Therefore all we have done with our policy of treating everyone as though they are at roughly equal risk,
We are all at roughly equal risk. Equal risk of giving it to everyone else.
Haven't you got bored of creating new accounts yet? You must be in double figures by now, take the hint.
@petemoore you are going to need way more citations if you are going to go against the majority of the UK scientific community. Are you aware that a leading epidemiologist working on COVID is a regular poster here? You have a big hill to climb and you will need more than internet waffle and selective interpretations.
It’s dangerous because you can have it, not know you have it and go around giving it to everyone else. The symptoms which put you in hospital or worse don’t occur for several days after infection.
This is what makes it different from, say, flu and why these unprecedented measures have been necessary. I am astonished, genuinely astonished that you don’t know this, we’ve been talking about it for two years now.
Asymptomatic transmission has mostly bee de-bunked and drives only a very tiny percentage of cases. It is a lie to suggest that we are all a walking danger to everyone else. If you are ill, stay home. Simple.
These people need to be pariahs
What do you reckon then ?, maybe wear some sort of identifying badge so you can spit on them in the street.
If you disagree with what I have posted then reply by all means, but with a reasoned argument
It's a waste of time. This is mostly ill-informed nonsense and you'll only change the subject if we do.
The trust is largely gone
I reckon 50-75% of customers at my local Asda are wearing masks.
@petemoore:
Another sad consequence is that by adopting public health measures with no proven efficacy in the real world (e.g. cloth masks)
So you say.
But before that one goes around the block again, I wonder maybe you could help me put this one to bed:
As far as COVID-19 deaths and cases in the years 2020-2021, why has Singapore fared so much better than the UK (per capita)?
You mean like this?:
And this?
And this
And this?
Asymptomatic transmission has mostly bee de-bunked
Gonna need some proof for that claim.
If you are ill, stay home. Simple.
Yeah, that's been working well so far, hasn't it.
So why would someone not want their vaccine? There are plenty of logical reasons, none of them to do with 5G or microchips:
1. The long term side effects of repeated vaccination are as yet unknown.
2. The vaccine is still only approved in the UK under emergency use legislation.
3. Anyone who had had Covid-19 already will have already acquired robust immunity from natural infection. See here:
Natural immunity as good as vaccine immunity
4. The refusal of the CDC and Pfizer to release vaccine trial and approval data.
5. Anyone of healthy weight, with no serious health problems, and under 50 is statistically at a tiny risk from Covid-19.
6. There are significantly more side effects from the vaccine than are currently being reported or acknowledged. I personally know six people who have had serious adverse reactions to their jabs. One is still unable to walk unaided.
7. The number of people to die from just Covid in the UK is only 17,000 (or so) as revealed by the recent ONS freedom of information request. This changes the balance of vaccine v’s infection risk somewhat.
8. The vaccine does not significantly reduce the transmission of the virus.
9. Cases per 100,000 in the vaccinated have been higher than in the unvaccinated, (adjusted for group size) in recent months.
10. Omicron has torn up the previous rule book and the efficacy of the current jabs seem marginal and short term at best.
11. High levels of vaccination, or measures like vaccination passes do not seem helpful in ending the pandemic. See Israel here:
Israel cases
And in France here:
France cases
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gish_gallop
It is a lie to suggest that we are all a walking danger to everyone else.
Fascinated to learn how it spreads, must be all those covid wards we all so frequently visit.
friends with an antivaxxer needs to be in the same league as being friends with drunk drivers, domestic abusers, and paedophiles.
😳😳😂
Perhaps a bit harsh!!
6. There are significantly more side effects from the vaccine than are currently being reported or acknowledged. I personally know six people who have had serious adverse reactions to their jabs. One is still unable to walk unaided.
I'm gonna go out on a limb here and call bullshit, unless you classify "serious adverse reaction" as "a sore arm" and "bit tired".
Here's my full view on the anti Vax brigade....
Your body, your choice - fine I understand this .....
