User Tag List

Page 534 of 707 FirstFirst ... 34434484524532533534535536544584634 ... LastLast
Results 5,331 to 5,340 of 7067

Thread: Coronavirus Pandemic

  1. #5331
    Member WMUG's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    1,943
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Niall_Quinn View Post
    the five studies that show asymptomatic carriers hardly ever spread the virus,
    First I'm hearing of that, could you direct me towards it?
    You used to be everything to me
    Now you're tired of fighting

  2. #5332
    ***** Niall_Quinn's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    65,781
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by WMUG View Post
    First I'm hearing of that, could you direct me towards it?
    I believe this is the first study. From the source of the outbreak itself and, naturally, full approved by the WHO.

    https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-020-19802-w

    Actually I think there are six studies, not five. A Norwegian study was released a few weeks ago IIRC, although that one may have related to children only where the transmissions are well known to be negligible. But they persist with their literally asphyxiating policies anyway.
    Für eure Sicherheit

  3. #5333
    ***** Niall_Quinn's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    65,781
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    As the BMJ stated:

    Testing should be reintegrated into clinical care with clinical and public health oversight and case definitions based on clinical diagnosis. Carefully designed prospective studies of cases and contacts are needed to estimate transmission rates by people with and without symptoms. These should include careful investigations of outbreaks—for example, testing all contacts of people with a clear history of exposure, especially in high risk environments such as nursing homes, prisons, and other institutional settings. - BMJ 2020; 371 Dec 2020
    That's something I didn't know. Testing is not even part of the clinical care protocol. That tells you everything you need to know about how serious the stated intention of eradicating the disease is. Not at all. You'd unplug this process from all the usual protocols only if you were deliberately seeking to make the outcome unreliable and subject to interpretation.

    UCL is telling us natural herd immunity will be reached on Monday, according to its modelling. Matt Handjob dismisses this as modelling rather than "data". So do I, tbf, but Handjob is very keen on the bullshit modelling coming out of ICL, isn't he? The crappy modelling that ignited the disastrous (for most, but certainly not all) response.

    EVERY course of action has been taken in line with the worst case scenarios with the assurance this is being done in the interests of public health. Well it's easy to call bullshit on that ridiculous claim when you look at the millions of missed appointments for serious illness and the criminal activity in the care homes. Public health my arse. Medical professionals indeed.
    Für eure Sicherheit

  4. #5334
    ***** Niall_Quinn's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    65,781
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    If the vaccines have been tested and are safe then how has testing of the AstraZeneca vaccine on children been halted? You can't stop something that has finished. The truth is, the vaccines are still being tested and those tests are scheduled to conclude between 2023 and 2025, depending on the vaccine.

    So who are the test subjects in the ongoing testing?

    You are.
    Für eure Sicherheit

  5. #5335
    Administrator Letters's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    37,363
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Niall_Quinn View Post
    If the vaccines have been tested and are safe then how has testing of the AstraZeneca vaccine on children been halted? You can't stop something that has finished.
    Weren't the initial trials on adults, given that the priority was vaccinating adults, particularly older adults who are the most vulnerable.

    The truth is, the vaccines are still being tested and those tests are scheduled to conclude between 2023 and 2025, depending on the vaccine.
    Well, obviously the long term effects of a vaccine (or a virus) which is new are unknown. But that doesn't mean medical trials weren't done and while most people I know who have had it have had some side effects it doesn't seem anything serious for most people. MrsL felt rough for about a day and a half and has been fine since. I prefer stats to one of anecdotes of course but I haven't seen any stats which indicate that this is dangerous. Millions of people have been vaccinated, don't you think we'd have some data by now? Unless I just haven't seen the right data?

  6. #5336
    ***** Niall_Quinn's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    65,781
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    In the UK alone the vaccines have killed around 600 people so far, according to the MHRA. Around half a million have suffered significant side effects, in some cases horrific side effects. No idea what the global figure is, I checked the BBC but there's no rolling ticker for that data. That's not many people compared to the millions vaccinated. But if any other drug killed 600 people it would be off the shelves by now. People are being sacrificed so this vaccine can be rolled out without proper testing and authorisation. Because, supposedly, the benefits outweigh the risks. Well the average age of those dying from Covid is 84. And read above to see how the science and medicine has been throw out of the window to reach the justification for pushing untested drugs on the global population. It's an absolute scandal and a disgrace and any doctor involved in it is breaking his oath at the most fundamental level.
    Für eure Sicherheit

  7. #5337
    Administrator Letters's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    37,363
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I think I know what you're referring to, but another perspective...

    https://fullfact.org/online/460-vacc...s-yellow-card/

    Facebook users have shared links to several websites which misreport government data on Covid-19 vaccines. These websites claim the data shows that 460 people have died in the UK because of the Covid-19 vaccine, and 243,612 have suffered “injuries”. This is not true.

