Is that a ChatGP ?
Make It Difficult for People in Their Lives and They Get Vaccinated » All Comments
- 1
- 2
are the 10 mental health appointments fully bulked bill?
They cover ~$130 of the fee per session at a psychiatric professional of your choice. It's good to shop around to find someone that works for you
If they are Covered by the Government (to a certain amount), does that mean the Government has access to that information as it would go through Medicare ?
Yeah, because $100 a session is still so cheap.
Yeah in the grand scheme of things.
Yeah for OP especially it's a bargain. Good luck to the doctor though!
Inaccessible to someone who's struggling to make ends meet due to mental health issues.
It is actually, yes.
Sure, if you're doing well. But if you're struggling to feed your family, say due to mental health issues…
@syousef: There is no cure for most mental health issues, so not sure what you are expecting ?
Also if you have mental health issues of a severity that prevent you from earning enough to support a family, it's no one else's responsibility if you then go and have a family despite not being able to afford to support them.
@infinite: what if you already have a family and then find yourself having severe mental health issues?
@jrowls: Talk about it with your family & friends, call a free mental health hotline for support and visit your GP for a bulk-billed mental health discussion.
Mental health is only one small aspect of your life. It's not more important than your physical health, financial health & many other areas of your life. Most of those parts of your life will not have problems solved & subsidised by the tax payer either. Mental Health is not special in this regard compared to any other of those parts of life.
@syousef: Still doesn't mean it's not cheap. You pay $100 to a plumber to fix a problem you'd consider that cheap. Health professionals don't magically work for free.
@justworld: It doesn't matter how "cheap" you consider something if the person that needs it can't afford it. Food is cheap in countries where people starve.
@syousef: Compared to the market rate, $100 is an absolute bargain. Not sure how you fail to comprehend that.
@infinite: If you don't have the money it doesn't matter if it's the bargain of the century. "Not sure how you fail to comprehend that."
This board has become a meme.
@justworld: If you have no idea what you're talking about, don't type. You add no value to this discussion.
@RocketSwitch: Do you work for free? If not, why expect doctors or psychologists to do so?
Pay for what you want to have. Otherwise wait around, wait around on the public carousel.
If you think $1,200 a month after the 10 have expired is cheap, you're so out of touch with what's happening. Wake up!
@RocketSwitch: Wake up to what?
Getting a series of 10 consults for mental health subsidised and partly paid for by people other than yourself is a massive bargain.
In what universe are you getting 10 electrician, plumber, carpenter, accountant, lawyer, financial planner consults partly paid for by other people ???
Don't encourage people to clog up the already clogged up mental health system with this nonsense. We have enough "mentally ill" (sad & anxious) without encouraging the self inflicted paranoid, delusional types.
Fifty cents has been added to your social credit score🙄.
Getting the COVID shot (not a vaccine) is one of my biggest regrets, permanent issues since. Also speaking to my cardiologist he's seen a massive uptick in heart issues.
No way in hell would I get anything else that has been rushed.Its disgusting that you get negged or poor comments when you are just saying how it is for you. I hope things work out :-)
Because nothing he said was based upon actual facts…
Never claimed to be, it was a personal perspective. People just didn't like what they read.
@LanceVance: It's really unhelpful so I'll use all my negs on anyone being negative towards vaccinations.
Vaccination only works if the majority play ball. Antivaxxers are leading us back to the dark ages.
If you're one of the few who can't be vaccinated, you should all the more be encouraging everyone else to, it's for your own protection.
@SlickMick: For established vaccines sure? For the COVID ones, not so much. The entire stopping transmission line turned out to be a lie. So why shouldn't it just be down to personal choice?
@SlickMick: The majority did play ball and it did sweet (profanity) all - comparing these rushed junk vaccines to something like the MMR jab is just as irresponsible as saying you hate all vaccines
@SlickMick: Most of your comments are nothing but cliches people use when they do not know anything else. Trust me ive looked.
Is there a block button on here?
@djlee: Well you've never know unless you give it a go…. or did you hear somewhere that it's a conspiracy and it's not to protect our vulnerable?
@LanceVance: So you're pro-vaccination, but just not for Covid?
Are you aware that people aren't vaccinating against measles anymore? So if you're going to neg covid vaccines, you need to be be really clear that you totally support vaccinations in general if you don't want to be part of the problem.
We need 95% of the population is be double-vaccinated for measles, and we're dowhere near that. Unless this changes, it seems to me that life expectancies are going to revert to third world rates. (Apparently under 5 year olds aren't likely to survive in an unvaccinated public.)
Additionally, I just recently got another covid booster shot. Noone told me not to do it, that it won't do any good or will do me harm. I guess there is some sinister reason the medical profession don't agree with you? Controlled by the big pharmaceuticals I guess??
@SlickMick: Overall I think established vaccines are a good thing. Regardless it should be down to personal choice. If you have to resort to force and extreme coercion you immediately lose the high ground and destroy trust in the medical establishment.
Putting the COVID shots in the same league as established vaccines is just silly.Congratulations. You took an experimental vaccine for a disease that for the vast majority of people is akin to the common cold. But most importantly that was your choice.
There is definitely a sinister relationship between the medical profession and the pharmaceutical industry and the financial incentives that hold the two together. Also the fact that these companies get full legal immunity for these products add to suspicion, and in terms of incentives if you remove negative consequences from key players that removes their incentive to be as cautious as possible.
The pharmaceutical industry also has a terrible reputation. Look at how many times they've been fined in the US alone.@LanceVance: Looks like we've circled back. Personal choice only works when people are good, and are willing to make sacrifices for the greater good. Since that's not where we're at for the majority, ultimately we need to to have governments mandate what is good for us.
I reckon they made a good balance with covid - either do the right thing, or you don't get to be a part of society. IMO we absolutely do this with all vaccinations. Antivaxxers are a health hazard and we need to deal with health hazards. No letting them participate is a very reasonable response.
People in a better position than you or I had to make a call on rushing through covid vaccines. Even if it turns out it didn't help (which I think is nothing more than an antivaxxer conspiracy theory), it was the best option at the time. Our leaders made a call and I stand my it.
If all the effort put into conspiracy theories was invested in addressing actual issues there might be some benefit come of it. As it is, you're just part of a big problem.
@SlickMick: Lol you're pretty far off the reservation there. Thankfully we haven't reached you're desired level of authoritarianism yet, the 20th Century is riddled with enough examples of how catastrophically wrong that goes.
Good luck assuming that government always knows and wants best for you.@LanceVance: No, what you want doesn't work because people are selfish. Democracy is the closest thing we have to a workable solution.
@SlickMick: Wants democracy, which is based on freedom of choice.
Wants mandates, which cancels out previously lauded democracy.
Profit?If you clearly can't see the inconsistencies in your own position you're not worth engaging with.
Goodbye.@LanceVance: lol I'm saying we should all play ball with exactly what we have, without crying conspiracy when our government makes you do something that some some online stranger has convinced you is a secret plot to do you evil
Wants mandates, which cancels out previously lauded democracy
Think of what you do every day, from when you wake up to when you go to bed. Virtually everything you touch (and breathe) is affected by regulations and actions mandated by the government. Without those you don't suddenly get your version of democracy, you rapidly get anarchy.
@banana365: Are we now throwing out the Nuremburg code?
The voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential.https://research.unc.edu/human-research-ethics/resources/ccm….
Are you aware that people aren't vaccinating against measles anymore?
Following and blindly advocating the narrative presented by health authorities and pharmaceutical manufactures without looking at actual facts and data can lead to a false reality.
Data clearly shows that deaths from measles gradually declined to almost zero prior to the introduction of the measles vaccine.
https://files.ozbargain.com.au/upload/79016/107306/measlesuk…We need 95% of the population is be double-vaccinated for measles
There is no actual robust study or data to support that statement. Its actually opinion based and only exists because they said so and picked out that number from a hat. In fact the decline in measles deaths from the link above indicates otherwise.
From what appears credulous and inspires you to do the right thing could be detrimental. After all, pharmaceutical companies are primarily for profit organisations, not for pro-health.
@bigticket: I'm just quoting the experts. Who are you quoting?
Unfortunately, it looks like the next generation are going to find out which of us are right.
@SlickMick: I'm quoting actual mortality data. Experts look at data, interpret the data and give their professional opinion based on that data and who funds them.
Looking at raw data cuts out the middle man. Have a look at the graphical data in the link, use your objective critical thinking skills to analyse it and explain how good the measles vaccine was.
You have been indoctrinated with false beliefs and this data should be an eye opener. Unfortunately, most will ignore information that conflicts with their false ideologies and I expect you to do the same.
@SlickMick: it's rushed chemical. different bodies work differently. getting COVID shot is my biggest regret as well.
never visited doctor in my whole life and now every 6 months my throat gets f**ked. only thing I did is triple vaxxed because I thought it will bring greater good if I play the ball.
greater good my a**…
@CrypticM: You'll not the first person I've met to decide every illness they've had since vaccination is due to it. I would say thank you for your sacrifice for the greater good, if in fact your diagnosis is correct.
@SlickMick: your condescending reply doesn't add any value. what else could cause it after 3 doses of untested chemical in span of 12 months.
Pfizer itself provided testimony on effectiveness of their product. don't ask me to show me where these testimonials are, you can figure out yourself.
@SlickMick: The second I was threatened the answer was no. You don't get to call on my aid now after you threw me to the wolves then.
@Cusack: Firstly, are you people stupid? Australia got 1/100th of the covid deaths America did and you think these measures were ineffective?
Also what are you on about seatbelts? Vaccines are nothing like a seatbelt. By decreasing the risk of infection in the individual, they don't pass it onto others. If enough people are vaccinated, infection rates drop IE for other people's protection.
Look up a simple gif or video of how herd immunity works, you simpleton.
@CrypticM: We had 1/4 of the deaths per capita than the US. If we'd followed their lead, we'd have 75,000 more dead Aussies. Or if they'd followed ours, 900,000 Americans would still be alive. I know which country I'd rather be in.
@dazweeja: Something you may find interesting. https://www.nationmaster.com/country-info/compare/Australia/…
Without getting into accuracy of cause of death reporting, there's probably comorbidity factors that differ between countries.@BoltThrower: That's a reasonable point which may explain some of the difference. My inclination would be that it doesn't explain the majority of the difference but it would take some complex data analysis to bear this out.
What data like that does show is that the US as a society appears to me to have its priorities wrong. What is the point of having high GDP per capita if the population is generally sicker, less educated and more likely to be in jail than comparable countries?
@Rick Sanchez: So if you and get vaccinated, then YOU are safe and you don’t have anything to worry abt right? So why are you worrying abt the unvaccinated? Pls explain that to this simpleton
@Rick Sanchez: Hey there, another simpleton here.
If the covid vaccine protects you, why does anybody else need to get it to protect you?
Care to provide any evidence at all that the covid vaccine prevents transmission? Pfizer themselves admitted to the European parliament that they never tested whether it stops transmission in their trials. Yet we were all told that it would. Remember hearing that we could all return to normal life once we hit 70%+ double vaxxed because the 'R' value would drop and the virus would die out? I seem to remember that we remained under lockdown and the virus stayed.
So, how did herd immunity go for covid then?
@Cusack: It isn't, but "I'll put anti-collission technology in my car for your protection" would be closer
@SlickMick: That analogy doesn’t work.
Btw if someone has the mumps, I’ll gladly share a meal with them no worries ….Coz I’m vaccinated and not worried coz it works. So now tell me why everyone was so butt hurt from people not wanting the experimental vax when YOU are vaxxd?@Cusack: wow.
“I’ll put on my seatbelt for your protection”
works, but
"I'll put anti-collission technology in my car for your protection"
doesn't.okay, I can see this debate isn't a level playing field.
You'll have to interpret your last question, I don't understand crazy.@SlickMick: Ok then simple question time….
If you are vaxxd, then you have nothing to worry abt right. So WHY are you sooo upset at people unvaxd?
Are you up to date with all the booster shots they have? What is it up now anyway?
@Cusack: COVID vaccines reduce severity of disease and also transmission but does not reduce either to zero. Unvaccinated people pose a risk to people who can't get vaccinated but also to people who are vaccinated.
See: https://theconversation.com/your-unvaccinated-friend-is-roug…
@dazweeja: So when you realized they lied at the start saying it was 100% effective, you still played along? Btw have you read into Fauci?
So everyone, even the vaxd will still infect everyone. It ‘may’ reduce severity but we’re all still passing it to each other. You’d mandate an experimental vax for that?So when you realized they lied at the start saying it was 100% effective, you still played along
Please provide a source for this claim because your question is based on a false premise.
even the vaxd will still infect everyone
Yes, at a reduced rate. It's all probabilities.
It ‘may’ reduce severity
It did reduce severity of illness and dramatically reduced your chances of dying with earlier strains. The benefit is not as great with later strains because they are milder.
You’d mandate an experimental vax for that.
It's not experimental - the vaccines passed three phases of trials like any other - and yes, of course. The overall benefit to society was easily worth it.
@Cusack: I thought it was simple, but it seems you don't understand. Getting vaccinated isn't for me, it's for everybody.
It doesn't help me to vaccinate me, I need to vaccinate everyone to ensure we win and covid loses.Like you said, it isn't a count thing, it's a boost thing. Yeah I recently got boosted.
@SlickMick: “It’s not for you it’s for everybody”!? You really just said that. Oh boy.
Ok based on your thinking, why isn’t the measles vax mandated? There was an outbreak last month in Sydney. Why not crackdown on those unvaccinated?
….maybe because the measles vax actually works as intended and actually protects that person and stops transmission. Get it now?@Cusack: Didn't I bring up measles earlier? I would love vaccinations to be mandated. If not, then I strongly desire that anyone without vaccination and without accepted approval to not be vaccinated, not be allowed in our schools, workplaces, shops etc.
The measles vax used to work as intended. After fools jumped on this antivax bandwagon now we're expecting babies to start dying from measles again. Thanks for your contribution.
@SlickMick: So my simple point (again and again), someone vaccinated from measles is SAFE from those unvaccinated …so they’re not trembling scared anymore. Coz the vax works.
What about this sentence don’t you understand?@Cusack: Your point is too simple and missing the facts. Children under 5 can't be vaccinated from measles. So thier only protection is for everyone else to be vaccinated. We're scared for our children, who are our future.
because the measles vax actually works as intended and actually protects that person and stops transmission.
One of the reasons why measles vaccine work is because it doesn't replicate and mutate like crazy, always changing the goal post.
Every infected host and the longer the infection period , the more the opportunity is given to the virus to mutate again.
In a way kinda like how superbugs work.
@smartazz104: So this comment got upvoted, yet 2 up comment that says the same thing fot downvoted.
I don't understand ozbargain sometimes.
@baldur: It took 68 negs to get it downvoted though. There is a scary amount of antivaxxer support here. Due to the daily limit on negs, we need to use them sparingly.
Yes it is, and then even more so yours getting negged offering some support & positivity. People have strong confirmation bias and when something threatens their world view they'll get quite nasty in defending it.
Once you realise the true demograph of OzBargainers (check the OzB event birthday photos) you'll realise why they're getting negged.
@Fayble1212: I looked.
Wow, most of them look like they are about 15 years old. I understand the posts on Ozb a lot better now.
Zero life experience mob.
@Clambabula: Wow! just as you said I understand this site so much better :D
I guess it makes sense, I remember being a broke teen so I totally understand why they'd be the majority of a bargain hunter site.
People have strong confirmation bias and when something threatens their world view they'll get quite nasty in defending it.
Hope you realise, this is you as well as people negging you. Your worldview says COVID vaccine bad and (un)fortunately you're in the minority. Neggers believe the opposite and are in the majority.
@soan papdi: Fair enough, but if you look at my initial comment again you may notice I merely gave a perspective based on personal experience. If someone got some sort of reaction from eating a food and then said 'I don't want to have that again' I doubt people would bat an eye. But because this issue is so loaded people see a personal anecdote as something like a threat.
I can only say for myself that if someone commented saying that they had the shot, felt great and happy they did so I wouldn't give them shit about it.
So I'm not sure why people here are inclined to do so.@LanceVance: Because you are threatening their belief that they have not been fooled and that what has already been injected into their body could harm their health.
@Mad Max: and can still harm their health, turns out it still multiplies months after they said it would stop,it also seeks areas like testicles and heart
@soan papdi: Many including me trusted the system so much that we went ahead and got the vaccine.
But I realized they took advantage of this trust.
Now that trust is gone. As simple as that.@Mi2: Not many, almost ALL Australians did trust the system. And we ended up being miles ahead of other countries that didn't follow the health advice. What are you on about?
@Rick Sanchez: Nothing at all to do with the fact that we live on an island are were happy to go along with authoritarianism/fascism.
Answer this Mr Genius:
Why did the excess death rate increase in WA as soon as the vaccine started rolling out, but well before WA had any sort of outbreak?
People have strong confirmation bias and when something threatens their world view they'll get quite nasty in defending it.
The irony…
Fact is the vax bypassed all the controls that were in place for a reason. You know the years of testing and trials for a start. And we still don:t know the contents of those vials because it's still under "emergency use authorisation". Total joke if it wasn't so sad.
People weren't informed so it was impossible for them to give informed consent. You know, the first priciple from Nuremberg, also required in Australia.
Sorry but the people backing this scam are simply in fairy land at this point.Fact is the vax bypassed all the controls that were in place for a reason.
I remember when the "plant-based" industry were using terms like beef or chicken,
the meat industry took offence to this and kind of banned them from using those terms,
because beef is of a cow and chicken is … well,…chicken.So, after that directive from the meat industry, I started to see names such as "chick'n" for a plant-based variation of …well…chicken.
Having the name, means you've 'earned' that right to use it,
or the name is intrinsically and inherently what its make-up is.To not do any medical trials and still call something it isn't, by virtue of its existence, is the actual trickery and deceptive behaviour. If ACCC can have all these rules around "deceptive" marketing or "bait advertising" for products, then applying these concepts would reveal where the dodginess was for the products which got emergency approval.
By the way, the TGA gets something like 70%? 80%? 90%? "funding" from private companies.
This was written in Dr. MA Demasi's substack blog.
It is a vaccine. Negs well deserved.
No it aint.
Also speaking to my cardiologist he's seen a massive uptick in heart issues.
Your cardiologist should be speaking up about this if he believes it is related to the medical countermeasures rollout, but it will come with a huge cost to them personally.
Hence why they don't. A few have and they get absolutely vilified in the media and threatened with losing their medical license. Most people haven't got the stomach for that.
True.
@mrdean: There's also a decent probability that people didn't seek medical attention during lockdown. Could be vaccines affecting heart. Could also be the effects of having COVID19 on the heart, there's been evidence in brain of issues as well (esp. with long COVID).
(esp. with long COVID).
Most of the cases of so called long covid can be attributable to the medical countermeasures, not the alleged virus. This should be obvious to anyone who reads the individual submissions to the parliamentary long covid inquiry late last year. Submission after submission documents the emergence post jab of long covid, but the individuals never make the connection. That whole inquiry was a sham.
Most people haven't got the stomach for that.
Nothing to do with stomach my friend. More to do with career and bank account growth.
@Mad Max: I believe there are some who are afraid to speak up. How many is impossible to know. Those who covet career & $$$ have convinced themselves with "safe & effective".
@mrdean: The majority of doctors and specialists that decided to speak up were close to retirement so they could afford to do so.
All the other ones had to make a decision between the truth and their career, lifestyle, family, commitments, etc.All the other ones had to make a decision between the truth and their career, lifestyle, family, commitments, etc.
Yeah, but IMO the majority of those genuinely believe (or at least believed back then) in vaccines, even though these were medical countermeasures. They didn't have to make a decision because they were already blue-pilled.
I have no idea how many truly know about the dangers of vaccines (even pre-2020) but who try to ignore it & just do the work because they can't afford to lose their job.
You don't lose your medical license for speaking out. You lose it because you speak out with no regard for the objective facts. 70% of the worlds population has received one dose of the Covid 19 vaccine, with 13.58 billion covid shots administered globally. With those numbers if the vaccine was causing these uptick in other health issues, then the figures would reflect it, which they don't. Stop wasting everybody's time on this conspiracy rubbish and instead join the adults in discussing how we can learn from Covid pandemics and better handle future pandemics.
@letmesee: Ok let's imagine everyone got the vaccine.
Why did I get covid again with worse symptoms than when I wasn't vaccinated?
If the vaccine works only for certain strains of covid why with each strain the news tells us to go and get more booster shots of old vaccines without any evidence that it would be helpful for the new variant?
Best case scenario is that vaccines didn't work. But they had no side effects and billions of dollars got wasted and still being wasted.
@Mi2: The point was so the hospitals didn't fill up and we wouldn't have as many deaths. It is like the flu, but brand new so nobody had any antibodies built up, so it was very infections.
@crfnx: Ignoring all other aspects of health and immune system and promoting vaccines constantly as the only hope is an example of misleading people for profit.
I have a friend who believes that he won't get sick during winter with flu shot.
He doesn't even understand the difference between flu and cold.
He does it maybe twice because his GP told him. And still getting sick.
I was on the same boat before I started paying attention to other aspects.
The whole point is that we have to focus on making sure that everyone has a strong immune system to being with.
Checking their D level, zinc and etc.
If this doesn't work or reduce the number of hospitalisations then we go for the vaccine.
Last year my D level was 51 and my GP told me that I'm not deficient because it's not below 50. How ridiculous. Caught cold multiple times that year.
Now it's 90 which is even higher than their summer standard and feeling better than ever.
Not even a runny nose which was something normal for me the whole year.
@Mi2: Do you really not know the answers to these questions by now? I suppose it's hard to find them on whatever conspiracy website or fake news site you frequent.
"Why did I get covid again with worse symptoms than when I wasn't vaccinated?"
Because of different strains of the virus and because of different levels of infection, and because of any other variance in your personal health at the time.
I don't know why it is so difficult for you conspiracy types to understand the imprecise nature of biology. The effectiveness of any medical intervention is going to vary person to person, as does the severity of any ailment. Vaccines are a type of prevention that works amazingly well in aggregate, but can't really guarantee the same results for every individual.
"why with each strain the news tells us to go and get more booster shots of old vaccines without any evidence that it would be helpful for the new variant?"
The vaccines aren't either going to work or not, they will have variable effectiveness per strain. This means that any covid vaccine is going to be better than none regardless of the strain.
"Best case scenario is that vaccines didn't work. But they had no side effects and billions of dollars got wasted and still being wasted."
Covid vaccines have saved millions of lives and reduced the overall suffering of countless others, and have also reduced the impact on health care around the world.
"side effects"
All medicines have side effects. If you cared to look up the data, Covid vaccine side effects are very mild and low risk. Much lower risk than having Covid (especially having Covid when not vaccinated).
All medicines have side effects. If you cared to look up the data, Covid vaccine side effects are very mild and low risk. Much lower risk than having Covid (especially having Covid when not vaccinated).
Do you really not comprehend the point people are trying to make here?
The 'data' comes from the trials that were run.
Who pays for the trials? The manufacturer does.
Who runs the trials? A third party company. Has having privatised building inspections in NSW worked out well, or do you think it's a case of producing the result that the person who pays wants?
Are the trials run in a scientifically sound way? The Pfizer trial started off as blind but was then unblinded due to 'ethical concerns that the control group were remaining unvaccinated while a pandemic was going on'. Therefore comparing reported adverse events in the vaccinated group becomes meaningless when the control group also had the vaccine. No problems to see here!
Why were we only given 'curated' data on this.
Why don't you read this article that explains how bad the trials were: https://blogs.bmj.com/bmj/2021/01/04/peter-doshi-pfizer-and-…
Let me guess, the British Medical Journal is a now conspiracy theory website?Approval:
Who approves the drug to go to market? A government body does.
Who funds the government body that does the approvals (here, the UK and the US)? Drug companies provide the overwhelming majority of their funds. Here the TGA gets over 93% of its funding from industry.
Could there possibly be any issue or conflict of interest there?Why does Pfizer want the trial data sealed away for 75 years? What could possibly be in there that they don't want us to know about?
@Mi2: Is the answer "you don't know the difference between a highly subjective personal anecdote and evidence arising from population studies undertaken by qualified experts"?
@letmesee: Hey there genius who knows it all.
Could you please inform us children why excess mortality remains inflated in countries where the vaccine has a high uptake compared to those who don't?
When you subtract the reported covid deaths away from ours there is still a massive uptick in those that are dying compared to expected values. No one seems to be able to explain this but surely you can oh wise one.So all of these educated doctors that have spoke out so far and suffered consequences is because they were repeating unobjective facts? Oh yes that's right, they mustn't have gotten approval from the ministry of truth first?
How about you let the adults talk and you continue pretending that we live in utopia.
@glennski: No genius here, just know when to listen to people that are way smarter than me, instead of some deadbeat grifters on the web.
If your claim that excess mortality remains inflated because of the covid shot, why haven't the anti-vax medical fraternity been able to prove it is directly attributed to the vaccine. You know do some research, put forward a peer reviewed paper and let the experts discuss it and evaluate the data. Instead all we get is cherry picked data, which doesn't take into consideration other factors that may be at play.
You realise educated doctors get their license revoked and sued for malpractice all the time, all around the world. even before covid. Just because they are a doctor doesn't mean they get it right all the time. However if the vast majority of specialist in a certain medical field are saying something, and have published and peer reviewed evidence , I tend to believe them more so than a small group who provide as evidence the classic but this one doctor did a study and it found this hidden treasure of truth nonsense. But lets put your argument to a logic test. Those doctors that did speak the truth, would probably be lets say very generously 5% of the worlds doctors/medical professionals, which makes the other 95% of the world's doctors/medical professionals liars because they are either cowards for not speaking up against it, or they wanted to eventually kill you with a vaccine shot. Wake up, you had a good run thinking you were about to uncover the "real truth", but its over. Time to move on to the next conspiracy.
@letmesee: @letmesee
Ok let's now have a proper convo.
why haven't the anti-vax medical fraternity been able to prove it is directly attributed to the vaccine. You know do some research, put forward a peer reviewed paper and let the experts discuss it and evaluate the data.
There isn't a 'anti-vax medical fraternity' per-se. There are people in the medical fraternity who have concern on the safety of these novel products which would normally have to go through a 10+ year approval process (obviously for safety reasons).
Studies on mortality have and continue to be done. Here is one example: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38274635/
You'll notice that this paper has been retracted (by the journal). Why? Well you can google the names of the authors and read the litany of 'fact check' and newspapers takes on the claims made in the paper. Their names are now smeared forever on the internet.
Why would they volunteer to ruin their names by publishing these papers?
Is it 'science' that is happening here?
One of the authors writes an article to offer some insight: https://petermcculloughmd.substack.com/p/retracted-covid-19-…This immense pressure from media and retraction from the journal is not a case of 'let the experts discuss it and evaluate the data', IMHO it is censorship, bullying and smearing.
'Oh but the fact check says they were promoters of dangerous misinformation like hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin as treatments, it even points to a study showing that they're not effective'
Yes there are studies that conclude that ivermectin is not effective in treatment of covid symptoms.
Yes there are studies that conclude that ivermectin is highly effective in treatment of covid symptoms, such as https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8248252/So, why aren't studies like the one above being talked about? Well you tell me. All I know is that despite the existence of positive studies for treatment using this drug it was shut down instantly in this country by the TGA once it gained publicity. In the US this drug was vilified as 'Horse medicine' and not fit for human consumption by their equivalent agency to the TGA. Ivermectin has been around for 6 decades, won the scientists who worked on it Nobel prizes for medicine, and is on the WHO's list of essential medicines.
It's worth pointing out that Ivermectin is a generic drug (off patent) which costs a single digit dollar amount for a course of treatment, whereas Paxlovid and Lagevrio cost over $1000. There are of course studies which promote Paxlovid for example as being great, and others not so much like this - https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanwpc/article/PIIS2666-6065(23)00012-3/fulltext
Would emergency authorisation for the vaccines have been granted if there was already effective treatment available to prevent serious disease?
Instead all we get is cherry picked data, which doesn't take into consideration other factors that may be at play.
Can you give some examples of this?
However if the vast majority of specialist in a certain medical field are saying something, and have published and peer reviewed evidence , I tend to believe them more so than a small group who provide as evidence
I get that people like to think like this but it goes against scientific principals to write off the minority. Science is a process and not a belief system. Science is never settled. Scientific findings should and are often challenged if there is reason or evidence to do so. Many of the papers on this topic are at odds with each other. My question is why have things unfolded the way they have in the last several years? Why was there a 2 meter rule with social distancing despite there being no evidence to support it providing any benefit? Why were we wearing cloth and surgical masks despite evidence that they did nothing at all to prevent transmission? Why were we wiping down every surface with alcohol sanitiser despite no evidence that transmission was happening via surface? Why did we abandon our pandemic plan that was in place before covid 19? Why were we told that the vaccine would prevent transmission yet everyone got covid? Why was natural immunity from prior infection not acceptable in place of a vaccination shot when it came to mandates? Why was it touted that vaccination was the only way out of the pandemic, ignoring the possibility of treatment?
Just because they are a doctor doesn't mean they get it right all the time.
I never said they can't be wrong. Pro-vaxxers like to argue that anti-vaxxers are either grifters or flat earth sov cit dummies (they often are btw). I was making the point that there are educated professionals that are in the medical industry calling for inquiry.
which makes the other 95% of the world's doctors/medical professionals liars because they are either cowards for not speaking up against it, or they wanted to eventually kill you with a vaccine shot
That's a very unsophisticated look at it. How many GPs do you think had time to look into this when they were worried about the massive restructure of their businesses/jobs to do telehealth, see the massive influx of patients. Many would see the circulars sent to them by the health department, AMA etc. assuring that the vax was the real deal and assume that nothing was out of order or untoward. Many would be vaccinated themselves or have it mandated by their employer. I don't blame or hold any grudge for those that had suspicions but kept quiet for the sake of their livelihood. But I would commend those few who have risked a lot to speak out. See this link that Cobalt_ posted just below - https://thewest.com.au/news/coronavirus/covid-19-doctors-for…
Is this line of thinking that hard to swallow?Time to move on to the next conspiracy.
Like what? The Earth is certainly a sphere and sovereign citizens are double digit IQ. 5G doesn't do anything and there are no 'microchips' in vaccines.
There are many people out there with such a distrust in the government and media who will believe anything you tell them without evidence if it goes against what the government or media says.
There are also others who have such a trust in what government and media say that they will never question it at all.
I believe that we would be better off in this country if there were less people in both the above groups, and stopped falling for newspaper x and government party x from pitting group x of people against group y of people who subscribe to government party y and newspaper y.I'd invite you to broaden your mind by having a look at some of the links posted and giving some critical thought to the arguments I've given.
It's a pity doctors were threatened with being de-registered by AHPRA if they so much as voiced concerns about COVID therapeutics and treatments.
https://thewest.com.au/news/coronavirus/covid-19-doctors-for…Could the heart issues be from the virus, not the vaccine?
Possible, but unlikely if heart issues arose post jab.
@mrdean: /taps forehead
Deep thinking here /s
Do "what are the odds all this autism is diagnosed right around the time kids get vaccinated" next
Remember to just ignore concepts like correlation and causality, just choose your own adventure, man
The staggering increase of early deaths via unexplained heart conditions in healthy people is only effecting the jabbed. There's no increase at all in those who chose to skip the jab.
If it were a problem caused by Covid itself, then there would be an equal number from both camps suffering. That's not the case though.
@infinite: No it's not - heart complications were higher in unvaccinated people who caught covid than those who got the vaccine.
@Rick Sanchez: How many shots are you up to now? I hope you're on at least your sixth booster since covid is such a bad virus that it's causing a massive rise in heart problems.
Whatever you do, keep believing the results from studies that are paid for by the companies making billions off of this. After all they're not the most litigated against industry in all of history. Oh wait, they are.
@glennski: At the moment yearly boosters are not recommended for under 65s, so I only have my original 2 boosters.
https://www.health.gov.au/our-work/covid-19-vaccines/getting…
my original 2 boosters.
The first 2 injections were of the 'Alpha recipe', for the Alpha "variant".
The extra 2 injections, after the first 2, were also of the 'Alpha recipe'.
For marketing purposes and to invoke confidence, it was called a "booster".Plus, tens of millions of extra vials were ordered, in excess of Australia's population,
so there was pressure from the top, to use up the vials before the expiry date and to try to free up the refrigeration space.
School-children and young adults were pushed down that path, as too much was bought for AU's population.So, the 'original booster' was only 'boosting' the same recipe, because the Alpha recipe was not to tackle the subsequent variants, eg. Delta, Omicron, etc.
@ddilrat: I believe part of the conspiracy is that all the medical research is kept under wraps, but luckily people in the know are spreading the truth though social media./s
@GrueHunter: Great appeal to authority!
Care to explain why excess deaths increased markedly a couple of months after the vaccine rollout in 2021 yet rates of covid cases in Australia were very low until Jan 2022 compared to most other countries?
AHPRA pretty much warned practitioners not to spread "misleading" information which included anecdotal observations. This is mostly an empty threat given that AHPRA can revoke licenses temporarily, but at least here in WA, SAT has the final say on whether the doctor can practice and unless it's gross malpractice (and I mean absolutely shockingly bad) then the doctor will keep their license.
My wife, GP, sees around 6000 unique patients per year. During the covid rollout she observed about 6 cases of pericarditis, 1 myocarditis, 12 neurological (like Bell's palsy and other 'MS-like' illnesses) linked to the vaccine. Most of these serious side effects still impact the patients almost 4 years later. (This doesn't even take into consideration the huge number of people getting palpitations, just those who were diagnosed by cardiologists/neurologists.)
When I look at the statistics about the vaccine related side effects I note that the reported incidences are not 1 in 1000 but closer to 1:20000. Which means there is probably a large discrepancy in reporting. But what do we know. You should listen to our 'tRusTed SciEntifiC AnD MediCAl AutHOrItiEs'.
Personal anecdote aside, 94% of Aussie adults had 2 vaccines. If there were truly mass side effects as your alluded to we would know about it, you cannot hide 20 million Australians have XXX issues.
(4% might have had the shots but why do you assume the damage would be 100%? That would be too obvious. One only has to look at the global health statistics AFTER the mrna shots came out to come to a logical conclusion. Unfortunately when we are dealing with pseudo-religious topics like 'vaccine science' people prefer to go with their faith and avoid the data and facts as much as possible.
Unfortunately when we are dealing with pseudo-religious topics like 'vaccine science'
Are you implying immunisation science is faith based (Pseudo Religion) or are you attempting to say immunisation science is pseudoscience?
Either way, that is honestly a hilariously bad take.
@EightImmortals: Which bit is "blind"?
Oh you mean all the trials that give us all the evidence and the publishing and the peer review and the more blind trials
The stuff religion totally has as well
They're definitely the same thing
@GrueHunter: So which peer-reviewed placebo controlled blind studies did you read before you took the shot?
Please post links.
I've got a better conspiracy theory for antivaxxers…. what if you're listening to lies from an enemy state wanting to undermine our health?
@SlickMick: Well in the case of having two competing theories I tend to then default to what I can verify with my own eyes. And in 2020 THERE WAS NO PANDEMIC period. OK a sample size of one could be wrong, so I started asking people, hundreds of people all around the world and not a single person to this day has said that they actually personally knew of anyone who was sick or dying in any greater numbers than nay other year (that changed in 2021 of course). That observation was also confirmed by the all-cause mortality statistics for 2019/20, there was little blip but nothing out of normal parameters. Nothing like the 16-20% excess mortality we are seeing now. So if my own experience and that of literally everyone I spoke to was the same and that observation was backed by official government statistics then I know where I'm going.
“The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command.”
― George Orwell, 1984@EightImmortals: Are you kidding? Of the people I know in the US everyone knew of covid related deaths. And a lot of the people I know I'm Europe.
Are you saying those videos of overcrowded hospitals in Italy are fake?@Rick Sanchez: My question was did you personally (not on the TV) know of anyone dying or getting sick in 2020 in any greater numbers than any other year?
Of the people I know in the US everyone knew of covid related deaths.
Could be other reasons they were labelled as covid related deaths. James Miller MD (in the USA) has written a short affidavit attesting to what he experienced during 2020/21/22.
https://www.midwesterndoctor.com/p/the-price-of-truth-vs-dec…
"Whilst we were sitting at the nurses station, a news article was seen that had been published in a local newspaper indicating that the hospital, specifically our ICU, was overrun with a flurry of COVID-19 patients which was causing difficulties for the hospital's function. This was obviously the opposite of the truth as we were currently sitting in the ICU and it was only approximately 30% full."
"For example, one of my patients was an elderly lady who had been in an institution, nursing home, for quite some time and was dialysis dependent due to her kidney failure. The patient fell and arrived at the hospital with a brain bleed and she initially tested negative for COVID. Then, the hospital repeatedly tested her for COVID-19 over multiple days until they obtained a COVID-19 positive result. She shortly thereafter passed away due to her brain bleed and her death was labeled a COVID death. When I attempted to rectify the false cause of death I was prevented from doing so."
@mrdean: US is a basket case of sensationalised, politicised, commercialised maniacs, in all areas.
Can people stop using the US as an example of any issues (actual or alleged) in Australia? We are not, and hopefully never will be, anything like them.
@Chandler: My father in law was in hospital with an aneurism when he contracted and recovered from Covid. He died three weeks later from an additional aneurism.
But upon death, still tested positive for Covid, so you can guess what they put as cause of death on the certificate. Yup, Covid. No mention of massive brain bleed.
Gotta pump up those numbers some how.
@Gehirn: He was already at deaths door with massive brain damage before he contracted covid.
You have convinced me, Doc. It was covid.
@randomvis: I wouldn't be surprised if the misattribution of deaths to COVID is less "government agenda" and more "more COVID more $$$" given how much money governments were throwing around during COVID.
"Do we label this one as aneurysm or do we label it COVID and get some more funding… the patient did have COVID, and COVID could have contributed to their death, so technically not completely false…"
@mrdean: PCR tests were ruled 97% ineffective and unreliable.
All they were good for was to keep people locked down and to increase the manufactured number of people died for Covid.
https://halturnerradioshow.com/index.php/news-selections/wor…@Mad Max: Do yourselves a favour a google Hal Turner before you waste your time reading this hot garbage.
It's beyond comical that you used Hal Turner as a source. Honestly, just great stuff.
@youfnc: Regardless of who reported this, it is a true fact. Mainstream media don't want to report this things because it contraddicts what they have been bainwashing people with for 2 years.
@Mad Max: mAinStrEaM mEdiA
I guess it's shorter than typing "any form of media, anywhere, ever, that says things that don't substantiate my deeply held belief that the reason I'm not wealthy and popular is that I'm being held back by a global conspiracy, and definitely not because of anything to do with my personality or capacity for evidence-based reasoning"
@youfnc: This is the link for the court proceedings
https://www.oevento.pt/2020/11/16/tribunal-arrasa-eficacia-p…
@youfnc: This is the link for the court proceedings
https://www.oevento.pt/2020/11/16/tribunal-arrasa-eficacia-p…
That would be too obvious
Yes that would make all the lies too obvious…
Excess deaths in highly vaccinated countries are still sitting around 20%. Why is this? We don't know because it isn't being investigated.
Excess deaths are entirely attributable to SARS-CoV-2, and a starting to return to baseline. This has occurred because despite our best efforts, we haven't been able build perfect protection against it. This is the case for most vaccines, but especially for viruses that change rapidly.
You wouldn't know about excess deaths, if it weren't for the scientists who are studying this stuff. These statistics don't come from Joe Rogan and his ilk, they come from the same experts you're claiming are hiding things.
There's no conspiracy, the virus is orders of magnitude more dangerous than the vaccines, and any side effect of the vaccines is also a (higher) risk from the virus itself
Again, there's no conspiracy, only uneducated people on the internet. Go spread disinformation elsewhere.
@bikebot: lols mate, even the msm are starting to fess up to it.
https://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/covid-vaccines-may-have-ca…
It usually takes them more than 3 years for them to catch up but I guess the data set is so huge now they can't cover it up any more.
@EightImmortals: So much vagueness in that research.. these guys sum it up well: https://www.miragenews.com/linking-covid-vaccines-to-excess-…
If msm and doctors say something thing which doesn't fit your narrative it's a coverup because "reasons" , but when they do hint at something similar you dont think it's an attempt to secure research funding or capitilize on paranoid readership?
Considering most news thrives on doom and gloom does it surprise you to see more articles like yours now that short term damage can be limited to your audience?
@wyrmy: Did you actually read the ludicrous hypotheses put forward in that article?
