IOM Covid removing restrictions

[Thereisnt]

40 minutes ago, wrighty said:

These are out by a factor of 10x, so probably accurate in a vaccinated group. In my view that’s an argument for vaccination rather than against. 

You may, or may not, be right - the figures I quoted were from a summary of Dr Ioannidis’ study. Link to full study below:

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10654-021-00787-9

 

My partner for some years was a sales manager for Pfizer - I/we didn’t know then what we know now. I accompanied him on numerous ‘dinners with doctors’ - bribes essentially - and was usually surprised, sometimes shocked, by how naive and gullible these young, and not so young, men and women were and how readily they ‘bought’ what the drug manufacturers told them, usually without question. I usually avoided the elaborate and ‘generous’ foreign junkets Pfizer and others would offer all in the medical profession, but few declined their luxurious ‘holidays’ - they were called ‘conferences’ of course. There they would hear facts and tosh - hard to distinguish which was which - from their highly paid consultants which they readily lapped up. Perhaps you’ve been in receipt of some such hospitality yourself.

 

What is certain is that if you are still pushing the ‘vaccine’ - stats now showing one adverse reaction in 800 doses (accurate numbers, never previously seen/allowed in any previous program) - you are either ignorant, gullible or a fraud. Which it is will no doubt be clear soon enough.

[TheTeapot]

9 minutes ago, Thereisnt said:

You may, or may not, be right - the figures I quoted were from a summary of Dr Ioannidis’ study. Link to full study below:

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10654-021-00787-9

 

 

Interestingly, Ioannidis is best known for writing an essay called "Why Most Published Research Findings Are False"

[Thereisnt]

8 minutes ago, TheTeapot said:

Interestingly, Ioannidis is best known for writing an essay called "Why Most Published Research Findings Are False"

Indeed - a thoughtful man. One would hope that armed with that knowledge he will have made extra effort to ensure his own work bucks that trend. Reading his paper, what little I understood, that would seem to be the case. If only the mugs pushing the vaccines were so diligent.

[AcousticallyChallenged]

44 minutes ago, Thereisnt said:

You may, or may not, be right - the figures I quoted were from a summary of Dr Ioannidis’ study. Link to full study below:

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10654-021-00787-9

 

My partner for some years was a sales manager for Pfizer - I/we didn’t know then what we know now. I accompanied him on numerous ‘dinners with doctors’ - bribes essentially - and was usually surprised, sometimes shocked, by how naive and gullible these young, and not so young, men and women were and how readily they ‘bought’ what the drug manufacturers told them, usually without question. I usually avoided the elaborate and ‘generous’ foreign junkets Pfizer and others would offer all in the medical profession, but few declined their luxurious ‘holidays’ - they were called ‘conferences’ of course. There they would hear facts and tosh - hard to distinguish which was which - from their highly paid consultants which they readily lapped up. Perhaps you’ve been in receipt of some such hospitality yourself.

 

What is certain is that if you are still pushing the ‘vaccine’ - stats now showing one adverse reaction in 800 doses (accurate numbers, never previously seen/allowed in any previous program) - you are either ignorant, gullible or a fraud. Which it is will no doubt be clear soon enough.

Companies host conferences? I might faint at the sheer shock of it.

Have you actually got a breakdown of these 1 in 800?

1 in 800 sore arms is a lot different to 1 in 800 cases of more serious conditions.

Per the UK Gov, the current rate of yellow cards is 2 to 5 yellow cards reported. Note: that does not mean serious adverse effects. 

Also note: “For all COVID-19 vaccines, the overwhelming majority of reports relate to injection-site reactions (sore arm for example) and generalised symptoms such as ‘flu-like’ illness, headache, chills, fatigue (tiredness), nausea (feeling sick), fever, dizziness, weakness, aching muscles, and rapid heartbeat. Generally, these happen shortly after the vaccination and are not associated with more serious or lasting illness.”

[WTF]

16 minutes ago, AcousticallyChallenged said:

Companies host conferences? I might faint at the sheer shock of it.

Have you actually got a breakdown of these 1 in 800?

1 in 800 sore arms is a lot different to 1 in 800 cases of more serious conditions.

Per the UK Gov, the current rate of yellow cards is 2 to 5 yellow cards reported. Note: that does not mean serious adverse effects. 

Also note: “For all COVID-19 vaccines, the overwhelming majority of reports relate to injection-site reactions (sore arm for example) and generalised symptoms such as ‘flu-like’ illness, headache, chills, fatigue (tiredness), nausea (feeling sick), fever, dizziness, weakness, aching muscles, and rapid heartbeat. Generally, these happen shortly after the vaccination and are not associated with more serious or lasting illness.”

the dead people aren't filling out forms though are they.

[Roger Mexico]

54 minutes ago, TheTeapot said:

Interestingly, Ioannidis is best known for writing an essay called "Why Most Published Research Findings Are False"

Of course people then pointed out that his paper was one of them.  The Wiki article has a good summary of the debate. The most important point was that he used a theoretical model:

Biostatisticians Jager and Leek criticized the model as being based on justifiable but arbitrary assumptions rather than empirical data, and did an investigation of their own which calculated that the false positive rate in biomedical studies was estimated to be around 14%, not over 50% as Ioannidis asserted.

But 14% is still too high and though Ioannidis' paper was generally seen as over-dramatic and exaggerated, it did help boost what was already an important debate about publication bias, promotional bias and the replication crisis.