    These figures come from the UK’s Yellow Card scheme, which collects and monitors information on safety concerns involving medicines and medical devices, such as suspected side effects or “adverse incidents”, to provide an early warning of any previously unknown risks. To do this, it relies on voluntary reporting from medics and members of the public. These reports are known as suspected adverse reactions, or ADRs.

    But it is important to note that just because an adverse incident occurs after a vaccination, this does not mean that it was caused by a vaccination.

    The Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) has said: “The nature of Yellow Card reporting means that reported events are not always proven side effects. Some events may have happened anyway, regardless of vaccination. This is particularly the case when millions of people are vaccinated, and especially when most vaccines are being given to the most elderly people and people who have underlying illness.”
    It asks for any suspicions about adverse effects to be reported, even if the person reporting it is not sure that it was caused by the vaccine. This means that many suspected ADRs reported “do not have any relation to the vaccine or medicine and it is often coincidental that they both occurred around the same time.”


    The MHRA releases separate breakdowns of reports for the Pfizer vaccine and the AstraZeneca vaccine, as well as reports where the vaccine brand was not specified. The figures referred to by the websites shared on Facebook cover the period from 9 December 2020 to 21 February 2021, and were published on 4 March.

    These show that a total of 29,715 reports were received about the Pfizer vaccine in this period, detailing 85,179 reactions and 212 fatalities. For the AstraZeneca vaccine there were 42,917 reports, detailing 157,637 reactions and 244 deaths, while for there were 228 reports that did not specify a vaccine brand, featuring 796 reactions and four deaths.

    This means the websites are correct to mention 460 deaths and 243,612 reactions, but they are wrong to suggest these are definitely caused by the vaccine.

    The MHRA’s summary of this data states that analysis of individual reports of deaths “does not suggest the vaccine played a role” and the majority of fatal reports were in “elderly people or people with underlying illness”.

    For non-fatal serious suspected ADRs, it said they “all remain under continual review. There are currently no indications of specific patterns or rates of reporting that would suggest the vaccine has played a role”. It adds: “A high proportion of people vaccinated in the vaccination campaign so far are very elderly, many of whom will also have pre-existing medical conditions. Older age and chronic underlying illnesses make it more likely that coincidental adverse events will occur, especially given the millions of people vaccinated.”
    And this is what I'm pointing out. You say - with some justification - that the rate of Covid deaths is inflated by the fact that someone can have a positive Covid test, be hit by a bus within 28 days of that and be recorded as a Covid death. My riposte is that this probably doesn't account for many of the deaths attributed to Covid, and it certainly doesn't explain the fact that all cause fatality has been significantly higher than average over the last winter. Something sure killed a lot of people. And the number of deaths correlated quite tightly with positive tests, so it seems that cases were a good indicator of deaths.
    So you cast doubt on the Covid figures, but you're happy to accept these figures when there is no indication that there's a link between the vaccine and the death other than both of those events occurred.

  8. #5338
    Member Mac76's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Location
    London
    Posts
    13,263
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Letters

  9. #5339
    ***** Niall_Quinn's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    65,781
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Letters View Post
    I think I know what you're referring to, but another perspective...

    https://fullfact.org/online/460-vacc...s-yellow-card/



    And this is what I'm pointing out. You say - with some justification - that the rate of Covid deaths is inflated by the fact that someone can have a positive Covid test, be hit by a bus within 28 days of that and be recorded as a Covid death. My riposte is that this probably doesn't account for many of the deaths attributed to Covid, and it certainly doesn't explain the fact that all cause fatality has been significantly higher than average over the last winter. Something sure killed a lot of people. And the number of deaths correlated quite tightly with positive tests, so it seems that cases were a good indicator of deaths.
    So you cast doubt on the Covid figures, but you're happy to accept these figures when there is no indication that there's a link between the vaccine and the death other than both of those events occurred.
    Wrong again. I'm playing by the SAME standard in both cases - assumption. If assumption is good enough for the rolling death feast then assumption is the standard that has been set. Therefore, let's not hear a word about maybes. You either have science or you don't. If we're going by science then let's reduce the death toll associated with the unauthorised, experimental drug. But, by the same standard, let's cut the Covid deaths down to a realistic level so we can see what we actually had was a new disease that hoovered up every other disease in it's rampant rush to be king of the hill.

    In fact it's YOU that has had your cake an eaten it. You've defended the ridiculous rolling death toll but now you don't want any deaths WITH vaccine.
    Für eure Sicherheit

  10. #5340
    ***** Niall_Quinn's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    65,781
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Mac76 View Post
    Letters
    If you can't be embarrassed for yourself then I'll have to do it for you. Have some fucking dignity would you?
    Für eure Sicherheit

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •