Jump to content

Coronavirus


robf

Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, leedsvaliant said:

I believe they neither work (they've simply pushed deaths into danger months and made the situation worse) nor do I believe they do not cause much more severe issues for years to come. No amount of 'mathematical models ' from your extensive library of sources would convince me otherwise.

Here's an article from your favourite website from another 'nutter' , yes a Harvard Professor of medicine and expert in epidemiology but because he speaks out against the tactics of the government, he's clearly a conspiracy theorist and crackpot. His message is important though and perhaps something you should take heed of.

https://lockdownsceptics.org/we-cannot-afford-to-censor-dissenting-voices-during-a-pandemic-prof-martin-kulldorff/

And there we have it. No evidence will convince you, no matter how respected the source, but one article in a blog edited by Toby young (as opposed to a legitimate source up against peer review) is definitively the truth. I could find sources that argue against the herd immunity that you promote, but as you said, no evidence will convince you. 
When you ask yourself what would it take to change my view, and the answer is ‘nothing will’, then your stance is no longer rational. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Advert:


What does that prove? Even if he wins, all it demonstrates is that within a narrow, legal intepretation of 'lockdown' vs whatever it is that he is claiming, that he is able to prove something, other than he is against lockdowns. It won't send anything tumbling, given that he will be arguing within German law, not something universal. 
Lockdowns aren't implemented to satisfy the courts, they are implemented to try and prevent unnecessary sickness and loss of life. 
It could send politicians to prison, is that not a game changer?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And there we have it. No evidence will convince you, no matter how respected the source, but one article in a blog edited by Toby young (as opposed to a legitimate source up against peer review) is definitively the truth. I could find sources that argue against the herd immunity that you promote, but as you said, no evidence will convince you. 
When you ask yourself what would it take to change my view, and the answer is ‘nothing will’, then your stance is no longer rational. 
So what you're basically saying is that a world leading professor of medicine, who will have undoubtedly done his research , is wrong because his discussion hasn't been peer reviewed. Ok. Gupta of the UK, also a world leading expert, agrees. They've been shunned, deplatformed. No conspiracy here, it's because they are going against scientific consensus and nobody likes an outlier that doesn't conform to their views. Remember people who claimed the world was round?

I don't pay any mind to modelling. It never accounts for the real world and usually has such a wide range of potential outcomes that you might as well ask Mystic Meg.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Advert:


8 hours ago, leedsvaliant said:

So what you're basically saying is that a world leading professor of medicine, who will have undoubtedly done his research , is wrong because his discussion hasn't been peer reviewed. Ok. Gupta of the UK, also a world leading expert, agrees. They've been shunned, deplatformed. No conspiracy here, it's because they are going against scientific consensus and nobody likes an outlier that doesn't conform to their views. Remember people who claimed the world was round?

I don't pay any mind to modelling. It never accounts for the real world and usually has such a wide range of potential outcomes that you might as well ask Mystic Meg.

The studies I’ve shown is based on actual data from the pandemic. 
Deplatformed lol. I’m said before you can find someone willing to argue all sorts. Climate change denial is a good example.  But the overwhelming consensus is clear. It’s because it’s a consensus  it because they’ve been deplatformed. 
And I’m not saying because he hasn’t put his research, if he’s done any, up for peer review. I’m saying his opinion piece on a Toby young blog is not a legitimate as countless peer reviewed studies in respected journals. remember, you’re discounting the lancet, nature and the British medical journal. I’m discounting a COVID skeptics blog. Now which source is going to give research that has gone into it with an open mind. A respected journal or a blog titled ‘lockdown skeptics’. Remind which you called biased again? No agenda in a blog called ‘lockdown skeptic’ obviously.

8 hours ago, leedsvaliant said:
8 hours ago, Andyregs said:
So what explains the trends if not the lockdown measures?
 
5BB5F65C-917A-4BA2-ACFB-F929EFBA07D7.thumb.jpeg.b5ee8f2a498f4228822a69c081feff8a.jpeg

Whitty said that infections were already falling before March 23rd, the same happened in November. He said it.

