Make It Difficult for People in Their Lives and They Get Vaccinated

During a House Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus hearing Monday, Rep. Rich McCormick (R-GA) questioned Dr. Fauci on a statement on vaccine requirements he made during a recorded interview.

Video Source

“It’s been proven that when you make it difficult for people in their lives, they lose their ideological bullshit, and they get vaccinated.” Official Quote by Anthony Stephen Fauci

Note: When Fauci says proven, he is clearly referring to the science behind psychological manipulating the public. He says he is a man of science, so people should hold him to that.

Just a few years ago Fauci was crowning himself as the "King of Science". This includes the famous quote where he stated that if you disagree with him, you are disagreeing with science.

It might be your first time hearing these shocking comments by Fauci, but this is him behind the mask.

So what does it mean for Australia?

Undoubtedly these same types of scientific types of people that rise to the top of bureaucratic government positions all over the world. I suspect that this is because most people they grow up in school and they think science is easy. Students just repeat what is in the textbook and they score high marks because they can regurgitate facts and memorise a formula. By the way if you didn't realise, that is not real science and just shows how poorly structured the current educational system is as it emphasises the regurgitation of facts.

People forget the Therapeutic Goods Administration is not an independent organisation. There is nothing special about the people inside that organisation, maybe they learned a few extra years of some topic at university and I hope they at least are at a standard to which they have written a thesis which is basically a long essay on a specialised topic. Some thesis papers are absolutely garbage in my opinion. But most importantly it reveals that these types of people are just ordinary people. They are just government workers to be more specific. They know very little and more critically they especially know nothing about a new pandemic. They know nothing more than the average citizen. Governments should not be given the right to control how people behave in a pandemic.

The problem is this lack of knowledge is not just constrained to scientists, but humans in general. I have met many barristers and solicitors, even former judges. Believe it or not sometimes cannot even recall the facts of a case I mention or recall key legislation in their field of expertise after a bit of uhm and ahing. If you told me if I remembered some facts of an obscure case I would probably tell you, "I am not sure myself, I believe it was something involving some type of snail-like object in the bottle, but I would not commit myself to that". However, you will often notice that because of the immunity granted to bureaucrats that they will not be frank and honest with you about what they don't know. This is why you cannot trust the government.

This is why it is my opinion that the public should focus on replacing government with uncensored artificial intelligence. People should not be scared of it. This is the reality that faces us and I don't see why the public puts so much emphasis on the government to protect its citizens when it is basically not well equipped to do any such thing. For example, the government cannot represent the people properly because the number of representatives does not account for the growth in the population. Even if representation somehow worked at the time when the Constitution was written, it clearly no longer functions as it was intended to. Has the number of senators and representatives increased by 7x in line with population growth? No it has not, representation has gone backwards to a tune of 7x. Even if you believed the government worked for the good of the people, you cannot deny that the representation has been watered down so much. I am not saying that would fix the issues immediately as there are core problems with the existence of government.

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.

Bill Gates is a kind of famous oracle and he states that another type of pandemic will happen again. Time and time again his predictions/wisdom ironically seems to come true. Apparently the cusp of another Bird Flu Pandemic is here.

Ask yourself: Are you going to make the same choices next time?

Would you honestly take another experimental bird flu vaccine?

Comments

                      • @Chandler:

                        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.

                  • +2

                    @Chandler:

                    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…

                      • -2

                        @Chandler:

                        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.

                      • @EightImmortals:

                        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?

            • @infinite:

              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?

        • +1

          You can consider them experimental. Doesn’t make them so.

          • +2

            @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.

      • +3

        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.

    • +4

      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.

    • +1

      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 suggest

      • +6

        lol 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?

    • +5

      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.

    • +1

      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.

      • +6

        Assuming they want to hear it, there's a lot of censorship happening with this topic.

      • +1

        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…

    • +2

      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

    • +4

      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).

      • +1

        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.

    • +3

      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.

    • +1

      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

  • +98

    So THIS is what happens to your brain when you don't turn off "autoplay" on YouTube!

    • +39

      And when you don't have a job and can just dribble words on the internet…

    • Algorithms gonna algorithm…

  • +94

    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…

    • +4

      Written by Chat GPT itself.

    • +2

      I'll be back

    • +3

      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.

  • +10

    ok

    • -2

      Pulls out the popcorn.

      Move on people.

      Seems Darwinism missed a few.

      • +1

        This is referring to OP.

  • +10

    what the

  • +1

    Ok and? Next time when a pandemic happens, just make it difficult then people will get vaccinated. Got ya!

  • -6

    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.

  • +57

    OP's post and comment history shows the account was only made to voice their agenda. FFS.

    • +13

      I thought it was the voices in their head arguing that was spilling on to the keyboard.

    • +2

      Doesn't look that way to me, but I suppose one never knows.

      • +16

        exhibit A
        exhibit B
        exhibit C
        exhibit D

        Shall I add the rest for you?

        • -1

          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.

          • +2

            @mrdean:

            which started around late May

            That’s when OP must have had their shot

        • +3

          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.

  • +50

    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.

      • +30

        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 vaccines molecular biology epidemiology philosophy. 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.

        • -1

          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.

          • +6

            @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).

            • @freefall101:

              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.

              • +1

                @mrdean:

                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.

                • @freefall101:

                  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.

                  • +4

                    @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?

                    • @freefall101:

                      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.

                      • @mrdean:

                        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?

                        • +1

                          @freefall101:

                          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?

                    • @freefall101:

                      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.

    • +16

      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.

        • +8

          Is Jones right about Sandy Hook?

          As for the other two points… Yeah, nah.

          • -6

            @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

            • +11

              @mrdean: No thanks. I prefer to keep my youtube recommendations free from nutjob conspiracies.

              • -1

                @fatpizza: I'm not sure how a 3 minute clip of a legal deposition qualifies as nutjob conspiracies, but whatever.

        • +7

          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.

    • +5

      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.

      • +1

        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.

      • +7

        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.

        • +10

          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.

          • +5

            @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.

              • +5

                @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.

                • +5

                  @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.

                  • +8

                    @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.

                    • +1

                      @Mad Max:

                      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.

                      • -1

                        @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!

                        • +3

                          @Mad Max: I did decline the Astra Zeneca for the reasons you mention, and no black helicopters started following me, nobody forced anything.

                      • +1

                        @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

                  • +3

                    @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.

      • +5

        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 years

      • +12

        Now do it as death rate per 1000 of population so you have a more statistically useful comparison.

        Perhaps also one including average population age?
        A

        Crude and standardised death rates per year should get you there.

      • +2

        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

      • +1

        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.

      • +3

        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 ? ?

        • Covid vaccines may have contributed to rise in excess deaths,researchers suggest

          • @SteveD: They did not. You are basing your opinion on the misreading of the article by Murdoch media.

        • +4

          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?

  • +57

    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.

    • +6

      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…..

    • +18

      Glad I got my shots, as 3G will total shut down this year. Now I have great 5G.

      • +5

        After 2nd shot my 5G improved a lot…

Login or Join to leave a comment