OK they weren't as silly as some of the other things put forward as an explanation for the excess deaths after 2020, like 'climate change' and 'gardening', but still. 'The return of the flu?' As if one prevalent virus would kindly take a back seat for the new kid on the block. Look up the official government numbers for the flu in 2020…are people really that gullible?
And just like I didn't notice a 'pandemic' in 2020, I am seeing a lot of damage and deaths in people who took the shot. Not everyone, not by a long shot, but way too many. I know far too many people who regret taking the shots, including my own dad, far too many who are constantly sick now but were healthy before and far too many who are still in denial and are more than happy to blame 'anything' else. Granted the 'died suddenly's' we noticed in 2021/22 have started to slow down this year but are still happening in way too many young people.
In the end it all comes down to beliefs and if people want to believe the covid narrative then that's on them. My concern is the amount of violence and discrimination issued on those who refused to believe. If it wasn't for that I wouldn't have nearly as vocal as I was/am on the topic.
Anyway, I'm off to the coast for the weekend, the 'elephant in the room' memes kind of petered out last year so if people can't/wont figure it out by now I don't know what else to say. It's not like there's a shortage of evidence out there.
I get what you are trying to say and agree that issues should be more obvious but even the ones that have had legitimate issues after the vaccine are immediately dismissed as making it up, as it being unrelated to the vaccine or that the same issue could have happened via covid. Lots of people are afraid to even speak about it for how they will get treated and doctors are reluctant to label things as being caused by the vaccine.
A colleague of my wife, young guy in his 20s, got the vaccine, a week later he is in hospital with one of the heart issues (I forget which one), took nearly 2 years to get back to normal, no doctor will say it was because of the vaccine, just a coincidence they say.
But with the AZ vaccine, get a blood clot and everyone believes you because the government said it was a thing.
as it being unrelated to the vaccine or that the same issue could have happened via covid
So how do you know any issues post vax aren't unrelated or due to COVID?
But with the AZ vaccine, get a blood clot and everyone believes you because the government said it was a thing.
No, it's because the data shows a direct connection.
The same thing happened to me except in my case it was a black cat crossing my path. I never believed that myth before thinking it was only an old wive's tale. But sure enough 53 years 7 months later the doctor told me I had heart problems.
the issues don't sow up IN EVERYBODY
Seen this yesterday.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/06/04/covid-vaccines-m…Covid vaccines may have helped fuel rise in excess deaths
Experts call for more research into side effects and possible links to mortality rates
They warned that side effects linked to the Covid vaccine had included ischaemic stroke, acute coronary syndrome and brain haemorrhage, cardiovascular diseases, coagulation, haemorrhages, gastrointestinal events and blood clotting.
If covid was the deadly threat it was claimed to be then why weren't we all stepping over bodies in the streets? You cannot hide that level of injury and mortality. /s
I don't believe the side effects of covid vaccines are any worse than any other emergency medical authorised treatment. We knew we'd likely maim and kill people as part of those authorisations. That's why they exist in the first place: to take proper safety and efficacy testing out of the equation to speed deployment.
If I was to argue for side effects my argument is that cardiac issues often take time to present. It's a silent killer, so if you're otherwise healthy then how would you even know there's a problem? Give it five or ten years and then we'll have the stats. That's how safe medications are tested, over years and years, carefully and cautiously.
Finally and obviously, the same government that had zero problem running around like a headless chicken over covid is also the one that collects the statistics. Forget malice, these people are incompetent.
If there were truly mass side effects as your alluded to we would know about it, you cannot hide 20 million Australians have XXX issues.
Back in 2022, the number of Australians who had reported severe adverse reactions to hospitals and doctors was already at a whopping 137,000 people (https://www.tga.gov.au/news/covid-19-vaccine-safety-reports/…).
To the absolute disgust of the Australian senate and wider public, in 2023 the Federal Labor government ordered the TGA and Department of Health to stop tracking adverse reactions and stop publicly reporting them.
The website that provided that up to date data was removed completely along with all the published data & no longer exists: https://www.health.gov.au/initiatives-and-programs/covid-19-…
What's even worse now is that …….. and I'm not even joking about this………. To report adverse reactions from a Covid jab or booster and get medical help, the current Federal Government is advising Australians to call a hotline called "1300 Medicine" (1300 633 424) or visit "www.1300medicine.com.au". The people on that hotline are a mix of off-shore customer service operators and pharmacy students who advise on possible side-effects of PBS listed medicines. They will simply refer you to read some brochures published on the internet by the drug companies who currently produce the boosters available in Australia.
Back in 2022, the number of Australians who had reported severe adverse reactions to hospitals and doctors was already at a whopping 137,000 people (https://www.tga.gov.au/news/covid-19-vaccine-safety-reports/…)
Here's a more up to date version:
https://www.tga.gov.au/news/covid-19-vaccine-safety-reports/…You added severe to make it sound worse than it is
From the above link:
The most frequently reported side effects suspected to be associated with the vaccines include headache, muscle pain, fever, fatigue and nausea. Skin reactions at the site of the injection are also common and can include pain, swelling, redness and an itchy rash. These are recognised side effects of vaccination and are usually transient and mild.
You can report directly to the TGA, to 1300medicine or your health professional. They say the 1300medicine line is staffed by registered pharmacists, are they lying or are you? They do also advise to call 000 if it is an emergency. Their role in this case is to take your report, they can also provide advice as a pharmacist. They do not provide medical assistance, if you need medical assistance do what you always do and you can even report the adverse reaction/s to the health professional you see.
I'm not sure why you feel the need to misrepresent things.
For Pfizer at least, all batches were different.
It recently came out that Pfizer employees had their own batch made (100% saline, being the implication)Given that this was a WORLDWIDE roll out of an EMERGENCY USE AUTHORISATION EXPERIMENTAL MRNA injection that had NO CLINICAL TRIALS, would it not have made sense to keep extremely close record keeping? I.e. who received which batch, and side effects? It's no conspiracy that many people had significant side effects, but unless you were unable to walk, no one cared for recording it.
It's also no conspiracy that hospital statistic keeping were extremely laissez faire, because the Government would pay extra for patients with COVID. Plenty of instances of car crash victims coming in, basically dead already, getting PCR tested and dying from their accident wounds, but were logged as death WITH (not by) COVID.
Oh, speaking of PCR - that test can find anything you want, given enough spin cycles. Recently found to be 97% ineffective in a European court.
Not to mention that you were not considered 'vaccinated' until 2 weeks after your second dose - so anything that had a heart attack one day after their first pfizer jab could be chalked up as an unvaccinated death WITH Covid. They also didn't vaccinate palliative care patients who were on their way out, another great way to bump up unvaccinated deaths.
Check out how many influenza deaths were recorded 2020/2021/2022. Next to none. All pushed to Covid
Excess deaths mortality only jumped up after the 2021 vaccine roll out.Anyone remember all the TIk Tok videos of dancing health care workers, because the hospitals were so empty they had all the free time? But the media certainly scared us with "hospital bed capacity" without telling you that an arbitrary number of beds could be assigned by a hospital at any time, and this was not representative of every bed in the hospital being taken.
Oh, speaking of PCR - that test can find anything you want, given enough spin cycles. Recently found to be 97% ineffective in a European court
Do you think Pcr was invented for/during covid?
@Ughhh: Unfortunately the inventor Kary Mullis died in 2019 - he was on record saying that you can find anything you want with these tests, if you spin enough cycles. I recall the protocol for the number of spins used to detect covid was raised at least once to encourage more positive test results. 45 cycles if I recall? Which is huge
PCR is a wholly inappropriate test method for a virus. They just keep spinning cycles until they find a component loosely related to corona virus and go "yep, that's covid alright"
I get the point you are trying to make.
Let me pose a hypothetical to you. What if you had cancer or some other life threatening illness and the only drug available was an experimental drug still in trials but you could gain access to it. Would you take it?
Not that the covid vaccines were experimental. They are an mRNA vaccine which people don’t seem to grasp mRNA has been around for sometime and are the future for medicines
I might. The biggest problem that people have with it isn't that it as available, its more that they were forced or at least heavily coerced to take it.
As for them being experimental, I'd consider them absolutely that. mRNA has been around for some time but not used in a mass distributed vaccine and not ever used to treat a novel coronavirus so it was a world first/unestablished in those two ways.
They also required emergency use authorisation, because they hadn't gone through the proper long term checks yet. Another word for drugs that haven't yet been long term trialled and approved for mass use? Experimental.Agree with you that people should not have been forced or coerced into taking it and even having to wear masks outside etc.
With hundreds of millions of people having taken the covid vaccine, it’s fair to say it’s safe. The adverse events whilst very unfortunate, are within the levels of other drugs and we are now about 4 years on
@Dollar General: Too early to tell I think. Excess deaths in countries with high vaccination rates are still sitting at 20% above a baseline. Why isn’t this being investigated let alone discussed?
Gives credence to the thought that those in power probably know more than we do and are afraid of the consequences should certain facts come to light.
@LanceVance: Because if you knew anything about epidemiology, you would realise that the excess deaths was a trend and not something caused by vaccines…
Sincerely, someone that took graduate level courses in epidemiology and public health
The adverse events whilst very unfortunate, are within the levels of other drugs and we are now about 4 years on
That's completely untrue.
No drug released in Australia has ever even come close to recording the volume of adverse effects the Covid jab & it's boosters have recorded.
Up until 2020, the drug or booster with the highest average rate of adverse reactions was typically always the seasonal flu shot, which over 90% of Australians would take. The total yearly adverse reactions for that was about 2000 people a year (https://www.tga.gov.au/pandemic-h1n1-influenza-vaccine-suspe…). The Covid jab resulted in 25 times that number of adverse reactions in 2021 and again in 2022 (https://www.tga.gov.au/news/covid-19-vaccine-safety-reports/…).
The Covid jab and it's boosters have already gone down in medical history as being among the most damaging medicines ever publicly released & every year the data coming out about the severity of their on-going adverse reactions makes it even more damning. In just 2022, there were over 450 cases of myocarditis and pericarditis in children aged between 12 and 17 from just two of the available Covid boosters (https://www.tga.gov.au/news/covid-19-vaccine-safety-reports/…). Most of those kids will have those heart conditions for the rest of their lives. The total number of heart conditions caused by a booster that year is in the multiple thousands. To put that number in perspective, all opioid related overdoses leading to hospitalisation in Australia in 2022 was less than a thousand people.
In just 2022, there were over 450 cases of myocarditis and pericarditis in children aged between 12 and 17 from just two of the available Covid boosters
Covid vaccination is not recommended for children aged 12 to 17; so if they are taking it it is because they have pre-existing conditions (i.e. immunocompromised) that put them at higher risk if they catch coronavirus. Those pre-existing conditions could be contributing towards the adverse reaction, increasing it's severity, or causing/contributing to other complications. See also, xkcd:2618
Covid vaccination is not recommended for children aged 12 to 17
It was however the advice to force them on kids from state government health authorities and from the medical boards that were demanding GP's tell people up until 2023.
@infinite: I'm unsure when the recommendations were changed, but they were never "to force them". I believe it was recommended early on, same as it was recommended for not-at-risk adults. And there were (that I can recall) never any restrictions placed (by the government) on children in regards to the covid vaccinations.
Covid vaccination is not recommended for children aged 12 to 17; so if they are taking it it is because they have pre-existing conditions (i.e. immunocompromised) that put them at higher risk if they catch coronavirus.
Amazing how it shifted from "take a countermeasure to protect the immunocompromised (those who can't take the shot)", to "the immunocompromised should take the countermeasure to protect themselves."
Very few questioned it. We're at the point now that it doesn't matter what illnesses people have, or even if women are pregnant, the advice generally is "take whatever is given."
Amazing how it shifted from "take a countermeasure to protect the immunocompromised (those who can't take the shot)", to "the immunocompromised should take the countermeasure to protect themselves."
(IMO) Now that the risk has eased due to the current variants being less deadly and less infectious, the need for the whole population to be vaccinated has reduced, to the point now that it is treated similarly to the flu shot.
Regarding that shift - remember that just because you're vaccinated doesn't mean you won't catch X, as we have seen with all the variants of covid. But if everyone is vaccinated, then the virus is much less likely to survive long enough in the population to mutate beyond the protection given by the vaccine.
With regards to covid, having a decent proportion of the population vaccinated means the virus spreads slower (since they're not getting as heavily infected) and thus protects those in the population who either can't have the vaccination or even if vaccinated are still at risk.
A vaccination is to your body like the West is to Ukraine. An arms dealer prepping it for an invasion by a foreign body (i.e.
Russiaa virus). It doesn't stop the virus from invading, and while it's there it may still damage the place, but your immune system has been given plans ahead of time on how to attack the virus, meaning that instead of having to gear itself up after infection, it's already got itself at least partly prepared. Especially important with a novel virus like covid.the advice generally is "take whatever is given."
Advice regarding what? The covid vacine? What do you mean by "take whatever is given."?
I asked my GP about the covid vaccine (I think it was last year) and she said no need to worry about it since I'm not in any of the risk categories.It doesn't stop the virus from invading, and while it's there it may still damage the place, but your immune system has been given plans ahead of time on how to attack the virus, meaning that instead of having to gear itself up after infection, it's already got itself at least partly prepared.
Sadly, this oft-repeated belief is a limited & narrow view of what really happens when people get sick & how the immune system reacts. The mainstream admits it is highly complex & they don't know how it works. Sadly as well, no thought is given to the changes "vaccination" induces in the body, ie it CHANGES & forces the body to react in a specific way to all future infections. The first stages of an illness is crucial in mounting a response, vaccination bypasses this entirely & focuses on the endpoint of the natural process - the production of antibodies (which the mainstream also doesn't totally understand - they just see the production & ASSUME that is all that is needed to ward off illness, even though some people NEVER produce antibodies against certain illnesses & yet are still protected).
It is such a complex topic it would be impossible to give it justice on a forum such as this, but I urge you to THINK about the process from a wider perspective, not the generic belief you've reiterated.
@mrdean: Whilst I agree with what you are saying, and that the view I presented may be incomplete - is it incorrect?
Also not all vaccinations are engineered - some are modified versions of viruses, some are even the literal virus, just being given to people under controlled circumstances (i.e. health, age, etc) which mean that it will not be as severe, but some form of protection from/for future infections will be achieved. Does your statement apply to these vaccinations also?
@Chandler: It applies to all vaccines.
One way to think about it is this: fever. It is a natural response when ill. There was a time when the mainstream recommended reducing it with drugs. Lately the mainstream seems to have reversed course & they now say to let it run its course, monitoring it in case it increases to a dangerous level.
Think of what a vaccine is engineered to do according to the mainstream & your view; supposedly train the immune system, give it a taste so that it reacts slightly with a fever or rash or other symptom to prepare it to meet the real illness. Note, I'm not saying I believe any of this, just re-iterating the mainstream view. So after the vaccine, if the person contracts an illness with fever as a symptom, the body responds with a MILD fever, probably less intense than it would have if not vaccinated. Is this a good thing though? That's the question. Because if a strong fever is a necessary response by the body to get over an illness, vaccines have now prevented this from happening because it has changed, or "trained" the body in how to respond. Can you see how this may not be a good thing? Instead of getting over an illness, it may in fact create a sub-clinical CHRONIC condition where the body is trying to mount a response, but it can't because it has been modified to respond in a certain way.
And I'm not even touching on all the other ingredients/excipients/contaminants/trace elements in a vaccine that the body has to unquestionable deal with when injected. That's a whole other discussion, as is the notion of "viruses" hijacking cells (personally I believe this is a major myth that also needs to be talked about).
but some form of protection from/for future infections will be achieved. Does your statement apply to these vaccinations also?
Vaccines aren't guaranteed to do anything for anyone. It's simply that there is just likely a chance they'll have the desired reaction (the vaccine effectiveness for the yearly flu shot for example is a 40% - 60% likely chance of effectiveness for those who take it). A good percentage of those given any vaccine won't have any response to it at all, be it positive or negative. Then a percent of those taking it will have a negative outcome.
With that in mind, people have to be allowed to decide for themselves what if any drugs they wish to put in their own body and if their age, health and well-being dictates it's worth risking the outcome of the drug or not.
Now that the risk has eased due to the current variants being less deadly and less infectious, the need for the whole population to be vaccinated has reduced, to the point now that it is treated similarly to the flu shot.
There was never a need for anyone to take the jab or boosters, they never prevented the spread of the virus at all.
@infinite: Debatable, and hard to determine for Australia in my opinion. We had major lockdowns through the toughest portions of the pandemic, and then once we all started being physically present with others again, we had variants that the vaccinations were less effective against. Assuming this is accurate, yes you could argue that the vaccinations may not have been required, or at least not pushed as hard. Easy to say all of this in hindsight. We haven't had to deal with a severe novel virus for a long time…
We haven't had to deal with a severe novel virus for a long time…
The novel virus panic may have been inflated in order to usher in the era of mrna countermeasures. We have been told by the WEF that the 4IR will change what it means to be human…..
@infinite: One of the U.S.courts tends to agree. I wonder if Australia is paying attention?
"Addressing the merits, the panel held that the district court misapplied the Supreme Court’s decision in Jacobson v. Massachusetts, 197 U.S. 11 (1905), in concluding that the Policy survived rational basis review. Jacobson held that mandatory vaccinations were rationally related to preventing the spread of smallpox. Here, however, plaintiffs allege that the vaccine does not effectively prevent spread but only mitigates symptoms for the recipient and therefore is akin to a medical treatment, not a “traditional” vaccine. Taking plaintiffs’ allegations as true at this stage of litigation, plaintiffs plausibly alleged that the COVID-19 vaccine does not effectively “prevent the spread” of COVID-19. Thus, Jacobson does not apply."
In: Case: 22-55908, 06/07/2024, ID: 12890145, DktEntry: 54-1, Page 1 of 33 In Health Freedom Defense Fund v. Los Angeles Unified School District!
People were not forced to take vaccines, they were forced to take untested medical treatments.
One of the U.S.courts tends to agree.
An appeals court permitted the reopening of a lawsuit based on being previously dismissed due to prior case law, which they argued did not directly apply.
Now, if such lawsuit wins you could come to the conclusion you have, but at this case you're conflating an appealant court decision to permit the reopening of a case, with the result of the actual court case decision.
wonder if Australia is paying attention
Why would Australian courts pay attention to us supreme court case law?
@SBOB: Sorry, I thought I replied to this post yesterday?
Australia should be paying attention because if it is happening over there we might see some challenges to the government's actions during the scamdemic happening here. Not holding my breath, but who knows?
The most frequently reported side effects suspected to be associated with the vaccines include headache, muscle and joint pain, fever, chills and nausea. Skin reactions at the site of the injection are also common and can include pain, swelling, redness and an itchy rash. These are recognised side effects of vaccination and are usually transient and mild.
FYI. Some comments here give me similar adverse reactions 🤔. Where can I report this?
You can consider them experimental. Doesn’t make them so.
@davowan: It doesn't matter what people consider them to be, the Pharma companies themselves stated on the record they were experimental and that's the reason they sought government level immunity from criminal and civil action before releasing them.
Very simple. Optional vs basically forced and vilified.
Also very very unlikely chance of death in young healthy individuals.
And zero evidence/lies about effectiveness of the vaccine in preventing spread (to protect others).Not that the covid vaccines were experimental.
Wut ?
The drug companies themselves explicitly stated they were experimental and that's why they wouldn't release them for consumption without a guaranteed 100% legal immunity from fines, prosecution or civil action from all federal government's, in regards to the unknown side-effects of the drugs.
(hopefully) live and learn.
Wow…you got so negged hard,
and that is even after you complied,
by receiving the injections.It's either bots or some serious case of projection and bullying.
yuor the lucky one, others have been disabled and died from experimental vaccine
@LanceVanc:Sorry to hear, hope things turn out good.
Covid vaccines may have contributed to rise in excess deaths, researchers suggestlol not the news.com.au misrepresenting what the researchers said…
What the researchers actually said for example:Block-quote “A study assessing excess mortality in the USA observed a substantial increase in excess mortality attributed to non-COVID causes during the first 2 years of the pandemic. The highest number of excess deaths was caused by heart disease, 6% above baseline during both years. Diabetes mortality was 17% over baseline during the first year and 13% above it during the second year. Alzheimer’s disease mortality was 19% higher in year 1 and 15% higher in year 2. In terms of percentage, large increases were recorded for alcohol-related fatalities (28% over baseline during the first year and 33% during the second year) and drug-related fatalities (33% above baseline in year 1 and 54% in year 2).82
And…
Block-quote In conclusion, excess mortality has remained high in the Western World for three consecutive years, despite the implementation of COVID-19 containment measures and COVID-19 vaccines.Which means, yes, excess deaths still were high, and yes that should be examined. What they did not say in the article is what news.com.au is suggesting that Covid vaccines contributed to excess deaths…
But what do you expect from someone getting their science news from Murdoch?
Pfizer 1 shot heart inflammation checking in.
Safe and effective…
Come back for 2nd shot when you feel recovered they said.
WTF GFY. Maybe over my literal dead body.If there is a massive uptick as claimed then I suggest the cariologist publish a paper in a reputable journal after gathering the evidence.
Making a website with the claims, posting on forums, passing around anecdotes or putting opinions on X is not the answer.
Assuming they want to hear it, there's a lot of censorship happening with this topic.
They did (https://health.economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/industry/em…).
He said there have already been international calls to suspend mRNA vaccines like those manufactured by Pfizer and Moderna because of the serious adverse effects especially related to the cardiovascular system. However, a comparison done up till June 2021, and published in a peer-reviewed research journal, showed that the Oxford/AstraZeneca's Covid vaccine is far worse than Pfizer's mRNA jab in terms of cardiovascular effects, heart attacks, strokes, death and clotting problem in both younger and older adults, he said.
They then successfully campaigned globally, not just locally, with the main UK college of cardiologists to halt usage entirely for a number of the boosters, as well as limiting recommended usage for most of the public (https://canberradaily.com.au/british-cardiologist-calls-for-…).
An independent re-analysis of the original Pfizer and Moderna clinical trial data, conducted by some of the world’s top medical scientists and published last year, found that patients are more likely to suffer serious harm from the vaccine – hospitalisation, disability or a life-changing event – than they are to be hospitalised with Covid. This was always the case, even when the original Wuhan strain was prevalent. For Dr Malhotra, the appalling conclusion is inescapable: “these vaccinations should never have been approved for use in a single human”.
Dr Malhotra points out, for example, the obvious problems that follow when national regulators – responsible for ensuring that new pharmaceutical products are safe before they are authorised for public use – are dependent on Big Pharma funding. “Most people don’t know that”, he says. “The Chair of the British Medical Association didn’t believe me that our regulator takes 86 per cent of its money from Big Pharma”. Australia’s Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA) derives 96 per cent of its income from the companies it is supposed to be regulating. Seventy per cent of the World Health Organization’s money comes “with strings attached”.
“Norman Fenton, Emeritus Professor of Risk Information Management at Queen Mary University in London, says that 50 per cent of excess deaths in the UK since 2021 are directly or indirectly caused by the Covid vaccine. What we know from the Australian Bureau of Statistics is that most of these excess deaths now in Australia are not Covid-related. And given all the other evidence we have about the harms of the vaccine, it’s very clear that these have to have been playing a significant role. Is the Covid vaccination the number one factor? I can’t tell you for sure. Is it a major contributing factor? Almost certainly.”
Then on top of that, their collective campaigning for a federal inquiry into the jab/boosters and an expanded compensation program for those suffering heart conditions due to the jab/boosters was agreed too and will happen in 2025 after the next UK federal election (https://www.bbc.com/news/health-67935037).
One of the many reasons the UK government agreed to this was that Cardiologists across Europe wrote to the UK Govt, supporting his studies, his work, his campaign and discussed how they'd found the same levels of increased heart problems caused by Covid jabs and boosters as well (https://www.hartgroup.org/letter-top-cardiologist/).
It's almost like the scientific method that people are decrying in here actually works…
Sorry that happened to you, it's a really shit situation / catch 22 isn't it though.
I have a friend who has had similar cardiovascular issues since getting the jab, and he's only really just getting back to normal cardio / pulmonary function now and has taken up running again.
Need to weigh up the amount of deaths vs amount of people who get horribly affected like yourself, and unfortunately a "for the better good" choice was made with some seriously messed up consequences.
But would the alternative consequences have been worse? Probably given the death tolls in other countries.
TLDR: This sucks.
'..çovid shot…' and '…not a vaccine…' what are you on about?
Covid itself can and does affect the heart
I was about 25 and had sudden onset of chest pain after my first Moderna shot. Then the news about its use being suspended by the Nords came out. I had a lot of scans but no underlying cause was discovered so I was forced to take the second shot or lose my job (Victorian).
I met several young guys around your age at a few of the anti-mandate rallies with a similar story.
Is it still an issue? Sounds similar to what I had. Worth digging as far as you can for a diagnosis. Feel free to DM me.
Same here. I work in ICU and the amount of my colleagues who ended up injured post vaccine is massive. I ended up with a heart condition after my third mandated vaccine whilst other colleagues were hospitalised for myocarditis and other issues. Several of my colleagues lost mothers / fathers / husbands. When I went for my second echocardiogram after taking medication for a while, I asked the sonographer what they were seeing and he said they had a mass increase in young, fit previously healthy people coming in with heart issues. It's not just heart problems - my cousin was hospitalised a few days after his second - they thought he was having a stroke but concluded it was the Pfizer vax he had been given. My mother ended up with a neurological disorder - took her 3 years to get a vaccine injury diagnosis. Never again. I regret not leaving my job and remaining healthy and unvaccinated.
Sorry to hear that happened to you mate, it's a crime that this is being swept under the rug and those in the medical community who are seeing this happen are too afraid to speak out.
Hey bro, sorry to hear about your negative outcomes. For any others reading this in the same scenario, it absolutely sucks. Money can't buy health, and this sort of thing is irreversible. I hope it can galvanise you to help push back if anything similar is pushed again
So THIS is what happens to your brain when you don't turn off "autoplay" on YouTube!
And when you don't have a job and can just dribble words on the internet…
Algorithms gonna algorithm…
That's enough internet for you today
This is why it is my opinion that the public should focus on replacing government with uncensored artificial intelligence.
Lol…
Written by Chat GPT itself.
I'll be back
I'm just waiting for the day the so called uncensored AI works out that humanity itself is the problem and degrading the planet.
Solution: Get rid of humanity.
ok
Pulls out the popcorn.
Move on people.
Seems Darwinism missed a few.
This is referring to OP.
what the
Ok and? Next time when a pandemic happens, just make it difficult then people will get vaccinated. Got ya!
You had me until the bit about AI. In my opinion, it is not necessary. Just need to get real humans who have empathy into positions like Fauci had & government in general.
The current fear over bird flu is, in my opinion, aimed primarily at the culling of animals under the biosecurity act (they did this recently with bees in nsw, killed a lot of them) which will make it even more difficult for small farmers, drive up the cost of meat/eggs even more (this is already happening, noticed chicken raised $1 per kg higher last couple of weeks), enable the government to mandate more toxic injections into livestock, & make more money for the pharma companies.
OP's post and comment history shows the account was only made to voice their agenda. FFS.
I thought it was the voices in their head arguing that was spilling on to the keyboard.
Doesn't look that way to me, but I suppose one never knows.
No need, but I'll just mention account created 19/04, plenty of comments before those ones you linked to (which started around late May).
When taken in context of other bargain related posts, it doesn't support your assertion that the "account was only made to voice their agenda."
Although, it is impossible to know for sure.
The OP not replying or commenting in this thread so far (like in the only other thread-poll they create), does tend to lend credence to your argument.
I'm so glad we did not get so many of these crazies in Australia, and Covid did not become the political circus it did in the US.
Look at the results: over a million excess death in the US. In Australia, around 20,000 and a greater proportion from nursing homes.We got plenty wrong of course. There was very limited info available on effectiveness on masks and lockdowns. But you can tell the nutjobs when they go after the aspect that had the most scientific data, vaccines.
vaccines.
Sadly, we've been deceived. There is no doubt. Now, it's just a matter of more people realising the unpleasant truth. Which is why governments all over the western world are massively pushing for censorship under the guise of misinformation.
https://content.iospress.com/articles/international-journal-…
Someone from the Children’s Health Defense, a prominent anti-vaccine group headed by renowned brain worm recipient Robert F Kennedy Jr thinks that what was used in the placebo negates the proven effectiveness of the HPV vaccine? Oh my!
Good thing the people who ran the study are experts in
vaccinesmolecular biologyepidemiologyphilosophy. Otherwise it'd be hard to take them seriously.In other news, cigarette manufacturer studies have shown that the smooth, smooth taste of tobacco cures your ills and improves your sexual stamina.
Tomljenovic had a brilliant career in science until she & a co-author started publishing quality work that put in a dent in the "safe & effective" vaccine mantra that we've all had drummed into us. Just like Prof Chris Exley did when he too started linking aluminium to biological health effects. There's no scientist in the world who knows more about aluminium in biology than Exley, but he got pushed out of his university because of the threats to the vaccine program worldwide.
https://drchristopherexley.substack.com/p/hpv-vaccine
Both of them have been attacked by lesser scientists & so called "skeptics", which is where you've regurgitated your "brain worm" comment from.
@mrdean: I regurgitate the brain worm thing from recent media, you may have noticed that RFK Jr is running for president. I don't know what so called "lesser scientists" are (personally, I think people who had their papers retracted due to fraudulent doctoring to be lesser, but that's just me), but the study you linked to had nothing to do with vaccines being safe and effective. It was a bizarre take that because a placebo was not saline we should give up on vaccines and move back to pap smears - which is not effective at preventing HPV only treating it.
What you're calling a conspiracy is just generally what happens when someone goes off the deep end, they are taken less seriously. James Watson is a good example of that.
There's no scientist in the world who knows more about aluminium in biology than Exley
Even if this were true (I highly doubt it, that is such a broad statement), he went from aluminium toxicity in the brain, something reasonable for a chemist to know about, to aluminium being the cause of autism. He is certainly not a leading scientist in the causes of autism and has been readily dismissed by those who are. That's the problem when people who know about one thing try to magically apply it to another thing. First we had mercury, then aluminium, but there's no link to either.
He was hired to be a scientist. He wasn't being a scientist. Why should people who don't do their job continue to have their job? That's not a conspiracy theory question, I've fired people who are unable to do their job, there's rarely a major conspiracy behind it (we don't talk about Bolivia).
I don't know what so called "lesser scientists"
Let's not pretend all scientists are competent, intelligent, or ethical.
he went from aluminium toxicity in the brain,
Try fish in the 1980s. It was the era of acid rain being promoted in the media. See how you only have a cursory knowledge of his history, based on what you've read of other peoples assessment of him? And did you know what he noticed in those fish intoxicated by metals? Believe it or not, changes in social behaviour. Yeah. That was later seen also in Paul Patterson's lab at CalTech in his experiments with mice, although they were injecting vlp's.
Exley is (or was) a REAL scientist. He went where the SCIENCE & DATA took him. And he's paid the price. But people like yourself have been unable to see it.
Let's not pretend all scientists are competent, intelligent, or ethical.
I agree, as I said ones that manipulate results stand out to me as lesser. I don't know what you mean by lesser.
Try fish in the 1980s
I think you'll find that fish have brains.
I agree, as I said ones that manipulate results stand out to me as lesser.
The cases of "fraudulent doctoring" you referred to, if you bothered to actually look at them closer rather than just read the reams of garbage published by others (I'm assuming you are referring to Wakefield here, but it applies to others as well that go against the "consensus"), might give you a glimpse of what goes on behind the scenes.
Exley's book gives examples of how science publishing works in cases of "retraction". ie the papers were good science, but external economic forces & interests pressured their retraction (with the help of various on-side "experts").
The book can be found for free on various web sites.
@mrdean: No, I'm talking about the authors you linked to, such as Tomljenovic and Exley. Who is still not any kind of expert in vaccines but seem to be experts at publishing rubbish with fake information.
I'm glad we've narrowed down the point though, anyone questions an anti-vaccination standpoint we can ignore that because it's the global vaccine cabal in concert with other medical professionals, science publishing and whatever other external forces. Cool.
While we're flinging names around though, what are you thoughts on Dr. David Hawkes? Respected molecular virologist, heavily supports the HPV vaccine. How is he not competent, intelligent or ethical?
No, I'm talking about the authors you linked to, such as Tomljenovic and Exley. Who is still not any kind of expert in vaccines but seem to be experts at publishing rubbish with fake information.
Alright, let's dive down into this claim of "publishing rubbish with fake information" from both Tomljenovic & Exley.
What were the sources that convinced you of this? Link to them. If you decided on that based on reading & studying their actual published peer reviewed research yourself, then link me the articles.
actual published peer reviewed research
The publications were revoked. Do you get what that means? There were such significant flaws with the methodology and information in their published results that it was deemed not to contribute anything. The research was fraudulent, what is the value in reading lies?
The sources that convinced me of this are the people that revoked it. Who are the same people who published it in the first place. Why do you place such high esteem on being published in the first place but nothing on the process that revoked it?
The publications were revoked. Do you get what that means? There were such significant flaws with the methodology and information in their published results that it was deemed not to contribute anything. The research was fraudulent, what is the value in reading lies?
Well, let's go through it! Link to the retracted papers! And then we'll go through BOTH sides of the argument.
But here let me give you a taste of what you are in store for, from Exley's book, regarding Hawkes:
"In another example of how publishers, this time Elsevier, are heavily influenced by external forces, I recall how one day I came across, essentially out of the blue, a published Letter to the Editor about a paper I coauthored in the journal Toxicology. The notorious provaccine troll David Hawkes was one of the authors of the letter. When I asked Editor-in-Chief Hans Marquardt why we were completely unaware of it and, as is usual practice, we had not been given the opportunity to reply to the letter prior to its publication, he answered in an email I have reproduced verbatim below: Dear Dr Exley, of course, you are absolutely right : I should have contacted you before publishing this letter. I have no explanation for this oversight. I sincerely apologize for this my mistake. I hope you can accept my apology."
"Subsequently, he offered us a retrospective right of reply that we accepted, and we submitted a rebuttal letter pointing out the true identities of the letter’s authors and how they had purposely not declared their background affiliations as a conflict of interest."
"We had pointed out in our letter that Hawkes had used the University of Melbourne as his affiliation in his letter and not his actual full-time employment at the Victoria Cytology Service, a private company promoting and selling the HPV vaccine."
There's more, much more to the story, but the question is, are you AT ALL interested in hearing both sides?
what are you thoughts on Dr. David Hawkes?
Hawkes was involved with attacking Tomljenovic & her co-author Chris Shaw's work that questioned the "safe & effective" vaccine paradigm. Hawkes is just one of many "experts" & academics who are used to discredit uncomfortable research findings. I have no doubt Hawkes believes what he did was right.
There's still too many. On the way to work I occasionally drive behind the same car that has stickers saying 'Arrest Dr. Fauci', 'Alex Jones Was Right!' and 'Arrest Bill Gates'. Makes me shake my head every time.
Jones is right on a lot of things, but his role is predominately misdirection IMO, but the other 2 points are spot on.
Is Jones right about Sandy Hook?
As for the other two points… Yeah, nah.
@fatpizza: Maybe you should revisit the microsoft trial, before Gates pivoted to world health, which has made him even wealthier.
Just a snippet.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jgm455M-N3Y@fatpizza: I'm not sure how a 3 minute clip of a legal deposition qualifies as nutjob conspiracies, but whatever.
Jones is right on a lot of things
Oh dear, yet another shock-jock worshipper
Anything that man is right about is utterly utterly eclipsed by his behaviour toward those poor dead kids and their parents. How anyone can listen to him after that speaks volumes about their character.
Covid did not become the political circus it did in the US.
It was highly politicized but for different reasons.
When I was going about getting vaxxed the best science in the world was coming out of Israel, who were up to their 4 shot or something. All their data indicated that the shots should be spaced out a MINIMUM of two months, ideally 3.
When I tried to use that information to space my shots out, I was informed that anyone who waits longer than the 5 weeks between doses will be reset to 'unvaccinated', despite the legit science saying otherwise.
The real kick in the teeth is that now, years later, if you google it, the Aus gov recommends a minimum of 8 weeks between shots…The only reason for them to ignore the best science and force the small window between shots was to reach a double vaxxed population % faster, to brag about politically.
So to reference OP's questions, I will absolutely be more skeptical of the government's motivations and honesty next time.
Also, an anectodical kicker, the only time I got whacked by COVID badly was in the month immediately after the second shot. It was quite frustrating to read the science, be denied the ability to act on it, and then reap the predicted consequences immediately.
When I tried to use that information to space my shots out, I was informed that anyone who waits longer than the 5 weeks between doses will be reset to 'unvaccinated', despite the legit science saying otherwise.
The government used this to dishonestly report case numbers & hospitalizations, making the numbers appear to support the medical countermeasures rollout.
They were still pushing Astra Zeneca as safe and effective until the day before it got withdrawn from the market for safety concerns. Enough said.
No Max. They were pushing it for higher risk people only, on an emergency authorisation, on the basis that it was less dangerous than the disease. Which was true.
Astra Zeneca was never given full approval, and never pushed on the general population. Unlike the MRNA vaccines, it did not pass the stringent standards for routine vaccination.
Shame on you for spreading lies. Please check your facts in future.
@bargaino: No mate. I personally know a number of people that had to have Astra Zeneca because that is all that was available to them due to their age back in October 2021. Younger people were given Fizzer (not much better).
And I personally know a 55 years old man that was in good health before, but has been suffering of myocarditis since then.@Mad Max: What actually happened in October 2021 was that people who had already had their first dose of Astra were not offered Pfizer as a 2nd dose. This was a bit controversial among health officials at the time, and due to the shortage of Pfizer. The logic was that risk from the second dose was lower, if the first one went OK. FWIW, I did not agree!
He could have waited.
@bargaino: No. You are changing the facts to suit your story.
What actually happened is that if you were 50 or older the only vaccine available to you was Astra Zeneca. And if you had to be vaccinated by November 2021 in order not to lose your job you had no other choice.
These are the facts.
Then you vaccine fans and goverment supporters can try to change them ad much as you want. History doesn't lie. It is just people that are trying to change the facts to suit their narrative or to get out of being accountable.@Mad Max: Nov '21? Which job was this? now you are narrowing the scope of your claim dramatically.
The key point is that Astra was never given full approval, just emergency approval for higher-risk people. Myocarditis after which vaccine? The risk is much higher from Covid infection, which you should not ignore.
@bargaino: So it was never given full approval, but it was mandated on people over 50?
The QLD government sacked people that were not fully vaccinated by November 2021. And if you were over 50 Astra Zeneca was the only available option. But guess what, it then eventually had to be withdrawn for safety concerns. Yes, trust your govenment. They will look after you!!!
Thalidomide anyone? It's free!!!
Not interested in arguing with you till the cows come home.
I was lucky enough to avoid Astra Zeneca and any other MRNA experimental vaccine. And I don't regret it one bit. At least I am SURE that I did not get injected with anything harmful or potentially harmful. Can you say the same?
Yes, IT WAS experimental. And it was experimented on you and everyone else that trusted the government and the pharmaceutical companies. The same pharmaceutical companies that have been fined billions of dollars in the past for deceiving people in order to make more money.The QLD government sacked people that were not fully vaccinated by November 2021.
Citation please. Which people? Police and paramedics?
"experimental"? I can see why they call you mad. pfizer & moderna are fully tested and approved.
@bargaino: All the best with your Astra Zeneca vaccination. Or fizzer for what matters.
Keep getting boosted. It is the only way to be safe!@Mad Max: I did decline the Astra Zeneca for the reasons you mention, and no black helicopters started following me, nobody forced anything.
@bargaino: Yes - those and other health workers affected by the mandates rolled out at the end of 2021 and into 2022 in qld. Case being heard at the high court about them being unlawful atm
@bargaino: This is ridiculous. Victoria implemented a blanket mandate for anyone with a job and people were given the choice of Pfizer or AZ. There was no 'AZ just for over 50's' at the time.
This is a very strange story. Can you provide a citation? Who exactly was "requiring" it? Your employer?
I was vaccinated before most in May 2021, as over 50, and the booster was 3 months later.
Frankly, your claims about government motivation sound ridiculous. But lest check the facts first before groundless speculation. Details please!
Deaths per year in Oz in thousands:
2014 - 154
2015 - 157.4
2016 - 158.6
2017 - 163.21
2018 - 158.41
2019 - 164.95
2020 - 162.84
7-year average - 159.92
2021 - 172.2 (7.68% above the average)
2022 - 191.93 (20.02% above the average)
2023 - 182.04 (13.83% above the average)
~66K extra deaths in three yearsNow do it as death rate per 1000 of population so you have a more statistically useful comparison.