So no answer then? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You've also looked over my argument. A consensus doesn't mean it's correct. Being published in journals doesn't mean it's correct...you can make data say anything.There are countless examples in history of people saying something is wrong and people decrying them or deplatforming them, yet turning out to be ultimately correct.

There is a lot of data led evidence out there and I admit that I should use more to back up my point. These are intelligent, highly experienced people from some of the world's leading academia and background, putting their reputation, funding and income on the line because they believe what is happening is wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, leedsvaliant said:
1 hour ago, Andyregs said:
So no answer then? 

Well....yeah...the answer above. The infections were falling before or in some cases a while before lockdown was introduced. Not my words, the words of the CMO.

No you haven’t answered. I asked what explains the drastic change in the data both times after a lockdown. Does it just just coincidently started falling both times there was a lockdown?

44 minutes ago, leedsvaliant said:

. A consensus doesn't mean it's correct. Being published in journals doesn't mean it's correct...you can make data say anything.There are countless examples in history of people saying something is wrong and people decrying them or deplatforming them, yet turning out to be ultimately correct.

There is a lot of data led evidence out there and I admit that I should use more to back up my point. These are intelligent, highly experienced people from some of the world's leading academia and background, putting their reputation, funding and income on the line because they believe what is happening is wrong.

Of course it doesn’t. It makes it more than likely to be correct though. And the whole point of putting your research up for peer review is so people don’t ‘make the data say anything’. They release their data and methodology so people can check their conclusions. Something a lockdown skeptic blog won’t do. The people you mention are highly educated, but if you want what they say to be taken as seriously, then they should put it to the same scrutiny. I can’t see how saying that is at all controversial. But you’ll argue the point regardless. 
This whole deplatforming thing just makes me think a lot of the people on your site are big trumpers. Of course you can bring up examples of when scientists are wrong, because they put their research up for scrutiny. There are massively far more times when they are right though. 
My argument is that if 99% of scientists say one thing, then it’s probably right. Your argument is that they are all wrong because these couple of people say differently. There is a difference here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A high court decision may put all the fines due to covid back to the people it was taken from and restrict the police's ability to ask for details.

The police are getting some bad press lately.

1 convicted of terrorism.

1 being tried for murder.

1 being investigated for rape.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Advert:


Of course it doesn’t. It makes it more than likely to be correct though. And the whole point of putting your research up for peer review is so people don’t ‘make the data say anything’. They release their data and methodology so people can check their conclusions. Something a lockdown skeptic blog won’t do. The people you mention are highly educated, but if you want what they say to be taken as seriously, then they should put it to the same scrutiny. I can’t see how saying that is at all controversial. But you’ll argue the point regardless. 
This whole deplatforming thing just makes me think a lot of the people on your site are big trumpers. Of course you can bring up examples of when scientists are wrong, because they put their research up for scrutiny. There are massively far more times when they are right though. 
My argument is that if 99% of scientists say one thing, then it’s probably right. Your argument is that they are all wrong because these couple of people say differently. There is a difference here.
And most of the time I'd agree with you, but I just can't with this. It feels to me like everyone is going along with the government line because they feel it is the 'right' thing to do. It's been made morally repugnant to go against the narrative.

Look around you, speak to people. How many people actually fully believe that what we've been doing is right? I work with lots of different people in lots of different situations. I've spoken to people old and young, vicars, nurses, solicitors, plumbers...most just go along with it because they never bother to think why but when you actually speak to them, around 90% have broken one or more rules, and almost unanimously they think it's all very silly but just go along with it. It's a relatively nasty virus for a certain demographic but we've lost all sense of sanity.

Look at what it's done to people. Wiping things down like mad men, putting tissues to their mouths, preferring to nearly getting run over than walk anywhere near someone coming the other way. There's far more behavioural psychologists on SAGE than epidemiologists...doesn't that tell you something? The sense of proportion is crazy.

Yes, we should try and protect the most vulnerable but we should never have done that at the cost of everything else. My daughter has gone backwards since going back to school...will she ever get back to where she was? Will it affect her forever? Affect her future grades, job prospects? She has no chance of dying from the virus and at her age there is virtually no evidence that she transmits it, so why punish her with her whole life ahead of her?

