News Forum - Will it, won’t it? October re-opening in doubt as Anutin defers to medical experts

[Stonker]

1 hour ago, JohninDubin said:

You really should take a look at the thread between @Stardustand I.

I only wish I had the energy required

[BlueSphinx]

10 minutes ago, Bob20 said:

...

The choice is really very simple if you want to control the problem. You lockdown and vaccinate. 

Everything else leaves you with leaks to plug, people to look after in ICU and bury or cremate.

It's really that simple.

The Simpleton's Guide to Controlling Covid...  and not bought by those that have some common sense left. 

[DiJoDavO]

7 minutes ago, JohninDubin said:

That's quite an interesting post you make there.

Robert Malone says it doesn't exist. Can you provide his peer reviewed study proving this. During the meantime, there is an article in the highly respected Nature Magazine which contradicts this. Indeed you yourself go on to say, "If someone has that, it just means they have a crappy immune system. If my immune system is shit, whatever makes me sick, will last a long time". You can't have it both ways. Either it exist or it doesn't. And of course, nobody claimed that long covid is permanent. https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-01511-z

There is also plenty of evidence that vaxxing has reduced mortality rates, and that those who have been vaxxed and are still infected, have better outcomes than the unvaxxed.

If you want to challenge my numbers, the source is https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/#main_table  They source the numbers from official gov statements from the countries listed.

 

Ok, if we are going to go nitpicking, I meant to say if someone stays sick from Covid a bit longer. That could mean there's a serious problem with their immune system. 

About Robert Malone, of course everyone who is in the media is against someone who tells something that they don't want you to know. Imagine if the media were wrong all along for 2 years of feeding people bs. 

I'm nowhere claiming thet vaccines are not completely bad. Of course they help. Or else I wouldn't get mine. But what are they going to do when this vaccine's efficiency expires? Keep vaccinating people? That is what I meant by it's not a good thing to do. 

If countries or people for some reason benefit off of those numbers, of course they are allowing the use of those numbers. 

My question to you would rather be, how can we be so sure if these numbers are right? Just because they say so?

No one knew these people personally, so no one is able to count and check whether certain people were doing some bs or not. Really easy to mess with such information. 

What I know about numbers is only what I have experienced and so does everyone.

There's a rare case where someone I knew had Covid, and beat it almost instantly. 1 person died from it who has been stuck in her house for almost 2 years. That person was already really old and weak tbh. Another person died of a heart attack right after receiving the news and others were told it was Covid which did that. 

[Stonker]

1 hour ago, DiJoDavO said:

Another group, which no one pays attention to, only in a negative light, proves time after time that there are ways to prevent covid more conveniently, and that Covid actually isn't that bad. 

Maybe because they never "prove" anything apart from to show what a bunch of plonkers they are making things up about themselves.

[DiJoDavO]

19 minutes ago, Bob20 said:

Thanks for mentioning Dr.Malone, because now we know where you stand. The good Dr. is an absolute nutcase, not respected by anyone in his field, listed mostly on conspiracy websites and quoted not by his peers, and not even by "pro-choicers" but by hardcore conspiracists.

Everyone knows that partial lockdowns don't work, if you didn't get my colindar "joke".

The choice is really very simple if you want to control the problem. You lockdown and vaccinate. 

Everything else leaves you with leaks to plug, people to look after in ICU and bury or cremate.

It's really that simple.

It's funny how you immediately ridicule someone's points who also did research, but in the meantime trusts everything that the TV will tell you. 

Just as in your previous reaction to my post, you don't believe that people are easily led by what they hear on the news. But they certainly do. Also in this case. Someone said he was wrong, and instantly everyone says he's cuckoo. But 9 out of 10 people you ask why, will have no answer on it, other than yelling the words 'conspiracy theorists'. 

Btw, this dr is just one of the people I could mention who have a different view on this topic. 

But go ahead, I hope you'll try it out. Grab some news articles from a while back, and current news articles. They are contradicting themselves constantly. 

[Stonker]

5 minutes ago, DiJoDavO said:

But what are they going to do when this vaccine's efficiency expires? Keep vaccinating people? That is what I meant by it's not a good thing to do.

Well, that's what people do with flu vaccines and tetanus, and no-one seems to complain.

13 minutes ago, DiJoDavO said:

What I know about numbers is only what I have experienced and so does everyone.

So Belsen and Tol Sleng  may never have happened because you weren't there to do a census?

 I see ..... 

[Stonker]

21 minutes ago, BlueSphinx said:

... and not bought by those that have some common sense left. 