Perhaps also one including average population age?
ACrude and standardised death rates per year should get you there.
2020 was down because with the border closures, we had a big drop flu deaths.
2021 was a bit of a catchup. You need to look at the treend, not just average.Looks like my 20k number was bit low, but outside of nursing homes, our per-capita deaths have been very low compared to US and Europe. But I can understand if some people think it was not worth it. If you live in Victoria, I sympathise.
You have to take into account overall health of populations in these areas - i.e. do they already have higher death rates? If so then something might kill them that might only make someone else here very sick.
We shouldn't make the concern of the elderly and immunocompromised stop society just like we shouldn't make it everyone else's problem if you have an allergy that might kill you
Okay now split it up by age. Have a look at the age groups higher than average, you may find the over 65s are strangely overwhelmingly represented.
extra deaths occurred worldwide in countries that took up vax
yes in every country excess deaths occured just after and following years the vax was implemented.
and Australia government DOES NOT WANT TO LAUNCH A INQUIRY TO WHY WE GETTING THESE EXCESS DEATHS AFTER VAX TAKE UP, when requested by politicians, its fallen on death ears, what do they have to hide ? ?@SteveD: They did not. You are basing your opinion on the misreading of the article by Murdoch media.
For gods sake use the meat between your ears. What do you think the excess death rate may have been if they didn't take that up? Do you think maybe it would have been higher? Have you tried to break down any of this data at all? Excess deaths in which age group?
LOL anti vaxxers still trying to be relevant.
I thought the vaccine was going to kill us all? Anyway us vaccinated all moved on and are living our lives happily and healthily without a second thought.
In reality your scaremongering was bullshit and the scientists were right.
It must suck to base your entire belief system on a lie.
Yep. I am actually dead now after getting the latest covid vax. This is the AI writing for me.
Or am I alive because I got the covid vax before going on that plane filled with coughing tourists…..
Glad I got my shots, as 3G will total shut down this year. Now I have great 5G.
After 2nd shot my 5G improved a lot…
@DashCam AKA Rolts:Good on you mate, now you can upload all your videos to Dashcam owners Australia at 5G speeds😂😂😂😂😂
I got told I was going to drop dead so many times and yet here I still am…
anti vaxxers still trying to be relevant.
All of us who did not get booster injections,
are classified as "anti-va**ers" too.The scaremongering about COVID was also total bullshit….
I'm not afraid of either but it pissed me off to have to get the vaccine to travel or go to the pub. The government overreacted and overreached and we should be telling them where to stick it
Jesus H Christ and the wee donkey, how on earth do these denier nutjobs survive in life? This is why people like Trump succeed, because fools believe and live conspiracies and take 2 words from a credible scientist and use that against all the other 1826 words that were spoken by them. Selective reading/hearing. I totally despise idiots who refuse to believe facts.
I do feel bad for the people that have experienced ongoing side effects (one of my parents included) but it's than being dead.
Sorry to hear that. If I may ask, what are they experiencing, & did they report it to the TGA/DAEN?
Also, do you feel bad for the people that didn't want to take the medical countermeasure, but did so in order not to lose their job?
I assume it was reported correctly. There was some chest discomfort and some heart stuff and constant follow ups with the doctor. Symptoms have subsided.
Also, do you feel bad for the people that didn't want to take the medical countermeasure, but did so in order not to lose their job?
Nope, not really. It's for the greater good, we live in a society. I know some people with long covid and one of them used up all their leave and was given the boot.
@Caped Baldy: Thanks for the reply.
Doctors don't usually admit the medical countermeasures were the cause of any post injection side effects. The usual explanation is either a coincidence, or the symptoms were a result of a recent infection. ie a case of "covid", or age related.
Yeah, the greater good is an argument that is often repeated.
Hard to believe anyone is dumb enough to not get the vaccine, especially if it'll cost them their job. Your ancestors got the Spanish Flu vaccine, the Russian Flu vaccine, all those viruses that killed millions and the vaccines saved your ancestors so you could eventually be born. Your great great grandparents wore masks during those pandemics, they didn't complain. Well some of them did complain, but it worked, they stopped the spread, the vaccine cured the disease. Cookers would still see us have polio I reckon if they had their way.
but it worked, they stopped the spread, the vaccine cured the disease.
Dude, how could that be the case, when Fauci himself co-authored this:
This is like you expecting Windows 95 to be able run 2024 programs and protect you from malware etc, and all computers are the same….
…..linux.
This is the problem with the antivaxers. They are literally too ignorant to understand the topic they spend so much time researching.
How do you read that and conclude "if you understand what they are really saying, that it has been a FAILURE."
There is absolutely nothing alarming or concerning about the fact that vaccines don't provide enduring protection against respiratory illness, while they reduce death and hospitalisation. Noone who isn't brainwashed would interpret these facts as "a failure".
We saw it already with the apparently slam dunk "with COVID not from COVID", as if it's a great revelation that a disease kills the weak first. A complete inability to apply logical thinking.
What is concerning is how many people are unable to think in the modern era. Their continued bad takes set back any possible progress on personal freedoms, in the same way that Pauline Hanson being the champion against immigration has made any progress on the issue impossible for decades. Well done for being the stereotype "useful idiots".
There is absolutely nothing alarming or concerning about the fact that vaccines don't provide enduring protection against respiratory illness, while they reduce death and hospitalisation. Noone who isn't brainwashed would interpret these facts as "a failure".
"Durably protective vaccines against non-systemic mucosal respiratory viruses with high mortality rates have thus far eluded vaccine development efforts."
See how they trick you with careful language?
I got the vaccine and have had no problems but I do think it should have been voluntary. Maybe restrict access to government payments etc if you didn’t get it but forcing people to get it is not what governments should be doing
Thanks for the sane comment.
Who was forced to get it? In the same way people are "forced" to wear clothes if they want to keep their job in a nursing home? Nobody is stopping them from being nude at their home all day every day.
Who was forced to get it?
Everyone who didn't want it.
Employers were mandated to have employees working for them to be double vaccinated to continue working for them.
We can argue about whether that’s forcing people, but taking jobs away from people is akin to being forced.
@Dollar General: Not really, plenty of people quit their jobs over their conspiracy theories. Mostly boomers who were close to retirement age anyway I bet.
@AustriaBargain: What's your line in the sand? Can you think of anything the government would coerce you to inject for your protection & safety & for the community, that would make you say no? Do you even have a line in the sand? Or you just go with whatever you are told?
@mrdean: Give me some examples of injectable things and I'll tell you whether I'd get it done to me, or approve of it being rolled out like vaccines, or not.
@AustriaBargain: So many example in the pipeline or already available to choose from:
rsv
norovirus
epstein barr
cytomegalovirus
https://s29.q4cdn.com/435878511/files/doc_news/Moderna-Advan…Pfizer is keen on c.difficile infection, streptococcus & lyme disease is on the FAST TRACK
pg 14: https://cdn.pfizer.com/pfizercom/product-pipeline/Pipeline_U…Whatcha gonna do if you don't want one, but the government mandates it, you know, to protect yourself & the hospital system? They might not all be communicable diseases, but I mean we should just err on the safe side & protect ourselves yeah?
Why wouldn't I want those vaccines?
Lol. You're asking me?
OK, you'd happily take them, probably all at the same time. You'd be happy to have them mandated?
I happily tested a phase 1 gene therapy for just a few thousand bucks. idgaf
Say no more.
I don't recall it ever becoming mandatory. I recall being ID'd at bars, and some requirements to work from home. I don't recall an out-right ban.
You were required to provide employers with proof. I had colleagues that were let go cause they didn’t provide required documents
Is this parody?
I dunno. Your reply is on page 2 and my comment you replied to is on page 1, so I can't remember what I wrote.
Proof some sites do have ‘em.
I love these threads…right after the job ad one too. chefs kiss
Any tip for Origin try scorer/s tonight?
Do you also believe that the earth is flat?
Hey The Flat Earth Society has members all over the globe!
Can I blow your mind for a minute?
My mum's friend, Gary was over and I was playing with his record collection. He knocked me right into the mini fridge but when I came up I was holding one of the records. The shape of the record? Flat. Guess what record it was? The biggest band in 1971…. Earth Wind and Fire! And what was their album cover? A pyramid - the symbol of the illuminati. And who's the drummer for Earth Wind and Fire? John Paris. What group is from Paris? The Templars.
And when did the pope kill them? Friday the 13th. Who's the bad guy in Friday the 13th? Freddie Krueger. Who played Freddie Krueger? Robert Englund. What do you call an apartment in England? A flat. Who lives in an apartment in England? What satanist? Harry Potter. And what month did he go to school to become a Satanist? September. Who had the biggest hit called September? Earth Wind and Fire!
And where's my mum's friend Gary now? Living in Mt Druitt.
Flat earthers!
AstraZeneca Poo vaccine
Flogged it here cos CSL was making it. Let's see LNP MPs holdings of CSL in 2019-2021
Conspiracy nutjob alert!!
I agree that it is impossible to reason with stupid people using logic.
im not reading all that.
im happy for you though.
or sad that happened. idkWhat I find about the sovcit crowd is that they all hate government intrusion into their life but are more than willing to receive government handouts like the dole, attend government hospitals for medical care (AS LONG AS IT'S NOT THE VACCINE) and get PBS rebates on scripts.
Where are you Muzeeb?
I am here and I'm convinced that as this thread gets bigger that the of original thread was posted from your alt account.
I already went through this before with the whole SlavOz alt thingy. It's tiresome. I'm not a government agent or intelligence operative or info/disinfo/cyberwarfare soldier. Are you?
Even Ayn Rand had to take the American equivalent of the aged pension in her elderly years because she'd be homeless otherwise. She had her assistant fill out the application form.
It's never sat right with me, getting handouts from the government. At least the way the system is currently designed because I see the obligation aspect of it as easily abused. I know people who are on various benefits & they've noticed how the government have gamified the system, points/credit score like etc. And it's not like it happens only at the individual level either, businesses & whole industries get "support", but they too have obligations.
If the government was populated by truly ethical, moral & human humans, then maybe.
Government is corrupt af. But not as corrupt as most other world governments. In India if a cop rapes you, then it's basically tough luck. In Australia there's a good chance of accountability, especially if you can afford a lawyer.
If someone on benefits seems like they are gaming the system to avoid work, I'd bet most people in that situation wish they could have even a minimum wage job. But their situation and mental health and whatever else is a barrier. Maybe they don't want to open up to you about their feelings and barriers, maybe it feels more noble to seem like they are gaming the system. The country as a whole created the situation they are in at the end of the day. If we wanted to then 50 years ago we could have worked towards a system like in Norway where everyone has great mental health and support and stuff. Despite the corruption and ineptitude of the government, it's still our government, this is our country. We shouldn't leave someone behind over a few hundred bucks a week that is going directly into the economy anyway.
@AustriaBargain: Unfortunately, it isn't our government, or our country. Things could be different no doubt, but that only comes after the realisation that the government isn't corrupt because of ineptitude, it's by design.
There's a quote from James Fenimore Cooper in the early 19th century that applies even more now than back then:
“Whenever the government of the United States shall break up, it will probably be in consequence of a false direction having been given to public opinion. This is the weak point of our defenses, and the part to which the enemies of the system will direct all their attacks. Opinion can be so perverted as to cause the false to seem true; the enemy, a friend, and the friend, an enemy; the best interests of the nation to appear insignificant, and the trifles of moment; in a word, the right the wrong, the wrong the right. In a country where opinion has sway, to seize upon it, is to seize upon power. As it is a rule of humanity that the upright and well-intentioned are comparatively passive, while the designing, dishonest, and selfish are the most untiring in their efforts, the danger of public opinion’s getting a false direction is four-fold, since few men think for themselves.”
It's from this book: https://jfcoopersociety.org/content/resources/pdfs/americand…
@mrdean: Yeah maybe that's right. The concept of a hive mind or mass hysteria, or people just generally being easy to manipulate if you know how and know the right people, that's a different matter entirely compared to whether handouts and such make sense. I think it's not directly related to corruption either, other than explaining how it works maybe. You can make a system that is more immune to corruption though. You can make people act generally more honest, if you cared to do that and had money and time.
The benefits too I think is a lot more complex than just a black and white thing. A country isn't your home budget and the way a country spends money isn't like a parent checking what their kids spend pocket money on. Handouts may or may not lead to people choosing it instead of working, but the ethics or morality of that really don't matter. Maybe the money spent policing the honesty of the people on benefits would cost more than the money that could be saved by doing it. Maybe the reality is some of those people wouldn't or couldn't work even if benefits didn't exist, and they literally need it to survive. Maybe it all pays for itself in economic benefit because long term it gives everyone autonomy and lowers their stress and who knows how many other factors that could make easy benefits a real money maker decades from now, or even right now, compared to no benefits.
Reality should always be important to consider. If you claim you hate seeing money wasted on easy benefits, then what would you say if it paid for itself. Or that it saved lives. Lowers crime. Decreases domestic violence. If you could know everything somehow and could see that it is great value in terms of policy outcomes, like you'd have to have rocks in your head to not do it because it'll literally save you money in other areas, then would that change your feelings about money being wasted on a bludger.
Even the mining corporation port, we give away our resources for 15% instead of 70% like Norway. Boneheaded move, but there must be some reason we do it that isn't completely explained by corruption or ineptitude. Maybe we are getting like 3% of the mineral value back in some other way, so it's actually 18% instead of 70%. Maybe the only way to get the US to spend billions on positioning of extending some anti-nuke capability over Australia was to give away billions in mineral values to American corporations, or whatever. Like who knows. I'm sure Albanese doesn't sit at his desk and open excel and think about running the country like we do our households. There's a whole real world out there and our households are like little windowless bubbles.
If the government was populated by truly ethical, moral & human humans, then maybe.
That isn't going to happen. So logically we need governance structures and laws that make corruption more difficult.
The solution we often see promoted is the exact opposite, that we need to have a 'small government' so that we can all live
under feudalism at the whims of the wealthyfreedom!So logically we need governance structures and laws that make corruption more difficult.
The governance/laws are being passed at an increasingly fast pace, & they are designed to destroy what's left of western civilization by extracting wealth upwards & hollowing out any sort of resilience or independence of people, making them defacto dependent on government/corporate support. This is end game control & full spectrum dominance.
@mrdean: This is what happens when government 'partners' with industry and seeks their input in draft legislation, without seeking any input from consumer representatives/unions etc.
Defunding or abolishing regulatory agencies doesn't fix this, it removes any possibility of fixing the issue. The 'government' is the only difference between feudalism and a free society.
Defunding or abolishing regulatory agencies doesn't fix this, it removes any possibility of fixing the issue. The 'government' is the only difference between feudalism and a free society.
So, in your view, what fixes this?
By the way, I agree government "partnerships" with industry are a major problem. The corporates are basically controlling governments at this stage of the game.
@mrdean: In Germany there is a requirement that in large companies, a certain number of employee representatives have seats on the board.
Extending that idea, there could be a requirement that consumer organisations must be consulted during development of legislation or major changes in funding.
For example, currently the Community Pharmacy Agreement that determines the level of funding Pharmacy owners receive is workshoped between the Department of Health and the Pharmacy Guild - representing the owners of Pharmacies. The general public has no voice in this process. The Union representing employee Pharmacists is not even invited into this process, even though it directly affects them. As a result all new health care initiatives delivered through Pharmacies are paid directly to the pharmacy owner, even though they must be delivered by a health professional.
The solution isn't to dissolve the Department of Health and let the Pharmacy industry regulate itself. That's what 'small government' means.
@greatlamp: A step in the right direction, but I'm skeptical because I've seen it before. And I've seen how these consumer representatives or employee representative are basically put there as a token sign of inclusiveness. Others know they don't have the ability to influence the direction a corp/govt dept goes.
@mrdean: It would be as effective as 'the voice' that failed the referendum. It's not a cure, but transparency is better than not even trying.
The libertarian philosophy does not work in a world where most industries are controlled by giant corporations, it only works when the market power is relatively evenly distributed and competition works.
@greatlamp: Agree about transparency, but when a govt/corp is full of people who see the world the same way (UN SDG & all that entails), & corporations basically create policy that EXCLUDES real market competition, we only have the pretense of a fair system.
People often forget Mr Fauci (I refuse to call him Dr) is just a human being who happens to know Science more than your average Joes and Jills. It doesn't make him God nor an expert in truest sense (not in name only) and America has just learned that the hard way.
He is as often wrong as he is right. The mistake the America committed (and Australia too - Re: Sutton & Jeroar) was that they gave him a taste of power and boy did he rule America and look what happened next.
I thought Donald Trump ruled the US at that time…
TLDR please?
Crazy be crazy
The thing about crazy people is that they don't know that they're crazy. That's what makes them crazy.
American election cycle letting all the Qs out again.
I have an appointment in an hour or two for my next regular covid shot.
Just saying….
Damn, did they have a special on tin foil hats again and I missed out? I tore my last one when I put it on to inspect my smart meter and I need a new one…
I only got to the first “Dr Fauci” and just wrote the rest off and mindless garbage.
Can’t wait for you “Trump is innocent” post. Should be a riveting read…
This shit's gonna ramp up as the Americans lurch closer to their election/revolution/space lasers
I’m unsubscribing to this forum. Fortunately the Covid antivaxxer nutjobs have no effect on my life anymore. People have enough information out there to see the reality. They just need to stick with reliable sources and don’t go down the rabbit hole. Step back and engage your brains.
Announcing departures is so 2010.
Trust your government and you will live a prosperous and healthy life.
They will look after you!OzConsipiracy.
It's mid 2024, why are we talking about this?
Because there are still thousands of people that are suffering from side effects. It may be a minority, but still deserving respect. Everyone got Covid anyway. And the vast majority recovered without lasting consequences, vaccinated or not.
Vaccinated and multiple boosted people are now getting covid and other viral infections even more than unvaccinated people.Do you ever wonder what was done with the millions of vials that weren't used or expired?
Expired just wasted $.
Unused currently pushed as boosters.
Must use them so they don't go to waste!
Plenty if takers by the sounds of it.@Mad Max: Yeah, but those millions of vials don't just magically vanish into thin air. Landfill? Dumped into water? Food supply? Shipped to Africa?
I haven't really looked at the numbers but I was under the impression the jab prevented more deaths than the number of people that had severe side effects. Is this incorrect?
Does that justify mandating a medical countermeasure across the majority of a population?
I never would have gotten the vaccine if it wasn't for the free 5G :)
I would be keen to know which previous ozbargain disabled username you use to post under
I do wonder why people keep bothering with these posts.
And I also wonder why I myself keep getting involved in these discussions.
The undeniable ultimate reality and bottom line is that I did not get injected with the stuff. Whatever it was.
I got Covid and I got over it quicker that a normal flu.
I am healthier as ever.
I don't have to worry and keep wondering about what really was in those vaccines ad what sort of short, medium or long term known or unknown side effects they may have.
End of story.Have you only had it once? When was it, & did you get tested?
Only once. Was sick for 2 days. Not tested, but family member was positive (music festival in December 2021…young and silly…) so I guess…
Was there anything strange about it? Unusually intense headaches for example?
I got Covid and I got over it quicker that a normal flu.
I'm so glad you got better. Forgetting that millions still died…
….most likely as a result of the mandated medical countermeasures.
BS
Forgetting that millions still died…
They must have been fully vaccinated.
Yeah congratulations on not working in healthcare in 2020, pat yourself on the back.
I really don't know which side to be on in the COVID vaccine fight.
One side said it was safe. The other side said it wasn't. I know what the official statistics say. That it was safe. But I personally had an adverse reaction to it that took me 11 months to recover from. If I hadn't been retired I would have been unable to work. And it has left me with permanent nerve damage on my left side. And even then they refused to count it officially as anything other than a "normal reaction". To be counted officially as an adverse event I would have had to have been unable to walk unaided, ie, to be hospitalised. I personally dealt with GPs and specialists and the TGA, and saw that the medical establishment was rigging the statistics by only counting SEVERE adverse events. How can I trust the official statistics when I don't know whether there were only a few people like me, or a lot. I have no way of knowing whether I was dealt with poorly because my personal experience was so unusual, or was quite common and the vaccine was a lot less safe than they admitted. To this day, years later, when I discuss my medical history with doctors, I still get some of them saying "you couldn't have had that because its always fatal".
One side said it was effective. The other side said it wasn't. It was only towards the end that it was admitted that despite requiring people to get vaccinated, if for no other reason than to protect other people from being infected by them, that the vaccines didn't in fact do much to protect you from getting infected, or protect other people from being infected by you. The thing they were effective at was helping you to fight the infection and not get a serious case. They protected the hospital system. Which is better than being totally ineffective, but a lot less than they claimed.
From my experience I see a bunch of looneys on one side wildly exaggerating how dangerous the vaccines were out of ignorance, and on the other side a medical establishment that did everything it could to do what it thought best for the majority of people by encouraging people to get vaccinated, up to and including rigging the statistics by denying less than severe real cases of harm from the vaccine.
We're in the midst of a global information war for people's minds.
*only if they're on the Internet.
*or watching tv.
either you trust the medical doctors or some tik tokers with undiagnosed schizophrenia. your choice
Only the most uneducated and stupid people I know rejected getting the vaccine and had no issue putting everyone else at risk. Just wait until we get a pandemic that has 100% fatality rate - we are doomed because of these morons. Republicans and the right wing media have a lot to answer for. History will not be kind to them.
100% fatality rate
So long as it kills its carrier before it spreads very far, seems like Australia might be OK with its geographic isolation.
But in any case whether you had covid or not there is 100% fatality rate — you will die eventually.
Beer, capuccino/latte or vodka martini?
Just wait until we get a pandemic that has 100% fatality rate - we are doomed because of these morons
No worries, we'll be safe because of all the morons like you that have no hesitation in being guinea pigs 🤣
Except the whole 'putting everyone else at risk' trope was a complete lie. It did nothing to prevent transmission which was the whole premise as to why it apparently had to be mandated. Can you see why people lose trust in the medical establishment now?
No it was not a lie. These morons were galivanting around the countryside with no regard for anyone else and spreading the virus far and wide. How can you possibly be so stupid - are you trolling?
Your statement reeks of pure ignorance, the amount of information currently available on the harms of clotshots and the associated risks and excess mortality is overwhelming. History already is not very kind to the sheeple like you.
Not a single person ever regretted not taking it. Not taking it despite the pressure and the risk of losing my job is probably the smartest and bravest thing I've done in my life.Please tell me this is a Quality shitpost and you didn't just use the word sheeple unironically…
Help me out to find a better term for a group of people who consumed blatant government propaganda and fear port unthinkingly, and then went ahead and injected themselves with an experimental substance multiple times often motivated by a cheap reward like a free doughnut. Is "euthanasians" a word?
injected themselves with an experimental substance multiple times
Because the first and second one didn't work and they still got covid. So they kept going for 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th. I am sure about 6th. Don't know if some got more. But don't worry, the next one will work. And it would have been so much worse without those 6 boosters!
@Mad Max: Remember when the word vaccine used to mean that it would grant you immunity…….
(before they changed the definition so these covid shots could be called vaccines)
@qaz182: Flu vaccine, hep vaccine, measles vaccine, etc etc.
All vaccines that you can still get the disease.They didn't change the definition of a vaccine, you just never knew what it was.
@Gehirn: It should be referred to as a "medical countermeasure", not a vaccine.
https://www.fda.gov/emergency-preparedness-and-response/abou…
We are being shifted into a biosecurity state: https://www.agriculture.gov.au/biosecurity-trade/policy/legi…
There is a war going on.
It should be referred to as a "medical countermeasure", not a vaccine.
https://www.fda.gov/emergency-preparedness-and-response/abou…No it shouldn't. This is Australia, it was approved as a vaccine.
If you believe the words of the FDA though they suggested to get the vaccine, or 'medical countermeasure'.
There is a war going on.
lol
@Gehirn: It should because it was rolled out during a declared "public health emergency". Meaning the "normal" rules didn't apply.
https://www.health.gov.au/topics/emergency-health-management…
The ADF were brought in.
https://theconversation.com/calling-in-the-army-for-the-vacc…
https://x.com/JohnBlaxland1/status/1400963574940377089
@MessyG: Ultimately self-interest, political survival. Total compliance was the immediate goal of the propaganda, but compliance was just a means to the end of keeping pollies afloat.
Nice one troll. You can't possibly be this stupid. This is a poor reflection on our education system.
I am fortunate to not have been conditioned by the Australian education system, I guess this is why I do not believe the government, can tell when I hear blatant propaganda lies, and do not have suicidal tendencies.
Not a single person ever regretted not taking it! <— go ahead and argue with this.@ldq: Why would I argue with that statement? It is a stupid statement that can be applied to anything in life.
Not a single person ever regretted not taking it!
Do you not consider these people as "people"?
https://edition.cnn.com/2021/08/06/health/coronavirus-virgin…
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/christian-…
What a silly statement to make.
Do you not consider these people as "people"?
https://edition.cnn.com/2021/08/06/health/coronavirus-virgin…
The article linked to his facebook post around July/Aug that described his hospital experience. It is no wonder the press latched onto the story. After all, it should be obvious it supported the campaign to promote uptake of the countermeasures.
Travis is a good human. Yes, he was a cheerleader for the countermeasures during 2021. Interestingly during his time in hospital, in his various short video uploads to social media, he mentioned that he'd had no food & was dehydrated for 5 days. Maybe he couldn't stomach food. It's interesting, because I've listened to many stories like that from the unjabbed in hospital, even though they asked for both food & water.
He had 2 jabs in Nov of 2021, about a month apart. He had symptoms the day after the 1st jab, after the 2nd he mused that " I will admit it seems as if getting the shot has minimized my syptoms."
He's obese, having rheumatoid athritis since his youth & been in constant pain which was eased by eating. He likes phat pizza, subs & burgers (who doesn't).
In May & June of 2021 pre his hospitalization with "covid" symptoms, he had surgery; “If you truly know me you have seen a rapid downward slide from me wheel chairs to walkers and massive life changing pain. They are still replacing the knees and hip but i'm so thankful to the point of screaming and tears of joy” He also had a second TKR in Jan of 2022.
He also appears to have copped "long hauler covid" around Dec 2021.
Around Jan 2023 he was in hospital again for some sort of a "study for covid".
During Mar 2023 he posted about being in stage 3 kidney disease, as well as being on ozempic.
Interesting around May 2023 he posted a friends business in the area he lives which is called Herbal Care Plus Bristol. I assume they have herbal products that allegedly ease "pain".
Earlier this year, this post from Travis kind of sums it up: “Ptsd sucks, I hate the way it makes me feel. It has changed me and the way I think. Covid sucks”
He hasn't really cheerleaded for the countermeasures since getting the jabs late 2021. I guess he'll never know what would've happened if he hadn't. The experts here would assure him he'd be worse off, but that is speculation.
2020 called….
I mean didn’t the world brainwash themselves into believing where covid originated without any proof?
Feels most just mentally bullshat themselves, especially basement troll hiding in there cavesWow. Is this what it's like taking meth? Felt like someone was high as a kite writing this down and thinking it was a good idea.
Posts like these are a reminder that 50% of people are dumber than the average person.
Posts like these are a reminder that 50% of people are dumber than the average person
Over 90% according to government vaccination rates
Congrats on putting your hand up to help demonstrate their point
One only has to look at certain weekly protests to find the individuals whose IQ is in the double digits. Proudly unvaccinated too probably.
Most people who refuse to vaccinate are the same who:
- take or have taken all sort of street drugs
- don't even flinch when taking any kind of pain killers and any sort of medication, they just become susupicious when they hear the word vaccine
- they don't trust scientific researchers, but are 1000% convinced by and believe blindly some random guy on the internet with no qualifications
- don't believe in large scale statistics, but put 100% of their trust in anectodal stories
They are just a bunch of idiots, simple as that really
Most people
What about the remaining people?
I guess the remaining people are just the suicidal ones. They consciously choose not to vaccinate even though they know doing so is bad for them. Never met one but I believe they exist
I've found the correlation with your first point to be absolutely fascinating and have seen it time and again.
Love the bullshit coming out of your fingers. Like your scientific research for your "most people" statement? Larp!
look, here's one ladies and gentlemen ☝️
Look, one of the "most people"… where's your credible source larp?
@RocketSwitch: Where exactly did I claim my comment was based on credible scientific research? Oh, I did not.
Now tell me, you are telling me none of the points I have listed above apply to you sweetheart?Now tell me, you are telling me none of the points I have listed apply to you sweetheart?
None of the points apply to me, darling.
@liongalahad: According to you, "most people" do, I guess you must have used some scientific studies, like you do to make your informed decisions to come to these conclusions right? Right? I'm sure you believe in large-scale stats right? Right? Don't tell me you're assuming like those who refuse to vaccinate? Oh dear!
@RocketSwitch: you guess wrong, I do not claim any statistical credibility it's an OzB comment ffs and I am not trying to convince anyone of anything.
But Im pretty sure I must have hit where it hurts with you though, considering your passion
If the USA had framed their response as a WAR on the CHINA VIRUS in Feb/March 2020 they might have done a lot better than many other places in the world.
LNP Governments in Australia went kicking and screaming into this approach and as a result it became the SYDNEY VIRUS to many of us in responsibly governed jurisdictions.
WA, for example, taking a Pro-Life approach minimised covid casualties, with hard borders and restrictions that eased once we could getem corona needle.Most of WA is far less densely populated than anywhere in Sydney or Melbourne, so hard to draw conclusions there.
WA had the same number of Covid cases on a per-capita comparison as everyone else in Australia, but their case load was much higher for much longer compared to everywhere else except Victoria, because they closed down the borders and forced extensive periods of lockdowns well after the rest of the country had moved on with life already.
The person you're replying to actually was correct. WA had higher cases per 100 people than both Sydney and Victoria.
https://covidlive.com.au/report/cases-per-populationRealistically WA is quite isolated already though so it's unlikely their stance was anything above and beyond any other state. If they were on the East Coast they'd have the same if not worse results as the others.
Thanks, the link you provided clearly shows the data to prove I was correct.
WA had higher cases per 100 people than other states, exactly as I just stated.
For those who don't wish to comply with future vaccine mandates, there is only one option - become financially independent.
I did not need to comply with the Covid vaccine mandates because I made sure to accomplish this goal.
I was fully prepared and able to lose my job but ironically possessed skills and knowledge that my employer was not willing to throw away for my non-compliance, thus the rules were broken for me.
Become valuable to society and most importantly, rich - your freedom (and possibly health) depends on it.
Well done.
Or become a politician or a member of the judiciary. They thought that vaccines were so safe that they exempted themselves from the mandate! They make the laws!Thanks! Yeah the moment I saw the 'important people' exemption and that immunity from legal liability was granted to the pharma companies I knew I had to withhold my consent.
Or just work for the government / media. You had total exemptions to the jab and to travel as you pleased if you worked in those fields.
Doctors had no requirement to get jabbed either, nor did most contractors of other types.
I get what you're saying, but I would never work for one of the three institutions I despise most (the third one is universities).
Oops. You caught covid though and you died because you didn't get the free vaccine.
Looks like money doesn't solve stupidity in the end. :(
With the amount of unknowns of a new virus and initial data that was made available, I bet that an AI controlled government would have made the same decision about lockdowns and vaccinations.
This is like BBQ bragging rights.
There is always one guy who brings up they call "this" then they change topic onto something else like they are so kind of expert on the other topic now.
I am dying to hear more about how an uncensored AI controlled government would work.
i saw principal skinners baby and he looked at me
Excess mortality across countries in the Western World since the COVID-19 pandemic: ‘Our World in Data’ estimates of January 2020 to December 2022
https://bmjpublichealth.bmj.com/content/2/1/e000282Mostert et al, BMJ, important on several fronts:
1) for COVID-19 pandemic deniers, there were excess deaths in 2020 with SARS-CoV-2 infection2) for vaccine promoters, there was no reduction in death with mass, indiscriminate COVID-19 vaccination. Just the opposite occurred.
In conclusion, excess mortality has remained high in the Western World for three consecutive years, despite the implementation of COVID-19 containment measures and COVID-19 vaccines. This is unprecedented and raises serious concerns. During the pandemic, it was emphasised by politicians and the media on a daily basis that every COVID-19 death mattered and every life deserved protection through containment measures and COVID-19 vaccines. In the aftermath of the pandemic, the same morale should apply. Every death needs to be acknowledged and accounted for, irrespective of its origin. Transparency towards potential lethal drivers is warranted. Cause-specific mortality data therefore need to be made available to allow more detailed, direct and robust analyses to determine the underlying contributors. Postmortem examinations need to be facilitated to allot the exact reason for death. Government leaders and policymakers need to thoroughly investigate underlying causes of persistent excess mortality and evaluate their health crisis policies.
He who controls the AI wins !
Huh, I thought all of the cookers had moved on to cloud conspiracies now…
Should tell them the government has found a way to transmit COVID vaccine over the internet.
I had 4 vaccines first was the so called dreaded AZ……. perfectly fine…… Have not had COVID yet……..either lucky or one of those that cant catch it….
I enjoyed the 2 yrs working from home indeed….. but back to the grindstone.
Vaccines save lives, of course some people will have side effects that is just natural in the gene pool, same as medicines you take.
There is no need to go down the rabbit hole with the OP.
Whoa…time to disconnect from watching excessive YouTube videos and step outside into the fresh air of the real world.
Hey OP. Sounds like you must be a doctor or at least have some medical background. I'd love to know where you studied and what field do you practice in now?
Yes, I'll wait :)
Doesn't this apply to everything? Tell people they have to do their taxes or they'll go to prison, and they'll do their taxes. Tell people they'll be arrested if they drive without a licence, and they'll get their licence. Give people the option to work or starve to death and they'll choose to work.
OP reckons he's come across some shocking revelation, when it's just a regular (and common) occurence in society.
FYI Dr Fauci has never called himself the "King of Science". I had a look on Google. The top result came back with somebody calling Fauci the King of Science. The second result was this post. I'm not a Fauci expert but I've read, watched and listened to enough to know that he wouldn't call himself such a ridiculous thing.
Here's an excerpt from the quote highlighted by OP, which I think provides important context - especially that Fauci is not endorsing making people's lives difficult to force them into getting vaccinated:
Rep. McCormick: “You said in an interview that you gave us part of an audio book, written by Michael Specter, that you believed an institution should make it hard for people to live their lives so they’d feel pressured to get vaccinated. Can we run the audio clip on that, please?”
Clip of Dr. Fauci, Summer 2021: “I have to say that I don’t see a big solution, other than some sort of mandatory vaccination. I know federal officials don’t like to use that term. Once people feel empowered and protected legally, you’re going to have schools, universities, and colleges are going to say, ‘you want to come to this college buddy, you’re going to get vaccinated. Lady, you’re going to get vaccinated.’ Yeah, big corporations, like Amazon and Facebook and all of those others, are going to say ‘you want to work for us, you get vaccinated.’ And it’s been proven that when you make it difficult for people in their lives, they lose their ideological bullshit and they get vaccinated.”
Rep. McCormick: “Thank you. Are all objections to COVID vaccinations ideological bullshit, Dr. Fauci?”
Dr. Fauci: “No, they’re not. And that’s not what I was referring to.”
paying tax or sitting a driving test does not require an injection that is safe and effective ,
Here's an excerpt from the quote highlighted by OP, which I think provides important context - especially that Fauci is not endorsing making people's lives difficult to force them into getting vaccinated:
Amazing you interpret it that way, when what Fauci says is the very definition of a endorsement, which he then flips on. What a mind stir.
But I appreciate you putting the full quote there.
I've tried to find a free download of the audiobook it's quoted from but, alas, none seem available.
But I would contend that Fauci wasn't clearly arguing for mandatory vaccination to clear out "ideological bullshit". He was explaining the only way the issues of vaccine hesitancy could be cleared up, theoretically, is to force people into taking them. That is a fact. There will always be portions of the community who are hesitant - and they will only take it through coercion. Him explaining that is not the same as him endorsing that. One could argue there is no big solutoin, other than banning cars outright, to get the road fatality toll down to zero. That's probably true - but it doesn't mean I agree that's what we should do.
Unfortunately I'm not convinced any of us will be confident we know exactly what he meant unless somebody takes the time to listen through the audiobook (Fauci by Michael Specter, if you're interested). There's too many people on the House Oversight select subcommittee on the coronavirus pandemic who can be relied upon to distort the truth to fit their conspiratorial narrative, for them to be believed without concrete evidence to back their claims up.
Unfortunately I'm not convinced any of us will be confident we know exactly what he meant
Seems like a no brainer to have asked him what he meant during the congressional hearing.
I don't agree it isn't what he meant because of the simple fact that he could have chosen not to use "ideological bullshit", he could of framed it in a much more different way. But he didn't. He wasn't able to withhold his worldview, it came to the fore.
Seems like a no brainer to have asked him what he meant during the congressional hearing.
I agree. That the congressman didn't give him that opportunity to makes me suspect and frustrated in equal measure.
I don't agree it isn't what he meant because of the simple fact that he could have chosen not to use "ideological bullshit", he could of framed it in a much more different way. But he didn't. He wasn't able to withhold his worldview, it came to the fore.
Maybe. As I say, until we can get a copy of the audiobook it can't be certain. He did imply it's a misrepresentation of his meaning, though - and that would be risky to do when the interview is publicly available (for those willing to pay).
@RolandWaites: I've listened carefully to a lot of Fauci's interviews over the years. He is, like most high profile government people, very careful with the language he uses & how he frames arguments.
I doubt listening to the whole audiobook would make things any clearer.
@mrdean: You may be right. But as I say, until we have that primary source we don't know. It would only require five minutes either side of the specific quote to get the idea about what he meant, not the whole book.
He said that isn't what he was implying for a reason. I'm curious as to what that reason is.
Imagine being one of these people ostracised from their friend groups, other websites, etc. so now you resort to posting your ramblings on a bargain forum.
What would a governing AI do if a pandemic happened?
AIs only output from the data they are trained on. IE the medical data and modelling plans for pandemics, which are all created by government departments.
Which means the AI would have issued the same things that our current government did. Masks, closed borders, lockdowns and jabs.
https://www.health.gov.au/sites/default/files/documents/2022…
IC3: Mask wearing by symptomatic individuals in the community - This measure may be considered by individuals when the disease has a high clinical severity - effectiveness - NO EVIDENCE (pg 124)
B10: Voluntary isolation of ill travellers not requiring hospitalisation - not recommended - effectiveness minor (pg 139)
B7: Thermal scanners - not recommended - effectiveness minor (pg 136)
B9: Screening of passengers on cruise ships prior to disembarkation, where there is evidence
of cases of influenza on board - Not recommended unless there is evidence of high clinical severity - effectiveness minor (pg 138)
B10: Voluntary isolation of ill travellers not requiring hospitalisation - On its own, it is unlikely to have a high impact on reducing transmission due to limitations in identifying cases. - effectiveness minor (pg 139)
B13: Internal travel restrictions (restriction of travel across state or territory borders, or within certain areas of a state or territory, either to protect remote communities or to isolate areas with higher rates of exposure) - not recommended - effectiveness minor - danger of societal function disruption (food & fuel) (pg 140)There's more, but I think people can get the drift. It all went out the window didn't it. Maybe AI would of done the right thing!
Always good to just take snippets from reports and only use the bits that align with your view as definitive evidence.
Its like reading a news headline and reposting it on facebook that you agree.Using just your first as an example.
Not worth elaborating on the rest but others can easily read the 200+ doco to show that people with actual scientific and medical knowledge that compiled the document likely came to conclusions that don't align with yoursIC3
left out context in your summary like
Effectiveness: The evidence highlights that incorrect technique for wearing PPE is common. Mask wearing in the community is unlikely to affect
overall attack rates from a pandemic unless disease transmissibility is low, compliance with the measure by the majority of the
population is high, and the measure is used in association with other pandemic mitigation strategies.i.e. its effectiveness increases with larger compliance, and wearing them properly
Benefits: This measure may reduce the exposure of individuals’ household and family members to infection. It can be started
quickly and without specific knowledge of the respiratory agent. It may reduce transmission.i.e. assist in reducing exposure
Timing: There is a case for wider use of masks early in the pandemic, when the clinical severity of the disease may not be well known. Early
application offers the greatest opportunity to reduce transmission, although benefits would continue throughout the pandemicetc etc etc
Yup. It's like saying the brakes in the car don't work because I don't want to or know how to put my foot on it.