But I also think that the statement is also inherently selfish and uneducated, but I won't hold that against them. Theres always going to be a proportion of the population who are selfish or uneducated or both.
There are flat earther's, moon landing denial, global warming denial, many, many god worshipers etc. All of these things are against my personal beliefs in a similar way to anti-vax - but don't directly effect me or the people around me so I generally disregard them. & I'm sure there are many who feel my views are anti theirs.
However the difference with antivax is it immediate and direct implications with public health - the others, flat earther's, religions etc can be put In the looney category as they don't directly effect others. Antivax (for now) can't.
Anti Vax won't go away, if unvaccinated now, they prob will be for ever - or will continually try to find new and exciting ways to copy and paste from Google.
Also - don't feed the trolls....😃
Are you aware that a leading epidemiologist working on COVID is a regular poster here?
I have seen what he says but he seems focused like so many scientists, on a very small area of research, at the exclusion often to what is happening out there in the real world. He seems out of touch with the consequences of the policies he seems to support, lacking in empathy even, unable to evaluate with an open mind an alternative course of action. Perhaps he is skewed by his own statistically rare experience of Covid? There are many far more senior epidemiologists and virologists who would disagree with him. But hey, that's science.
*Torn between answering every single false statement, and this... 🙂
Also – don’t feed the trolls….😃
I reckon 50-75% of customers at my local Asda are wearing masks.
It's probably about 95%(or higher ) here in Scotland.
There's even talk about making masks a full time thing. Which given pollution etc isn't such a bad idea, When you take into account a country where wearing masks is normal, their rates from Covid, it makes a lot of sense.
Take Japan for example
Population size - 125 million. Deaths from covid 18500 thousand
Its normal there to wear a mask.
The UK. Less than half the population, and 150,000 deaths
Now probably it's not entirely down to wearing a mask, but with figures like that and taking into account Japans aging population, it has to play a pretty important part.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gish_gallopNice.
<< In practice, each point raised by the "Gish galloper" takes considerably more time to refute or fact-check than it did to state in the first place. >>
Nah, it doesn't. Watch and learn, Grasshopper.
1. The long term side effects of repeated vaccination are as yet unknown.
No they aren't.
2. The vaccine is still only approved in the UK under emergency use legislation.
No it isn't.
3. Anyone who had had Covid-19 already will have already acquired robust immunity from natural infection. See here:
No they won't.
Natural immunity as good as vaccine immunity
No it isn't.
A link to a YouTube video going "send money here" and a Uganda phone number.
4. The refusal of the CDC and Pfizer to release vaccine trial and approval data.
No they haven't.
5. Anyone of healthy weight, with no serious health problems, and under 50 is statistically at a tiny risk from Covid-19.
No they aren't.
6. There are significantly more side effects from the vaccine than are currently being reported or acknowledged. I personally know six people who have had serious adverse reactions to their jabs. One is still unable to walk unaided.
No there isn't, no you don't and no they aren't.
7. The number of people to die from just Covid in the UK is only 17,000 (or so) as revealed by the recent ONS freedom of information request. This changes the balance of vaccine v’s infection risk somewhat.
No it isn't and therefore no it doesn't.
8. The vaccine does not significantly reduce the transmission of the virus.
Yes it does.
9. Cases per 100,000 in the vaccinated have been higher than in the unvaccinated, (adjusted for group size) in recent months.
No it hasn't.
10. Omicron has torn up the previous rule book and the efficacy of the current jabs seem marginal and short term at best.
No it hasn't and no it doesn't.
11. High levels of vaccination, or measures like vaccination passes do not seem helpful in ending the pandemic.
Yes it does.
See Israel here:
And in France here:
We don't live in either of those countries and there's another 200 to go at.
Gonna need some proof for that claim
Why are you even engaging with this clown?
he seems focused like so many scientists, on a very small area of research,
What, "science"?
