing themselves, and/or who think their opinionated ignorance should be given the same weight as experts with public responsibilities, but you wouldn't be in those categories would you? Rhetorical question.
@ozhunter: They've told us, you might be on a secret 'don't tell' ASIO list as a result of listening devices they planted at birth. I believe they used DNA to decide who knows what. What did you want to know? I'll use my insider privileges and renowned diplomacy to shake the tree and see what falls out.
They've told us, you might be on a secret 'don't tell' ASIO list as a result of listening devices they planted at birth.
oh man, how unfortunate for me.
What did you want to know?
Same question I was asking DogGunn. Why are they just making the vaccine available to people over 30 and under 50 but not recommending it anymore.
@ozhunter: Not sure exactly what you're referring to but ATAGI advice is based on current stats, knowledge and experiences both here and overseas. It was always a moving feast, and it is completely logical that advice would change as more data and analysis became available. Conditions have changed, knowledge has improved with time and data, there is far less pressure on health professionals and systems, and far more people have been vaccinated. Did they get everything right? No, but why would anyone expect that to occur? Did govts and health advisors do their best to balance health, social needs, economic considerations etc? In my view they did without exception. We're all brilliant with hindsight.
Not sure exactly what you're referring to
Just wondering why the vaccine is available to people over 30 and under 50 but they aren't recommending it. This supposedly "safe and effective" vaccine to help with covid isn't being recommended for those 30-49. Why do you think that is?
It is also specifically not recommended for those under 18 who do not have any risk factors for severe COVID-19.
Dogunn's response: "The reason is obvious. They don't believe there is a benefit that outweighs the risk for an overall recommendation for people under the age of 65 without comorbidities."
@ozhunter: I'll assume you're genuine in your interest and not fishing.
I'd read ATAGI's advice if I were you. They usually provide background - or did during the pandemic peak. I've already commented about new data and analysis so no point in repeating that. A deals website isn't my port of call for proper advice, although there are occasional gems.
My educated guess is similar to DogGunn's comment. The risk of serious illness etc may be low in those age-groups, especially in a highly vaccinated population where covid acquisition has also been significant (as you know covid acquisition provides [additional] protection in some/many people via antibodies). The benefits are therefore probably/possibly minimal. Every medical procedure involves time, resources and costs. Those resources are best utilised in areas of greatest need.
I'd read ATAGI's advice if I were you
I did read and I see what they're saying, and what they aren't saying.
https://www.health.gov.au/news/atagi-2023-booster-advice
Even bolded and got a little table now on who is recommended and who isn't
My educated guess is similar to DogGunn's comment. The risk of serious illness etc may be low in those age-groups
But there's still a risk and it just additional protection, right? It's just a quick a simple medical procedure, that is supposedly safe and effective. It's the best protection from covid?
Apart from the risk-benefit ratio, I think another primary reason against recommending it is they don't want to be liable for its side affects.
especially in a highly vaccinated population where covid acquisition has also been significant
So what if other people are vaccinated.
(as you know covid acquisition provides [additional] protection in some/many people via antibodies).
Yea natural immunity isn't new.
The benefits are therefore probably/possibly minimal.
Yea so minimal the benefits don't outweigh the risk. That the new vaccine(bivalent) made specifically for covid isn't even recommended. Just reinforces the notion that the vaccine is utter garbage.
Every medical procedure involves time, resources and costs. Those resources are best utilised in areas of greatest need.
It is allowed and available for those who want it so they have already allocated resources for it.
@ozhunter: As I suspected you had and have nio interest in information, your enquiry was a fishing expedition.
But there's still a risk and it just additional protection, right? It's just a quick a simple medical procedure, that is supposedly safe and effective. It's the best protection from covid?
I haven't read recently about risks from boosters but previously (and logically) if no major event occurred with first, second etc jabs then unless your personal heath has changed, the risk would be SIGNIFICANTLY lower. However, I'm not your doctor and I'm not an epidemiologist so you should seek professional advice. Is the vaccine the "best" protection? I don't know. There are many variables involved, including whether you've had covid recently and how "bad" it was.
Apart from the risk-benefit ratio, I think another primary reason against recommending it is they don't want to be liable for its side affects.
As much as some in society need spoonfeeding (some genuinely, others because they have closed minds and dgaf), personal responsibility plays a major part in all health interventions. Your doctor should advise you of side effects and risks, and provide you with a checklist. ATAGI provides expert advice to the public and health practitioners and aren't directly involved in personal health care. By all means take any action you think suitable (letter to the paper, contact your local Member, sue your doctor/ ATAGI/CHOs /pharma companies etc) IF you can show that they intentionally concealed critical information or that their negligence led to serious outcomes for you. Alternatively get some "friends" together and try a class action.