[AcousticallyChallenged]

28 minutes ago, WTF said:

the dead people aren't filling out forms though are they.

Didn’t you know, Mystic Meg spends all day contacting them for the yellow card reports.

In all seriousness, the yellow card system does actually record fatalities too. 

[When Skies are Grey V2]

Climate lockdowns will be next

 

*Dons tin foil hat......

[Thereisnt]

On 1/1/2023 at 12:54 PM, wrighty said:

These are out by a factor of 10x, so probably accurate in a vaccinated group. In my view that’s an argument for vaccination rather than against. 

Geert Vanden Bossche from 2021 - lo and behold it has come to pass...

"Mass vaccination campaigns conducted in the middle of a viral pandemic will, for generations to come, become the most sobering example of the boundaries of human intervention in nature in general and of the boundaries of conventional vaccinology in particular. This irrational experiment will unambiguously highlight the clear-cut limitations of conventional vaccine approaches. It will convincingly illustrate that – unlike natural acute self-limiting infection or disease – ‘modern’ technologies alone do not suffice to develop vaccines that are capable of preventing viral transmission or immune escape. For that matter, even ‘modern’ vaccines will not allow conventional B or T cell-directed antigens to generate herd immunity when massively administered in the heat of a pandemic of a highly mutable virus.

Because of the disastrous consequences the current mass vaccination campaign will entail, I cannot imagine that the word ‘vaccine’ will continue to persist in the medical vade-mecum. In order to highlight the short-comings of all vaccines eliciting conventional B- or T cell-centered immune responses I propose to coin a new term for these vaccines and refer to them as ‘conditionally immune protection-inducing formulations’ (CIPIFs).

While the word ‘vaccine’ may be banned, the word ‘fact checker’ will only gain traction as a general term used for any scientifically illiterate person who uses arrogance to vilify those who speak the truth and promotes – in exchange for dirty money – a narrative and groupthink mentality that are merely inspired by the interests of the stakeholders they blindly support.

For lack of insight, international and public health authorities will continue to blame lack of success on the more infectious variants and propose (impose?) boosters as a never-ending strategy to chasing new emerging variants. This should ring a bell to people and make them understand that the mass vaccination program is nothing else but a big experiment. For how much longer is the public going to believe the treacherous narrative? One can only hope that more and more people will begin to realize that the outcome of this experiment is being evaluated on a purely empirical basis and fully unpredictable, at least in the mind of those who’re overstepping their competence and authority to impose vaccine mandates on never-ending booster shots and thereby trample on human rights while humiliating independent scientists who fight back with rational arguments out of passion for the truth. Only a mind that has lost its grasp on reality can fail to see how pathetic all this has become…."

Geert Vanden Bossche, (DVM, PhD)

 

https://nulluslocussinegenio.com/2021/09/13/why-mass-vaccinations-prolong-and-make-epidemics-deadlier-real-vaccine-expert-calls-out-flawed-government-pandemic-strategy

[Apple]

On 12/29/2022 at 7:47 PM, thommo2010 said:

The media have got bored of Ukraine so I'd expect a scare campaign involving covid to pop up. In years to come people will look back and be amazed at the lengths we went to in 2020

Masks are being advocated in the UK again for flu etc.

Is there anywhere here on the island we can get PPE stuff if we need it again?

[Thereisnt]

17 minutes ago, Apple said:

Masks are being advocated in the UK again for flu etc.

Is there anywhere here on the island we can get PPE stuff if we need it again?

Barrow loads on Finch Rd apparently

[Banker]

7 hours ago, Apple said:

Masks are being advocated in the UK again for flu etc.

Is there anywhere here on the island we can get PPE stuff if we need it again?

You can buy masks etc in most chemist shops, I’ve still got a load from last lockdown but not planning on using yet 

[AcousticallyChallenged]

8 hours ago, Thereisnt said:

While the word ‘vaccine’ may be banned, the word ‘fact checker’ will only gain traction as a general term used for any scientifically illiterate person who uses arrogance to vilify those who speak the truth and promotes – in exchange for dirty money – a narrative and groupthink mentality that are merely inspired by the interests of the stakeholders they blindly support.

There is a wild, and stark irony here. 

You, yourself, have freely admitted that you don’t understand a lot of at least one of the papers you have cited in your debate. So, how can you discern between the good science and the bad? Or those simply writing prose to get themselves in the paper?

Yet, you are adamant that you know something the majority of the medical community don’t.

Sounds like blind groupthink to me. Groups eschewing, in some cases, hundreds of years of science. See Justice for Jabbed as an example. They’re adamant viruses simply don’t and can’t exist. Germ theory is kiboshed too. 

Can you see it yet? Or is the big bad pharma going to eat us all in our sleep?

[monasqueen]

It's the power of "Social Meeja". Feed people enough duff information, and they'll believe it.

[AcousticallyChallenged]

3 minutes ago, monasqueen said:

It's the power of "Social Meeja". Feed people enough duff information, and they'll believe it.

I think it can even be simpler than that. 

People like thinking they know things.

People like thinking they know more things than someone else. 

People like grouping together with the people who make them feel like they know more things too. They seek out the material that makes them feel like this is validated too. 

Suddenly it’s an “us vs them” and ends up being a part of their identity.

So, challenging an anti-vaxxers views is seen by them as challenging their identity. Which, understandably, they can find quite jarring.