In their view, which thankfully is only held by a tiny minority who think the lizard men are running the world.

[DiJoDavO]

11 minutes ago, Stonker said:

Well, that's what people do with flu vaccines and tetanus, and no-one seems to complain.

So Belsen and Tol Sleng  may never have happened because you weren't there to do a census?

 I see ..... 

Read carefully, only about numbers here I can't be sure. Don't do the thinking for me. 

How can anyone be sure about those numbers when they are too easy to mess with? Just give me a reason other than: the news said so. Then I might get your point. 

Giving this as an argument is too cheap. 

About the vaccines, I'm not an anti vaxer, (so don't need to mention that) but I never get vaccinated for the flu and I do well too. 

[ThailandRyan]

5 minutes ago, DiJoDavO said:

Read carefully, only about numbers here I can't be sure. Don't do the thinking for me. 

How can anyone be sure about those numbers when they are too easy to mess with? Just give me a reason other than: the news said so. Then I might get your point. 

Giving this as an argument is too cheap. 

About the vaccines, I'm not an anti vaxer, (so don't need to mention that) but I never get vaccinated for the flu and I do well too. 

Every year as a Diabetic and with it being an auto immune disorder I get a Flu vaccination.  That vaccination is different from the one the year before and the year before that.  It is predicated on what the new flu strains being seen are based upon as far as the virus, thus each portion of the world has different flu variants and different flu vaccines.  Those vaccinated for Covid will need a new vaccination yearly is what the poster is saying.  It is not about the previous vaccine not working but like the variants we are seeing that are continually evolving the new vaccination will be indeed a booster much like the annual flu jab I get.  Does that make sense to you now.

[Stonker]

16 minutes ago, DiJoDavO said:

How can anyone be sure about those numbers when they are too easy to mess with? Just give me a reason other than: the news said so. Then I might get your point. 

Because while I'm dubious about plenty of "numbers", particularly here, when everything else which is verifiable points in the same direction and nothing verifiable suggests otherwise it's not unreasonable to accept them.

[Stonker]

11 minutes ago, ThailandRyan said:

Every year as a Diabetic and with it being an auto immune disorder I get a Flu vaccination.  That vaccination is different from the one the year before and the year before that.  It is predicated on what the new flu strains being seen are based upon as far as the virus, thus each portion of the world has different flu variants and different flu vaccines.  Those vaccinated for Covid will need a new vaccination yearly is what the poster is saying.  It is not about the previous vaccine not working but like the variants we are seeing that are continually evolving the new vaccination will be indeed a booster much like the annual flu jab I get.  Does that make sense to you now.

Maybe yearly, maybe not, but the idea that a vaccine has to give immunity to be a vaccine is for fruit loops - that's the holy grail, but none are.

One possibility is similar to tetanus - people forget that needs up to six jabs before it's once a decade.

It's simply early days.

[JohninDublin]

15 minutes ago, DiJoDavO said:

Ok, if we are going to go nitpicking, I meant to say if someone stays sick from Covid a bit longer. That could mean there's a serious problem with their immune system. 

About Robert Malone, of course everyone who is in the media is against someone who tells something that they don't want you to know. Imagine if the media were wrong all along for 2 years of feeding people bs. 

I'm nowhere claiming thet vaccines are not completely bad. Of course they help. Or else I wouldn't get mine. But what are they going to do when this vaccine's efficiency expires? Keep vaccinating people? That is what I meant by it's not a good thing to do. 

If countries or people for some reason benefit off of those numbers, of course they are allowing the use of those numbers. 

My question to you would rather be, how can we be so sure if these numbers are right? Just because they say so?

No one knew these people personally, so no one is able to count and check whether certain people were doing some bs or not. Really easy to mess with such information. 

What I know about numbers is only what I have experienced and so does everyone.

There's a rare case where someone I knew had Covid, and beat it almost instantly. 1 person died from it who has been stuck in her house for almost 2 years. That person was already really old and weak tbh. Another person died of a heart attack right after receiving the news and others were told it was Covid which did that. 

I have no agenda against Malone. I weigh the evidence in this way. Nature Magazine is a highly respected Science Magazine it has published multiple articles on the subject, most if not all have been peer-reviewed. Once they find they have published an article that fails peer-review, it is withdrawn and an explanation given for this as was case with Wakefield and his so called MMR/Autism study. To date, no such articles have been withdrawn.

In addition, I have heard both politicians and or Doctors in the UK, Ireland, EU and US talk about the problems that are coming down the road from long-covid.