So what if other people are vaccinated.
Do what plenty of others do and see what the stats say about reduced risk of covid infection and illness. In other words, get off this deal and spend some time LEARNING.
Yea natural immunity isn't new.
Yet you appear to be extremely ignorant about other covid and vaccine issues. Why would that be?
Yea so minimal the benefits don't outweigh the risk. That the new vaccine(bivalent) made specifically for covid isn't even recommended. Just reinforces the notion that the vaccine is utter garbage.
OR that your conclusion is tainted, ignorant and indicative of a closed mind. Those "utter garbage" covid vaccines have saved the lives of an estimated 14M people to date. Not that ygaf eh? I have to ask - why would YOU trust what authorities say about a new vaccine anyway?
It is allowed and available for those who want it so they have already allocated resources for it.
Your ignorance of our health systems is astonishing. Vaccines may be available but every procedure uses medical resources and creates an administrative workload and Medicare cost. I'll leave you to investigate further.
personal responsibility plays a major part in all health interventions.
Now they say that. Before it was get the vaccine or lose your job and freedoms.
Why would that be?
Lol, barely ever heard a peep about it from the authorities. They had the data very early on that if you young and healthy, you're chances are incredibly high. Didn't stop the fearmongering and heavy-hand laws from happening.
Those "utter garbage" covid vaccines have saved the lives of an estimated 14M people to date.
How many you think it saved in Australia?
why would YOU trust what authorities say about a new vaccine anyway?
I don't but you apparently to. Why do you think some people didn't get the vaccine. Distrust of government/big pharma
Vaccines may be available but every procedure uses medical resources and creates an administrative workload and Medicare cost.
Cost-benefit ratio would be very good would it not. You're trying too hard to make it seem like there isn't enough or its because it cost too much.
Now they say that. Before it was get the vaccine or lose your job and freedoms.
They? I said that all (some obvious exceptions where others have to decide for you) medical interventions involve personal responsibility. It's common knowledge in the adult world, and when you reach maturity you might eventually understand why it's both responsible and ethical.
Did YOU lose your job, and why? What freedoms did you lose, and why?Lol, barely ever heard a peep about it from the authorities. They had the data very early on that if you young and healthy, you're chances are incredibly high. Didn't stop the fearmongering and heavy-hand laws from happening.
You must have been hibernating, or perhaps the messages didn't penetrate or got scrambled. As has been said ad infinitum, health advisors were acting with caution and using current data and research. What would YOU have had them do? They weren't there to make you feel all fuzzy and soft sell the threats. There was, and still is, no way of accurately predicting how any individual will react to the virus. Don't blame others for failing to do your homework.
How many you think it saved in Australia?
I don't usually speculate on things I haven't read about. What's your totally uneducated guess?
I don't but you apparently to. Why do you think some people didn't get the vaccine. Distrust of government/big pharma
That's just one of a few reasons. In your opinion have the same people ever taken medication in their lives?
There are times when one could be excused for being disillusioned with and/or losing faith in government (a classic case of baby and bathwater), but here we have journalism, 'free speech', the law, and a variety of checks and balances (eg Auditors General, Ombudsmen etc) to help balance the scales. Total distrust of government in this country is irrational, although it is a common characteristic of a certain demographic. Chances are you'll grow out of it, depends on how far down the rabbit hole you've already ventured.
Cost-benefit ratio would be very good would it not. You're trying too hard to make it seem like there isn't enough or its because it cost too much.
Your comprehension skills need a LOT of work. I wasn't suggesting anything of the sort, I was simply alerting you to something you had zero knowledge of. ATAGI puts out advisories and recommendations based on current analysis. 'Everyone's' circumstances differ, so in conjunction with their doctors they need to make a choice. Try joining the dots. Most people have no trouble understanding how the system works and get on with it. I'm eligible for a booster but advice was that it was unlikely to make much difference in my case. So, unless advice changes (eg a new variant emerges) I won't bother. Theoretically I have plenty of antibodies already and I have no reason to further burden health workers and the Medicare budget.
If you don't understand ANYTHING, ask your doctor. If you aren't getting the info you need - switch channels from SKY, do some research.
They? I said it, and when you reach maturity you might eventually understand why it's both responsible and ethical. Did YOU lose your job, and why? What freedoms did you lose, and why?
The government. Some people did. Due to vaccine mandates. Some couldn't enter certain places.
As has been said ad infinitum, health advisors were acting with caution and using current data and research.
Data was there within weeks or a month.
What would YOU have had them do?
No lockdown no mandates. Treat it like the flu
I don't usually speculate on things I haven't read about. What's your totally uneducated guess?