If only just a few of those 11 points were actually true you may have a point…
1. Is obviously true. I'm not saying there will be long term side effects but until time has passed will we not know.
2. The UK did approve as there was an emergency. https://www.bmj.com/content/371/bmj.m4759
3. There has been a peer reviewed paper that shows this to be true.
5. This is true.
7. This is true. Although that doesn't mean C19 didn't end other people lives prematurely who were ill with other things. So a bit misleading.
So to dismiss everything out of hand is incorrect and not helpful.
So to dismiss everything out of hand is incorrect and not helpful.
Burden of proof. Let him prove us wrong.
In dismissing everything out of hand we've provided exactly as much evidence as the original poster. Some of it might have an element of truth, it's likely to be so even. That's how these wall o' text arguments work, by providing just enough truth and half-truth to add credence to the rest.
Why are you even engaging with this clown?
Good point. I'm done here. If I still had access to the hammers I'd be spam-killing by now.
And lo, the trolls have arrived. Welcome to the forum new poster!
Again...
I’m gonna go out on a limb here and call bullshit, unless you classify “serious adverse reaction” as “a sore arm” and “bit tired”.
One of these ladies in this video is a good friend of mine. I won't tell you which one for privacy's sake but would you tell her to her face that it is bullshit?
our policy of treating everyone as though they are at roughly equal risk, by quarantining the healthy
This never happened. We reduced social contacts to reduce transmission to protect those at risk.
Welcome to the forum.
One of these ladies in this video is a good friend of mine. I won’t tell you which one for privacy’s sake but would you tell her to her face that it is bullshit?
No, I would tell you to your face that you're talking bullshit. Next?
But hey, that’s science.
Please don't use the word science while you are posting links to YouTube* and Instagram videos as 'evidence'.
*Which would be laughable enough - but the "please send me money" with Ugandan contact details takes it to thermonuclear LOL levels.
1. The long term side effects of repeated vaccination are as yet unknown.
2. The vaccine is still only approved in the UK under emergency use legislation.
3. Anyone who had had Covid-19 already will have already acquired robust immunity from natural infection. See here:
Natural immunity as good as vaccine immunity
4. The refusal of the CDC and Pfizer to release vaccine trial and approval data.
5. Anyone of healthy weight, with no serious health problems, and under 50 is statistically at a tiny risk from Covid-19.
6. There are significantly more side effects from the vaccine than are currently being reported or acknowledged. I personally know six people who have had serious adverse reactions to their jabs. One is still unable to walk unaided.
7. The number of people to die from just Covid in the UK is only 17,000 (or so) as revealed by the recent ONS freedom of information request. This changes the balance of vaccine v’s infection risk somewhat.
8. The vaccine does not significantly reduce the transmission of the virus.
9. Cases per 100,000 in the vaccinated have been higher than in the unvaccinated, (adjusted for group size) in recent months.
10. Omicron has torn up the previous rule book and the efficacy of the current jabs seem marginal and short term at best.
11. High levels of vaccination, or measures like vaccination passes do not seem helpful in ending the pandemic. See Israel here:
1) Vaccines tend not to have longterm side effects, they disposed of very quickly but the immune response remains.
2) That doesn’t mean it not licensed
3) No, they have some immunity it’s showing not to be very effective and comes with larger risk as you have to catch covid first.
4) They’ve never refused that us utter misinformation. They have agreed to release the data but with a warning the data requested is vast and will take years to compile.
5) Yes they are but they can stil get the virus, still be very unwell with and of course are more likely spread it to others.
6) If they’re not being reported then how do you know. Your sample of 6 is swamped by billions without any issues. You also have to provide absolute evidence that the very sad new of your friend was caused by the vaccine.
7) Just from covid yes as in point 5, that’s your tiny risk. But this doesn’t mean the other 130k or so didn’t die due to covid. The highest underlying cause was diabetes, diabetics can live quite long lives. However, they’re at risk of various illnesses such as flu and covid-19. This is why they are vaccinated and why it’s important others should be vaccinated to help reduce the risk.