Or algebra doesn't exist because i don't understand it.
🤯🤯
Hi, what is the name of this document?
Australian Health Management Plan for Pandemic Influenza
August 2019
These are Influenza pandemic measures. Unless the disease/virus behaves like Influenza, the above is pretty much irrelevant.
Yeah, bits of rna & dna in a protein coating have totally different personalities.
bits of rna & dna in a protein coating have totally different personalities.
exactly, its all the same
which is why we treat Ebola the same as influenza.
right…right…
Clever little devils aren't they?
Might want to reassess the foundational assumptions underlying the so called science of virology. Got the time? lol.
After reading these comments it looks obvious to me that many "OZ Bargainers" took the C-19 vaccines just because they were free ! Didn't want to miss a bargain !
The main side effect seems to be that they refuse to accept any opinion that differs from theirs !
Remember that the science is never settled and you must continue to research. Many on here probably think Formaldehyde is safe .Many on here probably think Formaldehyde is safe .
Hope so.
Its in your exhaled breath, and your body produces about 40mL of it a day.This is a prime example of why we don't take scientific advice from ozb forums, and where actual scientific details such as quantities or concentrations make a difference rather than just scary chemical names;)
Yet you continue to give out scientific advice on OzB. And you are correct in this case, as I meant to say Thalidomide for morning sickness . It's a good example of the experts getting it wrong. I fear that the covid vax will be many many times worse than that !
Yet you continue to give out scientific advice on OzB
link to scientific advice i'm handing out?
Science is fallible which is great. It means we adapt to things as we learn more.
So far the science on vaccines is well-established and the effects of covid are far worse than anything the vaccine does.
So if you're a man of science you'd be happy to take the covid vaccine. Unless you're just pretending to be scientific of course to run an anti-vaccine rhetoric. :)
Many on here probably think Formaldehyde is safe .
It's because they've probably come across so called debunking articles like this: https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/toxic-myths-about-vaccines/
Where they dismiss it mainly because of "the dose makes the poison" argument.
edit - lol. case in point, SBOB above.
thanks.
I consider you also another prime example of why we don't take scientific advice from ozb forums :)Lol, no just unelected global leaders like Tedros, Bill, George's son & many others. And when real experts produce good "science" as in the Pandemic Influenza Response Plan, it gets………………….ignored…………..because……………….it's a catastrophe………………..must do something………………
must do something………………
You mean make a lot of money selling vaccines that don't work, even if they may harm people?
@Mad Max: Strange as it may sound, I don't think profit was the main objective. It was to get as many people on the planet injected as possible. Why? I'm not sure.
@mrdean: It sure involved huge amounts of money. People did not even know because all they knew is that vaccines were "free". But governments all over the world transfered billions to pharmaceutical companies. All "commercial in confidence" of course.
Only time will tell if there was a more sinister reason.@Mad Max: Yes for sure, there was a huge transfer of wealth into private hands, not just in the pharmaceutical sector.
@mrdean: What people do not realise is that all that money has been taken away from other government services like hospitals, schools, roads, infrastructure, housing, etc.
So the people are actually paying for the "free" useless vaccine.@Mad Max: The idea is to get western governments into debt so that they won't be able to pay back. Make no mistake, bankers control the western world. They have been plundering treasuries for a long time, & the last four years has been an unprecedented feeding frenzy.
Do you drink any alcoholic beverages? Then you're consuming very small amounts of formaldehyde on a regular basis. And I bet it's far more than the residual amounts found in a vaccination.
Typical unscientific response, assuming ingesting, breathing or INJECTING a substance has the same effect.
Well actually, they can. It all comes down to its bioavailability. And vaccinations are not injected into blood vessels, they're injected into the muscle. Formaldehyde has been used to treat radiation induced proctitis at much higher concentrations.
Formaldehyde when managed safely, is safe. As always, the dose makes the poison.
Antivaxxers are good for my income. I gotta give them credit for that at least.
how?
Let's see what the crazies can come up with. Won't take too many guesses.
Industrial grad aluminum foil importer?
Umm some type of role that involves access to information or an HR officer or employment lawyer?
We should poll this.
Big pharma
Bonuses for writing covid on death certificates
Big pharma
Big government
Big pharma@MessyG: Big pharma shares like Pfizer were good early 2022. All these antivaxxers I can thank for raising awareness.
That's not the whole picture though. The sad truth is more covid cases was beneficial.
Funeral director
Gotta love that anti-vax/anti-mask sentiment.
I refuse to take vaccines from the government to prevent me getting sick, but will demand they pay my medical bills when I inevitably do!
I refuse to wear a mask because they are ineffective, but will kick up a fuss if my surgeon doesn't wear one when I'm under the knife!What the hell are you on about? If you don't know what you're talking about, don't type.
I see the same people barking the same rubbish from last time? Like you guys are true NPCs, I'll leave this here for people like SBOB:
https://www.nationalreview.com/news/dr-fauci-could-not-recal…
And the article now appearing everywhere:
https://www.news.com.au/lifestyle/health/health-problems/cov…Don't let these ignorant people tell you otherwise. Same people who will destroy humanity. They disgust me.
If they could think or read they would have seen this vaccine was no where near ready. But that's what they do, probably paid to brainwash you.
The article is the usual attempt at damage control. They lead with the results from the study, then downplay it in the second half by reinforcing the notion that "“There is no credible evidence to suggest that Covid-19 vaccines have contributed to excess deaths in Australia or overseas,” the Health Department said in its submission."
The MSM is in no way going to tell people the truth.
lol, exactly, like they're going to say, oops, we just killed 80 million people, LOL YOLO. It's mainly for NPCs that you see here who are regularly brainwashed by the propaganda. Can't see the Matrix. Just protect your fam my man, let these guys get fed the rubbish. As they use to say, natural selection. Smart ones will survive and not get affected by it.
What is an NPC?
They're people. The most commentary these people have to offer revolves around the weather. It’s almost like they aren’t consciously even there. They’re just kind of running on a script. They're side characters that lack of critical thinking, as well as cognitive dissonance, a lack of empathy, and a lack of passion and intrigue for higher concepts.
You mean…people who are disinterested in this discussion?
Always love a good name drop :)
Especially when it's rare the dropper can point to one of my posts that's so "pro" whatever it is I'm meant to be the cheerleader for or being "paid" to brainwash about.
Seems its usually just that I previously pointed out something 'less than intelligent' they post, rather than screaming from the soapbox for their opposing side.tips hat
Hey RocketSwitch
Sure, if it means not going homeless, I'll get it.
If it's actually proven to work.I managed to claim close to $11,000 in compo for my third covid vax, first 2 were fine but I got Pfizer third.
Didn't benefit me because I didn't profit.I'm happy to skip it, even though I have never got covid I'd much rather have compared to what I've gone through.
Prior to this, I was all for the vax and the first 2 were completely fine, I'd argue with anti vaxxers online, to be fair most of them are cooked qAnon-style people that have conspiracies. I just think it was unfit and not tested enough for humans, which we won't get without trials and years of monitoring.
Ultimately it is what it is though and if it was a net positive it's a good thing.
Respectfully, I think you're wrong.
Your entire post just reads of some unsophisticated critique of the status quo. The reality (whether you like it or not) is that our system of government and our societal structures have given us the wealth and prosperity we have today.
If not for the system of democratic government which we've built on since enlightened times, you would not be sitting in front of a computer writing out your opinions on an online forum. You would be doing some combination of hiding in a cave somewhere, trying to fight wild animals to hunt food, or perhaps, becoming a yummy dinner for a tiger somewhere.
Obviously I'm for critiquing specific government actions - at the end of the day, they represent us, and it is important that we exercise our will. However, the criticism of "government" as an idea is patently stupid. The reality is that anti-government types are protected by governments - try living without public infrastructure, laws, and the benefits of decades of "reasonable" governance has given us. If we did not live in a society of law and order (enforced by the will of the people), the loudest dissenting voices would be taken out first.
The entire basis on which you're able to say what you're saying today is our system of government protects your speech and protects your right to have your opinion.
If it were a real pandemic then everyone would be clamouring to get vaccinated (provided that vaccine worked and did not have an even higher death rate than the disease it was preventing) and those foolish people who remain unvaccinated, pardon my words, will be left to rely on their natural immunity. I am sure many of the people within the anti-vax movement understand this core principle.
They were - over 90% of people in Australia got the COVID vaccine. This is a huge number, it's more than the percentage of people who can drive, who completed high school, who have ever been on a plane…etc.
At all of my vaccination appointments, there were lines stretching from the centre all the way to the carpark with wait times of over 2 hours in the summer heat. If standing around on a 30+ degree day to get vaccinated is not "clamouring to get vaccinated" then I don't know what is.
Ask yourself: Are you going to make the same choices next time?
Yes
Would you honestly take another experimental bird flu vaccine?
Yes
Not this sh1te again - don't you people get sick of the sound of your own voices?
I'm a right-wing libertarian. I believe in the power of the individual over the collective. Make your own decisions and live by them. You're anti-vax, that's cool and more power to you - but please don't spout your nonsense to try and influence others. That's bollox, let people make their own decisions - and live by them.
Personally, I'm pro-vaccination and I had my covid shots, but I was against vaccination mandates - and still am. Personal choice that I know many others will disagree with but there it is.
COVID-19 was just a example of Australians psyche.
No one "forced nor induced" to buy toilet paper.
But they did. In hordes, unashamedly.It will happen again, no one changed.
Pointless to fantasize differently.I think you'll find that the bog roll 'panic' was a global phenomenon, not just an Australian thing.
But you're right, it will happen again - just as it's always done.
C19 was proof that people are very, very, very set in their ways
and will never learn, nor spend their life trying to unlearn.There are those who see;
there are those who don't see;
there are those who don't see,
when they are shown.It just shows people are easily programmed and manipulated and coerced into doing things they otherwise wouldn't through FEAR. Most lack critical thinking skills and courage to not follow the demands of authority when there was clearly inconsistencies with the information and messaging.
I'm quite happy with the microchip that Bill Gates slipped into the vaccine. my 5G reception has never been better.👍
I'm still trying to work out if covid was the depopulation plan, or the vaccine was the depopulation plan, and whether or not they find tracking me around Myers was good value for money.
The mRNA creates a kind of OS platform inside your body,
and then like your smartphone, different 'apps' can be placed on this OS
and/or different strains of viruses know which 'triggers' to push,
to get an immune response from the body.So, like a lock & key, ie. each virus variant interacts/unlocks the body in different ways,
and this is why some people are falling sick more than others.PS:
I saw a small documentary, from before C19 times,
where excited Micro$oft researchers talked about mRNA like a software map for the human body.share the link for the doco. otherwise it's just an hilarious statement.
@mjuice7: The hilarity is that all reality MUST have a URL,
otherwise it cannot exist in this world outside of the clutches of a search engine.The internet was being used in late 1970s and 1980s for defence and military purposes,
but when I talked about the Internet in early 1990s, people looked at me, like a weirdo…
… not realising a time where everything in the 'future' will change.I digress.
I think it's the video of the "DNA Programmers" that is embedded here:
https://tapnewswire.com/2021/03/microsoft-2016-we-can-progra…You can also read more about it, on this page:
https://www.naturalnews.com/2021-03-08-plot-to-turn-human-dn…You don't need to believe everything is real or true,
but that everything has a possibility and probability of being true.
Sometimes, many incriminating videos are also removed from online sources,
just like books were removed or burnt from libraries.Example:
These videos were also removed from YT, where I saw them a couple of years ago,
ie. the "hidden-camera" expose of the Pf1zer staff (I forget the name of the African American guy),
that was caught over a restaurant meal last year,
in that Pr0ject Ver1tas sting, saying that Pf1zer was experimenting/creating variants , after the worldwide success of its jabs.
That guy realised that he was in hidden camera, divulging secrets,
and then began to get aggressive, violent and started to cry as well.
Pf1zer quickly issued an official statement on their website,
to confirm they indeed experiment/create variants for 'research',…
BUT everyone else (eg. Merck, etc.) also created variants,
so this is nothing unusual and is part of the 'research' they do, for their products.
This caused such an impact, that soonafter this, the Proj3ct V3eritas head,
had his reputation tarnished and mysterious forces got him booted from that company/organization.@whyisave: "all reality most have a url otherwise it can't exist".🤔 isn't all the stuff you've cited from the internet? maybe it all comes down to which rabbit hole you find yourself in & what passes the believably test to you.
isn't all the stuff you've cited from the internet?
My point was, that I mentioned:
- I watched "a" documentary
- the documentary was from a time before C-19Based only on these bits of information, I was asked to find you a link,
which means you presumed I could only watch documentaries online,
OTHERWISE my statement would be a 'hilarious statement' by your standard.So, I had to see if the video existed at a URL that I could share with you,
because originally, I did not watch the documentary via HTTP.It seems that most people's rabbit-hole is the actual Internet, and they're so far down that hole,
they won't realize that the Internet is a small part of reality (or not even), but reality is not a part of the internet.You know when you see managers talk over a coffee or politicians have dinners with business people,…
…is because they ENSURE that their conspiring stays offline (oh no!…conspiring = conspiracy)
and their offline dealings are not recorded in anyway to be online.That means people hide their affairs offline,…and what if someone saw or heard this happen?
how is a society meant to get a URL to something they witnessed ,
otherwise, it becomes a defamation lawsuit.It's an interesting situation now, because most MPs in AU FedGov are using WhatsApp to communicate,
and using encrypted apps to hide discussions, etc… and for the purpose of democracy,
this has become an issue, because FOI requests have problems dealing with transnational company legalities, etc.
Lots of people who made those smug comments about microchips had a case of SADS.
It's best for all of us to stay humble, … Amen.
lots of people eh?🤔 you've obviously got numbers from reputable sources to back up your statement or are you just channeling the right wing nutjob brigade?🤣
I've seen their FB profiles or Twitter posts,
that said similar things, and acting very proud and smug,
about getting the shot…and then months later,
their family or friends or relatives, saying that they lost that person
to mysterious 'sudden death', 'doctors being baffled', etc.So, in spite of smug comments,
spreading a message to stay humble is not "channeling right wing nutjob brigading".@whyisave: i wouldn't regard faecesbook or twatter as reliable sources of info. lots of hilarious rw nutjobs on both. i remember having a back & forth with some idiot on twatter about covid vaccination at the height of the covid crisis. from memory he/she went by the handle of proud old soldier with a profile pic of an old geezer. he/she was trying to convince everyone vaccinations were bad. when asked whether he/she had had vaccinations as a service person he/she didn't have a comeback argument. i know i had vaccinations when i served. i then became a bot to him/her. notice i stated him/her because anyone can be anyone on the internet can't they. some people that may or may not have been vaccinated have passed away, but using your own argument that doctors couldn't find the cause of death how do you then assert it was from the covid vaccine? seems you're not into vaccinations. you do you. I'm ok with being vaccinated & as I've stated before my 5G reception is fantastic!🤣
doctors couldn't find the cause of death how do you then assert it was from the covid vaccine?
We don't know what it is, but we know what it isn't.
s I've stated before my 5G reception is fantastic!
Sounds like a smoker, who keeps telling me,
why should I stop smoking?, … I haven't got lung cancer yet!
(PS: This person got the jab too and also says smoking is the reason,
the covid virus didn't get to them…ever )@whyisave: "we don't know what it is, but we know what it isn't".🤣 who? your fellow conspiracy theorists on faecesbook/twatter? thx for the good belly laugh.👍🤣
"we don't know what it is, but we know what it isn't".🤣 who? your fellow conspiracy theorists on faecesbook/twatter? thx for the good belly laugh.👍🤣
Medical person would say something like that, to a person in a wheelchair, after a leg amputation,
but somehow OzB forum posters are telling that wheelchair-bound person after their first jab:
<insert snide, mocking tone> "who said? your fellow conspiracists?"
Why be insensitive towards victims of any jabs, let alone the most highest profiled one ?PS:
By the way, I have NEVER negged any comments on these Forums.
i wouldn't regard faecesbook or twatter as reliable sources of info.
I don't use either of them, anyway.
i wouldn't regard faecesbook or twatter as reliable sources of info.
I agree with you, because you could have been interacting with a bot,
because bots were intentionally deployed to spout the opposite narrative as well.
If someone knows about this, their NDA would prevent them talking about it.but using your own argument that doctors couldn't find the cause of death how do you then assert it was from the covid vaccine?
what do you mean by using your "own argument" ?
I am implying that a term like SADS was been created
here - https://www.baker.edu.au/health-hub/sudden-cardiac-deathto catch all the sudden instances of an outcome,
that has no cause identified yet (hence, why it's a 'syndrome'),
and no cause may ever be known, because post-mortems
cannot always be carried out due to cultural, social norms.also, when do I assert it was "from the cov!d jab" ?
i was asserting to stay humble, than to be smug about 5G or microchips.@whyisave: congrats on never negging anyone on ozbargain?🤷♂️ present your wrist for an elephant stamp. bet you could talk the leg off a wooden chair or all at least until the other person is blue in the face. consider me blue in the face.🤣
present the back of your wrist for an elephant stamp
I had to look up on Google, what "Elephant Stamp" meant, haha
https://www.google.com/search?&q=elephant+stampconsider me blue in the face.
In life, change the plan if you have to, but never change the goal.
PS:
Dr. Nick Coatsworth
https://x.com/JohnLarter000/status/1800677699314438336
I might have missed something, but didn't the COVID lockdowns end a while ago? You either got vaxxed or didn't, I'm not sure what benefit there is to continue complaining about it.
It should’ve been that simple. But remember the high strung, fearful citizens that berated, mocked, pointed in disgust at the ones that rightfully did not want to take an experimental vax? People don’t forget stupid behaviour
Remember the healthcare workers that were assaulted? Remember harassing them in the street and on the train so much so that we had emails from work warning us not to wear anything identifying on public transport and to change into scrubs at work? Remember bailing us up threatening us if we wrote covid on the death certificate, and worse, trying to get us to change the death certificates?
We all moved on. And if you care about yourselves at all, perhaps you should too, so you don't have to live mired in this bitter hatred. You deserve better now. There's no more mandates, the lockdowns ended (even when you all said they never would), and no one cares if you're vaccinated anymore. So instead of spewing hatred wherever you go, go to therapy, process this awful time like the rest of us had to, and go and live your life away from the Internet.
Remember bailing us up threatening us if we wrote covid on the death certificate, and worse, trying to get us to change the death certificates?
Health care workers fill out death certificates?
It is terrible that any hcw's were harrassed or attacked, but they were far in the minority considering the trauma those who resisted the jabs were subject to.
@mrdean: How about the over 65s? They certainly weren't in the minority and everyone was telling them they didn't matter. That they were 'dead wood' or something. And yes, healthcare workers do death certificates. They are called doctors. Your group thinks you were the only people traumatised, you still hang on to it, you still circle around social media posting like you are in some way helping the world when all you do is repeatedly attack people over and over, and claim righteousness in that because of the vitriol you copped on social media.
Meanwhile people died without morphine. Without their loved ones present. Their loved ones had to get their bodies embalmed if they wanted to even see them after death. Viewings in driveways. Or how about aged care?
Seriously do you have any idea beyond your own nose just how many people were traumatised during covid? The difference is that they all had to get on with it, and cry in silence and in therapists, nurses, and other healthcare workers offices, in private, instead of constantly going on the attack and calling people sheeple. They don't want to be in this argument you're having because it traumatises them beyond belief. The true fallout from this pandemic is silent, and huge.
But yeh, go off about how traumatised you are because people disagreed with you.
Seriously do you have any idea beyond your own nose just how many people were traumatised during covid?
Yep, absolutely I do.
All those people who believed the tv were absolutely traumatized.
Disturbingly, those events you mentioned, like not being able to say goodbye to loved ones, seeing people through glass screens, in bubbles or any other number of absurd protective measures, done by GOVERNMENTS, was turned into some sort of VIRTUE. I still reel from the scale of the trauma based mind control inflicted on society.
A thought experiment for you……..if there was NOTHING on the news about the alleged virus & everything just carried on as usual, would you have noticed anything different post 2020?
@mrdean: Well given I work in a hospital yeah I would have noticed a massive difference post 2020 and that would be people dying of lung failure, en masse, in the hospital and in nursing homes.
It wasn't the government that set those policies, it was the healthcare sector. "Absurd protective measures" weren't government decisions, they were healthcare sector decisions. They weren't virtuous, they were terrible. They should not have had to happen but they did because of societies general attitude toward healthcare spending and the idea that they'll never get sick until they do.
Your trauma isn't special. None of our trauma is. But the big difference is that we don't go around making threads like this. I will never forget in the midst of covid, seeing a picture of a little girl on a power pole and the claim that she was a victim of vaccine injury. I took a photo of it and reverse image searched it. She was not a victim of vaccine injury. She had died in the Sandy Hook shooting. Don't tell me that the kind of vitriol your crowd spew, the deliberate lies, are in any way close to healthcare policy. Everyone sees you all for what and who you are, they just don't bother with you anymore.
I will never forget in the midst of covid, seeing a picture of a little girl on a power pole and the claim that she was a victim of vaccine injury. I took a photo of it and reverse image searched it. She was not a victim of vaccine injury. She had died in the Sandy Hook shooting. Don't tell me that the kind of vitriol your crowd spew, the deliberate lies, are in any way close to healthcare policy.
That's an interesting anecdote, thank you for sharing it. It adds to my view that some of what passes as anti-vaccine or conspiracy theories are actually deliberate disinfo attempts by let's say, "bad actors", to trigger people. They're likely not done by genuine people in the freedom movement. It's done to paint us as crazy, & it works as evidenced by your views.
Real vaccine injury stories are being done by groups like Forest Of The Fallen.
As a hcw, did you agree with preventing people from being with their loved ones at their death?
the deliberate lies
many 'deliberate lies' were planted effectively,
just to smear and poison the well.this was an intentional and calculated way to tarnish any dissenters.
Look for SPARS Hopkins pdf ,
and see the chapters on media control
and then try to imagine reading this PDF in 2020.many 'deliberate lies' were planted effectively,
just to smear and poison the well.Yes, exactly.
@mrdean: I saw photos on social media, of certain persons at those anti-mandate protests,
and those certain persons would be unruly and aggressive,…maybe even throw projectiles,
but all the people around the certain persons would get arrested
except the certain person, … as if the authorities knew who that certain person was.
All those people who believed the tv were absolutely traumatized.
People who didn't watch TV nor use the Internet much,
didn't even know what the fuss was about,
ie. they just saw a new fashion accessory when they saw
people mask up on the streets.
I was actually hanging at home during that time, so no, I don't remember sorry.
It has ended though right? I mean I get pissed off about stuff that happened 20 years ago in high school but it seems like a waste of time to continue dwelling on it.
Sounds like you had a nice lockdown then. Didn’t experience job loss, or loss of business, vax injury, can’t give last hugs or even see a loved one about to die, etc. Of course they should get over it but to toss it aside like it’s nothing, especially when you have ppl here doubling down. Then yeah its good to remind ourselves then people are still stupid
@Cusack: Yep I am one of the millions of people who sat at home, worked away, got vaxxed and didn't die.
I'm also best mates with someone who didn't get vaxxed, sat at home, worked away and didn't die.
We don't spend our time complaining about covid though, more about stuff that actually affects our lives.
what benefit there is to continue complaining about it.
It's because Fauci is in the news, saying many things contrary to what happened.
If politicians were saying "they received the health advice" for making decisions,
then those "health advisors" are saying 'umm…yeah, we made it up, because it kinda made sense',
is the reason for Forum discussions like this.Hundreds of millions of people believed arrows on the floor and stickers on seats,
is the reason why they were still alive enough to get the jabs….2x, 3x, 4x,…and more.You either got vaxxed or didn't
Some got 1, and got very sick.
They were not counted in the "you either got vaxxed" statistic,
because they didn't want to complete the 2nd dose.
They were berated by medical staff and by family/friends.Also, many of us, didn't get boosters.
So, non-boostered population got classified as anti-v*x too.Didn't you see all the dating profiles or FB profiles
of girls and guys, that were proud to claim that they got jabbed,
showing logos of how many doses they had,
and they were specifically saying they did not want non-jabbed people.It was their perfectly human right to choose who their partners should be,
and they've all removed this "jab badge" or mention of jabs from their profile in the last year.
Why did they do that ?Again, what benefit is there to complaining about it?
It's cool if you don't want to get vaxxed, but I don't see why people need to like you for doing it, yet alone saying it everywhere. Of course if you are anti vax some people won't like it, that's a choice you're making for yourself. How about just live with it, and stop complaining about it - life is easier that way.
what benefit is there to complaining about it?
Democracy does not start and end only on the day you choose a political party.
It's a daily conversation and a daily scrutiny of elected officials and their decisions.We have penalty rates in Australia and paid holidays or parental leave,
because someone continued to complain about it, in spite of being told "what benefit, is there to complain?"All change in life, that is a 'benefit' to everyone, came from the empathy of a few.
If you re-frame this as a "complaint", then you should write letters to a news editor and also stop watching the news.
They're always broadcasting to everyone their complaints about something,
or at least writing articles and discussing topics,
to elicit a specific emotional response out of the reader / viewer as well.They're always showing news about knife attacks and terrorists.
Stop complaining about terrorists in other countries !
It's no benefit to me here. Life is simpler, by stopping complaining about events that don't affect me here.I was just saying that Fauci was in the news, because Fauci appeared before U.S. Congress.
In fact, Daszak appeared before Congress last month.
The editors of the biggest scientific journals (eg. Nature, Scientific American) appeared before U.S. Congress, in the last 1.5 months.If you read into Fauci's testimony, his responses are what stirred up the emotional response in people around the world.
If you saw Daszak's responses and what Congress are doing now, you'll see that it was a serious issue that affected the whole world.
The editors of the scientific journals suppressed peer-reviewed scientific articles from being published, akin to removing books in a library or never allowing a book to be read.This information formed the basis of bureaucrats around the world, in the biggest civil-rights abuse globally.
Some take this seriously,…and some just shrug their shoulders and say "meh…why complain?"The following are all the same statement, in different contexts,
and it just sounds weird, to be reductive for issues that affect us all.We're all in this together
Again, what benefit is there to complaining about it?
It's cool if you don't want to buy fake meat, but I don't see why people need to like you for choosing fake meat, yet alone saying it everywhere. Of course if you are anti meat some people won't like it, that's a choice you're making for yourself. How about just live with it, and stop complaining about it - life is easier that way.
Again, what benefit is there to complaining about it?
It's cool if you don't want Ukraine, but I don't see why people need to like you for choosing Ukraine, yet alone saying it everywhere. Of course if you are anti Ukraine some people won't like it, that's a choice you're making for yourself. How about just live with it, and stop complaining about it - life is easier that way.
Again, what benefit is there to complaining about it?
It's cool if you don't want Dutton, but I don't see why people need to like you for choosing Dutton, yet alone saying it everywhere. Of course if you are anti Dutton some people won't like it, that's a choice you're making for yourself. How about just live with it, and stop complaining about it - life is easier that way.
Again, what benefit is there to complaining about it?
It's cool if you don't want immigration, but I don't see why people need to like you for choosing it, yet alone saying it everywhere. Of course if you are anti immigration some people won't like it, that's a choice you're making for yourself. How about just live with it, and stop complaining about it - life is easier that way.
Again, what benefit is there to complaining about it?
It's cool if you don't want to vape, but I don't see why people need to like you for doing it, yet alone saying it everywhere. Of course if you are anti vape some people won't like it, that's a choice you're making for yourself. How about just live with it, and stop complaining about it - life is easier that way.
Again, what benefit is there to complaining about it?
It's cool if you don't want to pay tolls, but I don't see why people need to like you for doing it, yet alone saying it everywhere. Of course if you are anti tollroads some people won't like it, that's a choice you're making for yourself. How about just live with it, and stop complaining about it - life is easier that way.
@whyisave: I agree with all of your substituted examples.
You can hold personal views, but this does not require people to like you for having those views, and if you go around shouting those views everywhere, that doesn't mean that others have to accept them or like you.
So again, what benefit are you drawing from this process?
what benefit are you drawing from this process?
It's for the benefit of all of us who live on this land.
The empathy of a few, gave us penalty rates, paid annual leave, parental leave, etc.
Those few were asked the same question too: "why argue? what benefit is your complaint?"Some people only have their "say" on 1 day, every 3 years (Federally),
when other people also exercise their "say" through their words and actions, every other day,
to scrutinize the decisions of your servant.@whyisave: You seem to misunderstand my question.
What actual, quantifiable benefit are you getting from complaining about this issue on this specific Ozbargain thread?
You say it's some general benefit from everyone in this land, I haven't really noticed a difference since it started. What changed in my life?
This was basically the message….
The vax is 100% effective!!
The vax is 90% effective
The vax is 60% effective
The vax is 40% effective
The vax helps
😂This was basically the message….
The vax will kill you
The vax will change your dna
The vax will make you infertile
The vax will give you covid
The vax is bad
😂Cusack - all false
Gehim - all trueIs it true it has microchips too?
@Ughhh: Its a thing. Its also a great scary sounding name that makes science sceptics a little moist in the pants :)
Eg
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9988954/The fact we have incredibly smart scientists in the world making research this advanced should be applauded.
Everyone's posting on ozb on a device whose processor has billions of transistors each only a few nm in size thanks to electical engineers without a second thought.
We also have medical researchers doing equally unimaginable (by regular foke) advancements and development that will hopefully progress society towards such advancements as targetted cancer cures and other uses for the technology. Or maybe it will just give us really good 7g reception.targetted cancer cures and other uses for the technology.
Do you know what the real tragedy is?
That there already exist many natural cancer treatments that work. But people don't realise it because of propaganda & corruption.
@mrdean: I think 'they' ran experiments via the different batches,
because 'they' could not have all batches behave the same way, for purposes of uptake.Some observers in the USA correlated the adverse reactions from their database
with certain batch numbers, to see a whole bunch of side-effects.
They also surmised that some of these batches had to travel great distances,
with (suspected) poor refrigeration, because those vials needed sub-zero temperatures to stay 'fresh'.They also surmised that some of these batches had to travel great distances,
with (suspected) poor refrigeration, because those vials needed sub-zero temperatures to stay 'fresh'.Yep, the belief most people have that the contents of every countermeasure/jab shot are exactly the same are totally at odds with reality.
Ah so which one did you fall for? The first one at 100% effective? Oh boy.
Both sides emphasized the worst from each other when talking about it. Truth is reasonable takes were the majority on both sides. It's reasonable to want people to be vaccinated to protect others. It's also reasonable to be suspicious of vaccines from pharmaceutical company's with history of deception where government had agreed to waive all their liability for this special case.
So, when in doubt, don't do it.
Fauci is a criminal working against the populace and profiting from the pharmaceutical industry
Prove it.
The quickest way to reach net zero carbon targets is less carbon on the planet.
zing !
lmao the memory holing is insane in this thread
Leave American politics where it belongs, in the bin. The stupidity over there is contagious and clearly has made its way around the world like cancer.
How much are the tin foil hats ?
Are they on special ? Gotta grab a bargain.
Experts have confirmed that tin foil hats are very safe and effective against myocardites, pericardites, heart attack and blood clots.
Currently doing research on effectiveness against sudden inexplicable deaths in young athletes.Yep some of the vaccines caused issues for a minute fraction of those immunised.
Meanwhile Covid acute and long covid have caused statistically significantly more deaths and long term affects.
So the point is? Anyone is able to a choice but one is mathematically the smarter one. But it’s still a choice.
Meanwhile threads of crazies like this ranting about conspiracies and crazy shit instead of thinking “hey these are people who are just trying to make the right calls in difficult times with good but not complete data”…
So many cracked out antivaxers in one thread. :) It feels like 2020 again.
If only they shunned modern medicine in its entirety and not when they feel it suits them.
not when they feel it suits them.
Modern medicine says take them.
However, many of us did not take any boosters.
Not taking boosters = anti-jab
So many cracked out antivaxers in one thread.
Nah … about the same number as provaxers (= vaccine junkies), about 50-50.
What is sad is nothing changed.
Like in 2020 it is one group against the other.
No one wants to reconsider.Nothing has changed, nothing will change.
Maybe they don't need to reconsider? Maybe if we stopped making threads like this, these arguments wouldn't be happening. If people don't want vaccines, fine. Let the rest of us get on with our lives.
Nothing has changed, nothing will change.
Well, the one noticeable change is that the pro-vaxxer crowd are getting thinned out in number by a sharp increase in deaths due to "unexplainable" sudden heart conditions. No such issues for those who chose not to put experimental drugs in themselves & moved on happily with life.
If they moved on happily then why do threads like this exist at all?
No such issues for those who chose not to put experimental drugs in themselves & moved on happily with life.
Says man with 17 anti-vax comments in 24 hours
The pro-thinker crowd (what you call pro-vaxer) have moved on from arguing with morons and are enjoying life, not needing to froth at the mouth to feel relevant.
@buckster: Mmmm … this sub-thread started with one of those individuals fanning division and calling names.
Somehow those individuals you categorize as "enjoying life" are not quite there and have an urge to comeback to throw some fuel into this pit.
Now we're just missing all the pro Russians who supported the invasion. They were the majority in a few threads. Maybe they're off being pro Hamas now.
Oh, this again? How fun.
Dumbest part about this entire schmozzle is where were the people saying "if you don't want to have it, don't, and if you want have it, have it".
These clowns that are heavily invested in either side just look like the biggest donkeys because they can't be comfortable with people making their own decisions.
If you want to be guilt tripped by the "I've get a responsibility to the community" crap, go right ahead, if you want to run around saying "the vaccine is linked to 5 and 6G" crap, again, go right ahead, but leave the rest of us alone that aren't weak minded enough to submit to any of this bullsh1t.
For f**ks sake🙄.
PCR tests ruled 97% ineffective and unreliable.
Only good to justify keeping people locked down and to inflate the number of people died from covid.https://halturnerradioshow.com/index.php/news-selections/wor…
All those conspiracy theories coming true…
CLAIM: “MSM Silent As Court Holds PCR Covid Tests 97% Inaccurate - Unfit for Purpose”
VERDICT : Inaccuratehttps://healthfeedback.org/claimreview/claim-portuguese-cour…
This is the link for the court proceedings
https://www.oevento.pt/2020/11/16/tribunal-arrasa-eficacia-p…
Its great that you linked that since your first link of a radio show has no references.
Why would I trust this conspiracy blog though that features articles like:
'Eurovision is a satanic ritual, not a music show'
'Holocaust planned for solar eclipse'
And numerous others on rothschilds, asian secret societies, etc.@Gehirn: Ok, keep trusting your trusted government approved sources. She'll be right.
Or do some research and think with your brain.@Mad Max: Haha we've seen your research! I was gobsmacked when you confidently shared an article written by a Nazi. You proceeded to double down claiming it doesn't matter where you get your sources from.
@youfnc: Ah ok. I thought you may use the nazi escape.
Nothing to do with safety and thruthness. Only political. As all the pro vaxers mob. My government says it is good and true. And I believe it.
I have something much better to do now.
Go get boosted.@Mad Max: Good point. When I'm looking for down to earth, no nonsense honest news, I turn to far-right political commentator and convicted felon, Hal Turner. /s
@Mad Max: You made me waste my time reading that decision.
This was a case of requesting RETURN to detainment for a group of criminals. Authority stupidly tried to appeal their release, in relation to the CRIMINAL proceeding, on the basis of a PCR. Not a public health order or otherwise.
Did you even translate and read the decision? Guessing you plucked it from one of tinfoil hat echo chambers.
Back up your "PCR tests ruled 97% ineffective and unreliable."
Go.
@Mad Max: Alright mate, what are your credentials. Let's hear your highest education level and current occupation.
@ThadtheChad: Listen buddy don't make fun of them for not finishing school. It's unkind to their peanut brains
Who checks the fact checkers?
I'd love to see this critic in regards to your own sites that post no references, rely on the accounts of secret societies, and outdated moon landing conspiracies.
https://www.who.int/teams/regulation-prequalification/regula…
"The website of Health Feedback is a member of the WHO-led project Vaccine Safety Net (VSN)."
Paid fact checkers. They will check fact accordingly…
Paid fact checkers yet no mention of being paid.
https://science.feedback.org/partners-funders-donors/The conspiracy deepens right?
@Gehirn: The VSN is run by employees of the WHO. It's not being funded by outside sources.
https://www.paho.org/en/topics/vaccine-safety/expanding-vacc…
About the WHO’s Vaccine Safety Net (VSN)
The WHO’s Vaccine Safety Net (VSN) is a network of websites run by the World Health Organization (WHO)@infinite: The VSN is run by WHO, the website in question Health Feedback is not, nor funded by them.
It is made very clear in the links.The VSN is run by WHO, the website in question Health Feedback is not, nor funded by them.
It is made very clear in the links.Science Feedback has commercial arrangements with Meta & Tiktok. They say it on the page you link to. In the budget section on that page, they got around 2mil euro for 2022. Ashoka Fellowship is the first in that list.
Here's Ashoka's partners, in the USA: https://www.ashoka.org/en-us/our-partners
Lots of corporates, including Google, & foundations. They've also been funded to the tune of over $15m back in 2008 by the BMGF: https://www.gatesfoundation.org/about/committed-grants?q=ash…So, one can see, even with this cursory examination of one of Science Feedbacks funders, that money is being funneled to these so called "independent fact checking" organisations by a variety of "corporate" sponsors, & that there is a history there.
@mrdean: And yet they still did not receive money from WHO.
Does a fourth person want to chime in and demonstrate their lack of abilities in reading?
And yet they still did not receive money from WHO.
Unless you go through & research the links of all the funders on that Science Feedback list, & then research each "partner" of those funders, & then research the "partners" of those organisation etc, you won't know for sure.
What I do know however, is that the BMGF, who did fund Ashoka for a period of time (& may well still be doing so through other avenues) is the biggest private donor to the WHO (which you should know as well by now).
So, your claim that the fact checker organisation is free from WHO $$ influence, is rather naive.
Unless you go through & research the links of all the funders on that Science Feedback list, & then research each "partner" of those funders, & then research the "partners" of those organisation etc, you won't know for sure.
Really seems like something the 'do the research' crowd should be interested in then.
@Gehirn: No, cause we know. It's not our first rodeo.
You should be though. But you don't seem interested in knowing.
Yeah well still haven't died yet like you all told me I would, over and over, since 2020. Take it back to Twitter mate.
Have you had any post jab health issues develop?
Nope
@mrdean: I'm in healthcare. I've had more vaccinations than I've had shifts finishing on time. No issues at all.
@mrdean: It's fine, like my hundreds of other colleagues. You'd think you'd see an upswing in excess healthcare worker death and disease if this was real but it's business as usual for us.
@MessyG: Your answers aren't direct but I expected that. I also expect that if there were health issues, either with yourself or your co-workers, the automatic reaction would be that they would be unrelated to the countermeasures or traditional vaccines. A lot of people never make the connection. Or refuse to.
Thanks for replying though, most wouldn't.
@mrdean: I feel like I was direct but try this. My general health is good. I have no chronic health conditions. I take no regular medication. My colleagues are all at work and enjoying their time off. I don't know what else we should be looking for. If there were issues we'd all know about it because healthcare is a big family. People aren't suddenly disappearing or taking time off work. You'd think the workforce would have been decimated with what is being described on here but it just isn't.
@MessyG: Given you are in healthcare, although I have no idea in what role, & you say you have had more vaccines than work shifts, have you ever been sick after a jab, sick enough that you couldn't go to work, took a couple days off? Say within a one week to two week period post vaccination?
Just wait and worry what else may have been in those vaccines that they didn't tell you. The didn't tell much about it anyway, and you still got it.
I think it was McCullough who said that if one did not get any sort of reaction at all (no bruise, swelling at injection site) then they were probably ok.
I know a couple (husband & wife) who seem to confirm this, 2 shots in order to keep their teaching jobs (they both didn't want to do it, put it off til the last available moment), both pfizer, but did not react at all & no observable post jab health issues so far, & it's been a couple of years.
Yeah see the difference is I don't think I'm particularly important to their master plan. I'm fine.
20% increase in excess deaths post Vax, around the Western world in official stats.
Similar decrease in fertility.
Catastrophic increase in still births and baby deformities.
Very high increase in injuries to the workforce.
Sorry to those who took it that you couldn't be reached.
Worse than WWI and II due to the scale.Take the red pill or stick with the blue. Repeating govt propaganda won't help other than false comfort, denying the truth in plain sight.