Has Malone even published a study into his claims and subjected it to the rigours of peer review? Not that I can find. However, I did find this: https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2021/08/robert-malone-vaccine-inventor-vaccine-skeptic/619734/

So in making my decision on the credibility of Nature or Malone, in the absence of any scientific evidence from Malone, this became no contest.

As regards "My question to you would rather be, how can we be so sure if these numbers are right? Just because they say so?" I freely admit that I have grave doubts about the Chinese figures, but in general, I believe the rest of them are pretty close to ballpark. You imply that people will dismiss media reports if they are not what they want to hear, but it seems that you are doing this with both Malone and the reported covid figures. Where is the evidence to support Malone? Where is the evidence to say that there is massive fraud going on with these figures?

I note you don't even say whether these should be higher or lower. However my general trust in the reasonable accuracy of most of these figures is based on the axiom, that the more people involved in conspiracy, the more likely it is to fail. With that In mind, even though we live an an era of whistle-blowers, I can't say I've noticed many insiders coming forward and saying that "Ruritania has been falsifying the data". 

When trying to make up my mind about what is being said in the media is true or untrue, I often ask the question, "What is missing from this story that should be there"? Assuming I have to apply that to your question, I'd say that what is missing is the reports of whistle-blowers exposing this behaviour.

[9S_]

The proper amount of money from affected industry executives needs to shuffle upwards. Then they can re-open

 

[BlueSphinx]

11 minutes ago, ThailandRyan said:

Every year as a Diabetic and with it being an auto immune disorder I get a Flu vaccination.  That vaccination is different from the one the year before and the year before that.  It is predicated on what the new flu strains being seen are based upon as far as the virus, thus each portion of the world has different flu variants and different flu vaccines.  Those vaccinated for Covid will need a new vaccination yearly is what the poster is saying.  It is not about the previous vaccine not working but like the variants we are seeing that are continually evolving the new vaccination will be indeed a booster much like the annual flu jab I get.  Does that make sense to you now.

Did you know that yesterday the FDA advisory panel in the US has REJECTED booster jabs for the general population (and only advise it for those +65 years of age).  Of course the panel-members have been looking at Israel, the 'world's vaccine lab', to know where this is heading with now already waning effectiveness of that 3rd booster shot and Israeli health authorities considering a fourth booster. 

Hopefully that FDA advice is taken over by the FDA and the CDC, but of course there will be enormous pressure by Big Pharma that would see their extremely profitable 'Vaccine subscription scheme' stopped in its tracks. Let's hope that common sense prevails and there will be no booster-shots mandated for all the already jabbed.  And that means that 5-6 months after their last shot, there will be no difference anymore 'protection-wise' between the vaxxed and the unvaxxed.  But with the slight difference that the vaxxed will now have to cope with a  screwed-up immune-system and the adverse effects of having taken those shots, which will doubtlessly emerge in course of coming years.

[yselmike]

49 minutes ago, Stonker said:

Well, that's what people do with flu vaccines and tetanus, and no-one seems to complain.

So Belsen and Tol Sleng  may never have happened because you weren't there to do a census?

 I see ..... 

It's only the over 60s and the vulnerable who get the flu jab.I didn't get my flu jab one year,got the flu of course,that turned into Pneumonia thought I wasn't going to make it through that one.I'm first in line for any jabs.

[Bob20]

2 minutes ago, yselmike said:

It's only the over 60s and the vulnerable who get the flu jab.I didn't get my flu jab one year,got the flu of course,that turned into Pneumonia thought I wasn't going to make it through that one.I'm first in line for any jabs.

Hope you get yours soon. Wonder why that didn't happen yet if they jabbed the numbers they claim. You should have priority.

[DiJoDavO]

28 minutes ago, ThailandRyan said:

Every year as a Diabetic and with it being an auto immune disorder I get a Flu vaccination.  That vaccination is different from the one the year before and the year before that.  It is predicated on what the new flu strains being seen are based upon as far as the virus, thus each portion of the world has different flu variants and different flu vaccines.  Those vaccinated for Covid will need a new vaccination yearly is what the poster is saying.  It is not about the previous vaccine not working but like the variants we are seeing that are continually evolving the new vaccination will be indeed a booster much like the annual flu jab I get.  Does that make sense to you now.

I know how vaccines work. And I don't understand how you get the idea I didn't understand. 

I just mentioned that I never get my yearly flu shots and I'm fine. Some poeple might need it, but if you are just a healthy person, there's no need for it. 

