IOM Covid removing restrictions

[Roger Mexico]

40 minutes ago, offshoremanxman said:

That’s a theoretical supposition based on something that never happened. 

The line immediately before the bit you quoted was: This is what happened in the UK in early 2021.  We were lucky we could isolate.  Even a goldfish would have remembered that!

[offshoremanxman]

5 minutes ago, Roger Mexico said:

The line immediately before the bit you quoted was: This is what happened in the UK in early 2021.  We were lucky we could isolate.  Even a goldfish would have remembered that!

Well goldfish move on, unlike your good self. 

[quaylaM]

14 hours ago, Roger Mexico said:

No it wasn't and it saved a lot of lives.  Before most of the population were vaccinated, if Covid got into a population, the health service was overwhelmed and many died.  This is what happened in the UK in early 2021.  We were lucky we could isolate.

I actually think both you and wrighty are wrong to not take up the latest booster.  The data we have suggest that boosters help protect against infection and that they do so a bit better than prior infection.  (Both may be even better, but that means you have to have had the inconvenience of catching Covid).  The latest vaccines are also claimed to have increased protection against Omicron.

 

Your statement that ‘lockdowns saved lives' is nonsense. That draconian policy had never been widely used in the West before, not only for human rights reasons but because it is obvious that sick people stay at home and therefore do not present a contagion risk. We are now experiencing the effects of lockdown, not only on people's mental health but on our economy - which will ultimately do far more harm than any flu-like virus.

 

Your suggestion that yet another so-called ‘booster’, ie; more unknown and unproven mRNA and chemicals, will provide any human being with better ‘protection’ than natural immunity is risible.

[forestboy]

20 minutes ago, quaylaM said:

 

Your statement that ‘lockdowns saved lives' is nonsense. That draconian policy had never been widely used in the West before, not only for human rights reasons but because it is obvious that sick people stay at home and therefore do not present a contagion risk. We are now experiencing the effects of lockdown, not only on people's mental health but on our economy - which will ultimately do far more harm than any flu-like virus.

 

Your suggestion that yet another so-called ‘booster’, ie; more unknown and unproven mRNA and chemicals, will provide any human being with better ‘protection’ than natural immunity is risible.

You are talking nonsense. 

[quaylaM]

Rather than rubbish any comment I make, below is a link to Dr John Campbell’s latest video, where he talks about SARS COV2 and natural immunity - he mentions the counter-productiveness of ‘lockdowns’ at minute 17:

 

https://youtu.be/EaSU2mfNrIg

 

Dr Campbell’s 'journey’ is interesting as he gained a huge following on Youtube during the pandemic as a result of his no-nonsense and factual perspective - he was initially a vaccine and lockdown advocate. However, over the last 2 years, in the light of increasingly concerning evidence of vaccine injury - as evidenced by VAERS and others data - he has so radically changed his position that he is now being warned by Youtube. He hasn’t changed his position as a result of any ‘anti-vax’ dogma but because of the growing evidence that all is not well.

 

A similar ‘journey’ has been followed by many, many medical professionals who have had the intelligence and curiosity to follow the evidence, rather than what we are all told ad infinitum by government and media - latterly by noted cardiologist Dr Aseem Malhotra. Dr Malhotra was initially a vaccine advocate, being featured on ITV’s ‘Good Morning’ program to encourage us to ‘get vaxxed’. However, like many other well-qualified medical professionals, has woken-up to the harms that have been caused by the 'vaccine’ and is now challenging the narrative that has been peddled to us by government and the media. Dr Malhotra recently gave a well-attended talk titled "Has big pharma hijacked evidence based medicine?” - Lancet medical journal comment below. The question mark was unnecessary though - the UK MHRA acknowledges the majority of its’ funding comes from the pharma industry, the same is true in the US and the Australian regulator recently acknowledged that 85% of its’ funding comes from the pharma industry. The reality is that every aspect of our so-called health system has been dominated by the drug companies, which was no doubt why increasing our natural immunity was never mentioned as a response to the covid virus.

 

I sincerely hope that anyone reading this who is considering another ‘booster’ will look at what these professionals are now saying before taking that route.

 

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(22)02413-8/fulltext

[kevster]

16 hours ago, offshoremanxman said:

Now even after it’s all ending you still can’t get a doctors appointment for two weeks

Just looked on the Patient Access app and I could get an appointment Monday morning if I wanted to

[HeliX]

15 hours ago, Gladys said:

It is a contentious topic, but you have to consider what should be basic healthcare. 

All of it, indiscriminately.

[HeliX]

1 hour ago, quaylaM said:

sick people stay at home and therefore do not present a contagion risk

Have you ever met people?

[quaylaM]

9 minutes ago, HeliX said:

Have you ever met people?

The pros and cons of lockdowns examined below:

https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/15/9295

[HeliX]

3 minutes ago, quaylaM said:

The pros and cons of lockdowns examined below:

https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/15/9295

That wasn't the question. People go out sick all the time. They go to work sick, they send their kids to nursery/school sick.

[Gladys]

21 minutes ago, HeliX said:

All of it, indiscriminately.

Ideally, yes, but that will cost in more ways than financially. 

[quaylaM]

19 hours ago, Roger Mexico said:

No it wasn't and it saved a lot of lives.  Before most of the population were vaccinated, if Covid got into a population, the health service was overwhelmed and many died.  This is what happened in the UK in early 2021.  We were lucky we could isolate.

I actually think both you and wrighty are wrong to not take up the latest booster.  The data we have suggest that boosters help protect against infection and that they do so a bit better than prior infection.  (Both may be even better, but that means you have to have had the inconvenience of catching Covid).  The latest vaccines are also claimed to have increased protection against Omicron.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-11485347/Britain-didnt-need-boosters-says-Covid-tsar-Sir-John-Bell.html

[John Wright]

8 minutes ago, quaylaM said:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-11485347/Britain-didnt-need-boosters-says-Covid-tsar-Sir-John-Bell.html

Didn’t need is very different to not entirely convinced.

Didn't need is south of 50% by a long way. Not entirely convinced is not quite 100%. So 90%?

[swoopy2110]

14 minutes ago, quaylaM said:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-11485347/Britain-didnt-need-boosters-says-Covid-tsar-Sir-John-Bell.html

"Asked what the latest evidence showed on the effectiveness of boosters, Sir John said: 'All three of the original vaccines — the AstraZeneca vaccine and the two mRNA vaccines — have been unbelievably effective at eliminating that really dreadful disease that caused so many deaths early on."

You missed out that bit from your argument.

[wrighty]

37 minutes ago, quaylaM said:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-11485347/Britain-didnt-need-boosters-says-Covid-tsar-Sir-John-Bell.html

Thanks for sharing.  Not much in that article I disagree with, except the wording of the headline.  As it appears you haven't read it, I'll summarise:

 

• The initial vaccine programme was incredibly effective at preventing serious covid illness
• Elderly and vulnerable individuals may benefit from annual boosters
• The young and fit/healthy probably are just as well occasionally getting a mild covid illness

He doesn't say anything about there being a massive realisation that vaccines are dangerous, and that we're all going to die, or that Pfizer are guilty of crimes against humanity, which seems to be your usual narrative.