If you want to transition to an open mind, maybe start by taking some time to hear evidence from a funeral director:
https://x.com/TopherField/status/1798656119105269786I'm not sure your interpretation of 'evidence' is the same as everyone else's.
You know the best thing Elon Musk did in buying Twitter was to make it one nice big echo chamber for you all. Please use it and enjoy it. Go and save souls there, we're all sick of it.
The truth hurts
You've got yourselves a major platform now. Is that still not enough for you?
"One of the most cowardly things ordinary people do is to shut their eyes to facts."
Fantastic quote. Looking forward to the antivaxxers opening their eyes to facts instead of conspiracy BS.
Gotta love the antivaxxer independent group thought process. One of us…
It'll never happen
"One of the scariest things unintelligent people do is get thier 'facts' from social media."
Ah, I shouldn't reply…. but why not. This is insanity. The data is very clear. The anecdotes of issues caused by vaccines hold the same weight as flat Earth theory (which is fine, just don't push your crazy onto others). The data simply doesn't support it.
There's lots of stuff out there with fake news and made up data, but again, the actual data from real qualified bodies just does not support it.
So, should medical professionals do what they need to do to get people to stop being sheep and actually consider the evidence to take the best action? Yes. If it's hard and clearly a bad thing, the population will avoid it. If it's good, then they'll go with the flow and shake their fists afterwards…
OTOH, the more we learn about Covid the more we learn about the risks of the disease. Eg a lot of similar diseases are shown to severely increase the risk of cancer. It's too early to see the data on this, but early indications aren't looking good.
PS if you don't trust the government and don't want to be a part of the community it fosters, why not just opt out? Go to a region where there is no government and live free. Sure, it's not as nice as living in a place run by a scary government who's out to get you… but you have the choice.
You made your comment easy to disregard when you compared actual side effects people were having from vaccines to an actual conspiracy theory of flat earth.
No. Because there is no evidence for flat earth, and there is no evidence for the vast majority of covid vaccines (excl good old astra).
You can disregard it, but you’re on the same level at flat earthers. Which is fine. Just leave everyone else alone.
There is false info on both sides but most of the studies of harms due to covid point towards the spike protein as the cause of the issues. The same pathogenic spike protein that the vaccines get your body to make throughout the body, organs and brain- hence many vaccine related harms are similar to harms from covid itself which causes major issues for some.
Here's a collection of over 3500 peer reviewed studies and case reviews of vaccine related harms https://react19.org/science
If you care to pay attention there are hundreds of top doctors and experts worldwide speaking out about the harms they are seeing- from heart issues to neurological complications, autoimmune and cancers.
The data from 'real qualified bodies' does support their assertions- TGA and other adverse event databases have skyrocketed in number and excess deaths are through the roof- mostly since the rollout. Adverse reactions to covid vaccines in Australia make up over 20% of all adverse events for ALL other medicines combined since 1971. If the TGA weren't predominantly funded (96%) by pharmaceutical companies they may be singing a different tune.@lando54: Those are all case reports. Do you know about the tiers of evidence quality? Case reports are at the bottom. They make for super scary reading but they at about the same level as anecdotes. The fact that you'll so readily misrepresent information in this way really does speak volumes. If this was occurring at the rate you all claim it does, it would be in NEJM. It is not.
The dose of spike protein from the vaccine compared to getting covid itself is near-homeopathic.
The TGA charge pharmaceutical companies to examine their drugs for entry into the Australian market because a government contract (our PBS) is lucrative, and they self-fund that way. They're not the FDA, they don't just wave things through (see Lecanemab).
But you don't care about facts, you care about distorting them because you believe at a pathological level that you are the chosen ones who know the truth, while all the established (and there are many) groups of hardworking, dedicated, university scientists and healthcare workers who just want to go to work in peace, are wrong.
So I reckon the flat-earther comparison is pretty darn right.
Those are all case reports. Do you know about the tiers of evidence quality? Case reports are at the bottoms. They make for super scary reading but they at about the same level as anecdotes
They are still regarded as "evidence". Skeptics love to pull out the "low quality evidence" card.
@mrdean: So are you a skeptic or are you a blind believer then? One minute you call yourselves vaccine-skeptics, the next minute the rest of us are.
It's not a card, it's a truth. Here is why. The opioid crisis stemmed from a case report that was taken as fact by the medical profession in the eighties (more a letter to the editor, but anecdotal level of evidence only). It is taking us decades to undo that harm. That is why we take evidence quality extremely seriously now. Quality of evidence matters. Case reports exist to steer research - we read them and examine if the same is happening to our patients. If it is, we now have a theory to test, which gets done with larger scale studies, and gets proven or disproven.
So if you're blindly accepting case reports as facts, then I'll happily be called a skeptic.
So are you a skeptic or are you a blind believer then? One minute you call yourselves vaccine-skeptics, the next minute the rest of us are.
I was referring to the pseudo-skeptics who have blind faith in vaccines. Hence any reports of harms (anecdotes) are dismissed as junk.
It is a lovely fantasy that case reports of countermeasure harms are being taken seriously, when there is so much censorship & bias going on in the scientific community.
@mrdean: The beauty of the scientific community is that it is widespread and competitive. If one person is saying one thing, another group are trying desperately hard to prove them wrong because they want to win. It's not some big homogenous borg-like mass. Case reports aren't dismissed as junk - they're just leads, like in a criminal investigation. Not every lead turns out right. Some do. Astra Zeneca vaccine had rare but extremely fatal side effects. Pfizer can cause transient myocarditis/pericarditis. Guillain Barre is a known, rare, side effect for many vaccines. That came from case reports. But don't think that putting together a list of 3500 different case reports counts as consistent evidence because it doesn't.
@MessyG: Lol you clearly didn't read through the list because while yes there are many case reports there are also plenty of other cohort studies and systematic reviews of literature from across the world. Yes i know about hierarchy of evidence as I work in health and am involved in research. I completely agree case studies on their own are lower quality evidence but when you have case studies from all over the world showing similar serious side effects that line up with plausible mechanisms ie from the spike protein or mrna platform it adds weight to those stories that shouldn't be written off.
The TGA did wave through the covid vaccines without stringent testing just like the FDA- the trial data has been shown to be full of issues and the fact that pfizer vials have now been shown to be contaminated with plasmid DNA in significant quantities is a HUGE concern. I know how the funding system to the tga works and its a conflict of interest however you want to paint it.Personally I know the harms after my younger sibling died suddenly in the prime of their life following the covid vaccine. Going off history the massive harms will be continued to be denied/ignored for the next few decades to avoid liability then eventually admitted when all those responsible are out of positions of power.
Personally I know the harms after my younger sibling died suddenly in the prime of their life following the covid vaccine.
Condolences.
I know how the funding system to the tga works and its a conflict of interest however you want to paint it.
Ethical people from the TGA should come forward as whistleblowers.
Ohhhh I've just found this thread. Popcorn night watching the tin hat brigade spout the 'secret information' that 'they know'.
Most people with a brain knew he was full of shit. He never met a camera he didn't like was a quote by someone that has known him for years.
They only want to trust the science from people they approve and dismissed it from any doctor (which there were many) who had a different opinion based on science.
We live in Australia. He didn't feature here. Why is everyone so obsessed with this American guy?
Not obsessed, just recognise he's the most powerful bureaucrat who essentially controls the grant money for all health research in the USA.
What no he doesn't, that's not how research grants work
Because their overlords told them to
If you want to participate in the conspiracy circle-jerk, you need to go straight to the drug-riddled, paranoid source. The US of A.
Wow, this thread is full of (profanity) conspiracy nuts.
It sure is. I guess they like bargains too
Quite a few of them actually don't like bargains and have never given a positive vote.
This thread is brought to you by the Dunning-Kruger effect.
just here to write that after i got the covid vac, 3 months after ..give or take.. i had a pop in my lower back for sneezing and the disc got herniated. for a completely healthy guy, good weight ,good food,good rest, mid 20s , a sneeze was all it took for a hernia.
could not make sense of it until i googled back issues after covid vac and found a increase in number of herniation vaccinated vs unvaccinated.
I am not a pro vac but I do happily accept vaccinations if felt needed and covid vaccination was the only stuff that was pushed with fear and now i am left my whole life wondering what would have happened if i didnt take it,I started exercising and watching my diet a couple of years ago and am in pretty good shape. But just recently I've started having a sore heel and elbow. Doctors and physios can't cure nor tell me why it suddenly happened… but I just realised… I got a covid booster recently…. it's starting to make sense to me now.
WTF is going on here.
Question medicine and you get called an antivaxxer
Question climate change propaganda and you are called a denier
Science is meant to be questioned all the time. As OP mentioned even experts in their field are still learning new things all the time. Question everything and DYORYes welcome to being alive, where people give you shit. It doesn't matter what you believe or do in life, there's always someone around to give you grief for it. So knowing that, you might as well do and believe what you want, and at the end of the day be proud of following your own path in spite of naysayers. This is a very basic fact of life I teach my kids.
You've chosen your path, great, be proud.
There are so many people out there hurting from their own or family vax injuries, sudden death/turbo cancers, autoimmune diseases etc. I know quite a few. The government now has a service to pay funerals for vax deaths: https://www.servicesaustralia.gov.au/deceased-covid-19-vacci…
The media is constantly attributing false reasoning. For example ridiculous causes of heart attacks such as being a father. There is no such thing as long covid, it's long vax. Unvaxxed don't have it, and you can be sure the media and Govt would be ramming it at us if they did. The Govt knows who are unvaxxed. They were publishing the hospital stats weekly in NSW but finally stopped, after there were hundreds of hospitalisations for Vaxxed and at the same time Zero for unVaxxed.
The vial batch toxicity can vary dramatically which explains a lot. It's Russian Roulette. You can look up your own here: https://knollfrank.github.io/HowBadIsMyBatch/HowBadIsMyBatch…
It's all very sad.
In any case, it's your choice. You have the right to Boost up !!
If a person doesn't think covid is real, is it any surprise they think long covid or any symptoms due to covid isnt real too.
All those people suddenly dying/hospitalised before the vax was made must have all been paid by the Gov and big pharma!
All those people suddenly dying/hospitalised before the vax was made must have all been paid by the Gov and big pharma!
People were definitely hospitalized & died during 2020. Look closer at the treatments they gave those people (or withheld from them) in hospitals. Some of those people survived the protocols, most didn't.
Are you saying masses of people went to the hospital first for no reason, while healthy, was given some treatment/ or without treatment from a 'fake virus', then they started having breathing problems/fell ill? What happened in 2019?
You really do bend the facts to suit your narrative.@Ughhh: I don't know how you're off on that tangent. It was a nasty strain of coronavirus likely created with gain of function research in biolabs.
However, their treatment has negative efficacy and horrible short and long term side effects.
The more doses, the worse outcome. Can't you see? https://ibb.co/Z2RVwgL
I don't know how you're off on that tangent.
Because I'm replying to mrdeans comment, not yours.
I'm just trying to understand mrdeans logic. I'm just as confused as you are.He's often claims that covid is fake.
Blames the excess deaths/hospitalisation on the vax.
When questioned about the excess deaths prior to the vax, he blames it was due to treatments given/or lack of…..treatment for what, if covid is not real?@Ughhh: Here is a vid discussing the OECD stats from Dr Campbell https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y7vTqEmlkvw
There were minimal excess deaths prior to the Vax.We also have a large control group - WA.
That state was locked down and had no covid, but then were Vaxxed, then all hell broke loose.@trevor99: Just to be clear, lock down is good as a temporary and long term measure?
Careful there, you may have just made mrdeans blood boil even more. Though he might just turn a blind eye to your "anti freedom" as long as you continue being anti Vax.
Are you suggesting all those videos of people in hospital (before covid hit Australia) are fake?
@Ughhh: A chunk of those videos of panicked people in hospitals turned out to be from movies, TV shows and even video games. Other news shows played edited clips that were decades old.
Are you saying masses of people went to the hospital first for no reason,
Duh, no. The went to hospital because they were ill, for a variety of reasons. They had symptoms like shortness of breath, chest pain, & the one that convinced people to go, low oxygen stats via pulse oximeter.
Once there, the hell really began for some people. There were protocols the hospitals had to follow. Protocols that may have led to a lot of deaths.
They had symptoms like shortness of breath, chest pain, & the one that convinced people to go, low oxygen stats via pulse oximeter.
Due to what? What was the reason for sudden increase of hospitalisation with those respiratory symptoms?
I think we'll get there eventually, some need more time.
Due to what? What was the reason for sudden increase of hospitalisation with those respiratory symptoms?
When I listen to accounts, I listen carefully, something you seem to studiously avoid.
What I do know, is that, because of hospital protocols, people were tested for covid using the test that never was a test, REPEATEDLY, & some were not positive on admission (I suppose depending on the CT level of the tests used, plus some had already been testing at home). Some LATER did become positive. Other posters in this thread have said the same thing.
Let's not forget, the treatment those who really were "unvaccinated" received in hospital was largely truly deplorable. Remember the perception all over the media how they were selfish, awful people who didn't deserve treatment, but should just be left to die? REMEMBER that? Remember the POTUS saying "we are losing our patience with you" to the unjabbed? Remember Kochie talking about not allowing the unjabbed over for xmas as a reasonable thing to do? Yeah, as if this cultural attitude didn't affect hospital workers having to deal with sick unjabbed people.
, I listen carefully
You're joking right? Maybe only on things that agree with your narrative. Couldn't be more bias.
I'm talking about before Vax and diagnosis for covid. But you keep yapping on about after and going off tangent, avoiding the question.
Due to what? What was the reason for sudden increase of hospitalisation with those respiratory symptoms?
It was caused on paper by AHPRA demanding GP's blindly follow state govt public servants medical advice (despite none of them having GP or medicine experience/qualifications), to tell patients to rush in to hospitals if they had a bit of asthma or a sniffly nose, despite GP's advising AHPRA and state govt health officials there was no medical reason for it.
Even with that being the case, our hospitals were never at "breaking point" or anything like that, they simply had staff in public hospitals working under actual pressure loads like those in the private system for once and they freaked out about it. They then compounded the issue for themselves by sending staff away for up to 10 days every time they tested positive for Covid, despite most having no symptoms and being fine to continue working. So their "staff shortages" were nothing but self inflicted problems that private hospitals and GP practices had no issue with at the same time. They actually had among the lowest persistent levels of work and staff requirements ever during the Covid years, because the hospitals cancelled regular planned admissions and general/private clinics across the board, having entire floors and wings of hospitals completely unused.
The end result was that people with actual severe and chronic health issues became sicker or died, while people went in for treatment they didn't need, or actually made them even worse.
It was a nasty strain of the flu. That's what coronavirus is, always has been. Thousands of oldies die of the flu each year, and mysteriously none were reported during that year. Think about it.
The hospital protocol was to administer Remdesivir (nurses call it run death is near), and ventilators. Remdesevir firstly is very expensive, but has a 50% death rate. They used it in Africa and when the results were so bad, they never used it again. Until now. Same with MRNA by the way, they experimented on animals in 2010 and they all died due to immune system suppression.
The deaths were primarily in people with Vitamin D deficiency. This is the single most important treatment, and was never mentioned.
I supposed you could classify being hit by a car as a nasty 'strain' of being punched by a psychopath, since the injuries would be fairly similar. Many people die everyday, why do people get upset about drink drivers.
So the government has taken steps in the face of the very real harms of the AstraZeneca vaccine, and the rare side effects of the Pfizer/Moderna vaccines (pericarditis, myocarditis). If you have a look at the form you need to fill out to claim compensation from the government, it's all there in black and white. They're not hiding anything.
Secondly, it is a baldfaced lie that unvaccinated people don't get hospitalised for covid. I work in a hospital.
The safety and risk vs benefit of any vaccine or drug, is a discussion to have with your family doctor. It is fine not to get vaccinated if you feel that the risks are too high for you. For others the benefit far outweighs the risk. That is fine. You don't need to make up lies to justify that, just let people make the right decisions for them ffs.
Secondly, it is a baldfaced lie that unvaccinated people don't get hospitalised for covid. I work in a hospital.
Absolutely true. However the reporting of those "unvaccinated" people was misleading, to say the least. If they had taken a countermeasure, but were less than 2 weeks post jab & were in hospital, they were classed as "unvaccinated". The official reasoning given for this was that it took 2 weeks for the person to be "protected". Working in a hospital, you should know this.
Well yes, that's about how long it takes the immune system to create sufficient antibodies for protection. They couldn't mount an immune response in that period so that would count. But we looked after many many properly unvaccinated people with florid covid and it was horrible.
Well yes, that's about how long it takes the immune system to create sufficient antibodies for protection.
So wouldn't common sense dictate, upon close questioning of those who presented to hospital emergency within 2 weeks of having had a countermeasure injected into them, that it was likely these people were there because they were having severe reactions to the said countermeasure?
And while we are it, what do you think classing those people as "unvaccinated" does to the statistics compiled by the hospitals/government?
Why couldn't they separate the stats out by creating a category called "jabbed but less than 2 weeks so not protected" & leave the "unvaccinated" category separate. That way there would be ACCURATE numbers of "unvaccinated" in hospitals/icu. After all, if you were to ask most people what the definition of "unvaccinated" is they would likely say: someone who did not get a jab!
"Secondly, it is a baldfaced lie that unvaccinated people don't get hospitalised for covid. I work in a hospital."
That's not what I said.
Of course unVaxxed get the flu, especially Vit D deficient. What I told you is a fact from the final stages of NSW state Govt reporting.Why is this fact from the NSW government true, yet other facts from them about long covid, etc not? Its weird how they are only credible when they support your argument.
@Gehirn: Fair question.
These are raw stats from all hospitals on a weekly basis that would be difficult to fake, because too many people are involved, and there'd be holes and inconsistencies.The "Long COVID" syndrome, is a narrative attributing an opinionated cause to the condition.
Here's an example of the NSW report. This one has only one unvaxxed death, but possibly an oldie with Covid as not admitted to ICU, so maybe died of something else, rather than from Covid.
Oh look, you caught them. Congrats, be proud.
From that report, ignoring the people whose vaccination status is unknown:
1 out of 9 unvaccinated (or one dose) people died - 11%
23 out of 471 vaccinated (at least 2 doses) died - 5%
You can't compare numbers of people with vastly different population sizes without comparing it to the total of that population.
@whatgift: Please read it again.
3 people out of 480 hospitalisations were Unvaxxed !!
0 of the 3 Unvaxxed made it to ICU.
1 Unvaxxed Died. Who knows what happened there but if he/she didn't make it to ICU, unlikely it was not a covid caused death, more likely with.
@trevor99: I've read it just fine, you're using the statistics to suit your narrative, ignoring all the other possibilities (or you don't understand how data works). If most people are vaxed, then they are going to be overrepresented in the numbers. Also, getting the vaccine doesn't prevent you from getting covid or dying, it greatly reduces the likelihood.
There are so many inferences you can make from the data but none is conclusive. Also, it represents a single week in time, so hardly a comprehensive set of data to make any reasonable conclusion.
Edit: as I mentioned before, numbers of people by themselves mean nothing, they have to be compared to their respective total populations (vaxxed pop vs unvaxxed pop).
@whatgift: It's a datapoint, evidence of a snapshot of a week in time, to prove to you that when you said I lied you were totally wrong. It's not nice to call someone a liar.
You say this "Also, getting the vaccine doesn't prevent you from getting covid or dying, it greatly reduces the likelihood." There is no evidence that it saved one single life. If so please share.The initial trial was fraudulent, people went missing, then after a few weeks they vaxxed the control group!
Actually reading your response again it's total garbage,
@whatgift: I agree with you that's its hard when looking at stats for an individual week in time and without population adjusted comparison. NSW had the most comprehensive data publicly available in Aus but it was muddied by their mixing of terms like unvaccinated, no effective dose and unknown. They did provide clearer data on numbers per dose between May and December 2022 and this was a database helpfully comparing numbers to total population numbers for each group.
https://t.co/bn2kZrNtEA@lando54: Judging by the most recent unhinged response to my post, I don't think there is any point in continuing to respond, but appreciate the additional data!
From that report, ignoring the people whose vaccination status is unknown:
Those reports had the effect of showing the countermeasures in the best possible light. That's why they changed criteria names, going from "vaccinated" in earlier reporting to "doses" in later reporting, & adding AIR "matching" in the later reports which is why the "unknown" category has such large numbers. As far as I'm aware, they don't even define what "no dose" means in those reports (or at least I haven't seen it). Earlier they used "no effective dose" which I take as having a shot a while ago.
Technically the government hasn't lied with these statistics. But they've used language & data capture & reporting techniques to deceive & manipulate people.
@mrdean: People are also using statistics to suit their narratives, ignoring how data works and the other possibilities that don't lead to their desired conclusion.
@Rick Sanchez @ddilrat @djgreedo @hypie @Gehirn @MessyG @pulpfiction @ribze1
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/06/04/covid-vaccines-m…
Where will you get your news from now that mainstream media is also peddling horrible conspiracy theories?
Please get your booster shots.Do you think many members of Ozbargain get their news from Telegraph UK?
It's weird how you guys say not to trust mainstream media but use it to support your arguments.
You'll say not to trust government reports, yet will link it if there's even a single case that supports vaccine death.
Don't trust pharmaceutical companies because they have conflict of interest, yet naturopathy and other alternative medicine is filled with ads to others products, books, patreons, etc.
Don't trust everything you read, yet here are articles on sites promoting moonlanding conspiracies, or a clip from a guy on twitter.
@Gehirn: It's weird how you completely missed the point. I never said not to trust mainstream media.
People are so adamant that they made the right choice, shamed people who didn't trust what was going on, supported apartheid etc. that they won't admit that they maybe got it wrong as they would have to feel bad about their actions. Yes we were all given information and were assured that it was and always would be correct. Is it that bad to you that questions are asked?There are idiots here that think the earth is flat and that they don't have to follow the laws of the country because they exist outside of it in some psuedo nation. Why is it that asking questions about a medical product that was rushed to market makes you in the same basket as the others?
Is science a belief system or a process? I'm pretty sure science should encourage asking questions.
Don't trust pharmaceutical companies because they have conflict of interest, yet naturopathy and other alternative medicine is filled with ads to others products, books, patreons, etc.
Surprise! People like making money. The problems come when profits are put before safety and due process. Before 2020 new vaccines would take 10+ years to come to market. Why was that?
Don't trust everything you read…
I don't. I haven't been posting stupid twitter clips either.
It's weird how you completely missed the point. I never said not to trust mainstream media.
It's weird how you tagged me in a comment with zero interactions between us, saying that I must get my thoughts from mainstream media.
supported apartheid etc
I don't know what South Africa has to do with this.
Why is it that asking questions about a medical product that was rushed to market makes you in the same basket as the others?
Have you seen what the other people in this thread are saying? It is not wrong to ask questions but is it really asking questions when you have already decided you are right and everyone else is wrong?
I don't know what South Africa has to do with this.
My apologies - I'm referring to the two tiers of society that the vaccinated vs. unvaccinated would be in. We even had the NSW Health minister suggest that the unvaccinated should have to pay any hospital costs incurred if they got sick. For the record I had two shots of AZ.
Have you seen what the other people in this thread are saying? It is not wrong to ask questions but is it really asking questions when you have already decided you are right and everyone else is wrong?
I agree. There are without a doubt people here that will have a view because their favourite publication said so or someone with authority told them so. People on both sides of the argument.
I advocate an open discussion. I read MSM regularly, read both sides of arguments and try to debunk both sides. I can only hope that people read some of these comments and have pause for thought.
Don't trust pharmaceutical companies because they have conflict of interest
Or you could just not trust them because they lied about the chemicals in the jab, lied about how it worked, lied about it working at all and then lied about knowingly releasing a dangerous product not fit for use.
Here's Pfizer getting done in by the UK's pharmaceutical regulator, with Pfizer employees and executives in the UK now being referred for prosecution. It's not a news report, it's the actual findings from the medical body themselves.
https://www.pmcpa.org.uk/media/cwvkqvyz/3741-case-report-28-…
Breaches found against them in the findings:
- Bringing discredit upon, and reducing confidence in the
pharmaceutical industry. - Releasing and promoting an unlicensed medicine.
- Making a misleading claims to the government and population.
- Making claims about the performance of a drug despite no available evidence.
- Wilfully making false claims regarding adverse reactions and side effects.
- False advertising and claims were knowingly made by Pfizer employees and executives in 2020, 2021, 2022 and 2023, despite their own internal testing and evidence showing those claims to be false.
- Bringing discredit upon, and reducing confidence in the
How about the Courier mail? https://www.facebook.com/couriermail/posts/pfbid02bWkejTGmi3…
Or could try Japan https://x.com/lawrie_dr/status/1798988399992553747
Or could try Japan https://x.com/lawrie_dr/status/1798988399992553747
What if this is A.I. ?
In the future, they will look at this and debate if it's AI or not,
like in our contemporary times,
there is a debate about the film quality and camera angles of the JFK assassination.@whyisave: You can tell it's not AI, because the doctors and intellectuals discussing the topic in that clip are Asian and White.
"Don't believe MSM!" vs "Here is an MSM article proving what I say is true!"
Which is it?
I could find you articles refuting this if you like, which is what you do every time someone sends you a link seemingly disproving your stance…but we all moved on from that rabbithole. Why you're all bitching about it on a bargain forum is just beyond me.
Which is it?
The article, like all msm articles, is an attempt at damage control. It admits some findings in the study cited, but then counters it with the official narrative. This is their standard operating procedure, going back to when the first deaths from thrombocytopenia started post rollout. They are doing perception management.
So…I should believe the part you tell me to believe but not the other part which is the lie…
Which is it?
We don't know what it is,
but we know what it isn't.Where and when did I say "Don't believe MSM!"?
You brand everything that's not MSM as conspiracy theory rubbish. Now you have MSM agreeing with independent media.
Which is it?
Why you're all bitching about it on a bargain forum is just beyond me.
Who made you engage in this thread, on a bargain forum of all places.The hypocrisy is hilarious.
Bro you gotta step away from this black and white thinking. This article is not conspiracy and I agree with it.
The article you posted doesn't invalidate that:
- based on the information available at the time,
the government made generally the right choices regarding mandatory vaccinations.
- the results are available, and they show that only the Astrazeneca vaccine caused more side effects than was expected
- overall, even with the additional issues caused by the Astrazeneca vaccine, aiming for high vaccination rates saved lives far in excess from any vaccine complications. This is demonstrated by the death rates in countries like Japan and Australia compared to dumbass countries like the USA which weren't able to achieve high vaccination ratesThe problem is the need for people to want to shut down discussion over the safety of these products. It most often happens by people writing it off as 'conspiracy theory rubbish' or similar. I would class this as black and white thinking.
There are absolute idiots out there that spout crap about flat earth and sovereign citizen junk. And these people latch on to anything that is anti government without a critical thought in sight.
But the fact that they do doesn't automatically invalidate anyone who wants to ask questions, in this case medical products that were rushed to marked in an unprecedented way.
based on the information available at the time
Why is it a problem to ask questions on this information? There are clear indications for the Pfizer trial that there were issues with how it was conducted. This is an informal post on the British Medical Journal - not some twitter compilation or youtuber rambling: https://blogs.bmj.com/bmj/2021/01/04/peter-doshi-pfizer-and-…
This is demonstrated by the death rates in countries like Japan and Australia compared to dumbass countries like the USA which weren't able to achieve high vaccination rates
I would invite you to look at the statistics of excess deaths in Western Australia, compared to the timelines of vaccine rollouts and covid infections and reported covid deaths in that state. I have yet to see an explanation going beyond saying that covid deaths accounted for part of them. It may well turn out to be nothing to do with the vaccines. Since the truth should never fear sunlight I wonder why there is no effort to look at this.
Not only did the US have a low vaccination rate, they also had much higher infections from the delta strain whereas we largely avoided mass infection until omicron.
Actually, I agree with your comments.
I think what's happened for a lot of people (inc doctor's) is that by engaging and validating criticisms and concerns publically, there's a fear that it will be seen as validating conspiracy theorists, or that it will be enough.for people to fall down those misinformation rabbit holes, and ultimately do more hard than good.
An example of this association is your comment - reading your comments after OP's post I assumed you were also endorsing their cooker babble about bill gates and government control.
The British Medical Journal is a good example of an entity that undertook valid reviews of the vaccine and was not afraid to criticise it. It actually shows that this discourse did happen in the medical field.
I'll look into the timelines like you're saying. But in the end, something like this conversation would be far too complex for mainstream media, which doesn't deal with nuance and just wants a good/bad label on everything.
@Rick Sanchez: Thanks
I suspect there has been a lot of self censoring going on in the last several years particularly from doctors. Not worth risking the career you've worked so hard for and I don't blame them.
cooker babble about bill gates and government control.
I will say this about Bill Gates:
The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation has donated and given grants totalling hundreds of millions of dollars over the years to media organisations. A skeptic might think that this could be helpful in avoiding scrutiny and negative coverage. Our ABC may not have benefited from this seeing the recent interview Sarah Ferguson did with Bill as it was quite awkward for him.
The foundation is one of the top contributors to WHO funding year on year. There is also indirect funding through GAVI, which the foundation is a major contributor also.
Despite the famous public pledge from Bill that he would give away his fortune through philanthropy, it seems he has been very inefficient at this with the foundation continuing to amass wealth and influence.…this discourse did happen in the medical field.
It is good that something is happening but very disappointing that there is little to no discourse in the media. Maybe they fear backlash from large parts of their readers and the government, who would think that any questioning or doubt would stoke vaccine hesitancy and therefore put lives at risk? Although the industry spends considerable money on advertising thankfully in this country advertisements for prescription drugs are not allowed (unlike NZ and US). The point I make there is similar to the B&MG foundation donations above. For an example here, see how many commercial news outlets reported on Harvey Norman's huge windfall on JobSeeker payments considering he's one of their biggest customers, or how most newspapers seem to have their own real estate advertising business and run articles every day trying to pump the market.
something like this conversation would be far too complex for mainstream media, which doesn't deal with nuance and just wants a good/bad label on everything.
Agree 100%. Doesn't seem to be so much here, but in the US on this issue it's a right wing vs. left wing, progressive vs. liberal, democrat vs. republican etc. It's a very effective tool to divide people when they should be uniting. Unfortunately we take the lead on narrative for what happens over there. And we end up with people that are 'Sky News viewers' or 'ABC viewers', and subscribe to all of the views on every topic without question instead of trying to use their own brains to form an independent view.
What is this rubbish
NEJM, Lancet etc.
Personally, I want everyone forced to get boosted every year - at gunpoint if need be.
But that aside, I don’t understand how some of us are still wasting our time on this. You got what you wanted, all the mandates came down - they weren’t even around for very long anyways… and now literally nobody cares what you do. You can be covid positive and walk into a hospital tomorrow and cough on vulnerable people with indemnity, if you so choose.
Why are people wasting the time of our courts, our parliament, our taxpayer dollars, on investigating the good work of our public health officials.
Get over it.
They said lockdowns would never end and would be extended forever.
They said the vaccines were full of RFID chips implanting us with 5g - which never happened.
They said we would be force boosted forever.
They said we were all going to die en masse, repeatedly over 5 years.And even now, years on, they're still making threads like these and expecting anyone to believe them.
They said lockdowns would never end and would be extended forever.
The framework is being built to enable future lockdowns for a variety of issues, including public health threats & climate change. The lockdowns also trained the population to obey orders.
They said the vaccines were full of RFID chips implanting us with 5g - which never happened.
In my opinion, these claims were spread deliberately to discredit any opposition. However there are a few doctors who have spent a great deal of time looking at live blood analysis, who are seeing what look like circuits in both blood & countermeasure vials tested.
They said we would be force boosted forever.
Which has come true, now yearly shots are recommended.
They said we were all going to die en masse, repeatedly over 5 years.
Some predicted a ramping up of death after about 3-5 years. Given the first shots in Australia were late Feb 2021, we have crossed the 3 year mark for the first wave of countermeasure recipients who were mainly the elderly & certain workers.
"However there are a few doctors who have spent a great deal of time looking at live blood analysis, who are seeing what look like circuits in both blood & countermeasure vials tested"
You realise this is literally impossible and defies all logic. Like, you read that, and actually believed it.
Jesus
They always, without fail, tell on themselves.
David Nixon, & some other groups of concerned humans, are using some darkfield microscopy to investigate & document what they are seeing.
The framework is being built to enable future lockdowns for a variety of issues, including public health threats & climate change. The lockdowns also trained the population to obey orders.
Is that why morons still march every weekend…
Is that why morons still march every weekend…
Not really. We march so that people may become aware that situations like this: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-06-10/coles-egg-limit-bird-… are pretending to be about health & security. Why not let farmers farm? Biosecurity legislation was passed circa 2015. I suppose they had to use them.
As conditions deteriorate, socially, economically, & healthwise, people may well start asking why. They might get angry too, although I hope not. I hope they will be able to see things a bit clearer.
are pretending to be about health & security.
Mrdean again proudly demonstrating his ignorance.
Clearly chickens are the only birds out there, and nothing should be done until masses of birds all die. Big Bird is to blame of course.
"good work"
Hehehehehe
I genuinely would like to know what drives people to think there are mass coordinated conspiracies across competing companies, governments, health officials of dozens of countries and practically every senior health and research person
Stop and think about that. WHY and HOW would everyone be in on this vast conspiracy ?
There is/was a nasty virus called coronavirus. Many thousands of people died around the world, and all these parties tried to do the best thing they could to save more from dying - and they did. No doubt there were people with self-interest at heart also - that's natural. But to insist there's a giant conspiracy is…unexplainable.
"When you hear hooves, think horses." Not miniature aliens controlling realistic-looking zebra robots…
Stop and think about that. WHY and HOW would everyone be in on this vast conspiracy ?
Simple. They're not. They genuinely believe they were doing the right thing. Still do. Although some have started to question.
I have a conspiracy theory of my own…. I reckon someone is playing information warfare against us with astounding success.
I don't know how many times I've told people to check the credibility of thier source before they spread propaganda and conspiracy theories, and I really feel that I'm fighting a losing battle.
Part of the same consiracy theory: I wonder how many of these posters are actually bots? I reckon they must need to build artifical momentum with a conspiracy before people would be guillable enough to jump on board.
There is/was a nasty virus called coronavirus
The entire response to a virus was based off tests (eg. PCR).
Based on the testing methodology and accuracy of these tests,
dictated the kind of response a bureaucrat made,
eg. lockdowns, arrows on supermarket floors, keeping 24-hr McDonalds open, hot-spot zones in Sydney,
closing down borders, hotel quarantines, preventing families seeing their dead relatives in nursing homes, etc.What if there were multiple viruses floating around,
which produced the same symptoms, but the PCR tests were just to detect a type of coronavirus?Heck, there was a theory that white-hat biolab hackers studied the original strain of covid,
and then released a modified version of this strain, which infected the whole world quickly
(i think it was Omicron? or Delta? i forget).
This strain got everyone sick, but with mild symptoms, and built herd immunity.
Virologists studied this strain and said that there were very little mutations from the original strain,
and compared to the other strains floating around, this particular strain branched from the original strain
in such a way that it had to be engineered….but by whom? That was the mystery.
It ticked off Bill Gates too, as if someone had foiled his investments in BioNTech…
…and B.Gates said in an interview, in an unamused way:
"…this variant did a better job vaccinating everyone, than the actual vaccine…"Many thousands of people died around the world
The argument is, many thousands didn't need to die,
because extremely low-risk medicines and treatments existed to treat symptoms,
as all doctors are trained to do, ie. use their knowledge to diagnose symptoms.Most developed nations have doctors stick to approved protocols (think of "work instructions" or "process documents"),
and when countries subscribed to the W.H.O. protocols for a new (ie. novel) virus,
then, all those doctors were told to abandon whatever procedures they had,
and to follow the new protocols (work instructions) to approach covid.You can ask hospital staff, if you know any, what protocols they had in hospitals at that time.
Western countries have a very litigious legal system,
so medical practitioners do not go against the protocols set by their administration
or even go against their RACGP memos, as their licence/membership is at risk.In countries where they didn't stick to W.H.O. protocols, ie.
the doctors just did whatever they could to save lives (in Africa, South America, India, etc.),
ie. the medical practitioners used their knowledge of proven low-risk medicines,
and they were able to prevent many deaths and build that herd immunity.Ah ok. So totally unsubstantiated tin foil hat wild. Gotcha :)
The excess death rate is persisting at around a 747 load of people per week in Australia. Is that ok with you? Because it's not with me. These are real human beings, in addition to all the other injuries and disabilities
Because it's not with me.
So what are you doing about it then?
I'm trying to shine a light on the truth so less people take the next poison, such as BirdFlu and regular Flu jabs. The Flu jab is not what it once was.
Follow the evidence wherever it leads. It may sound extreme but the truth is extreme sadly.
What politicians did, a few years ago in fear of the possibility that hospitals would be inundated with bodies,
are all looking away now and avoiding the Royal Commission, when the reality of excess deaths is actually here and trending upwards.Trev, its over mate. You can go outside again.
What was worse than covid was the sheer amount of mental illness the period seems to have bought out in the general public from all the conspiracy theories and anxiety.
Don't worry, 300 years ago we were still hanging people for being witches.
Those same people still exist today.
Bird flu, ey?
It's U.S. election season
make bird flu great again
As per usual, the real deal is in the comments.
It's not just vaccines. Make it difficult and people will do what you want before anarchy strikes.
He's right. I know for a fact that 100% of the people who took covid vaccines have either died or will die. The government have tried to hide it but the numbers are there for everyone to see. Open your eyes people, I mean sheeple.
Are you saying the unvaccinated will never die? Being 2000yo would be so boring 🤔. Maybe Alex Jones will have some kind of anti aging oil I can take so my body stays young?
You're right though, I've died already, twice this year. About 90% took the Vax, has 70% of those people died yet? I'm getting sick of traffic, 😔
Can you argue my fact that everyone who has taken the vaccine is either dying or will die? I think not.
Every dies at some stage
Can you argue the fact that anti vaxers will die too? Or are you hinting that anti vaxers are vampires?@AS2035: Well that was an intelligent, well thought out retort with clear evidence supporting your argument.
Its ok, school holidays start in a week. Enjoy the break.
@Clambabula: Exactly. It's no conspiracy that 100% of vaxers will die in their lifetime. And 0% of unvaxed will die, ever, they're immortal. Fact.
trump might sell snake oil to cure all before November… He plans on living forever and holding office for decades to come.
seek help..
mRNA is the base for cancer vax that is being trialed
they are doing tests on melanoma and pancreatic cancer
people with tutors who had covid vax seen tutors shrink.
Tute on son..tute on
People didn't want to wear masks during the 1918–1920 flu pandemic either, I await someone to stand up and tell us that was all a hoax too.
People did wear masks in the 1919 flu pandemic, it was studied extensively and that's how it's specifically known that masks do nothing against the flu, just like they offered no protection against Covid, as both the Flu and Covid are nanoscopic in nature & as such, no mask prevented the spread or transmission of them.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4868614/
Masks are worn by healthcare professionals to lessen the extent of cross contamination of bacteria between large volumes of sick people in a small contained area. They have no impact on curving the spread or proliferation of nanoscopic airborne viruses or organisms however, especially in a public setting.
(Belkin NL. The evolution of the surgical mask: filtering efficiency versus effectiveness. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 1997;18:49–57)
masks work when worn properly.
you need to wear a mask, not something you made up at home
The influenza epidemic that swept the world in 1918 killed an estimated 50 million people. One fifth of the world's population was attacked by this deadly virus. Within months, it had killed more people than any other illness in recorded history.
It came out of the military bases in the US at that time.
That should give people a clue as to what is really going on.
masks work when worn properly.
Wut?
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4868614/
Masks were worn throughout the 1919 influenza epidemic all around the world and they had absolutely no impact on the curve of the influenza spread. This is because like most viruses, influenza is nanoscopic and masks don't stop viruses that small from spreading.
OK,
- That article was published prior to the discovery of COVID, so clearly cannot have included studies of COVID.
- "MD, PhD candidate in English and cultural studies". Good research can be done by PhD students, but are they the best source for medical research?
- In any case the article mentions that masks may be useful for source control. Source control is better than nothing, and in fact source control of COVID was the main reason to wear a mask.If you are interested in pre-COVID viruses, the following article seems to give much more detail on how masks can prevent infections: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7169241/
vax saves lives.. your life, the life of people who for health reasons cannot get vaccinated.
as with all medication there are possible side effects
How convincing. Well then, Boost up !!
No Covid jab prevented the spread of Covid. The one and only benefit was they had a slight chance that in some people, having taken the jab may lessen the severity of the side-effects of Covid for about one day, during the time you had Covid.