8) It reduces it by a large amount, it keeps people from being seriously ill, it reduces you chance of death and helps keep hospital bed clear. The more vaccinated the less likely it is to spread.
9) Simply not true. However, why not look at the deaths instead the unvaccinated are vastly outweighing them.
10) No, no it hasn’t. Omnicron came along around a year after the first vaccines, as in many other vaccines that meant a booster was needed. You know just like the flu has an annual vaccine.
11) And you think the answer is no vaccines and no restrictions?
You’re a new member, maybe, spreading misinformation on the virus. Unless you have interests in other areas of the forum or provide credible information it’s probably best you disappear.
Please don’t use the word science while you are posting links to YouTube* and Instagram videos as ‘evidence’.
*Which would be laughable enough – but the “please send me money” with Ugandan contact details takes it to thermonuclear LOL levels.
In his defence the majority of that video is a UK based Doctor discussing a paper published by the CDC. Who is certainly not an anti vaxer.
https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/71/wr/mm7104e1.htm#contribAff
Nah, it doesn’t. Watch and learn, Grasshopper.
1. The long term side effects of repeated vaccination are as yet unknown.
No they aren’t.
2. The vaccine is still only approved in the UK under emergency use legislation.
No it isn’t.
3. Anyone who had had Covid-19 already will have already acquired robust immunity from natural infection. See here:
No they won’t.
Natural immunity as good as vaccine immunity
No it isn’t.
A link to a YouTube video going “send money here” and a Uganda phone number.
4. The refusal of the CDC and Pfizer to release vaccine trial and approval data.
No they haven’t.
5. Anyone of healthy weight, with no serious health problems, and under 50 is statistically at a tiny risk from Covid-19.
No they aren’t.
6. There are significantly more side effects from the vaccine than are currently being reported or acknowledged. I personally know six people who have had serious adverse reactions to their jabs. One is still unable to walk unaided.
No there isn’t, no you don’t and no they aren’t.
7. The number of people to die from just Covid in the UK is only 17,000 (or so) as revealed by the recent ONS freedom of information request. This changes the balance of vaccine v’s infection risk somewhat.
No it isn’t and therefore no it doesn’t.
8. The vaccine does not significantly reduce the transmission of the virus.
Yes it does.
9. Cases per 100,000 in the vaccinated have been higher than in the unvaccinated, (adjusted for group size) in recent months.
No it hasn’t.
10. Omicron has torn up the previous rule book and the efficacy of the current jabs seem marginal and short term at best.
No it hasn’t and no it doesn’t.
11. High levels of vaccination, or measures like vaccination passes do not seem helpful in ending the pandemic.
Yes it does.
Cougar, perhaps you should have a look at the actual real world data outside of the utter guff that is spewed continually in this echo chamber. The real world data disagrees with you on every single point. You are not only ignorant, but seemingly wilfully ignorant.
I'm wondering if the name petermoore is In reference to the Welsh serial killer....
Or the Dr Peter Moore who said
After the vigorous assessment from the MHRA I would be absolutely confident that any minute risk from a Covid vaccination is less than the risk of contracting the disease.
You are not only ignorant, but seemingly wilfully ignorant.
You know that the statement works both ways right? as Cogar, said he's only used the same tactic as used in your post. Unfortunately your 'google it' ways won't work here....
Damn, I engaged 😄
Cougar, perhaps you should have a look at the actual real world data outside of the utter guff that is spewed continually in this echo chamber. The real world data disagrees with you on every single point. You are not only ignorant, but seemingly wilfully ignorant.
Ah, irony.
I've provided exactly the same amount of evidence to back up my claims as you have, which is "none whatsoever." As I said earlier, there's little point in me wasting time in actually fact-checking your claims because if I do prove you wrong you'll just ignore it and change the subject. We've all seen this movie before I'm afraid.