[DiJoDavO]

23 minutes ago, Stonker said:

Because while I'm dubious about plenty of "numbers", particularly here, when everything else which is verifiable points in the same direction and nothing verifiable suggests otherwise it's not unreasonable to accept them.

Accepting the numbers is not equal to that those numbers are right. The problem is now more or less that when you don't accept them, you are immediately a conspiracy theorist. But to many, the numbers do look a bit odd, compared to what you experience in real life. It's a very slippery slope to censoring people who have a different view. It's almost as if you're not allowed to think even slightly different. 

[Stonker]

6 minutes ago, DiJoDavO said:

 And I don't understand how you get the idea I didn't understand. 

Well, ummm ..... from statements like:

 

7 minutes ago, DiJoDavO said:

some poeple might need it, but if you are just a healthy person, there's no need for it. 

[ThailandRyan]

24 minutes ago, BlueSphinx said:

Did you know that yesterday the FDA advisory panel in the US has REJECTED booster jabs for the general population (and only advise it for those +65 years of age).  Of course the panel-members have been looking at Israel, the 'world's vaccine lab', to know where this is heading with now already waning effectiveness of that 3rd booster shot and Israeli health authorities considering a fourth booster. 

Hopefully that FDA advice is taken over by the FDA and the CDC, but of course there will be enormous pressure by Big Pharma that would see their extremely profitable 'Vaccine subscription scheme' stopped in its tracks. Let's hope that common sense prevails and there will be no booster-shots mandated for all the already jabbed.  And that means that 5-6 months after their last shot, there will be no difference anymore 'protection-wise' between the vaxxed and the unvaxxed.  But with the slight difference that the vaxxed will now have to cope with a  screwed-up immune-system and the adverse effects of having taken those shots, which will doubtlessly emerge in course of coming years.

Had not seen that one. Thanks for the information.  I will look it over after catching up on the newest issue with Australia choosing sides instead of playing the middle between China and the US.

[DiJoDavO]

16 minutes ago, JohninDubin said:

I have no agenda against Malone. I weigh the evidence in this way. Nature Magazine is a highly respected Science Magazine it has published multiple articles on the subject, most if not all have been peer-reviewed. Once they find they have published an article that fails peer-review, it is withdrawn and an explanation given for this as was case with Wakefield and his so called MMR/Autism study. To date, no such articles have been withdrawn.

In addition, I have heard both politicians and or Doctors in the UK, Ireland, EU and US talk about the problems that are coming down the road from long-covid.

Has Malone even published a study into his claims and subjected it to the rigours of peer review? Not that I can find. However, I did find this: https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2021/08/robert-malone-vaccine-inventor-vaccine-skeptic/619734/

So in making my decision on the credibility of Nature or Malone, in the absence of any scientific evidence from Malone, this became no contest.

As regards "My question to you would rather be, how can we be so sure if these numbers are right? Just because they say so?" I freely admit that I have grave doubts about the Chinese figures, but in general, I believe the rest of them are pretty close to ballpark. You imply that people will dismiss media reports if they are not what they want to hear, but it seems that you are doing this with both Malone and the reported covid figures. Where is the evidence to support Malone? Where is the evidence to say that there is massive fraud going on with these figures?

I note you don't even say whether these should be higher or lower. However my general trust in the reasonable accuracy of most of these figures is based on the axiom, that the more people involved in conspiracy, the more likely it is to fail. With that In mind, even though we live an an era of whistle-blowers, I can't say I've noticed many insiders coming forward and saying that "Ruritania has been falsifying the data". 

When trying to make up my mind about what is being said in the media is true or untrue, I often ask the question, "What is missing from this story that should be there"? Assuming I have to apply that to your question, I'd say that what is missing is the reports of whistle-blowers exposing this behaviour.

It's not that I am completely a huge fan of his work. I've heard him talk about some things which made sense to me. One thing I have heard him say is that vaccines do work. It's a bit ridiculous to be in that business your whole life and then claim what you are doing is bs. He is concerned about the overuse of vaccines. Too many vaccines over a certain period and vaccines given to healthy people whose immune system should be able to take care of Covid. I think that's a perfectly reasonable way to look at it. I just named him because it was the most recent person I've heard talk about it. And you guys wanted some source from me. 

 

You are talking about doubts on the numbers from China. If China is able to do it.... Why not any other country? 

I do agree that I can't prove anything, but no one can. We can only say, hey this dude sounds reasonable. But it's ridiculous to be so sure that you ridicule anyone who don't think the same. Like I mentioned before, my point of view is that there are plenty of lies told in the media already, and they have contradicted themselves later. So why should I trust them bringing new news if the newer news contradicts the previous news and on and on and on.... 