None of the jab's stopped you from spreading it, none of them stopped you from catching it, none of them stopped you from having it for as long as it was going to be in your system for. None of them had any capacity to save the life of a person who couldn't get a jab due to pre-existing health conditions.
Not prevent spread but reduce by about 2/3, depending on how you measure. Better than nothing: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36724697/
infinite you don't have to concede that it reduces any severity, certainly not anymore. Even if it did create some useful immune response in the beginning, that strain is long since extinct and the crazy poision is still supposedly using your body to create useless poison spike proteins from the original extinct virus !
Do you understand what the makers are claiming it does? It sends packages of "lipid nanoparticles" that penetrate your cells and combine to reprogram them to create a poison protein, they claim will make a correct immune reponse. Unfortunately when they tested it on animals 10 years ago they all died. There is no off switch, and here they are, arrogantly messing about with a million year old molecule, RNA and DNA contamination, the book of life. Just think about that. No wonder turbo cancers are exploding, immune systems are confused and heart surface damage is occuring to cause heart attacks as heart cells create poison and get attacked by your immune system !
Have you noticed they're putting defribulators everywhere? Even in primary schools for little kids????
Long Covid (i.e long Vax) victims have been found to have decreased immune cell counts. The vaxxed who are sickly should have a compete blood count immune cell test. AIDS is defined as low immune system counts under certain levels (not an HIV test).
This is not my advice, but the advice of Luc Montagnier, the French virologist who won the Nobel prize for discovering HIV.
Sorry for the bad news but at this stage we may as well flush out the truth. VAIDS for some :((
vax saves lives.
The origins.
Over 200 years ago, on March 17, 1802, Edward Jenner, creator of cowpoxing and later rebranded as vaccination, petitioned the House of Commons, stating that vaccination was perfectly safe and would protect you for life: “That your petitioner having discovered that a disease which occasionally exists in a particular form among cattle, known by the name of cow-pox, admits of being inoculated [vaccinated] on the human frame with the most perfect ease and safety, and is attended with the singularly beneficial effect of rendering through life the person so inoculated perfectly secure from the infection of small-pox… [vaccination] has already checked the progress of small-pox, and, from its nature, must finally annihilate that dreadful disorder”
In the year 1805, a mere few years after the widespread adoption of vaccination within the medical community, Dr. William Rowley, MD, who held the esteemed position of Physician to Her Majesty’s Lying-in Hospital, made a notable observation: “Out of 504 persons vaccinated, 75 died from the consequences [14.9%.] There is no question here of supposition, or calculation of probability—it is truth: It is evidence which seems to speak, and leaves no doubt. Now, if in the space of seven or eight years (from 1798 to 1805) Vaccination has shown itself so grievous to society, what may we not fear for the future.”
https://romanbystrianyk.substack.com/p/the-mythology-of-safe…
That seems implausible since only two deaths have been reported from cowpox. https://emedicine.medscape.com/article/1131886-overview?form…
That seems implausible since only two deaths have been reported from cowpox. https://emedicine.medscape.com/article/1131886-overview?form…
They are referring to cases in modern times. The cited references range from 1993-2017, 2017 being the case where a young person with renal transplant died.
Jenner's era was about 200 years ago.
Well some random 2 lines written in a cliched manner with no evidence seals it for me.
Shoot it into my arms baby, shoot it good, I really want to fit in to society and this is my start.
Jab me JAB ME NOW
Rather than the Ostrich head in the sand (negs), how about indicating what in particular is factually incorrect, with your evidence? Be specific.
They can't, all they have is down-voting and full time running interference for global pharmaceutical companies, despite not being paid anything by them.
I mean, I can understand why the shills on TV shows and media outlets were behaving like that, because they were getting paid by pharma companies to lie for them. But rando's on the internet who are mostly unemployed and the very people now suffering the side effects of the jab…… god only knows why they are doing it for the pharma companies ?
I guess it's the Agent Smith effect. They pop up to defend the Matrix.
Yep I got the jab and suffered from still only having 4g. It took an hour of my time, and what do I have for show for it? Just a safe and effective way of ending an pandemic that cost millions of lives and practically halted the world economy! Please pray for me. :(
Aren't you the one saying things like "Have you noticed they're putting defribulators everywhere? Even in primary schools for little kids???" above?
How come we need to cite specific evidence and you get to blurt out "lookit all the defributalors everyone!!!!"
You don't think they're installing defribulators in Schools? Wow. Try your Google machine.
I have no doubt that there are defibrillators at schools, just as there as defibrillators at shopping centers and swimming pools.
Your problem is you're yet to connect their existence to "global conspiracy theory', which you need to do for your argument to make sense.
@Crow K: I'll try to make it really simple.
They didn't place defribulators in primary schools years ago, because the heart attack rate was trivial. Now they do because it isn't.
You want evidence, here's a taste: Medicare new item 63399:
https://x.com/real_GGoswami/status/1800456330463121701@trevor99: That "evidence" was a word salad tweet by a confirmed conspiracy theorist.
I know that doesn't make a difference to you, but there are normies in this thread who might have been thinking "well Trevor dropped some facts via a link I did not click so maybe this is an excellent time to free associate about medical conspiracy"
Which it is not. Most public institutions now have defibrillators. The "BUT WHY ARE THEY PUTTING THEM IN CHILDREN'S SCHOOLS" mania is dispelled with the realization that children in children's schools are taught by adults.
@Crow K: Why do people keep saying "conspiracy …"? No, it's called analysis.
Knee jerk triggers aiming to prevent any discussions or consideration.
Meanwhile people are dying.
Yet again attack the messenger not the message.Item 63399 is a fact.
https://www9.health.gov.au/mbs/search.cfm?q=63399&sopt=I@trevor99: UK child excess deaths.
That means children who are now dead that shouldn't be. UK parliament.
Https://youtu.be/UO_d9rAFpx0?si=fXiyx8u266szkow1Why do people keep saying "conspiracy …"? No, it's called analysis.
"Analysis" via looking at something and free associating there must be a secret agenda underlying it.
I mean, I get it. Conspiracy theorists hate being called conspiracy theorists because they know of the reputation it gets … So they want to call themselves something a bit different while still doing the exact same thing.
This entire discussion started because I pointed out you telling all of us we needed to cite hard evidence, and yet here you and your mates are with your "analysis" which doesn't have the same burden of proof.
Conspiracy theorists, theorizing conspiracies.
Every time.
@Crow K: 🙃 Is the item number from the govt Medicare link I gave you fake? Is that what your saying? Is the youtube vid of documents and discussions in parliament fake? Or are the ministers telling lies in the UK Parliament? Which is it? Be specific.
@trevor99: Your argument was 'they are putting defibrillators in schools because of covid vaccines effects, the evidence is medicare item 63399'.
Does that medicare item reference defibrillators or schools? No. Did you provide any evidence that defibrillators are in schools because of covid? No.
You would be surprised about by the specific health devices schools now have on hand. Does it mean those afflictions are increasing too? No.
Do Westfields, pools, etc have them on hand because of covid? No. Places with large gatherings have these devices in case of emergencies.
@Gehirn: Got it, so you ignore vital and clear evidence of harm but demand proof that all these new installations of defribulators are not just a coincidence. Ok, take a look on your Google machine, here's an example that took me 10 seconds:
https://lfafirstresponse.com.au/blog/defibrillators-for-scho…
I can tell you this was never the case it the past. If you insist on blinkers at this point you're a candidate for the Darwin Awards, frankly. You have the right to boost up, but please think about it first with an open mind.
To be clear this was my quote "Have you noticed they're putting defribulators everywhere? Even in primary schools for little kids????" Totally true.@trevor99: Does that link provide evidence that they are for covid or even mention covid? No.
Have you provided any "clear evidence"? No, you have provided separate events that do not reference each other.To be clear this was your quote too:
They didn't place defribulators in primary schools years ago, because the heart attack rate was trivial. Now they do because it isn't.
You want evidence, here's a taste: Medicare new item 63399:
https://x.com/real_GGoswami/status/1800456330463121701Was that evidence that the defibrillators are for covid? No.
@Gehirn: Wow, you're concatenating different paragraphs now and removing spaces.
Didn't know you had to be a lawyer to write on here.
Boost up !!
I can tell you this was never the case it the past.
The ever reducing cost and increasing availability of AED's is of no consequence in your determination?
My work place has an AED, as do many.
If you went back 10 years ago the number of workplaces with and without would be drastically different than today.
Zero to do with covid,
100% to do with significant cost reductions, increased availability, clear demonstratable benefits from AED availability, and increased OHS regulation regarding first aid requirements within workplaces (of which schools are)Or, perhaps its all just because of covid vaccines.
Correlation <> Causation, but your Venn diagram is clearly just a single circle on this one.
@SBOB: But that's your opinion.
My opinion is you're trying to fake an irrelevant tangent that isn't there to distract yourself away from the increasing mountains of catastrophic harm of excess deaths and injuries that just happened to start with the experimental Vax. Keep it up.But that's your opinion.
These are factual items
- significant cost reductions,
- increased availability,
- clear demonstratable benefits from AED availability,
- increased OHS regulation regarding first aid requirements within workplaces (of which schools are)They are the same reason that you now see AED's in more and more places.
Every shopping centre, workplace, public sports field, day cares, and, as you earlier identified, schools etc etcThe only one making irrelevant tangents would be the one that doesn't consider any of the above conditions in their assessment of increased AED's within society, nor has any actual statistics to show that a distinct and significant uptick/hocket stick in AED sales and installations occurred to align with their 'theory'
@SBOB: Nice discussion you're having with yourself, of course irrelevant.
On another note, there's a 42% increased chance of developing a neuro problem after covid, equating to 7% of those infected.
Many are seeing it.@trevor99: Wow, youve worked out COVID had side effects.
Impressive
(You do realise that study /numbers isnt talking about vaccines right)
Does that mean we need to start blaming "Big Fib" , instead of just Big Pharma, for things now?
Horrifying…
Dr. Sucharit Bhakdi: "Depending on where the vaccine damage occurs, a wide variety of neurological and psychiatric illnesses can occur. Nerve failures and paralysis, but also dementia, psychoses and personality changes are on agenda for vaccinated people. The unbelievable horror story doesn't end there. Chopped DNA fragments have been found in large numbers as vaccine contaminants. Fragmented DNA sequences have increased propensity to be incorporated into the chromosomal DNA. The possible consequences are endless. The finely tuned network can be disrupted that controls cell division and differentiation. Cancer and developmental disorders can result. Mutations in sperm and fertilized eggs could make altered characteristics heritable."
https://x.com/FMannuss/status/1801638053422792969Horrifying that (a) a professional would invent things to mislead and misinform and (b) that your ideology prevents you from getting a balanced view about vaccines, their obvious advantages and their possible side-effects.
When (IF) you finally open your mind and embrace rationality you're going to be really horrified about what covid-19 does to human bodies.
(13 Nov. 2022)
https://x.com/LCHF_Matt/status/1591693308455448576(17 Jun 2024)
https://x.com/akmcintyre/status/1802646145061339368That's your idea of medical science? I should be shocked - no, "horrified" - but in this age of self-aggrandisement, astonishing gullibility, celebrated ignorance, pseudo science, and anti-social and essentially immoral deception, unfortunately I'm not.
All medicines have risks. All vaccines have risks. People can have entirely different reactions to the same medication or vaccination. People died after having the Astra Zeneca vaccine, hundreds of thousands were saved. Some people have bad reactions to other covid vaccines. The vast majority of people had no or minor reactions to the various 'jabs', which saved the lives of millions around the world.
The stats say unequivocally that the risks of serious illness and death are greatly reduced if you are vaccinated against the virus. They also suggest that if you are infected, survive and develop enough antibodies as a result then your risk of death from covid is also significantly diminished.
Leave any arrogant ignorance, ego and ideology at the door, read the science, and learn the risks, the benefits and the huge variation in probabilities. If possible do that while considering others in your community.
@Igaf: You've missed the point, and you probably did not read the second Twitter link:
-
BY FEB 2020 W.H.O. KNEW COVID 19 CASE FATALITY RATE WAS 0.7%
A Joint investigative mission between China and W.H.O. had already established by the 3rd week of Feb 2020, that the CASE FATILITY RATE was 0.7% across the population.
Quote (pg 13)
In China, the overall CFR was higher in the early stages of the outbreak (17.3% for cases with symptom onset from 1- 10 January) and has reduced over time to 0.7% for patients with symptom onset after 1 February
Report on the W.H.O China Joint Mission on Covid 19
16 - 24 Feb 2020(link in comments)
People who "accepted" the science, in Australia or Globally, took the emergency approval treatment (which was the recipe for ONLY for the Alpha variant) and then got worst side-effects or saw deaths too…but somehow they still get told "trust the science?"
The TGA, 90% funded by pharma, approved something that is now being revealed, was with underreported trial data.
What if the TGA got duped?The word "va*ine" was used before 2020, to mean something that had been tested over 7-10 years. People are not opposed to taking it but you'll find people opposed to sign up to experiments.
Trusting the science should see more people take the different recipe, for the different variants, but everyone has become anti-va*cks and not taken it. Why is that?
Pf1zer was taken to court (in 2022) by Aaron Siri, and Pf1z3r objected to releasing the adverse reactions to everyone who had accepted the " science".
Pf1zer said it will not release the documentation for another 55 years or 75 years,…I can't remember the years, but it was that long.The U.S. federal judge rejected the FDA's request to produce Pf1zer's Covid-19 vaccine data at the rate of 500 pages per month and instead ordered a rate of 55,000 pages per month.
Pf1z3r lawyers scrub / format the information…and publishes this data now —> https://phmpt.org/The Australian government have scrubbed their COVID 19 treatment guideline website not just leaving it static as an archive, but by overwriting it.
Unless hackers have taken over the DNS , "Domestic Air Freight Australia" use a website called "covid19evidence.net.au"
Check:
https://archive.is/a8xAVThe point is that Kristine Macartney (from Australia's NCIRS) used COVID19evidence.net.au , in her court testimony and it doesn't exist now.
@trevor99: Lol. How old are you, five? Right back at ya pal, disprove it.
That "hundred of thousands" was a come get me line. Some estimates put the number at up to14M worldwide. Google and read.
If you dropped the arrogance (that you know better than thousands of experts worldwide) and bothered to do an hour or three's research you'd easily find statistical evidence for the efficacy of covid vaccines in reducing the likelihood of serious illness and death from covid.
Multiples vary depending on country, stage of the pandemic (important for reasons you know doubt understand), quality of health services etc - as any informed person would expect (/s) - but factors of 8 to 10 were common outcomes from data analysis across multiple jurisdictions. In simple terms that even an uninformed anti-vaxxer shoiud be abe to understand that means an unvaccinated person was 8 to 10 times more likely to become seriously ill or die from covid than a vaccinated person.
Furthermore, assuming you have an average IQ and the most basic ability to do arithmetic, using those multipliers you'd be able to calculate for yourself what that meant for the efficacy of covid vaccines in terms of worldwide numbers of lives saved. Alternatively you could simply search for and read detailed statistical analyses from respected experts who are comprehensively better qualified, more knowledgeable and experienced than you (and me). It may look like rocket science to naive novices who haven't even scraped the surface of the data but it's perfectly simple and valid statistical analysis.
Your mind is not for changing but sadly, worse than that, it's not for opening.
@Igaf: All that blather and no proof.
You're pushing it with claims of benefit so surely it should be very easy.All that blather and no proof.
Confuscius once say: man cannot prove anything to a rock.
So much ignorance and no disproof. That's a given with your demographic though so no surprise.Verifying the efficacy of covid vaccines IS easy, IF - and that's obviously a very big IF in some cases - you're prepared to accept expert analysis over self-imposed ignorance AND you have a REAL interest in informing yourself of both the beneifts and risks associated with covid vaccines and covid itself. Should you dip your toe into the rational adult world you will find that the risks associated with covid acquisition are, overall, far greater than the risks associated with vaccines. There ARE, as most know, exceptions you should and would be aware of if you bothered to listen to the advice of Australian health experts or were prepared to do a few hours reading and verifying of your own.
I've already wasted enough time on rabid anti-vaxxers so you'll either have to get your nursemaid to do the basic research I've alluded to above or better still get off this website for and hour and do your own. It will take google less than a second to find the info you're oblivious to. How long it will take you to absorb and accept the facts is anyone's guess but anthing less than a few years will be progress.
@Igaf: The Govt knows who are unvaxxed and could easily prove efficacy of vaxxed vs that control group if it worked.
But they don't because it doesn't. You can be sure they'd plaster it everywhere otherwise.You are simply parroting Govt propaganda.
Sorry to advise the bad news, but you've been deceived, defrauded, attacked, brainwashed and poisoned. Yet you attempt to defend them.
@trevor99: Your paranoioia is showing. Time to don a bigger tin-foil hat.
The "govt" knows nothing about personal health info. Health institutions (hospitals, health centres, medical practices etc) do, and they provide aggregated information on vaccination, deaths etc to central authorities so that data analysis - such as that provided weekly for years during covid by UK and Australian health authorities - can be done in an an accurate and timely manner.
That you have no clue whatsoever about what goes on with health data collection and analysis is understandable. Most people would also be ignorant of the systems in place to record disease prevalence, treatment and outcomes.
You're not off the hook though. That you characterise what you don't know and have no capacity to understand let alone accept as "propaganda" is a testament to how far down the anti-vax rabbit hole you've descended. Only one person can fix that and a quick glance in the mirror will tell you who that is.
At some point in your life you will avail yourself of the massive health expertise you deny exists and your own experiennce will become part of the aggretgated system which is used to inform governments of health needs and trends. It will also contribute to health worker nwoledge and the improvement of treatments, systems etc.
I doubt very much you have a clue so I'll give you an example. During a more than 12 month period during the pandemic in Australia influenza almost totally disappeared (as you know /s it's a reportable disease) and there were zero deaths. I can hear that steel trap of yours trying to understand how it's possible that "the govt" knows this and what it meant for policy and in practice. Simple answer - doctors and hospitals reported what they were seeing, authrorities knew it was then unnecessary to advertise flu shots and stockkpile massive numbers of flu vaccines. No rocket science or system invention required - the systems and knowledge have been in place for decades and they are regularly refined to keep our communities as safe and healthy as possible.
During a more than 12 month period during the pandemic in Australia influenza almost totally disappeared (as you know /s it's a reportable disease) and there were zero deaths.
Was testing or reporting obligations for influenza limited, ceased or suspended under health emergency or other directives, during the time you speak of?
@mrdean: What does your steel trap tell you? Authorities collected and analysed and published the data, as they do every year. I and many others who don't have their headswhere the sun don't shine read it out of interest. The alternative is that a conspiracy involving health workers across the nations existed, and not even skeptics leaked it.
Here's a clue pal. This is an anonymous deals website. It's not a place to get accurate or informed information on pandemics, health etc. For all you know I could be an anti-anti-vax bot.
Here's a clue pal.
Hey pal, no need to get shirty. I asked a simple question, seeing how you seem to be in know & up to date with information.
You stated no deaths from the reportable illness influenza for 12 months. I simply asked if requirements for reporting changed or tests were minimized or suspended for it during that time. Surely that might have affected the resulting disappearance of the flu. I don't know the answer, thought you might.
Your question was puerile and loaded with inuendo. It got what it deserved.
Ooooh, loaded with innuendo. Let me guess. You pored over the brilliantly produced & presented reports, with nice pictures & graphs & sciency looking tables that showed "influenza" got shafted by "covid" during that 12 month period, & you nodded your head & approved. Some really basic questions:
what were the testing numbers for influenza during that period compared to the previous years? huh
were reporting requirements suspended during that time? huhSimple questions, but in your expert opinion, "puerile". Don't question! Naughty. In the corner with a tinfoil dunce cap for you!
@mrdean: Google and read, preferably before you post completely ignorant questions on topics you obviously know sfa about. Spoonfeeding should have stopped when you reached high school.
@Igaf: It's called the Australian immunisation register. How can this not be clear.
https://www.servicesaustralia.gov.au/australian-immunisation…Like I said, very sadly many of the vaxxed are in mental decline
https://x.com/PierreKory/status/1803808891928768690@trevor99: Most will have a long way to go before they reach the level of decline anti-vaxxers occupy.
You do understand that covid can have a severe effect known colloquially as brain fog presumably? Ever heard of long covid?
Like I said, very sadly many of the vaxxed are in mental decline
ignoring similar studies showing cognitive impairment, irrespective of vax status, in those who have been infected with covid19?
but those are probably on google scholar instead of twitter.
All that blather and no proof.
You're pushing it with claims of benefit so surely it should be very easy.True, it's a "trust the science" argument, one that appeals to authority.
I did a web search on "efficacy of covid vaccines" & had a look at the first link in the results.
https://www.cochrane.org/news/cochrane-review-covid-19-vacci…
https://www.cochranelibrary.com/cdsr/doi/10.1002/14651858.CD…
comment by well qualified "dissenter" who has been ridiculed & marginalized:
https://www.cochranelibrary.com/cdsr/doi/10.1002/14651858.CD…@mrdean: They have Stockholm syndrome.
Old bought and paid for papers, easily picked apart. Where are they now?
Can we all please remember there is a long and detailed approval process for vaccines that's there for a reason. There are several levels of trials for long term efficacy and safety for a reason. These were all bypassed with "Emergency use authorisation". And not for a small group but for the whole world.
@trevor99: Stockholm syndrome? Surely that's a myth, or do you cherry pick your authority based on whether it fits your view of the world? Rhetorical question - it's a universal trait of your demographic.
@mrdean: That authority is mostly well earned - much like the ignorance and lack of aurthority by anti-sciencers. It's what keeps societies safe, functional, and advancing, in complete contrast to your paranois skepticism. Despite your ignorance there is room for dissent - as ling as it is underpinned by sound reason, data etc. That is a fundamental of all science and why peer-review is critical.
@Igaf: Peer review is a modern invention, it certainly hasn't been around in the formal structured way modern journals require for hundreds of years. It is also open to abuse. There have been criticisms of it by well known figures at some of the top journals.
What passes for "science" today is nothing like you imagine it to be, to the detriment of TRUTH. People have blown the whistle on it, but you've been conditioned to fob it off as "ignorance" "anti-science" "conspiracy" & other epithets.
Your type is enabling the following:
"The human race pursues the path of collective suicide, while chanting the hymn of progress." Guy Wrench, Reconstruction By Way Of The Soil, 1946.
@mrdean: I'm well aware of the frailties of science. Pseudo science for example - much loved by anti-vaxxers - has become a real threat. One of many. No system involving humans is perfect. What you know about how science works and authority is earned could be written on a pinhead.
about how science works
If your type are in positions of influence in the so called "scientific" establishment then no wonder things are as corrupted & pathetic as they are. Time for a clean out.
@mrdean: Sure Donny.
If you have any credible evidence of scientific corruption or gross incompetence then feel free to provide it to the media, or even the authorities you think you know more than. Plenty of people before you, albeit with far more knowledge and wit, have done so - something you'd know IF you knew a poofteenth about science. Here's just one example exposed by an inquisitive and socially responsible journalist frommemory: http://edition.cnn.com/2011/HEALTH/01/05/autism.vaccines/ind…
@Igaf: Ooooh, I lurv how now on an anonymous bargain related website you want not just evidence, but "credible" (the choice word par excellence of regulators & administrators who want to protect themselves & others from any criticism) evidence. Get real & just start reading books from whistleblowers like Gotzsche. But I know exactly where you'll go from there, because you see Gotzsche got ousted from the organization he helped co-found, he got marginalized & ridiculed for exposing corruption within pharma/regulators, a whole sorry saga that people like you have used to discredit him. You say you are scientific & data driven, lol, no one relied on data more than Gotzsche.
Your link doesn't work, but I know it's about Wakefield from the url, the usual go to for pseudo-skeptics. And yes, Brian Deer has a lot to answer for. I'd advise you to actually read the GMC transcripts & the respondents answers to questions posed, but I know you never will.@mrdean: fyi The first listed adverse event of interest in Pfizer's "post marketing experience" (the report they tried to keep secret for 70 years but was ordered released by a judge) is 1p36 deletion syndrome. 1p36 deletion syndrome is a disorder that typically causes intellectual disabilities. They may have temper tantrums, bite themselves, or exhibit other behaviour problems
@mrdean: It's overwhelmingly sad when thinking about those poor little babies. And the scale of all this. There's so much pain out there.
As much as we try to help others we also need to step back to protect our families and live life.@trevor99: What is truly sad is that adult parents will risk their children's health because they haven't bothered to inform themselves of the risks and benefits of vaccines which have overwhelmingly been of enormous beneift to humankind.
@mrdean: I haven't read Gotzsche's book but reviews suggest it's revealing and convincing. Does he suggest we should throw all the big pharma companies and "authorities" under a bus like you appear to be doing?
We all know the failures of big pharma, failures which also extend to moral and social responsibility abandonment in poor countries especially, as outlined by the late great travel writer AAGill's Uganda sleeping sickness story.
So your theory is that everything and all authority is rotten to the core because companies and regulators are imperfect? Sorry, I shouldn't put words in your mouth. Another of your demographic's traits is that refuse to say exactly what they believe is wrong because they can then be pinned down, so here's your chance.
Precisely what is your complaint? You appear to be implying that covid data is invented or intentionally altered/skewed and that authorities and officials across the globe are complicit. Is that it?
@Igaf: At least now you are starting to acknowledge "failures", something apparently which "we all know" about.
My "complaint" could be succinctly summed up by pointing out those "failures" are endemic, not "rare" or "exceptions". How do I know this? Because of research!
https://files.ozbargain.com.au/upload/442669/113384/medicati…
Tell me which half of that trial data the pharmaceutical corporations submitted to the regulators to get approval for their drug, & tell me that the published science that touted benefits, wasn't rigged or flawed.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BJ4F_ZF3u9M&t=3014sMassaging data is common, which ironically, is what the pseudo-skeptic crowd toss out to "antivaxxers".
@mrdean: "Starting to acknowldedge"? You clearly haven't got a clue about me, or the vast majority of scientists worldwide for that matter.
Endemic my arse. What you mean is that your quaint notion of science, people and organisations has been rattled by the realisation that people and systems are imperfect, except for those who you believe are perhaps? As a result you're prepared to tar everyone with the same brush, and impugn their integrity - but only on an anymous forum. Extending your proposition should we also throw out democracy because "corruption is endemic", and policies, adminstration and people are imperfect? Puerile barely does that notion justice but it's a starting point. Just one example.
@Igaf: Just read Gotzsche's & Angell's books, & start looking critically at government reports, scientific articles & ask the right questions. Look at who's on the boards of the big scientific publishers & their connections to industry. Assume data is being massaged to begin with, that is the only logical starting point.
Did it even occur to you to ask those basic scientific questions about the influenza stats? You never answered.
Of course if you're in a position where your livelihood is dependent on grant money, asking questions & being critical, having integrity, if it causes unfavorable results that go against commercial interests or the government narrative of the day, is not a wise career move.Look at who's on the boards of the big scientific publishers & their connections to industry. Assume data is being massaged to begin with, that is the only logical starting point.
Childish tosh, but further proof of the extent you will go to anonymously impugn people with not a shred of evidence. Standard fare for your ilk. Drop a few names for me with details of what you claim they've done so we can test your claims.
Did it even occur to you to ask those basic scientific questions about the influenza stats? You never answered.
I have no particular reason to question the broad validity of influenza or covid stats because I'm not a conspiracy theorist. I also accept that scientific authority and reputation are usually hard won in democratic nations, and that there are many checks and balances which will expose subterfuge. You on the other hand think the worst of evryone bar yourself and your conspiratorial mates. You also apparently believe that mass group-think is involved in all data collection.
As you know, trends are far more important than specifc numbers during pandemics for patently obvious reasons and irrespective of country or jurisdiction they pretty much said the same thing despite varying approaches to testing, rollouts, herd immunity, virus management and obvious significant demographic differences. Even when countries like Israel announced stats and conclusions regarding multiple jab protection there were plenty of analyses pointing out the variation in parameters which needed to be accounted for when attempting to compare countries' results. I also have no reason to question the integrity of Australian or British health officials even when they made one size fits all decisions.
Of course if you're in a position where your livelihood is dependent on grant money, asking questions & being critical, having integrity, if it causes unfavorable results that go against commercial interests or the government narrative of the day, is not a wise career move.
Ah the old grants argument which essentially claims all science and scientists are beholden. That tired epithet has run its course through overuse during the so called "climate wars". The obvious counter - apart from the lack of any convincing evidence - is easily found in the public discussions and debate, and consistent checking by both media and scientists of the funding sources for reports. The fact that CSIRO for example continually reported anthropogenic climate change as real despite being "controlled" by the Abbott and Morrison governments gives the lie to your kowtowing claim. Can't wait for you next installment which by my reckoning should be due to include the old "they're all in it together" anti-scientist conspiracy. Question for you. Is that a new phenomenon or did it also apply when vaccines were developed for measles, the flu, whooping cough, papillomavirus etc? Another far more difficult question. What reason would governments of widely different political persuasion have to invent pandemic data, or hand over massive amounts of money to drug and PPE suppliers?
because I'm not a conspiracy theorist.
Moooooo.
https://files.ozbargain.com.au/upload/442669/113576/cowconsp…
@mrdean: Questions too dificult for you? Unwilling to share the names of those whose integrity you've malinged without evidence or rational consideration? I'm not surprised.
Was it your upbringing which made you untrusting and dismissive of your fellow human beings or did you acquire that trait all on your own? Here's some advice. There's a HUGE difference between being informed, inquisitive, skeptical, analytical and making massive leaps of distrust based on instances of gross malpractice you've read about and assuming therefore that everyone (other than you) is dishonest and complicit. The former is adult and rational, the latter is puerile, ignorant, irresponsible and frankly dangerous for mental health and societal cohesion.
Couple of ironies/disjunctions spring immediately to mind. (1) Although you are completely dismissive of advice, writings, statistics, analyses, books etc from "authorities" and/or authoritative authors, you are prepared to not only drool over "whistleblower" exposees but you will also blindly take a leap in the dark and assume, ergo, that everyone in senior/responsible positions in an industry therefore lacks integrity; (2) when you're not on an anonymous website trashing "authority" (ie generally people who know and contribute far more than you) you automatically accept that people are in fact for the most part not like your online portrayal of them at all. You willingly provide all sorts of strangers with your personal details, you interact with banks, medical practices, government institutions etc as a matter of course. You consume products that have been produced according to standards authorised by "authorities" and typically based on scientific advice. You rely on water and power systems developed and managed (with assistance obviously) by scientists. You travel over bridges/through tunnels/in tubes putting your trust in the integrity of both the science used and the scientists involved in designing and developing them and in the materials used to construct them. Presumably your paranoid distrust is selective?
There's a HUGE difference between being informed, inquisitive, skeptical, analytical and making massive leaps of distrust based on instances of gross malpractice you've read about and assuming therefore that everyone (other than you) is dishonest and complicit.
Do you know who Stanley Plotkin is? He has a textbook named after him. Plotkins Vaccines.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanley_PlotkinSeeing as you're all about the integrity of science, I assume you have.
Here's a legal deposition Plotkin participated in during 2018 where he was asked some very good questions by attorney Aaron Siri Esq, whose firm litigates on behalf of Del Bigtree's ICAN organisation.
Here is a document prepared by them giving a snapshot of vaccines & clinical trial data: https://icandecide.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/03/no-placebo…
Let's focus on HPV on that chart, because it actually was one trial that did include a small cohort who allegedly got a saline shot. Here is the fda document for that shot: https://www.fda.gov/media/74350/download
Look at section 6.1 Clinical Trials Experience, pages 4-10 approx.Go to the time stamp in the deposition at around 4:20:00 to about 4:33:00. The gardasil section actually starts some time before this around 4:05:00.
The data is partly there & it's phenomenal. Siri & ICAN had to sue for the clinical trial data saline data. Why? Because it shows the absolute corruption, the hiding of harms from the hpv shot. Do you see what they did? Or do I have to explain it to you like a child?
In short, they combined the "saline" & "AAHS Control" numbers for "potential systemic autoimmune disorders post shot" see pages 6-8 for the tables. But when tabling "local injection site reactions" they decided to break them out (see page 4). Why? Because local reactions are minor, but potential autoimmune disorders serious. It hides the harms because then the comparison rate is the same (2.3% Table 9). Had they broken out the "saline" they would of seen……….shock horror: 0% systemic autoimmune disorders.
Do you get it? How does Plotkin rationalise that? He assumes the researchers "ASSUMED" there's no reason why aluminum by itself would cause serious issues. And he comes up with the usual pseudo-rationalisations like "no statistical significance" because of the small cohort. Lol. That's not science. Even Aaron Siri was lost for words.
Sorry to tell you champ, but your faith in science is sorely misplaced, & it most certainly is blind faith.
Of course, there are good decent people working in science, it's just a shame such data manipulation appears to be standard operating procedure.
Sorry to tell you champ, but your faith in science is sorely misplaced, & it most certainly is blind faith.
Of course, there are good decent people working in science, it's just a shame such data manipulation appears to be standard operating procedure.QED.
Still no names or specfic accusations? What's stopping you pal? Fear of being exposed as a fraud or as a defamer?
I'll give you your due, your cherry picking is phenomenal even for a paranoid conspiracy theorist. Your puerile and illogical conclusions need quite a bit of work though, as I've already suggested. There is nothing new about questionable business ethics and cover-ups, often exposed by the very people you continue to denigrate - scientists. In those rare moments that you pop your head over the parapet you may have heard about tobacco and cancer, 3M and forever chemicals, Erin Brokovic, Big Oil and climate….
What is pretty novel is your conclusion that every scientist and manager in those industries is manifestly corrupt. That is demonstrably nonsensical and irrational, the product of a mind disconnected from reality.
Here's another simple question: In your clearly limited and cossetted lifetime, how much direct interaction have you had with scientists? Educated guess says sfa - or, statistically speaking, of no significance either time or quality wise. Corollary: Of those you have had some liited intereaction with (doctors for example), how many did you conclude lacked integrity and would manipulate data at the drop of a hat? That number would have to be in the top percentile given your unhinged comments above and elsewhere.
What is pretty novel is your conclusion that every scientist and manager in those industries is manifestly corrupt. That is demonstrably nonsensical and irrational, the product of a mind disconnected from reality.
Is this the only thing you have to fall back on?
I've given you two pretty clear cut examples, & you have zippo to say about them apart from "cherry picking".
Here, have a look at the data again: https://www.fda.gov/media/74350/download
table 9, page 8.If you were a parent about to give the hpv shot to a teenage daughter or son, would you consider yourself "fully informed" by looking at that table? 2.3% (about 1 in 50) reported a "potential" systemic autoimmune condition after the shot in both the "gardasil" & "aahs control OR saline" group.
See how they DECEIVE you with the word OR? If, for some inexplicable reason, you say yes, then what would you conclude if table 9 had 3 columns,
GARDASIL
AAHS Control
Saline& you saw 2.3% in the first two columns but 0% in the Saline column. Because that's the REALITY, champ. Would you conclude the benefit still outweighed the risk? Lol.
Would you even ask the following questions:
Why only 500 or so in the saline cohort?
If the trial was run with integrity & ethics why did they include a proprietary aluminum adjuvant as a "control". What was the effect of doing that?
Shouldn't they have run a larger saline group, or even just dropped the AAHS control & used all saline in that group? There would of been a similar number of trial participants in both groups. I know, the typical vaccine zealot response is that it's not "ethical". Hilariously tragic, given these biased "trials" are what the regulators rely upon to license injections that are given to millions of kids!!I know perfectly well why they used that "control", have you figured it out yet? I've only told you multiple times, but I'll repeat it again; to hide harms!! to give it a favorable safety profile!
I sometimes wonder, are people at these corporations & agencies aware of this, I mean do they know it's wrong, but are just afraid to speak up because they know there could be repercussions? Or do they genuinely believe vaccines are "safe & effective" & they've deluded themselves into thinking they are saving lives? If its the latter, does this justify the sleight of hand data manipulation? I don't think so, but I do understand the pressure people in these organisations face, so I wouldn't be surprised if its the former case.
@mrdean: Well, my first instinct would be to assume that it was to separate out known to be harmless side-effects from new effects from the HPV vaccine. There are just so many people claiming knowledge of flaws in vaccines without any evidence or complete bullshit "evidence".
But in this case, the people who understand the science seem to think it is a concern too: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7691700/
@gmatht: I hadn't seen that article, so thanks.
Both Doshi & Jefferson have been maligned by the pseudo-skeptics over at sbm over the years.
https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/peer-review-fail-vaccine-pu…
https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/the-cochrane-mask-fiasco-ho…
@Igaf: @Igaf
Here's just one example exposed by an inquisitive and socially responsible journalist frommemory: http://edition.cnn.com/2011/HEALTH/01/05/autism.vaccines/ind…
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QAkQlZgnbUQ
A clue to why CNN might not be a credible source of news on this topic is at 5 seconds into this video.
Yes, youtube videos are not proof of anything.
However would you care to point out how many commercial news outlets in this country reported on Gerald Harvey's big windfall with JobKeeper payments and refusal to give them back to the taxpayer despite HN's massive spike in profits over the lockdowns? Rhetorical question - none did. HN is practically their biggest spender with advertisements.Imagine being a journalist and going to your editor "I've got this great story on bad things that one of our major sponsors are doing". What would be the response?
Look into how much advertising on news channels comes from military related companies, and then wonder why the last 30 years of wars (including Ukraine) have had public support.
"I've got this great story on bad things that one of our major sponsors are doing". What would be the response?
How can we spin it?
@mrdean: In a more serious way I was thinking that the journalist would be told to drop it and work on something else, and possibly ridiculed or reprimanded for not knowing better.
I get it, they are a business and businesses will do as businesses do - return profits to their shareholders. It's quite frightening to see news organisations effectively captured with this process, at least on certain contentious topics.Same problem is in politics with donations.
@glennski: It's how the current system works.
RFK Jr has repeatedly told about his talk with Fox News CEO Roger Ailes, around 2015, about doing a vaccine story, but Ailes told him it was a no go area. If they did, Ailes would receive a call within 10 mins from Murdoch & probably have to let go of the journalists. I guess this eventually happened with Tucker Carlson. According to RFK Jr, Ailes mentioned around that time, about 75% of nightly ad revenue was coming from those pharmaceutical corporations. There's also the fact that Murdoch & his family have a long history promoting & pushing for vaccination through their investments & institutes like the MCRI.
@mrdean: RFK Jnr. Roflmao. Was that in a rare sane moment?
The Murdoch media empire regularly questioned covid vax efficacy even after the ob himself got jabbed. Calrson got the arse for entirely unrelated reasons, including but not limited to his role in the Dominion $787M payout and his open criticism of Fox management. I doubt they cared much about Carlson's xenophobia, racism and lies or his rants about management but when it came to paying for his fkups it seems the wallets had some limits.
However would you care to point out how many commercial news outlets in this country reported on Gerald Harvey's big windfall with JobKeeper payments and refusal to give them back to the taxpayer despite HN's massive spike in profits over the lockdowns? Rhetorical question - none did. HN is practically their biggest spender with advertisements.
Not sure what the relevance is but I hope you didn't bet your house on that clearly erroneous claim. Nine, via its mediam arms (smh, the Age etc) ran numerous articles on the ludicrous unfettered jobkeeper payment issue. HN was just one of many companies involved as you know. So did the Guardian. Don't like the bloke at all but give him his due he eventually paid back his portion of the windfall, as did some others.
Not sure what the relevance is but I hope you didn't bet your house on that clearly erroneous claim
My apologies, my memory has failed me. I was thinking of this report by media watch:
https://www.abc.net.au/mediawatch/episodes/harvey/13387258
Yes it was reported on in some media, and if you watch the report above you can see that if you spend lots of $$$ in media it will come with certain benefits.
Calrson got the arse for entirely unrelated reasons, including ….
Tucker didn't get fired. His show was 'taken off air', and Fox continued to pay his salary (and possibly even still). He claims it was tied to the Dominion lawsuit settlement as a condition that his show go off air.
Carlson's xenophobia, racism and lies..
Do you have a qualification for those assertions? Which episodes of Tucker Carlson Tonight were those qualities displayed?
Carlson had the highest rating show on cable news as a whole by an embarrassing margin. His 'role' in the Dominion scandal was sending text messages calling the lead person making the claims that the voting machines were riggged 'crazy'. If he was listened to it could have saved Fox all the $$$ in damages.
RFK Jnr. Roflmao. Was that in a rare sane moment?