I'd love to have a look at your actual real world data. Off you pop and provide it and we'll go through it together. But if you think I'm doing your legwork for you, you really must be new here after all.
😃😃😃
One of these ladies in this video is a good friend of mine. I won’t tell you which one for privacy’s sake but would you tell her to her face that it is bullshit?
Here’s a video of my friend on public social media post, I won’t tell you which one as the public video is private,
Ah, irony.
I’d love to have a look at your actual real world data. Off you pop and provide it and we’ll go through it together.
Why don't you provide the data to back up your dismissal of my points? Because you can't? Drac has had half a go but much of what he has said is disputed by many eminent scientists. Your response is pathetic though. You are the one promoting lockdowns and restrictions, not I, therefore the onus is on you to prove beyond doubt that the measures you support have efficacy.
Why don’t you provide the data to back up your dismissal of my points? Because you can’t?
I probably can't on some of them, but that's not my problem. Google "burden of proof." Why don't you provide the data to back up your points which you are claiming and we'll start from there?
Hate to break it to you sunbeam but this ain't Facebook.
Drac has had half a go but much of what he has said is disputed by many eminent scientists.
Which scientists are they?
Your response is pathetic though.
I simply responded in kind to your post.
You are the one promoting lockdowns and restrictions
I don't recall promoting anything.
therefore the onus is on you to prove beyond doubt that the measures you support have efficacy.
Well, the long-term side-effects are as yet unknown.
@petermoore You still don't see the irony.....?
No one has to prove anything, to anyone - you or Cogar. Just go on your merry way happy that your beliefs are in a minority and no one will change that. We aren't going to convince you and like wise. The thread quite literally is about why we disagree with antivax'rs regards vaccination, not lock down measures or anything else.
Stop feeding it!!! You know it’s pointless - entertaining but pointless!
Here’s a video of my friend on public social media post, I won’t tell you which one as the public video is private,
Well if you can't see the video then here is the support group: https://www.realnotrare.com/
Why don’t you provide the data to back up your dismissal of my points? Because you can’t? Drac has had half a go but much of what he has said is disputed by many eminent scientists.
Go on the show me these eminent scientists or will be another instagram video, I’ve watched that. Let’s just say I’ve seen better acting on Holby then some of those.
The onus is on you to prove your claims, otherwise you won’t be able to argue your case let alone change anyones mind.
Well if you can’t see the video then here is the support group
The fact you struggled to understand that is speaking volumes on your understanding of evidence.
Abusing others won’t help your cause.
I'm thinking more serial killer now
Do you dismiss anything that is not directly from your bum-chum TiRed?
Well not sure that’s a compelling argument or undisputed evidence.
Well if you can’t see the video then here is the support group:
Thats not bad, 8 people who had adverse reaction to the vaccine.
Still a bit less that the 5.6 million who had adverse reactions to not having it.
Why don’t you provide the data to back up your dismissal of my points?
Because we're taking the default position of listening to the scientists. You're the one with the extra-ordinary claims.
Re masks, there are tons of studies showing how they work, with high speed videos and stats and everything. So given that, and how easy it is to wear one, I do so just in case they are right. Because if I'm wrong and wearing one does nothing, no big deal. But if you're wrong, and wearing one DOES limit transmission and you don't wear one - very big deal.
@tpbiker - no, it isn't even remotely harsh. Let's take the drunk driver as an example. It's an evening and one of your party has driven to the pub, again. You have your catch up, a few beers, and you call for a taxi home, or to the Indian, whatever. The one who drove there turns down the taxi and drives home instead. He's made a conscious decision to do something that he knows could cause irreversible levels of damage to others and himself, up to and including death. Maybe he makes it home fine this time, and maybe he's caused a few accidents on his drive home. You'd kick that person out of your drinking group pretty damn quickly because they were obviously a stupid and selfish arsehole. Antivaxxers are effectively the same, except worse, because that decision to drunkenly drive is a decision to unvaccinatedly leave the house. And that's a much more regular occurrence.