I think you gobble up whatever the gov tells you. Some numbers for others countries here, https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-06-24/covid-vaccines-saved-…
Total distrust of government in this country is irrational
Never said I total distrust them, but I do when it comes to the covid vaccines.
I'm eligible for a booster but advice was that it was unlikely to make much difference in my case.
That's what many people being saying all along. It's not necessary unless you are old or sick. Could just take a panadol to help with covid.
The government. Some people did. Due to vaccine mandates. Some couldn't enter certain places.
WE know all that. WE also understand the reasons. You on the other hand have trouble with the concept of social responsibility.
I No lockdown no mandates. Treat it like the flu
In a nutshell there is the reason why we're lucky to have responsible, educated adults in charge.
I think you gobble up whatever the gov tells you.
No doubt you do. It's yet another characteristic of your chosen demographic.
Some numbers for others countries here, https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-06-24/covid-vaccines-saved-…
Not game to have an uneducated guess? At this stage you've passed peak foolishness so there's nothing to lose really.
Never said I total distrust them, but I do when it comes to the covid vaccines.
Then you're redeemable, which is very good to know.
That's what many people being saying all along. It's not necessary unless you are old or sick.
How old, how sick? No young people died of covid? WE know the risk profile, your absolutism is puerile and dangerous.
Could just take a panadol to help with covid.
And that's why YOU should never advise people on medical issues.
Stay safe, and get a jab - of perspective, if not vaccine (seek medical advice of course).
What would YOU have had them do?
As I said, treat it like the flu.
Not game to have an uneducated guess?
between 50k and jack squat. But not like there wasn't other medication available.
How old, how sick? No young people died of covid?
People can still take the vaccine if they want.
And that's why YOU should never advise people on medical issues.
https://www.theaustralian.com.au/breaking-news/aussies-urged…
@ozhunter: Your article is post-reopening and after most people were vaccinated. From a skim read, the advice seems to assume people would be vaccinated.
It comes as the country reached a major vaccine milestone with more than 44 million doses administered.
Here's some numbers from NSW Health in December 2021 -
@ozhunter: Yes you did say treat it like the flu despite all the freely available evidence. Astonishing in the real world that anyone would still hold that view but there you go.
What was this "other medication" you talk of?
People have always had a choice. The choice came with responsibilities, and consequences in very few situations. There are plenty of jobs which require adherence to health and safety rules you may not like but have to conform to.
The link meant what to you? There was nothing new in that at all even when it was written. Those drugs treat certain symptoms, they don't provide protection. Big pharma told us so, as did myriad doctors. Sleep, rest, hydration, sustenance etc all help. Illness severity depends on individual immunity systems. Two daughters had it bad despite vaccination (incoming, batten down the hatches), I had very mild symptoms. They would likely have been hospital cases if unvaxxed.
What was this "other medication" you talk of?
Panadol, ibuprofen, or even ivermectin.
The link meant what to you?
to treat is as a cold/flu.
Those drugs treat certain symptoms, they don't provide protection.
Don't need protection. Just need to help the body protect itself. How much do you think the vaccine helped a person if there survival rate was already 99.7-99.8%?
They would likely have been hospital cases if unvaxxed.
Yea, the vaccine probably made it worse for them .
https://www.immunisationcoalition.org.au/wp-content/uploads/…
What do you think about this link, noting that it doesn't even take into a person's health condition which is usually worse for older people. An unvaccinated young person(<50 has a much better survival rate than an vaccinated 70+ person.
Notice how much worse it is for 70+ and safe to assume its more negligble for those under 12.
@ozhunter: Because anyone not boosted without comorbidites has probably already had Covid. By definition they recovered or didn’t, either way it’s less necessary. Also did anyone under 18 ever get recommended boosters?
The other thing for older people is some had the AZ vaccine which unlike the mRNA vaccines is basically ineffective against omicron. While under 18s would have had another vaccine.
You realize that most people are over 18 right? Where the risk of complications or death from Covid is much higher?
The other factor they consider when offering medication is the cost. It may still benefit people but they feel the money could be better spent elsewhere.
Also realize there is an additional booster being recommended from March for people > 18. Who haven’t had a booster or Covid in 6 months. They’re not talking about the previous booster.
I know people who still want to get it. Despite it not being recommended, which may indicate that they suffer from "germaphobia" or "mysophobia".
Or that you don't know their personal health risk profile.
Or that they believe the risk is far lower for them than the possible reward.
Or that they have vulnerable friends they want to protect, so are taking extra precautions.
Or that they don't fully understand.ALL far more likely than your clearly ignorant diagnosis I'd have thought.
A few years ago, certain individuals recommended that people under 60 should steer clear of it. As it turns out, their advice was accurate.
A few years ago before the vaccines even existed?
Impressive.
@DogGunn: You're right it's not a few years, less than that. After the vaccines were released. The point still stands tho.