Ad hominem
Is anything of what @mrdean posted in the most recent comment above incorrect regarding RFJ Jr? I don't agree with his simping for Israel but apart from that he seems to be a very sane and intelligent man with a decorated history of fighting for the environment and trying to hold large corporations to account.
The point of all this is that media can be bought/influenced through advertising spend. Do you agree or disagree?
Ask yourself why Lockheed Martin needs to advertise F-35 jets to the public. Does the regular Joe buy these products?Tucker didn't get fired.
https://www.google.com/search?q=carlson+fired&rlz=1C1YTUH_en…
Take your pick.
Carlson's xenophobia, racism and lies..
Do you have a qualification for those assertions? Which episodes of Tucker Carlson Tonight were those qualities displayed?Learn to google and read.
RFK Jnr. Roflmao. Was that in a rare sane moment?
Ad hominemLearn to google and read. This might help you along. There's plenty more IF you want to get informed.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/saradorn/2023/10/10/rfk-jr-laun…The point of all this is that media can be bought/influenced through advertising spend. Do you agree or disagree?
The question is both simplistic and overgeneralised, and the implication massively overstated. It contains absolutisms when equivocations should have been used. In short, the reality is far more complex than your question implies. Rework it and I'll get back to you.
Question: why did you feel it necessary to insert irrelevant comments into my discussion on covid with "trev" and his anti-vax mates?
@Igaf: @Igaf
Learn to google and read.
Wow I got served. I'm so surprised to find that googling someones name who the media at large hate produces articles where the media hate him.
Since he's such a big liar you should be able to name 5 off the top of your head.
Xenophobia? Will you be telling me here in Australia that people are xenophobic if they don't want 500,000+ people a year immigrating to Australia and complaining of the havoc it's wrecking on cost of living, infrastructure, housing etc. ?Doing a google search on someone's name and reading the headlines proves that the person is talked about. Why do they hate him? They certainly didn't earlier in his career when he lied on behalf of establishment interests, like pushing for the Iraq war. More recently he tells the truth for example on the Ukraine war, and then starts losing sponsors.
This might help you along….
To be honest I don't know about half the things in that list, but the other half you could argue that to not think those things in fact makes you the conspiracy theorist. Who actually still believes that the virus originated in the wild considering the abundance of evidence and research papers supporting the lab leak, as well as American intelligence agencies? MSM are the promoters of 'wacky conspiracy theory' on that one.
That article also mentions the 'conspiracy theory' that Anthony Fauci exaggerated the pandemic to promote vaccines. Here, this one I'll make it easy for you - you don't even have to google! Just learn to read the OP!I missed the part of the article where they said they contacted him for a statement or rebuttal of any sort.
Question: why did you feel it necessary to insert irrelevant comments into my discussion on covid with "trev" and his anti-vax mates?
The general topic of this sub thread of course is pro-vax vs. anti-vax, whatever those terms are supposed to mean. Your convo with "trev" et al. most recently was responding to their responses to some of my comments. As you politely put it: learn to read.
Rework it and I'll get back to you.
Media coverage of companies or the industries which they operate within can be influenced by advertising spend and/or other business relationships the companies/industries in question have with media outlets. I believe to have evidence of this as seen in the Media Watch report posted earlier. Would you care to comment with your thoughts?
IF you want to get informed.
The irony. Trying to help you here to understand that the news isn't the news - journalists aren't paid to blindly give an objective view and report absolute facts. There are financial interests at play. Why is it hard to admit that some of the biggest companies in the world (and who also just happen to be the most litigated against) take steps to influence what is said about them, what people think about them, what policies are made that affect their bottom line? I'm not saying that the media are bought and paid for - they don't have to be. We can see bad things happening with mere nudges (e.g advertising spend).
You've linked a news article that a reasonable person on the street could categorise as an attempt at character assassination considering the lack of balance. Ad hominem - attack the person and not the merit of their argument.
I think Anthony Fauci is a lying scumbag who has personally profited wildly over the course of the pandemic. But that is not an argument. There is hard evidence suggesting serious wrong doing and a seemingly blind eye turned by most of the media. We should be asking why things turned out the way they did and investigating potential criminal conduct based on this evidence.
tl;dr money makes the world go around, more news at 11.
There are financial interests at play. Why is it hard to admit that some of the biggest companies in the world (and who also just happen to be the most litigated against) take steps to influence what is said about them, what people think about them, what policies are made that affect their bottom line? I'm not saying that the media are bought and paid for - they don't have to be. We can see bad things happening with mere nudges (e.g advertising spend).
In my opinion, this touches on a very major point. The lengths they will go to to protect their investments.
lgaf in a previous comment linked to a circa 2011 article on the Andrew Wakefield story, touchingly referring to Brian Deer as the "socially responsible journalist" who investigated it.How many people know that Deer was mainly commissioned by the Sunday Times newspaper to investigate? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Sunday_Times
Who owned the Sunday Times? News Corp. Murdoch.
Does Murdoch have an interest in protecting the vaccine paradigm? Yeah, you bet they do. https://www.mcri.edu.au/research/research-areas/infection-im…Brian Deer's investigation started years after that 1998 Wakefield et al paper was published & the paper was retracted by the Lancet after the GMC found Wakefield & Walker-Smith "guilty". What that paper really did was direct attention to the possibility that measles virus was involved in the etiology of something they termed "pervasive delayed developmental disorder". And it called for further research. Deer, with the help of an entity called the Association of Pharmaceutical Industries, was able to concoct a series of allegations against Wakefield that convinced people there was fraud involved when no such thing occurred.
Deer was hired essentially to discredit the Wakefield et al paper by any means necessary, protect investments & the vaccine paradigm. An effect of this was to shut down that avenue of research that would of been very uncomfortable for vaccine zealots.
Glaxosmithkline (GSK) is the pharmaceutical corporation that owns the MMR injection.
After the threat from Wakefield was neutralized by Deer & the GMC, the son of Rupert Murdoch, James Murdoch, was appointed as a non-executive director of GSK.
https://www.gsk.com/en-gb/media/press-releases/glaxosmithkli…Deer was hired essentially to discredit the Wakefield et al paper by any means necessary, protect investments & the vaccine paradigm. An effect of this was to shut down that avenue of research that would of been very uncomfortable for vaccine zealots.
You mean the £435,000 paper concocted by Wakefield at the behest of a personal injury lawyer? Surely given your modus operandi that should have rung alarm bells? It would have had your ideological beliefs not blinded you to reality.
You really have gone down the rabbit hole haven't you? I'd ask for your evidence but since none exists then it would have to be fabrication, something you're clearly adept at yourself if we believe the second link below. Your credentials, credibility, knowledge, experience and expertise against theirs? I'd put my house on your opinionated ignorance losing every time.
These rebuttals of your opinionated ignorance would normally break the self-righteousness of any rational adult but in your case it will undoubtedly make no difference. Perhaps it will when you achieve maturity, perhaps not.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6181752/#:~:tex….
These rebuttals of your opinionated ignorance
That's hilarious coming from someone who wrote this: "When you think you have the answer, you haven't dug or thought deeply enough."
Not only that, but you link to one of Stanley Plotkin's proteges in Paul Offit. Totally unbiased & objective. Have you read that book? I have. Have you read Deer's The Doctor Who Fooled The World? I have. What about Wakefield's Callous Disregard? No? I have. Have you watched or listened to any interviews with either Wakefield or Deer over the years? No? I have. You never answered when I asked if you'd read the GMC trial transcripts that resulted in the revocation of Wakefields license. Have you? I, at least, have read certain parts of them.
Isn't that what a normal rational person who wanted to hear all sides in order to come to a conclusion would do? CNN articles, webmd blogs, or books by people who are totally invested in the vaccine paradigm don't cut it pal. But no, you trust the "consensus" of experts don't you! The majority, including esteemed "experts" are saying Wakefields a fraud, so they must be right! The least you could of done was link to the so called investigation by Deer published in the BMJ in an attempt to give him some scientific legitimacy.
Here I'll do it for you: https://www.bmj.com/content/342/bmj.c5347
Or even to his website, I'll do that for you too: https://briandeer.com/You don't comment on any aspect of the links to "News Corpse" I laid out for you in a previous response, or how that might have factored into the resulting immense vilification of Wakefield so that people like you (who don't dig deeply enough) assume the MSM hit pieces are actually telling you the truth. How pathetic.
But since you seem to be so enamored of mainstream news articles, here's something suited to your level of comprehension, although I'm certain this information, like the other bits of information I've offered, will take a wide berth around your prefrontal cortex.
The deceased Bernadine Healy, a MD at the highest levels of the NIH, actually came out with some totally rational & intelligent & fair & balanced statements about vaccines & autism. This is someone with integrity.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/the-open-question-on-vaccines-a…
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/leading-dr-vaccines-autism-wort…I know, it's a report from the antivaxxer Sharyl Attkinson (before she was labelled an antivaxxer), who coincidentally was later coerced out of CBS. Do you reckon it had anything to do with doing stories that conflicted with the "vaccines have saved millions of lives" paradigm?
@mrdean: Justifying your ludicrous and demonstrably baseless disavowal of the life-saving efficacy of vaccines by using with Healy's open mind on a vaccine/autism is not just disingenuous, it's patently dishonest. Fortunately, in your case it makes no difference in the real world.
Science as you know /s is predicated on uncertainty and the current state of knwoledge and data, and most credible scientists will never claim to have found the ultimate answer to anything they study. That's one of the reasons why research requires precise definition and documentation of parameters, procedures, assumptions, and statistical variability, and why reproducability is fundamental. Irrespective of the importance and weight of consensus, the vast majority of scientists understand, and acknowledge, the limitations of their knowledge and conclusions.
Science as you know /s is predicated on uncertainty and the current state of knwoledge and data,
Maybe the National Academies should allow for the possibility of "uncertainty" on this page:
https://www.nationalacademies.org/based-on-science/vaccines-…
For example, instead of the claim "Vaccines cause autism", maybe they should of said "Vaccines, in some cases, can cause autism."
Instead of "Vaccines do not cause autism" a claim which leaves no room for doubt, maybe they should of said "According to the available science we have referenced below, it is the current view that vaccines likely do not cause autism."
If you're all about "uncertainty" & the "current state of knowledge & data", as well as integrity & honesty in science, I assume you'd be all for it.
@mrdean: Perhaps they should have, perhaps not, it all depends on context, which is obviously important, Pretty clearly that link is to counter the unbalanced, deliberately falsified misifnformation you and your ilk attempt to inflict on naive and unknowing victims like Kelly Lacek.
Offit pulls no punches when he suggests that worries about vaccine safety are primarily based on hype, misinformation,utter nonsense, and at times patently flawed science. He correctly identifies ideology as the driver behind modern day anti-vaxxer sentiment. When Wakefield opted for the "Callous Disregard" title to his book he must have been looking into a mirror, or perhaps acknowledging what he knows exists in the souls of your tiny demographic.
Context is important and clearly that link is to counter the unbalanced, deliberately falsified misifnformation you and your ilk attempt to inflict on naive and unknowing victims.
Yeah, I thought so. In other words, it's perfectly reasonable for the pre-eminent organisation in the US that houses thousands of scientists & researchers at many different centers & institutes to produce propaganda rather than being "objective". https://www.nationalacademies.org/about
Ideology indeed. You said "the vast majority of scientists understand, and acknowledge, the limitations of their knowledge and conclusions." But it's ok to forgo that objectivity when it comes to this topic, because of the greater good.Given your non-response to my previous queries, it seems obvious you haven't read any of the books mentioned, because if you had, you would know "callous disregard" was what the GMC in their final verdict, determined Wakefield was guilty of, among other things. He used the term ironically for his book, that was published in 2010. If you had read them, you'd be a lot more informed. It's funny how you accuse me of being ignorant.
Here's some info from the preface to Callous Disregard, written by Dr Peter Fletcher, (Ex-Principal Medical Officer with responsibility for the UK’s Committee on Safety of Medicines and later Senior Principal Medical Officer and Chief Scientific Officer)
"My first comment on this excellent book is in respect of whether or not this whole catastrophe could have been avoided by action taken years earlier than The Lancet paper. By about 1987 in the UK, product licence (PL) submissions for three MMR vaccines had been initiated and were the subject of discussion by the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation (JCVI). My past position of Principal Medical Officer with responsibility for the main Committee on Safety of Medicines (CSM) and its sub-Committees leads me to the conclusion that a great deal could have been done. It would have come to my attention from minutes of the JCVI that they were urging rapid granting of PLs for the three vaccines. That news would have been alarming because the JCVI was a purely advisory committee (i.e., not a Section 4 committee under the Medicines Act) and had no powers in the granting or refusal of Pls. In the past there would have been no way in which the CSM would have recommended the granting of PLs on such scanty evidence of safety in the submissions. By 1988/9 the only evidence available was a handful of clinical trials each having no more than 7-800 subjects and none of them conducted in the UK. Had I still been there I would have required at least 10,000 patients in each submission with active safety surveillance for a minimum of 3 months with the possibility that this could be extended if untoward findings should be reported. This would most probably have solved our current problem as we now know that at least 35 cases of “autism” had been officially reported by about 1993"
Yep, another principled & ethical person in the establishment with a moral compass. Notice the pathetic safety data used to justify injecting millions of children? But wait there's more.
"My fourth comment relates to the safety evaluation of medicinal products intended for healthy people. The two biggest examples are hormonal contraceptives and vaccines. The differences between the two are mindboggling. The contraceptives have been evaluated more intensively than any other group of medicinal products both in humans and animals. In contrast, vaccines have been minimally investigated and there seems to be no hope of an improvement in the future."
Yeah, they don't seem too interested in looking at vaccines too closely do they? Just like Bernadine Healy talked about. Because what would they find, assuming truth was their aim? But wait there's more.
"Lastly, I would like to mention the general clinical picture(s) presented by these children which, in my view, constitutes a complex new syndrome. The differing clinical observations cannot each have a different and separated pathological cause. It may be that two or just possibly three different pathological processes are involved, but the root cause has to be a single initiating factor — almost certainly vaccines."
Yeah, that was in reference to the children studied in that now fraudently retracted Lancet paper in 1998.
Wakefield's book goes into detail about Deer's allegations at that time (2000-2010), & refutes each point, but because of the complicated history & events involved to summarise them here would take up too much space.
The foundations of the vaccine paradigm are based on a lack of proper science.
Ideology indeed. You said "the vast majority of scientists understand, and acknowledge, the limitations of their knowledge and conclusions." But it's ok to forgo that objectivity when it comes to this topic, because of the greater good.
Are you really as obtuse as you're making out or is it the eternal problem of quick written repartee? Did I say already that what you know about vaccines, statistics, science, and scientists could be written on a pinhead? Clearly, but there's still room for things such as the greater good (the irony of an anti-vaxxer even mentioning that is palpable) and the psychology of messaging. The risks of bowel cancer are low overall and yet govt health officers insist on sending out test kits to particular demographics. Why is that?
Your demographic may struggle with the concept of limits of knowledge and need asterixes on every statement but the vast majority of the educated public understands and accepts that medical science operates within those limits every day.
Welcome to the world of messaging. Wakefield, or more likely his editor/publisher, was obviously trying to turn the callous disregard label he earned through some damned [sic] fine work back on his detractors. You seem to have missed that in return I did the same. Should I have spelt it out more clearly for you?
Fletcher's characterisation of vaccine research is complete nonsense. For starters most vaccines require a decade or more of research and testing, often directly or indirectly involving scientists across the globe. Once they've been through trials and been approved the data associated with vaccine administration is collated and analysed regularly. So, apart from the multitude of vaccine research papers every year, and the mutltiude of human years of associated work, there is myriad ongoing monitoring and analysis of post-delivery data. This is mandated in most western countries.
Fletcher's hindisght comment could be summed up as - for various reasons [including funding limitations no doubt] years ago we didn't know as much as we do now, and our systems and procedures weren't as good as they are now. Groundbreaking insight there - well actually a complete disregard for what he must have known was completely normal medical advancement. If medical science wasn't advancing in his jurisdiction either directly as a result of local expertise and experience, or osmosis from overseas, then that would suggest a massive failure of government, health administrators, and health practitioners.
If as you erroneously and irresponsibly claim "the foundations of the vaccine paradigm are based on a lack of proper science." then we've had an enormous amount of ongoing dumb luck and/or a series of extremely unlikely but fortunate coincidences for many decades. Perhaps it's "god's will" that millions of lives have been saved by vaccines and has nothing at all to do with our knowledge of how pathogens work, how our immune systems react, the combined efforts of thousands of scientists around the world, and the hunderds of thousands of human years of research and analysis involved?
@glennski: Quite obviously I wasn't responding to the topic in general pal, I've wasted far too much time engaging with narrow minded, self-centred, anti-science fools. Occasionally I'll see something which needs to be carved up and drop a response in to provide a reality check.
I'm so surprised to find that googling someones name who the media at large hate produces articles where the media hate him.
You mean like this, which analysed his show? https://www.npr.org/2022/05/12/1098488908/has-tucker-carlson…
Your immediate reaction/premise is that anyone who reports on someone's behaviour therefore "hates" the target? As I've said in response to numerous other inanities on this website, I'm not in the least surprised. That you appear to believe Carlson is someone of integrity with worthwhile social values fills in a few blanks.
You must have either missed the Dominion case text revelations OR got the shock of your life when he was outed for his private statements about Trump even as he publicly fawned over that dangerous pos. You must have been absolutely dismayed that Carlson admitted to being deceptive about things on air because it's what his/their viewers want to hear, and that the judge in another case found Carlson/Fox not guilty of defamation because "the general tenor of the show should then inform a viewer that he is not stating actual facts about the topics he discusses and is instead engaging in exaggeration and non-literal commentary." Laughably, yet ironically District Judge Vyskocil agreed, writing - without provdidng any evidence of its authenticity - "given Mr. Carlson's reputation, any reasonable viewer arrives with an appropriate amount of skepticism about the statement he makes." Whether she had a straight face when she wrote those words is unknown but it's as beautiful an example of sardonicism as you will find anywhere.
Look up Carlson and Hannity's responses to Heinrich's fact check tweet of Trump's Dominion lies. Question is did Carlon's facade fool you or is it simply that you're prepared to overlook his character because he appeals to your particular views? Again google and read, I'll help you out with some obvious some key words : Carlson deceipt racism xenophobia dominion texts lies
Who actually still believes that the virus originated in the wild considering the abundance of evidence and research papers supporting the lab leak, as well as American intelligence agencies? MSM are the promoters of 'wacky conspiracy theory' on that one.
Serious question? Try to keep up. The US National Intelligence Office for Weapons of Mass Destruction and Proliferation - *clearly not to be believed or trusted because it has "authority" and relies on "science" and the integrity of hundreds of scientists who run eyes over and provide assessments to govt, but fwiw /s - ultimately found no direct evidence for the lab theory but, rightly, their agencies hold the view that both natural and laboratory-associated origin remain plausible hypotheses.The NIC and four other IC agencies assessed that the initial human infection with SARS-COV-2 most likely was caused by natural exposure to an infected animal which carried that virus or a close progenitor. A respected Australian scientist who worked at the lab prior to the pandemic said that based on her experiences and observations there was no possibility that accidental "leakage" could have occurred. US reports weren't so unequivocal. The lab is certified to the highest standard. The question conspiracy theorists have to answer is why China would release such a potent virus in what is probably the country's foremost educational, cultural and economic hub?
IF, as you imply, you're really interested in that topic then you might find this summary of US IC illuminating if not instructive: https://www.dni.gov/files/ODNI/documents/assessments/Report-…
Media coverage of companies or the industries which they operate within can be influenced by advertising spend and/or other business relationships the companies/industries in question have with media outlets. I believe to have evidence of this as seen in the Media Watch report posted earlier. Would you care to comment with your thoughts?
That is a FAR better statement. It's as plain as the nose on your face - unless of course you ascribe to the media reporting, commentary and analysis "hate" theory you threw out wrt Carlson earlier - that commercial relations can have a level of influence over reporting (and government for that matter). It is not a new phenomeon, occurs across the globe, especially and ironically in the fast decaying USA. Thankfully the "hateful" media - possibly, along with the rule of law and "free speech", THE most important pillar of democracy - often provides a decent level of checks and balances.
The irony. Trying to help you here to understand that the news isn't the news - journalists aren't paid to blindly give an objective view and report absolute facts.
Lol, I'll give that the respect and attention it deserves. To wit News Corpse, for example?
Your writings here suggest you shouldn't be advising anyone about anything related to the media. They also suggest you have an obvious major blind spot, a lack of life experience, and like to view things in black and white with little consideration for the nuance which invariably exists in real life. Understanding the differences between the sponsored puff pieces regularly exposed on Media Watch (and many other small satirical media websites), opinion pieces, analyses, and investigative journalism might help you sort the wheat from the chaff.
Wrt xenophobia, racism, immigration and borders: the latter two are very complex issues, unlike the former two. That you conflate them is again instructive. In a rational adult world we should be able to discuss immigration and borders without resorting to grossly distorted racial/xenophobic rhetoric. You are no doubt aware of Carlson's false claims regarding Latin American immigrant crime (debunked by Texas crime studies). Then there's his support for the white nationalist "great replacement" conspiracy theory - featured in 400+ of his shows according to a NYT analysis - which he claims is all Democrat plot to retain power forever (he clearly knows the IQ of his audience). The NYT analysis found Carlson used terms such as "legacy Americans" which had only ever featured on racist extreme right websites previously (I'll leave you to draw your own conclusion on what that suggests). Interestingly the "great replacement" theory echoes fears dating back to the 1830s in America, fears which each time have proved unfounded.
But enough of this banality. You have to find your own way through the maze but I'll leave you with these thoughts to contemplate:
When you think an issue is black and white, you're almost certainly wrong.
When you think an issue is simple, you're probably still wrong.
When you think you have the answer, you probably haven't dug or thought deeply enough.
As renowned philosopher Betrtrand Russell famously said: The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts.The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts.
Nice addition there. Yeah, people like Paul Offit, Stanley Plotkin, Peter Hotez, are all so "full of doubts". /s
@mrdean: Without asking them specific questions you wouldn't know whether they have doubts or not on any topic.
When you grow up you MAY learn not to take things so literally; that the world isn't black and white like you think it is; that science and scientific authority is hard earned but sometimes far from perfect; that science is limited to the current state of knowledge; that ideology binds and blinds your mind irrationally; that in general ignorant and arrogant amateur opinions have no weight when compared to that of experts; that some people will lie and distort in order to prey on the doubts, fears and ignorance of others; that starting from a position of complete distrust of anyone and anything which doesn't fit your very narrow life view is puerile and debilitating; That there's a vast difference between scepticism and denial; that humans and their systems are both fallible and sometimes corruptible; that balance and perspective are critical to human and societal function.
That shouldn't stop you from being inquisitive, or critical of systems and people when you have valid concerns. People around the world function on that basis without being captured by conspiracy, distorted reality and extremism.
In current times, small pockets of societies embrace ignorance over knowledge even as they live their lives "blissfully" unaware of the science and knowledge which underpins the systems they rely on every day of their existence. In educated democratic societies knowledge and expertise will always eclipse egoistical, opinionated ignorance.
Quite obviously I wasn't responding to the topic in general pal, I've wasted far too much time engaging with narrow minded, self-centred, anti-science fools. Occasionally I'll see something which needs to be carved up and drop a response in to provide a reality check.
As renowned philosopher Betrtrand Russell famously said: The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts.
On that second quote, who are you trying to paint as a fool and fanatic? I'd wager that the reasonable person would read the first quote as someone who is quite certain of themselves since they feel the need to come and impart their wisdom to provide a 'reality check'.
They also suggest you have an obvious major blind spot, a lack of life experience, and like to view things in black and white with little consideration for the nuance which invariably exists in real life
That's a pretty black and white characterisation you've made there.
and the integrity of hundreds of scientists who run eyes over and provide assessments to govt
anti-science fools
Would you be talking about the government scientists working for any of these agencies?: https://web.archive.org/web/20240408203114/https://www.bmj.c…
How about the medical journals?
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1140949/No, these articles don't prove anything. But maybe give a reason for hesitancy or doubt?
Double blind randomised trials are generally accepted as the gold standard. They are also exceedingly expensive to run, often costing millions of dollars. Business do not spend this kind of money to get no return on their investment. They will likely not pony up to run a new trial on an off patent drug, instead would be much more inclined to invest in proprietary products which can offer a great return on investment.
In my view greater scrutiny needs to be applied to products approved over the course of the pandemic, considering a) the amount of tax payer dollars spend across the world on these and b) the suspicious evidence that has emerged since. It's very curious that this isn't talked about more in mainstream media.But enough of this banality.
Agreed. You go your way, I'll go mine.
and wiser people so full of doubts.
As I was trying to say in the last post and also this one, is that a little doubt of what we're told to believe from 'authoritative' sources would go a long way to a better world.
On that second quote, who are you trying to paint as a fool and fanatic?
Oh I'm not painting the anti-vax demographic as fools and fanatics, they're doing a perfectly good job of that themselves. That is a general quote for all anti/pseudo-science protagonists and their numerous hangers-on ("freedom" junkies, anti-establishment/authority agitators, anarchists, etc etc).
I'd wager that the reasonable person would read the first quote as someone who is quite certain of themselves since they feel the need to come and impart their wisdom to provide a 'reality check'.
I'm pretty confident that I'm better informed that the vast majority of those I respond to simply because their statements are based on cherry picked pseudo-science at best and irrational nonsense at worst. That indeed may be foolish but hey I'm one of those imperfect humans your demographic constanty rails about. On a related note, just so you know, I admit I'm extremely ignorant compared to most experts and "authorities."
That's a pretty black and white characterisation you've made there.
But somehow, based on your comments it seems more than reasonable.
In my view greater scrutiny needs to be applied to products approved over the course of the pandemic.
Greater than what? Judging from the amount of cherry picked links on this topic alone (and I've ony looked at a tiny number of comments) it seems there's a HUGE amount of scrutiny already, and that's not counting the ongoing research by academics and industry yet to be published, and the enormous amount of human years involved in regular analysis of covid vaccine data - something which, as you know, is routinely done for all vaccines.
I've previously suggested on other forums that there should and will be an enormous amount of studies not just on covid vaccines but also on the relative effectiveness of pandemic management policies. All credible reviews and papers are important, some will be far more valid and relevant than others to the Australian experience. Many people are eagerly waiting on the results of Australia's inquiry, not so blame can be laid and and smug finger wavers can say I told you so in hindsight, but because it's absolutely critical that we learn from our mistakes, the experiences of other similar countries, and plan for better management in future. During this pandemic, for obvious reasons there was undoubtedly (and reasonably) a level of "winging it", with an emphasis on harm minimisation.
a little doubt of what we're told to believe from 'authoritative' sources would go a long way to a better world.
I totally agree, but that's not the tenor of irrational extremists who will never acknowledge the enormous success of covid vaccines - for example. That "doubt" and assoiated accountability has existed in most advanced democratic coutries for decades. I'm surprised you've missed it. This "discussion" alone is a pretty fair clue to the amount of scrutiny being applied. although it rarely ventures into the motives of many involved.
How is your mate Tucker looking after you read text transcripts?
pseudo-science
Yes. If you'll follow, my point is that what is in front of us in the medical/science world in 2024 is a lot of pseudo-science driven by greed and business interest. If you pay for the study it will have the results that you want. And if you want to do a study that won't result in opportunity for profits, then good luck with your funding.
irrational extremists who will never acknowledge the enormous success of covid vaccines
These vaccines are not an enormous success. Pfizer was touted as having '95% efficacy' when announced.
Why was the Pfizer trial unblinded when it would obscure adverse events when comparing to the control group?
Why were people that caught covid within 7 days of their dose excluded from the results?
Why was the public mainly given death statistics that lumped those who died with covid in with those who died from covid?
What were the demographics of those who were deemed to have died because of covid, and how does it compare to other respiratory viruses such as the common cold/flu?
What were the comorbidities of those who were deemed to have died because of covid, and how does it compare to other respiratory viruses such as the common cold/flu?
Why is the basis of all 'lives saved' modelling using results from a test which has been shown can produce significant false positives, and is only testing for partial genetic material of the virus rather than the complete virus?
Why was treatment never an option, and 'the only way out of the pandemic is through vaccination'?
Why did covid continue to spread even after 90+% of the population was double vaccinated?
If the reason covid continued to spread was because of different variants becoming dominant, why did we continue to be vaccinated against the original variant?
Why did people keep dying even though 90+% of the population was double vaccinated?
Why did the government purchase enough doses for the whole eligible population to get 4 additional jabs as early as July 2021?
Why were children as young as 5, teenagers, and young adults encouraged to get vaccinated when their immune systems would run rings around older adults i.e little to no risk?
Why wasn't it a choice to get vaccinated (no jab = no work is hardly a choice)?
Why wasn't it a choice to get vaccinated if you didn't fit the risk profile?
Why were we not told about the need for booster shots at the start of the rollout?And more questions on the 'science':
Why were possible treatments (ivermectin, hydroxychlorequin) poo-pooed immediately and then 'taken off the shelves' by the TGA?
Why did the FDA in the US start a social media campaign branding ivermectin as horse medicine and unfit/unsafe for human consumption, despite it being on the WHO's list of essential (human) medicines?
Why were doctors threatened with losing their license to practise if they decided to prescribe these drugs as treatment?
Why were doctors not allowed to give individual advice to patients regarding vaccination?
Why has the vaccine been given full approval after 2 years despite vaccines traditionally requiring a 10 year+ process including positive long term studies?
Why have safety signals such as myo/pericarditis ignored when historically such events would cause a product to be pulled from the market?
Why was the pandemic plan that was already in place abandoned?
What was the science behind wearing masks and the flip flopping advice early on about whether we needed to wear them?
Why did we need to wear masks outside?
What was the science behind social distancing?
What was keeping 1.5 meters away from others indoors supposed to do?
Why did we need to social distance outside?
What was the science behind sanitising all surfaces?
What was the science behind the idea that a respiratory virus could transmit via touch?Why was the media given money by the government to report on covid 19?
What effect would this have on bias of reporting?
How were media ratings affected by covid 19?
Would audience ratings encourage neutral reporting?This "discussion" alone is a pretty fair clue to the amount of scrutiny being applied
Most who venture into these discussions are smeared as conspiracy theorist nutters. Is that healthy?
I live in a world where money corrupts and science as a whole is a gigantic global business with ruthless practices.
You appear to live in a world I used to live in (please correct me if I'm wrong) where this is not the case.
How is your mate Tucker looking after you read text transcripts?
You mean consulting with the balanced and objective New York Times? The same one that told it's journalists not to use the words genocide, ethnic cleansing and occupied territory when reporting on Gaza?
Covid is BACK!!
Old age homes report new epidemic levels.
Where are those reports from the nursing homes?
Ask the Hon William Shorten, instead looking after the sick he is usually travelling.
Shorten isn't responsible for Health and Aged Care. Nor is he a medical practitioner so he won't be able to assist with your foot in mouth problem.
@payless69: No, he's not mine and unless you met him at his place of work then the worthless comment you made about the fact that he has to travel is ironic no?
The NDIS has failed? Do you have a direct line to "the creator" or did you mistake your hopes for reality?
Another US state is suing Pfizer
https://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/4726687-kansas-sues-pf…
Unedited press conference given by the AG bringing the case: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k-mdJKu4d34
Not the best quality video, it was hard to make out his tin foil hat.
So we on verge of, ha ha ha, a serious bird flu virus ,shit
Which chooks birds pigeon, brains will get the experimental chook shot, clot shot Vax this time ! ! !
Studies flooding in - trending worse.
Psychiatric adverse events following COVID-19 vaccination:
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41380-024-02627-0#Fig3The evidence is in
https://x.com/SaiKate108/status/1804028420961063337Evidence has suggested an increased risk of psychiatric manifestations following viral infections including coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19).
while reducing the incidence and risk of schizophrenia and bipolar disorder.
Interesting. Being in nature it is presumably done by smart people but it me it reads more like correlation than causation. All the paranoid types don't get vacc'ed? No schizophrenia in the vaccinated. Chicken littles rush out to get vacc'ed before they die an agonizing death from COVID-19? Lots of vaccinated people with anxiety.
That said, while I doubt "Aluminum" has much effect it would almost be surprising if triggering an immune response had no hidden effect on our minds.
That said, while I doubt "Aluminum" has much effect it would almost be surprising if triggering an immune response had no hidden effect on our minds.
https://drchristopherexley.substack.com/p/hpv-vaccine
From a real scientist, with integrity & morals, who lost his career due to economic & political interests. Just like Wakefield.
@mrdean: Do you think the Children’s Medical Safety Research Institute (CMSRI) (a known organisation with a specific agenda) would still give him money if his results did not favour their agenda?
Follow the money.
@Ughhh: Lol. I can see you've been suckered into articles like this: https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/move-over-christopher-shaw-…
Haven't you figured out yet the site is used to discredit anyone who goes against the consensus? That site should give you a pretty good clue as to who the scientists with integrity, morals & ethics are!! Yes, Claire Dwoskin through CMSRI has supported Exley's work over the years.
Science should have truth as its objective, no matter where that truth leads. Do you agree?
@mrdean: Are you saying he didn't receive any money from a non neutral organisation?
Is it only "follow the money" if it's not something you want to hear? You're not very consistent.
Also, no, that's not the article I visited.
Also, no, that's not the article I visited.
sbm aren't the only ones out there writing hit pieces on real scientists like Exley. There are many other sites affiliated with so called "skeptics" groups. Regardless of where you "visited" to get the slanted view you have of Claire Dwoskin, the end result is the same.
Are you saying he didn't receive any money from a non neutral organisation?
See, framing the question incorrectly as usual in order the slant the response.
Yes, Dwoskin through CMSRI has funded some of Exley's work in the past. You say they have a "specific agenda". Well, lay out that "agenda" for us, don't leave us guessing. I doubt you will, because of the trolling nature of the questions.
Here's my "guess" though. Dwoskin, like most parents who now question vaccines or other poisons in general, probably has personal experience of adverse consequences affecting someone close in her life, possible a child, grandchild, sibling or other family members. If this is so, & if Dwoskin wasn't convinced the authorities are properly, independently, objectively answering questions, & her being in a position to do something about it, may have put money to research what the authorities won't fund.
Logically think about it. hypothetical example; do vaccines cause autism? Say Dwoskin wanted to know if that was the case because she noticed her infant regress after the dtap or mmr vaccine. Say she funds research to look at that. Do you really think her "agenda" would be to prove she was right? Why? Wouldn't that confirm to her that it was her fault for giving her infant the shots? Who would want that guilt? Nobody. She would have seen the government authorities being adamant vaccines don't cause autism, but she isn't convinced because there is a lot out there now about how those studies are fraudulent. She just wants the truth & is in a position to contribute. She would hope the independent science she funds provides the same result as the authorities. This would reassure her. Does CSMRI have anything to benefit? Are they selling anything? Do they have patents? Pseudo-skeptics have suggested it's all about the "grift". Reaping in the millions of dollars of donations from desperate parents. Not a convincing argument in the least. I can absolutely guarantee you that if CSMRI had that sort of funding, the first thing they would of done would of been to set Exley up with his own lab in order for him to continue his work.
On the other hand, are organisations like the CDC "non-neutral", even though they hold patents for vaccines, make money through licenses & buy lots from pharma in a circular type of economy, as well as having a purpose to drive vaccine uptake, while at the same time making sure they are "safe"?
So, your insinuations are nothing more than ridiculous attempts to undermine truly independent research.
Wow tons of posts (and long ones) since I last checked in here. Please be kind to each other.
Neil Oliver calls this "The Great Sorting" https://x.com/TCNetwork/status/1803890949690446227
I'm seeing many more now waking up and coming to this position:
https://x.com/Markmaycott2/status/1803507230215643572Here's the most up to date published peer-reviewed data on deaths and autopsy findings after receiving a Covid jab or booster:
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S037907382…
A Systematic Review of Autopsy findings in deaths after covid-19 vaccination:
Co-authored and published by Professor Emeritus at Yale University Harvey Risch, along with contributions from researchers, physicians, surgeons and coroners working with the Cross Cancer Institute, University of Michigan, Detroit office of Public Health, Yale University School of Health, Florida & Arizona State Health Departments.
Highlights:
•Our data suggest a high likelihood of a causal link between COVID-19 vaccination and death.
•These findings indicate the urgent need to elucidate the pathophysiologic mechanisms of death with the goal of risk stratification and avoidance of death for the large numbers of individuals who have taken or will receive one or more COVID-19 vaccines in the future.
•This review helps provide the medical and forensic community a better understanding of COVID-19 vaccine fatal adverse events.
•Through May 5th, 2023, the Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS) contained 1,556,050 adverse event reports associated with COVID-19 vaccines, including 35,324 deaths, 26,928 myocarditis and pericarditis, 19,546 heart attacks, and 8,701 thrombocytopenia reports. If the alarmingly high number of reported deaths are indeed causally linked to COVID-19 vaccination, the implications could be immense, including: the complete withdrawal of all COVID-19 vaccines from the global market.peer-reviewed data
A group of doctors from "The Wellness Group" making extrapolation discussion points from a subset of papers would be a better summary.
But absolutely, "If" is a key word in your bolded sentence.
Dont let other lines from their summary like this Finally, confounding variables, particularly concomitant illnesses, infection, drug interactions, and other factors not accounted for, could have played roles in the causal pathway to death get in the way though73.9% of deaths were directly due to or significantly contributed to by COVID-19 vaccination (from their 678 studies, of which 44 papers were selected, which contained 325 cases, containing a sample group with a mean age of death was 70.4 years.)
A group of doctors from "The Wellness Group"
You appear to have gone a bit too far off course with that completely unhinged rant.
Three of the doctors/scientists listed from the study, in addition to their roles as Cardiologists and professors, run a business called "The Wellness Company". It's a medical supply business that sells and distributes first aid kits and travel emergency kits for when people travel through third world countries and need bandages, Iodine wipes, anti-virals, antifungal creams, etc…
It's a medical supply business that sells and distributes first aid kits and travel emergency kits for when people travel through third world countries and need bandages, Iodine wipes, anti-virals, antifungal creams, etc…
Indeed, thats clearly their core business. Talk about some very selective analysis of their business :/
The Chief Medical Board are the architects of health and wellness: by seamlessly blending allopathic and naturopathic solutions, we are building a roadmap for health and wellness that frees people everywhere from the sickcare model that Big Pharma promotes.
https://www.facebook.com/TheWellnessCompany.health
just a bunch of travel medicine kits right?Wasnt a rant.
Is it wrong that I read articles and review the sources of the articles? Or should we just read headlines of articles and make our judgements from there?
I thought critical thinking and critical media analysis was a good thing?The Chief Medical Board are the architects of health and wellness: by seamlessly blending allopathic and naturopathic solutions, we are building a roadmap for health and wellness that frees people everywhere from the sickcare model that Big Pharma promotes.
A classic case of conflict of interest, the very same issue antivaxxers accuse "authorities" of. The irony.
A classic case of conflict of interest, the very same issue antivaxxers accuse "authorities" of. The irony.
Never :)
And I thought critical thinking and critical media analysis was a good thing according to some?If you dont at least (even briefly) read an articles content, review the source of any 'summary' highlights from within an article, and review authors and references, you're just taking facebook link/click bait and taking it as fact due to it aligning with your existing views.
Seems the opposite of most up to date published peer-reviewed data on deaths and autopsy findings after receiving a Covid jab or booster:And I thought critical thinking and critical media analysis was a good thing according to some?
The tactic of assuming the argument of your critcs has been widely used by deniers since the early days of anthropogenic climate change "debate". Cherry picking is the most prominent pseudo-science style adopted.
Casually linked is dead give away. In his book Chancing It: The Laws of Chance and How They Can Work for You Robert Matthews takes issue with casual associations and correlations, and explains why they are misleading. I'd want to see what percentage of vaccinated people those numbers represent, the demographics involved, and whether the myo/peri-carditis, heart attacks and thrombosis resulted primarily from covid itself or primarily as a reaction to a vaccine (you need to know when the vaccine was administered - pre or post acquisition - something which may in fact not be recorded, and what the statistical likelihood was of the same or even more severe "events" had the people not received a vaccine at all. It's a relatively simple job at this point to calculate the likelihood of someone getting covid and ultimately dying from it.
Irrespective, the highlighted statement is not just hyperbolic, it's unprofessional, alarmist rubbish. Had they written something qualified like "if further independent studies show credible correlations between covid vaccines as a primary cause of death in particular demographics, then we can use that information to further develop policies and advice to the public, as was done during the pandemic."