Next, if you approach news in the way you mentioned with: What should be there and what's missing, you are unnecessarily trying to look for things that you want to be in it. This is what conspiracy theorists do. 

How I approach the news is to look at their past reports and look at the current events. When that doesn't add up, something is wrong. 

[Stonker]

7 minutes ago, DiJoDavO said:

Accepting the numbers is not equal to that those numbers are right. The problem is now more or less that when you don't accept them, you are immediately a conspiracy theorist. But to many, the numbers do look a bit odd, compared to what you experience in real life. It's a very slippery slope to censoring people who have a different view. It's almost as if you're not allowed to think even slightly different. 

Well, I wouldn't label someone a conspiracy theorist because they didn't toe the party line, but I would think they were a bit of a nut job if they dismissed all the verifiable and expert evidence and couldn't produce a shred of credible evidence to support what they said, and their only argument boiled down to they hadn't seen it for themselves.

... and it depends on 

13 minutes ago, DiJoDavO said:

... but to many the numbers do look a bit odd compared to what you experience in real life.

It depends on your "experience" and what you mean by "many".

If you work in a Covid ward you'll see people dying every day.  If you don't, you won't, and "real life" is somewhere between the two.

If you're an anti-vaxxer (not that you are) you'll say that "many" in the French health-care industry have chosen to lose their jobs rather than be vaccinated, as 3,000 have done so.

If you're not, you'll say that 99.9% of those working in the French health-care industry have chosen to be vaccinated and only 0.1% haven't.

It all depends on your point of view.

[ThailandRyan]

Ran across this article and found the points very nicely put.  Not sure the other side of the equation will agree however.

https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/depopulation-by-covid-19-vaccines/

The final paragraph of the article is:

In reality, it is the antivaxxers’ whose agenda is far more likely to result in global depopulation. Vaccines are arguably the most effective medical intervention to prevent death and suffering ever devised by the human mind, having prevented billions of cases of disease and death over the history of their existence. Anyone who tries to frighten people out of taking advantage of vaccines, for both themselves and their children, is the true advocate of “depopulation.”

[DiJoDavO]

13 minutes ago, Stonker said:

Well, ummm ..... from statements like:

I think the one who didn't understand is you. 

If you are healthy, why should you get a vaccine? 

I don't have cancer, but you don't see me hanging around at the hospital for the chemo therapy. You only need it when you need it. 

You don't need to fill up a car with gas if it's full. You need it when you need it. 

Another Thai one, you don't need to comb your hair if you are bald. 

If you have a weak immune system, you might consider to take your vaccines. If you have underlying health issues, you might need a vaccine, yes. Because there's more risk involved. 

But why should a healthy person be forced to get it?

There's also something called a 'healthy lifestyle' which is the best way to prevent Covid. But somehow these words became taboo. No one talks about strengthening your body and immune system. 

And people who are at risk, should quarantine or something. But don't hold the whole population hostage, just because of those people. Vaccinate them, if they want, each year. 

[Stonker]

1 hour ago, BlueSphinx said:

Did you know that yesterday the FDA advisory panel in the US has REJECTED booster jabs for the general population (and only advise it for those +65 years of age).  

Do you know why, before jumping to the wrong conclusion and producing the usual absolute bollox that has no connection whatsoever with anything anyone your misrepresenting has said?

For example:

1 hour ago, BlueSphinx said:

 And that means that 5-6 months after their last shot, there will be no difference anymore 'protection-wise' between the vaxxed and the unvaxxed. 

... which is completely untrue and contrary to every recent study, including the ones you've grossly misrepresented and mis-quoted, which state very clearly and categorically that:

i) being vaccinated with Pfizer before being infected with Covid reduces your chances of being hospitalised or dying from Covid by 95%, while being vaccinated with a booster after being infected further reduces your chances of hospitalization and death by 50%, and ...

ii) that  "five to six months after their last shot", far from there being "no difference anymore 'protection-wise' between the vaxxed and the unvaxxed." that the vaxxed still have 90% protection over the unvaxxed against hospitalization or death due to Covid.

You've been given the links to all the studies, you claim to have read them, but you still completely mis-represent what they say, making claims about them which are totally untrue.

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/phe-duration-of-protection-of-covid-19-vaccines-against-clinical-disease-9-september-2021

This may all be a game to you, but people are dying because of what people like you are saying.