I have no problem saying you are right.
And I can say those people were right too.
I don't have to fight the truth.
I wonder if you will acknowledge when they got it right?
The deal that divides the ozb community :-) … I think this is the first time I saw a deal with "equally" high up and down votes.
We should have more of those. Even for vacuum cleaners! Unison is unidumb.
One of those cases of 'Junk doesn't become worth something just because it's free'
Dangerous misinformation. I'm sad that the mods here think this is ok. Also that I share a planet with people this stupid.
Everyone I disagree with is dangerous
Everyone who believes that they are smarter than thousands of epidemiologists because they did their facebook research.
Misinformation and personal slander.
I hope all the NEGS have booked in jab No.5
Me too, a vaccinated community is a safer community. Stay healthy everyone.
I said that in jest. I don't really want the negs to shorten their lives.
Actually you are mistaken..Many more jabbed are dying.. In NZ it's roughly 7x as many
What is Simpson's Paradox?
Nope, my family is all vaccinated and healthy. Thanks anyway
@BeauKilla: How do you know the long-term side-effects, its impossible?
How do you it's not weaking your immune systems and displaying itself in other ways?
How do you know it's not degrading your mind to where your perceptions can't even see the possible damage?Have you even considered and investigated the possiblity of these things? And if not, what does that say about your "healthy conclusions"?
https://www.health.govt.nz/covid-19-novel-coronavirus/covid-…
Percentage of 12+ who have completed primary course. 89.3%
So based on your own words and just combining it with a single other very easy to find reliable number, 10 out of every 11 people have roughly 7 times more deaths among them than the remaining 1 person.
That seems like a pretty good result.
@quink: Whats the covid death rate for age 65 and below? Is it worth talking or worrying about? Was it ever worth talking or worrying about?
Actually you are mistaken..Many more jabbed are dying.. In NZ it's roughly 7x as many
You mean there are more deaths of any cause in a 90% vaccinated population vs. 10% partially vaccinated/unvaccinated? I'm shocked.
Did you also know that 100% of people who have breathed air will die?
@jorf: I don't see those unvaccinated African's dying in their millions given the West used up all the vaccines, that voids your argument.
And to reverse your argument, how did they count the deaths of people dying WITH covid?
Did you also know that 100% of people who tihnk they are right are also deldued?
@DrDelusion: I'm sure you can provide me with some answers to your question (and sources) since it seems like you've done your research.
(at least you're letting us know what we're getting into with your username too, so thanks for the honesty)
@DrDelusion: OT but did you create a ghost account to make it seem like there are more people supporting your POV than there really are, Dr Delusion — or should i say mrCOOK?
@jorf: At this point, there's no point explaining it any further. I've seen it done countless times and it always ends the same way. It's either trolling, failure of the education system, or, wilful ignorance at this point.
It also often goes hand in hand with accusations of the data being inaccurate. If the system was going to lie, surely, they would do it in a way which would steer people toward vaccines.
Anyone who doesn't understand after an attempt at explanation is made should be considered lost.
@ihfree: Why don't you just say that you don't have any idea?
failure of the education system, or, wilful ignorance at this point
Yep.
Edit: Did you forget to log back in as your alt too? I seem to be replying to different usernames who are clearly the same person. I'm also assuming @MindControl is another one of your alts. Good at least to see you cookers aren't actually as numerous as you try to make out here.
@jorf: FYI - agreeing with your point vs rate in vaccinated/unvaccinated. It's a fairly simple matter of math/statistics. Maybe I hit reply on the wrong comment.
You mean there are more deaths of any cause in a 90% vaccinated population vs. 10% partially vaccinated/unvaccinated? I'm shocked.
Did you also know that 100% of people who have breathed air will die?
@ihfree: Can we get back to you using alts please? I'm finding it more interesting than whatever else you're banging on about.
@jorf: Lol. ok. Feel free to have a look at my other comments. You can probably even find a few analogies I've made to demonstrate this exact point.
You mean there are more deaths of any cause in a 90% vaccinated population vs. 10% partially vaccinated/unvaccinated? I'm shocked.
Did you also know that 100% of people who have breathed air will die?
@ihfree: Ah.. sorry for the confusion. I have you mixed up with the other antivax alts that are replying here.
@DrDelusion, @MindControl and @TheCOOK are the same person though.
Sounds like the programmed response after brainwashing someone.
Lol nice retort
Indeed.
At this point in time it's essentially the Pandemic of the Vaccinated.
Funny how negging for I don't like this product is now all fair game for these ebooks — and none other! — by the very same Karens patrolling negs 24/7.
Selective enforcing by the admins - negs on leftist related books all get removed e.g. communist manifesto
Don't forget to report all the invalid down votes people!