If the highlighted statement reflects the quality of the review then there's a real problem. At this juncture the statistics make it abundantly clear that covid vaccines saved the lives of millions worldwide. Will be interesting to see what professional reactions to it are.
At this juncture the statistics make it abundantly clear that covid vaccines saved the lives of millions worldwide.
More than half the countries in the world never rolled out the jab or boosters at all & those places recorded less Covid deaths per capita than countries that did roll out the jab & boosters.
Seems like the opposite of your claim is the actual reality.
More than half the countries in the world never rolled out the jab or boosters at all & those places recorded less Covid deaths per capita than countries that did roll out the jab & boosters.
I can't be bothered checking the veracity of that so you'll have to help me out. Where did you find that information and did you bother reading expert assessment of why that may be the case? Suffice to say your understanding of statistics appears to have stopped before the lessons on correlation and causation. Ever thought, for example, that "lifestyle" factors in say the USA might exacerbate covid deatrh rates even though they have advanced medical systems?
I can't be bothered checking the veracity of that so you'll have to help me out.
There you go.
@infinite: Lol. Come in spinner. Leaving aside the obvious - that you haven't got a clue what detailed analyses say about the complex relationships which determine covid illness outcomes (including death) - did you have trouble verifying your own claims? Rhetorical question, because we both know the answer.
@infinite: Lying, or regurgitating nonsense you've been fed by culpably stupid extremists, on an anonymous website is sad, but not in the least surprising in these times of egoistic opinionated ignorance.
You know what come in spinner suggests? Rhetorical question, obviously you haven't got a clue.
To those who still support the system and the protocols, and therefore believe the jabs are safe and effective could I please ask what do you believe has been causing the dramatic increase in excess deaths and the decrease in fertility since 2021 specifically. Serious question, thanks.
You're asking complete amateurs on a deals website to speculate on the reasons for decreasing fertility? Why don't you bother googling and reading what experts think? You'll no doubt be disappointed when/if you get around to it.The answer to the first part of your loaded question has been answered numerous times by epidemiologists and statisticians, and probably primary school students around the world.
If you were offered a million dollars to answer this question correctly, what would you pick, (a) or (b): excess deaths since 2021 are primarily the result of (a) covid-19 (b) covid-19 vaccines?
Just one paper but it's another good reality check for you: The impact of COVID-19 vaccines on fertility-A systematic review and meta-analysis
Anecdotally, two men I grew up with dropped dead for no reason within the past 6 months, I know three who've died from turbo cancers since they were vaxxed, 3 with myocarditis, 1 with pericarditis. Two with detached retinas (necrosis via micro clots), two with autoimmune including Lupas. At least, because many keep their diagnoses private. I've never known anyone with new heart conditions like that in my life. It's a flood.
Everyone seems to know people who're suffering like this since the vax, do you know any?
I'm sure I've come across you before, although I think the story has now expanded somewhat. Anecdote means diddly squat, even less on an anonymous forum where the commenter doesn't provide names and doesn't know anything about the actual health details of his associates.
Using the "casual correlation" approach mentioned above, my prognosis is that being associated with you may be a high risk factor for early death and/or serious illness.
Was your answer (a) or (b)?
@Igaf: An anecdote is a datapoint, and sure if that sequence that's happened to me was unique it could be an extremely unfortunate notwithstanding unlikely coincidence. However it's absolutely not unique to me sadly, in fact I've heard similar stories of carnage and mayhem from quite a few others. That's why I was curious if it has or hasn't happened to you.
An anecdote is a datapoint
Really? Sorry to have to break the news but in science it isn't, for patently obvious reasons. But then you don't deal in real science do you?
@Igaf: Curiousity got the better of me trev. I have engaged with you previously. https://www.ozbargain.com.au/comment/13208752/redir
Interestingly one of your previous comments (pretty sure there's another) was general, now it includes sundry "associates". Credibility? Fast approaching zero.
Everyone seems to know people who're suffering like this since the vax, do you know any?
lgaf doesn't answer simple basic questions like this.
Personally, I too know several suffering since taking the medical countermeasures, one guy in his 30's in the police force who was coerced to take it to keep his job, heart issues. I met a few even younger guys at some of the protests who also ended up with heart issues post pfizer.
Others have died suddenly. One active old guy I know had 4, after the first few he said he didn't feel right, gave up on his hobbies, noticed a decline in health with his friends post injection.
It's a flood alright. Carnage would be an appropriate term.
It's a flood alright. Carnage would be an appropriate term.
How big is that "flood/carnage" precisely?
How many of your anti-vax Ozb would agree with that clearly ludicrous characterisation I wonder?Struggling with those names and their alleged "sins" still?
I rarely answer questions which are predicated upon nothing and suggestive of plenty. Cherry picked anecdotes have no place in science or serious rational adult discussion for that matter (not that this is of course). Your characterisation is not just puerile, it's extremism writ large. Again nothing novel in that. As Offit suggested you don't have to look far to find vocal antivaxxers venting vast piles of nonsense, hype, duplicity, and profoundly flawed "science".
@Igaf: Fastrack to the top with you lgaf. Perfect leadership material.
I know it must be such a pleasure as well as a burden to be a Warrior for Truth.
When anybody attacks or criticizes you or your views, they are really attacking $cience itself.
@mrdean: Can't answer the question, or has it dawned on you that your extremism is real and it's better to change the subject?
@Igaf: @igaf
Dr John Campbell has researched the post VAX Excess deaths extensively, has done several Videos and he uses official data and Govt reports every single time, like the Australian Bureau of Statistics: https://www.youtube.com/@Campbellteaching/search?query=EXCES…
As far as my personal experience is concerned, it can't be cherry picked as I am only one person with the life experience of one and therefore it's random data as I'm just a random person. One person's data is not complete but it is still a random sample.
@trevor99: Yeh yeh, we went over the Campbell misrepresentations in the same deal I linked.
Like all good stories your "personal experience" gets embellished with each telling it seems.
Here's my anecdote. No-one I know, including some very ill older Australians had any significant health problems from their jabs. Ergo, according to extreme anti-vaxxers we may conclude that all vaccines are safe and no-one has ever had health issues or died from a covid vaccine.
@Igaf: Ok I take you at your word @igaf.
I have to say though, you appear to be extremely fortunate to have not one of your close contacts maimed, murdered or damaged in any way by the mrna jab poison. Those lipid nanoparticles must have failed on those particular occasions, including inside yourself. Maybe the doc couldn't keep the fridge down to the minus 60. You could take a tattslotto ticket after this luck, but how about instead, not playing Russian Roulette again :)) Good luck.
@trevor99: In very rough terms you have a 160,000 times greater chance of dying from covid than you have of winning Tattslotto Trev.
Wrt the Russian Roulette analogy: stats tell me that If I have a 1 in 6 chance of copping the slug then an unnvaxxed person has anywhere from a 3 to10 times greater chance. Nonsensical comparson but worth contemplating no?
@Igaf: Ha, nice idea igaf, but the Vax has negative efficacy before the catastrophic side effects are even considered. Unvaxxed just don't die from COVID unless vit d deficient or very old or something is seriously wrong with them. No unvaxxed person has regretted not getting it as far as I'm aware, however many, many have regretted taking the silly thing. Don't do it :)
@trevor99: Is negative efficacy related to anecdotal data points Trev?
No unvaxxed person has regretted not getting it as far as I'm aware
You don't think maybe a few of these blokes did?
https://www.forbes.com/sites/tommybeer/2021/09/16/another-an…Or poor Caleb Wallace?
https://www.thewrap.com/caleb-wallace-anti-mask-freedom-rall…Phil Valentine ("Vaxman") certainly did. https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/phil-valentine-radio-ho…
Can't find it now but during the pandemic a young black anti-vax/mask conservative in the US media wrote to his followers urging them to get the vaccine just before he died of covid.
Sad for families, friends and followers I expect.
Unvaxxed just don't die from COVID unless vit d deficient or very old or something is seriously wrong with them.
Or they end up in hospitals with protocols that have the effect of shortening ones life fairly quickly.
@mrdean: Speaking of bird flu, prima facie I diagnose a bad case of chicken little disease and nescience induced cerebral edema.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NO04VXBIS0M&ab_channel=keith…
Self-induced stupidity regularly shortens lives, as we saw during covid and the Darwin Awards attest.
https://media0.giphy.com/media/v1.Y2lkPTc5MGI3NjExa2dvZzRtZW…
You're probably stiil wondering what your oujia board was trying to tell you when it wrote Thr92AlaX2. Science can help.
@Igaf: Five states, Kansas, Texas, Mississippi, Louisiana, and Utah. are now suing Pfizer for purposefully misleading the general public on the safety and efficacy of their Covid vaccines.
When I first started warning about the experimental poision during the first roll outs the online response was massively indignant. I was considered a lunatic from hell, fair game to mercilessly attack and censor. Now not so much. Considering this trend at the current point in time, I wonder how attitudes will continue to change from here in say a year or so.
suing Pfizer for purposefully misleading the general public on the safety and efficacy of their Covid vaccines
So, hypothetically, if these lawsuits are unsuccessful and do not result in a slam dunk guilty verdict, will you have to change your 'view' on pfizer and re-evaluate your position for/against?
Strange it's just a lawsuit on misleading statements rather than being a straight up criminal prosecution for mass homicide though based on your 'warnings'
And why isn't Moderna also being sued in the same us states ?
@SBOB: The way they got Capone was through tax evasion. Rather than to try to prove any or all of the murders and other crimes. The Law can be a funny thing.
@Ughhh: There are so many different Govts, state, federal etc, and different countries. The world is certainly not black and white, 100% one way and contiguous.
@trevor99: One of the first cracks that appeared has interestingly been the Surgeon General of Florida Joseph A. Ladapo, MD, PhD 25th State Health Officer & Surgeon General
https://x.com/FLSurgeonGen@trevor99: You've probably already seen this recent short interview Demasi did with Lapado, but worth posting anyway, in case others haven't.
https://blog.maryannedemasi.com/p/florida-surgeon-general-me…
Common sense answers.
Dear @Igaf
Yes we're all a bunch of nobody amateurs whose combined knowledge could be inscribed on the head of a pin here, but you seem quite adept at the whole 'learn to google and read' thing so that's why we're all turning to you for answers.
Just one paper
Definitely not what some would call cherry picking.
I'll see your paper and raise you 2 not-cherry-picked papers
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9926143/
https://www.dovepress.com/potential-adverse-effects-of-nanop…Just anecdotal evidence but a few of my female friends reported adverse events relating to their monthly cycles after mRNA vaccination, and all spoke about several other females they had spoken to with similar results. As we know females don't grow new eggs if they get damaged so it would be a real problem if there was something more going on than just irregular cycles.
Why does this happen?
A conventional vaccine is usually injected into the delt muscle where the immune system sees it and produces a response, so that when the real virus enters the body the various components such as antigens, B cells and T cells coordinate an attack to remove the virus from the body. The immune response generally causes inflammation which is why you get a sore arm.With messenger RNA vaccines the delivery method is lipid nanoparticles, which encase the mRNA. The mRNA bonds to cells in the body and now those cells instead of producing whatever they did before, become spike protein factories, and an immune response is made for the spike protein (not the entire covid virus though). Evidence suggests that the problem is that these particles enter the blood stream and can visit every part of the body with the whites of your eyes as an exception. If these cells enter the ovaries (tests on mice suggest that ovaries and testicles receive high concentrations of the lipid nanoparticles) then that could be quite problematic considering the potential for cell inflammation there.
What happens when spike protein is produced in the heart? Brain? Ears?
Definitely not what some would call cherry picking.
You understand what meta-studies are right? Rhetorical question. My link was to but one of those, there may be more which disagree which is why I made my comment, as I often do. If I were to hazard a completely random and unscientific guess (sorry to steal your modus operandi) I'd say that those two papers you linked were possibly among the 1377 papers omitted from the systematic review. On second thoughts that would be a very foolish conclusion to make wouldn't it?
Just anecdotal evidence but a few of my female friends reported adverse events relating to their monthly cycles after mRNA vaccination, and all spoke about several other females they had spoken to with similar results. As we know females don't grow new eggs if they get damaged so it would be a real problem if there was something more going on than just irregular cycles.
So why did you write obviously amateur, ignorance-based anecdotal stories other than to sow doutbs in the minds or other equally ignorant people on this website? Covid has a huge range of widely varying effects on many people. Vaccines do the same, although obviously with completely different outcomes for the vast majority of people. I don't know the statistics but "anecdotally" in my circle of family and friends it would appear that Moderna caused more sever side effects that Pfizer (sample size - sfa). Would I then post on a deals website that people should avoid Moderna? I'l leave you to work that out from my posts, shouldn't be difficult. Any reason why you haven't check fertility and covid relationships, or compared say the incidences and severity of myo- and pericarditis from covid V vaccines?
With messenger RNA vaccines the delivery method is lipid nanoparticles, which encase the mRNA. The mRNA bonds to cells in the body and now those cells instead of producing whatever they did before, become spike protein factories, and an immune response is made for the spike protein (not the entire covid virus though). Evidence suggests that the problem is that these particles enter the blood stream and can visit every part of the body with the whites of your eyes as an exception. If these cells enter the ovaries (tests on mice suggest that ovaries and testicles receive high concentrations of the lipid nanoparticles) then that could be quite problematic considering the potential for cell inflammation there.
Your knowledge is astounding. Given the above what risk level would you assign to mRNA vaccines compared to say the risks from covid acquisition,and for what demographic/s?
I've got no interest whatsoever in pouring over your posts on covid/vaccines (yet) but for balance would you care to tell me if you've ever acknowledged the enormous success covid vaccines have had in reducing transmission (viral load reduction), serious illness, death, health system overload and (directly or indirectly) economic "meltdown"?
You understand what meta-studies are right?
The correct term is meta-analysis.
Your knowledge is astounding
The correct term is meta-analysis.
Were flood and carnage the correct terms or just your anger venting?
Took a while to google that did it? Yes that's what the authors labelled it and technically that is more accurate.
Your pedantry seems to be highly selective, much like your habit of cherry picking. Any comment about that study's conclusions or were you so excited to trip me up that you forgot the topic?
Maybe it's a cultural thing? https://unimelb.libguides.com/whichreview/metastudy
@Igaf: There's no need to get upset.
would you care to tell me if you've ever acknowledged the enormous success covid vaccines have had in reducing transmission
Well it depends on what you'd define as success. You can read my reply to you up above for some thoughts.
But yes huge success. Started rolling out in early 2021 and by late 2021/early 2022 you can see it really peak in its success of preventing infection and transmission: https://covidlive.com.au/report/daily-cases/aus#2020
Obviously covid deaths stopped and lockdowns lifted once we hit that 70%+ double vaxxed rate like we were told.
economic "meltdown"?
Maybe you only frequent this website for these discussions, but you would have noticed the inflation as a result of the actions taken based on perceived threat of the virus?
You understand what meta-studies are right?
Hold my beer while I go and cherry pick a book where some dude says that <application of science in certain way that doesn't support my argument> can actually be bad}: - https://handbook-5-1.cochrane.org/chapter_9/9_1_4_when_not_t…
To help you avoid making that mistake again, please check out this good book I found by some guy - https://www.amazon.com.au/Chancing-Laws-Chance-They-Work/dp/…
There's no need to get upset.
In fact there is. As many scientists and unrestrained media analysts have pointed out for years, the dangers of not addressing rampant ignorance - including the sort of anecdotal rubbish you and more particularly others have regurgitated here - are very real. On this website it may seem to matter little since most of you are very unlikely to repeat your twaddle except on anonymous forums and to like minded people, but ignorance and mis- and dis-information is insideous, especially among particular demographics.
As bioethecist Arthur Caplan said, public health agencies are not pulling their weight adequately in vaccine wars, no doubt because, among other things, engaging publicly gives some credence to distorted, unrepresentative and hyperbolic claims (eg https://www.ozbargain.com.au/comment/15427994/redir), and because it's a huge resource drain for professionals - as was scientific rebuttal of climate science denial for decades.
Caplan also suggests that [by failing to strongly respond] authorities have ceded some ethical high ground to vocal critics, and allowed extreme views to gain a foothold among the naive and nescient. Taken in isolation even the small part of this thread i've read is a perfect example. It's one thing to acknowledge the problems with vaccines and the failures, unethical behaviours and conflicts of interest of big pharma, entirely another to then make puerile and frankly irrational extrapolations which promote distrust of complete industries and everyone involved with their products.
I'll respond to your other nonsense later
@Igaf: You can drain your blood, ingest mercury and other poisions as they believed it was cleansing, you know, literally the official treatments they performed in the middle ages as this was the conventional wisdom of the experts so how could it be wrong?
But do not FORCE it onto others. Why should it bother you, because you're protected surely. Why would you get upset?
Similar to religious zealots, crusading, believing they're do gooders, complete with extreme virtue signalling. Cults.
Darwin will sort it out.
@trevor99: The reason the mainstream authorities are now pushing so hard against the rise of so called mis-information, dis-information & the like, is precisely because the truth is starting to become known to a lot of people. This is why ethically & morally bankrupt people like Paul Offit & Peter Hotez are extensively covered by the mainstream, both their books are weapons used against the truth.
zero facts, just conspiracy rubbish
A huge miscarriage rate and Pfizer knew and covered it up.
We're talking about murder.
Pay close attention.
"The reason why gene therapies were never, ever brought to the forefront is because we knew 30 years ago that there was a risk for them to be integrated into sperm, integrated into ova, and passed onto offspring," Lindsay says. "In fact, we sterilized people before giving them gene therapies so that they would not corrupt the gene pool."
"we knew that they caused leukemias and lymphomas because they caused leukemias and lymphomas when people were given gene therapy, and that's why they were not mass released."
This is the horror show of the ages.
Professor of international law Dr. Francis Boyle, describes how he refers to the COVID-19 "vaccines" as "Nazi COVID Franken-shots." He notes "there's no other word for them" and says that the mRNA technology used in them was developed by the Pentagon.
A short bit of info on the fda regulatory process (or lack of): https://blog.maryannedemasi.com/p/did-fda-fully-analyse-pfiz…
The FDA claims to have gone through the entire dossier submitted by pfizer, in 22 days. Potentially millions of pages of data to check. Peter Gotzsche, someone with a lot of experience in doing such analysis & with a great deal of knowledge in the tricks used by pharmaceutical corporations in order to exaggerate benefits & minimize harms, doesn't believe it's possible to go through so much in such a short time, unless it was the summary package the fda looked at. Interestingly, the fda gets access to the raw SOURCE level data, whereas our tga has to rely on summaries/aggregates only meaning they cannot do a proper reanalysis or re-evaluation of pfizers claims.
From the article:
"He says after analysing trial data that have been subpoenaed in legal cases, you really get a sense of just how much drug companies “lie and cheat” in the volumes of data.
“I know from experience that drug companies try to bury harms. For example, they might use different words to describe the same harm so that it doesn’t get picked up when you’re searching for those key terms in the documents,” said Gøtzsche. “The only way the FDA could have finished a full analysis of Pfizer’s IPD in 22 days is if they cut corners or they only analysed the aggregated information submitted in the dossier,” he added."Yeah, the lies & cheating is endemic. It's highly likely no vaccine currently on the schedule would ever gain approval if the clinical trials were run properly with scientific integrity. They use tricks like small cohorts, using substances that aren't placebos & call them placebos (for example antibiotics, or adjuvant only controls or other vaccines), they hide harms by combining placebo with control (like in the hpv example in this thread) & other tricks.
2009 Pfizer was fined $2.3 billion for fraud.
https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justice-department-announces-…AstraZeneca plc was fined $500 mill in another fraud,
Moderna was only formed in time for this fiasco so has no fraud history yet !
But they're all pretty decent chaps. For your health.
I've come to the view that fraudulent marketing fine is actually the least of their offenses. It seems sort of a cover for the real fraud which is the manipulation of trial data to hide harms of their products.
Moderna is military. It's the new breed going forward. Seed funded by DARPA & others.
Yes this is much worse.
Sasha Latypova proves all these "countermeasures" are run by the USA DoD! Uncle Sam.https://twitter.com/RealDrJaneRuby/status/180556014968135714…
Curious, would you have an issue with it if they were a small business?
You seemed to be fine with farmers adding poisons to our food so they can make money. You're a person with integrity right?
Omnicron's cousin is here and infecting people right now.
Our bodies contain over 300 trillion different viruses already, another isn't really going to do anything unless your already dying.
another isn't really going to do anything
Volunteering for tribute and put your critical science thinking to the test to with a sample of Ebola or Marburg virus?
That's quite the mental gymnastics right there…………
Another variant is about to hit Australia.
Don't care about yourself, your business but others who cannot get vaccinated for health reasons might die if you infect them.
better safe then sorry.
No Covid vaccine has ever stopped the spreading of Covid.
Not as witless as your other throw away line but still remarkably stupid.
There are lies and there are lies. Yours is one of intentional misleading via deception - or perhaps naive ignorance about how covid vaccines worked and what they could and couldn't do. Fortunately your particular deception will only have fooled people who, like yourself, have yet to get off the starting line of covid knowledge.
No credible medical authority ever suggested covid vaccines would stop transmissionof the sars-cov-2 virus.
What is uncontestable is that covid vaccines aided in transmission and viral load reduction, significantly reduced serious illness and death, and significantly reduced the huge demands on health systems and health professionals. That you don't know this or can't bring yourself to acknowledge it is symptomatic of a self-induced virus of the mind known broadly as ideological blindness.
No credible medical authority ever suggested covid vaccines would stop transmissionof the sars-cov-2 virus.
Again with the misinformation.
"Fauci Confirms ‘Extremely Low’ Risk Of Transmission For Fully Vaccinated" - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AK8OB8wlMGA
"Pfizer and AstraZeneca executive testify that despite advertising they could prevent transmission, no vaccine they released ever had the capacity to prevent the spread and they never even tested if it was a possibility" - https://www.news.com.au/technology/science/human-body/yes-th…
"Fauci says studies suggest vaccines slow virus spread" - https://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-news/looming-question-…
"Fauci Says Johnson & Johnson Covid Vaccine Effective In Preventing Severe Disease" (It was removed from sale due to being both ineffective and how dangerous it was with the life-altering health problems it caused) - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TRqI056-jjQ
"Fauci confident vaccines can 'crush' COVID" - https://www.cbc.ca/radio/whitecoat/fauci-confident-vaccines-…
Every last one of them aged like milk.
@infinite: They use words as weapons. lgaf uses the word "credible" as the get out of jail card. The authorities promoted uptake of the countermeasures in various ways. One was to give the impression that the countermeasures would prevent community spread. They did this by suggesting viral loads were reduced in the injected, that the chance of one transmitting the alleged virus to another was lessened. The studies they relied on for community spread were based on modelling, & the flawed assumptions that underpin virology. All very clever perception management techniques. Later on they pivoted to say it was the best information available at the time.
@mrdean: "Credible" is important in the adult wold where we need to differentiate between useful (real) information and junk analysis, perverted opinion, misinformation, disinformation, misrepresentation, cherry picking, and outright lies. As an egoidtic amatuer promoter of many of the latter it will surprise no-one that you pubicly (but anonymously) shun both credibility and consensus-based "authority" even - as I've previousoy written - you rely on that credible information and authority every day of your life, from birth until death.
consensus-based "authority" even
Ooooh, here we go, "consensus" based authority. Lol.
Here's a couple of statements for you:
There is no credible evidence that any vaccines cause autism.
There is no evidence that any vaccines cause autism.
What's the difference?
It's been interesting watching you go from insults to pivoting to "open your mind", back to insults again.
Hardly anyone brought up in our current medical & scientific education system, starts out as an "anti-vaxxer". The standard default position that is drummed into people from an early age is the "safe & effective" & "vaccines have saved millions of lives" propaganda. No student has the time to question basic assumptions or first principles, they are far too busy memorizing "facts" in textbooks. The result of their years of study is "indoctrination". When these students matriculate they are the "egotistic" ones because they think they know everything. It's only later, sometimes much later when they encounter something that makes them think, that they may start to question what they have been taught. Only some go through this, & if they dig, they invariably discover what they thought they knew & were taught, were basically misrepresentations of the truth. When they try to bring these misrepresentations & untruths to others within the establishment what do you think the response is?
Lol, yes, they become heretics, science deniers, conspiracy theorists, anti-vaxxers, flat earthers & all the other slurs the mainstream & their useful idiots come up with.
@mrdean: You insult adult reason with every post, and frankly deserve every reality check that comes your way. It may come as a shock to you since people usually go out of their way to be kind and appeal to the rationality you and others have locked away, but it ought not if they were blunt as I have been on this insignificant anonymous forum. As many have written for years now, there is no value in appealing to your ilk's intellect becauyse you smply swat away facts, data, and reasoned analysis and opinion and replace it with a perverse, exaggerated, cherry picked reality of your own making. Did I already mention the obvious hypocrisy of your egoistic views and what you unknowingly rely on for your very existence? It's worth repeating. Fwitism as a lauded cult is a modern affliction. How people get there and why they refuse to budge irrespective of reality around them has already been discussed at length by the experts you dismiss. We already know some of the societal effects of such extremism, what we can't predict is where that self-serving me me me disruption will lead if we allow it take take a foothold.
will lead if we allow it take take a foothold.
Yes, scientific & technological fascism will protect us all, the humble & learned priests of science & business will ensure misinformation is stomped out forever, There will be no debates allowed, no questioning of established "truths", for this will give credence to views that are simply un-credence-able.
“The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command.” George Orwell, 1984
@mrdean: More childish, extremist garbage. Your self-awareness is astonishingly poor, but even that is not a surprise. It's another trait of people who embrace cults such as those you endorse here. You rail against lack of debate, accountability, honesty etc yet your posts are riddled with examples which themsleves demonstrate the polar opposite is true. Most people with basic intelligence and learning know how science and knowledge advances, they accept the limitations and human frailty and trust that the system you think is corrupt beyond redemption will limit damage, right wrongs and ensure ultimate accountability. Ironically, fwitism cult members never hold themselves to the same standards of perfection they demand of others. Again, that is unsurprising.
You might want to ask someone with balance and knowledge to expalin what Orwell's message was in 1984. Misrepresenting his message as condoning the sort of behaviour your ilk indulges in is at best ignorant and at worst contemptible.
they accept the limitations
You know what's really sad professor?
In a previous reply where you called the quotes from Fletcher's introduction to Callous Disregard "nonsense", you then proceeded to rely on post-safety authorisation surveillance systems to "prove" that vaccines are "safe".
In that reply of yours there was zero mention of any "limitations" of such systems. That's the real irony. You should be aware there are plenty of course, such as data quality & capturing of adverse event numbers, & yet you & the authorities love to quote them when it supports your position of vaccine safety. But when others use the same systems & show harms, all of a sudden it flips to the surveillance systems being unreliable, only used to detect "safety signals" & them being unable to prove "causation".
But of course, for you to acknowledge those "limitations" would of meant you had zero argument against Fletcher's points which were about pre-licensure vaccine safety studies, so you couldn't. You fell back on that argument because there was nowhere else for you to go.
@mrdean: Your memory shot or your comprehension still in grade 1? I've mentioned scientifc limitations many times - not that it should need mentioning because most educated adults understand that scientific knowledge - especially medical - is always advancing, often as a result of "trial and error" (hence clinical trails mrnit/cherrypicker). Those who hadn't given any thought to the proceses involved - you and millions of others - MAY have learned a little during the recent deadly pandemic, As data were collected and analysed and risks assessed, so advice was modified.
The little piece of Fletcher's views you quoted may or may not represent his broad views. That said it was a simple job for an amateur to pick holes in his statements, which were based on HINDSIGHT.
I don't have to rely on "post-safety authorisation safety systems - whatever that means in your quaint world - I understand the complexity of the tasks drug companies were asked to perform, the absolute time-critical nature of the solutions often being sought, and the risk/reward ratio involved. Apparently there's no coming back from death.
By reading widely during the covid pandemic I also came to understand the enormous complexities involved in trying to understand and mitigate individual responses to the vaccines being developed. Unlike you I also accepted that there were risks involved, just as there are with every medication. We were fortunate in this country because of our relative isolation, and because we could draw on good data from the UK in particular.
not that it should need mentioning because most educated adults
"Educated adults" should know the difference between vaccine efficacy & vaccine effectiveness. Sorry comrade, you lost credibility when you couldn't distinguish between the two.
I don't have to rely on "post-safety authorisation safety systems - whatever that means in your quaint world -
Yeah you do, pharmacovigilance, adverse event safety reporting systems, like DAENS, VAERS etc, you know those "robust" systems that detect safety signals. It's what you responded with in regards to Fletcher's quotes. Ooooh, there's advancing knowledge, a reassessment when the (garbage) data gets manipulated to the desired conclusion that supports "safe & effective". I shouldn't lol, because it's tragic what's happening.
@mrdean: Old computing saying - garbage in, garbage out. Very apt in your case.
We've already dealt with your conspiracy theory mindset, which tars everyone with the same brush and tells you emphatically that nothing and no-one can be trusted. We've already covered the huge disconnect between that unreality and how you so easily accept data and opinion which fits your puerile narrtives, and how in fact your life relies on the "garbage" expertise you denigrate. It's hardly surprising that the same traits emerge in your posts on a regular basis.
@infinite: Your command of your presumably native language is as abysmal as your knowledge of covid and vaccines. STOPPING disease - as vaccination has done with smallpox as your extremist mate here now knows - is totally different thing to reducing/limiting transmission and its flow on effects. This is yet another elementary thing you'd know (if not comprehend) if you bothered to educate yourself on the basics.
So, you EITHER intentionally wrote STOPPED transmission - because as even some of your ilk knows (from data you believe only when it's convenient) vaccines werent capable of preventing transmission, just as flu vaccines aren't, OR your ideologically-induced ignorance keeps telling you that's what authorities said. The latter is highly likely because it's evident that you weren't listening or perhaps weren't capable of understanding the message. To wit the first link you posted above. I doubt Fauci could have been much clearer about why symptoms and transmission are reduced but since thinking is beyond your pay level I'll help you out with two words you can google to your heart's content - VIRAL LOAD. Was Fauci - who has nothing at all to do with this country - optiistic about vaccine transmission rates? Possibly but given the point of his message was about the importance and efficacy of vaccination, getting into long-winded techncal expalantions about how viruses mutate, how individual's bodies behave differently, how basic things such as masks and sanitizing were also critical would have no doubt confused some of his audience and diluted his message. If that was his reasoning then even years on this thread shows just how right he was.
Every last one of them aged like milk.
How's the covid epidemic travelling now? You dont think it's largely been crushed in most countries due to vaccines and related health authority actions? Of course you don't, even though anecdotally the evidence is all around you AND a mountain of data and statistical analysis says covid-19 is now FAR less deadly, and can be managed in a similar way to serious influenze outbreaks.
Fortunately you don't need to exercise that latent grey matter of yours to answer those questions. You COULD (if you had any real interest in facts) consult the huge array of data sets and anlysis already available, the same datsets you apparently didn't know existed when your wrote your bumf about unvaccinated countries. If you bother to consult the data (JHU, OWID, UKHSA etc) there's even more good news for you on the spoonfed front. You don't have to wade through the data, you can chart a huge array of it using criteria already available, compare countries, watch timed graph lines of outbreaks, deaths etc. You can even learn about the caveats and limitations of the data you're looking at, and in doing so activate some more of that underused frontal lobe we all possess.
To wit the first link you posted above. I doubt Fauci could have been much clearer about why symptoms and transmission are reduced but since thinking is beyond your pay level I'll help you out with two words you can google to your heart's content - VIRAL LOAD. Was Fauci - who has nothing at all to do with this country - optiistic about vaccine transmission rates?
From the link posted by infinite (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AK8OB8wlMGA0 From around 8.10 to 8.35
Graphic on screen: “The CDC guidelines are essentially implying that the risk that the vaccinated will transmit the virus to others, including their unvaccinated children, is so vanishingly low that it is not worth worrying about.”
Chris: “…..if you’re vaccinated, you really don’t need to worry about getting it in a way that’s serious or transmitting it.”
Fauci: “That is true. That is correct, Chris.”
@mrdean: What part of my previous comment on that did you not understand mrcherrypicker? Did we not cover messaging previously?
You presumably understand that transmission agents are almost impossible to track accurately let alone quantify /s and why that's the case? You SHOULD already know about vaccine efficacy in reducing serious illness and death and might be able to imagine how VIRAL LOAD plays a part there, although I very much doubt you'll ever admit that to yourself let alone on a public forum.
You SHOULD already know about vaccine efficacy in reducing serious illness and death
But professor, vaccine efficacy is a calculation that refers to clinical trial results.
https://www.who.int/news-room/feature-stories/detail/vaccine…
Did you mean vaccine "effectiveness"?
STOPPING disease - as vaccination has done with smallpox as your extremist mate here now knows
The vaccination question in the light of modern experience: an appeal for reconsideration.
C Killick Millard MD, D.Sc 1914
Medical Officer of Health for Leicester
Medical Superintendent of the Isolation & Smallpox Hospitals Leicester
Formerly Medical Officer of Health for Burton-on-Trent
Medical Superintendent of the Birmingham City Hospitals
preface pag viii“For forty years, corresponding roughly with the advent of the “sanitary era,” smallpox has gradually but steadily been leaving this country (England). For the past ten years the disease has ceased to have any appreciable effect upon our mortality statistics. For most of that period it has been entirely absent except for a few isolated outbreaks here and there. It is reasonable to believe that with the perfecting and more general adoption of modern methods of control and with improved sanitation (using the term in the widest sense) smallpox will be completely banished from this country as has been the case with plague, cholera, and typhus fever. Accompanying this decline in smallpox there has been a notable diminution during the past decade in the amount of infantile vaccination. This falling off in vaccination is steadily increasing and is becoming very widespread.”
@mrdean: But but but,,, acording to you there's no room for dissent and contrary opinions in medical science /s.
There's an obvious flaw in his argument which you've no doubt already divined - more on that later.
Are you seriously suggesting his considered, expert view is similar to, or somehow justifies, your own ignorant one size fits all extremism?
While you're exercising the functional grey matter can you explain why ATAGI's advice on covid vaccination for children (and other specific age groups) varied with time?
Are you seriously suggesting his considered, expert view is similar to, or somehow justifies, your own ignorant one size fits all extremism?
Lol, extremism. Anything to avoid the facts. Here's Millard's first paragraph:
“It is now eighteen years since the Royal Commission on Vaccination issued its Final Report. Since then, little or no attempt has been made seriously to review the Vaccination Question in the light of the experience gained in recent years. much has been learned and some things have been unlearned. Moreover, almost every writer, hitherto, has approached this question from the point of view of either the pro-vaccinist or the anti-vaccinist. The present writer has endeavoured to take up an entirely independent stand point. He has not been concerned either to defend or to attack vaccination and he has, therefore, felt quite at liberty to use any argument that appeared to him, after mature consideration, to be sound, irrespective of whether it told in favour of or against vaccination. At the same time he believes that the case he is presenting will be found logical and consistent, neither lacking in colour nor devoid of definite conclusions.”
Yeah chum, there's logic, facts & reason in that book, as well as some pretty pictures & graphs.
@mrdean: Still claiming his views mirror yours? Your ego and lack of intellectual honesty have no bounds do they?
So what was the obvious flaw in his opinion I hear you ask /s? Well as you're no doubt aware he assumed he could mitigate the pain and suffering of unvaxxed smallpox victims, and possibly prevent death in every case of unvaccinated exposure. He didn't have a good statistical basis for making those leaps of faith and instead relied on his own anecdotal experience. In lieu of simple, proven vaccination he instead relied on the fact that a large majority of people had already been vaccinated and so the disease was unlikely to spread widely or quickly, as it did when millions died pre-vax, I can feel the disturbance in your ether from here as it dawns on you that we've just been through a similar - but different for obvious reasons - experience with covid. I'll leave you to work out what the similarities and differences were, and how our authorities dealt with covid advice using a massive amount of statistical data.
Wrt your claiming of Millard as a fellow skeptic (you're FAR more extreme than that, he far less, as we'll now see) this might be of interest.
"It was on the question of vaccination and smallpox that Killick Millard made his most distinctive stand. Controversially, the Borough of Leicester had openly abandoned the national policy of infant vaccination 15 years before he went there as MOH, yet soon after his arrival there were several outbreaks of smallpox which these were controlled without difficulty. It was because of this experience that Millard felt compelled to modify his previously orthodox views about vaccination. He expounded his theory in a course of lectures given under the auspices of the Chadwick Trust, and these he afterwards published in book form in 1914 under the title The Vaccination Question in the Light of Modern Experience. He was convinced of the value of vaccination in protecting infants, and gave a practical demonstration of his faith in the power of vaccination by taking his wife and two young children -all recently vaccinated-into the smallpox hospital and photographing them by the bedside of a severely diseased patient. He was, however, against compulsory infant vaccination, and against mass vaccination as a means to control outbreaks of the disease, arguing that the evidence showed that the vaccination of all contacts was sufficient."
The contrast between his and your position - philosophically, intellectually and societally is stark. That you and your ilk pervert the truth and sully the names of others in order to justify your extreme views is a disgrace.
That you and your ilk pervert the truth and sully the names of others in order to justify your extreme views is a disgrace.
That's hilarious coming from someone who doesn't even bother to cite the source from which that quote was, to use a term you commonly insult others with, "cherry picked". That's the disgrace.
I'll cite it for you though: https://www.leicesterlitandphil.org.uk/1917-charles-killick-…
I had hoped you would of at least bother to read the preface of his book, which I linked to, but clearly you didn't. In the preface, indeed, Millard confirms that he was pro-vaccine: "He accepts the protective influence of vaccination on the individual as absolutely proven, & starts with this proposition as axiomatic." I was waiting for you to quote that from the original source, as it supports your position, but no, you google-fu'ed & came up with that leicesterlitandphil third party webpage.
Your insults & attempts to put words in my mouth about claiming Millard as a "fellow skeptic" truly are shameless. At least I put out links to both sides, so that people can educate themselves, if they choose to do so.
@mrdean: You didn't put out links to both sides at all, you attempted to purloin his knowledge to justify your own extreme views, which as I said, is disgraceful. Not only did you do that but you did it without giving even the slightest thought to the risks involved in his strategy - risks he might have managed with the help of previous vaccinations but which would have been totally irresponsible with a highly tramsmissible and deadly virus like sars-cov-2. Extremism, ego and lack of intellect are dangerous bedfellows as your posts regularly attest.
it has.. there are few break through cases but for most part the vax stopped the virus spread
currently Flirt is spreading… don't care about yourself. your business.
care about others.
but for most part the vax stopped the virus spread
I believe you of course, would you be able to cite some evidence for this though? Just to keep the antivaxxers here quiet.
@glennski: Anecdotally I know ten people who didn't spread the virus after being vaccinated, 100% of the sample. None died or was hospilatised, again proving that covid vaccines are 100% effective /s. Given your comments here surely that's good enough for you.
There is no medical science or expert data analysis which will convince your ilk of anything, unless you think it supports your anti-vax views of course.
@Igaf: Anecdotally I know ten people who did spread the virus after being vaccinated, 100% of the sample. All had adverse events, again proving that covid vaccines are not 100% effective. Given your comments here surely that's good enough for you.
There is no medical science or expert data analysis which will convince your ilk of anything, unless you think it supports your pro vax views of course.
@glennski: No prizes for second place pal, although they do say that imitation is the sincerest form a flattery. That said, flattery from your ilk has as much value as a used toilet roll.
@Igaf: Stay mad buddy. And great use of the word 'ilk'! Can you make it a hat trick?
Off topic but have you had a chance to pick up a copy of https://www.amazon.com.au/Chancing-Laws-Chance-They-Work/dp/… yet?
Hard to believe an infectious disease specialist would say this, but then again I am not surprised:
"Dr Leong Hoe Nam, an infectious disease specialist at Mount Elizabeth Novena Hospital in Singapore, sheds light on this perspective by comparing regular Covid-19 booster shots to updating our mobile phones. “Keeping our vaccinations current is akin to updating your mobile phone’s operating system regularly. We update our phone operating system regularly. With each update, the body is better protected against other viruses and malware. With the same reasoning, you need to be updated with the latest vaccine,” explained Dr Leong."
https://codeblue.galencentre.org/2024/07/10/getting-updated-…
Humans & animals are now viewed by our overlords as requiring regular "upgrades" to keep us functioning & protected.
- 1
- 2
Inb4 deleted for spam: in Australia you can get up to 10 mental health appointments under an MHTP, ask your GP!