What I never hear from people who support saving some lives here and now is, what about the future? People just want to deal with the here and now. Governments are just dealing with here and now because they know they'll be long gone once reality hits. My parents had a meeting with our local MP, he didn't know anything about infections, damage caused by lockdown, long term effects, literally nothing, yet he has voted with the government every time. He's just listened to the soundbites, like 90% of the UK population.

Then there's the other end of the spectrum, what about those at or towards the end of their life. They're spending the final months and years of their lives either lonely, unable to see their loved ones, unable to do anything that makes their lives worth living. In what warped mind is that right? We're 'saving' their lives but actually ruining them to the point where it isn't worth being alive.

I think ultimately no matter how many facts and figures you throw at me from your library, I fundamentally disagree with locking down a majority healthy population, it's morally, ethically and logically repugnant.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Right on Leedsvaliant. 

The world completely lost the plot in March 2020 and here we are in April 2021, still unwilling to accept the consequences of a chest infection that 32 million of the "at risk" members of society have been vaccinated against. Utter madness. I hope most on here have realised that the only option is to shove the rules up the backside of Boris and his yes men. Remember, one month from now it will still be AGAINST THE LAW to welcome somebody outside a support bubble into your own home, despite the fact that the hospitals will be empty of Covid patients and deaths will be down to single figures, if not at zero.

You don't get freedom back once you give it up so willfully. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, AMF said:

Right on Leedsvaliant. 

The world completely lost the plot in March 2020 and here we are in April 2021, still unwilling to accept the consequences of a chest infection that 32 million of the "at risk" members of society have been vaccinated against. Utter madness. I hope most on here have realised that the only option is to shove the rules up the backside of Boris and his yes men. Remember, one month from now it will still be AGAINST THE LAW to welcome somebody outside a support bubble into your own home, despite the fact that the hospitals will be empty of Covid patients and deaths will be down to single figures, if not at zero.

You don't get freedom back once you give it up so willfully. 

Hospitals will not be empty of Covid patients, deaths  due to Covid quoted by the Govt are only those within 28 days. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Right on Leedsvaliant. 
The world completely lost the plot in March 2020 and here we are in April 2021, still unwilling to accept the consequences of a chest infection that 32 million of the "at risk" members of society have been vaccinated against. Utter madness. I hope most on here have realised that the only option is to shove the rules up the backside of Boris and his yes men. Remember, one month from now it will still be AGAINST THE LAW to welcome somebody outside a support bubble into your own home, despite the fact that the hospitals will be empty of Covid patients and deaths will be down to single figures, if not at zero.
You don't get freedom back once you give it up so willfully. 
Thank God I have support!

Another one of the 'conspiracies' coming to pass....we were told that freedom would return on June 21st and vaccines would be our way out. I was harrangued again and people told me to stop talking nonsense.

Now we are told that masks and social distancing will continue for at least another year and we'll have a 3rd wave! We told you so....again!

One day people will finally wake up and realise.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Advert:


Hospitals will not be empty of Covid patients, deaths  due to Covid quoted by the Govt are only those within 28 days. 
Most beyond that will have probably caught the virus in hospital after going in with something else. That's where many Covid-19 infections occur. You have to have a cut off at some point otherwise someone who has been in a coma for months and then tests positive for the virus and then dies, would have previously been part of the death figures. Even those who have died within 28 days, we still have no clear grasp on whether they went into hospital with Covid as the source of their illness.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, AMF said:

Right on Leedsvaliant. 

The world completely lost the plot in March 2020 and here we are in April 2021, still unwilling to accept the consequences of a chest infection that 32 million of the "at risk" members of society have been vaccinated against. Utter madness. I hope most on here have realised that the only option is to shove the rules up the backside of Boris and his yes men. Remember, one month from now it will still be AGAINST THE LAW to welcome somebody outside a support bubble into your own home, despite the fact that the hospitals will be empty of Covid patients and deaths will be down to single figures, if not at zero.

You don't get freedom back once you give it up so willfully. 

I know a lot of people , both young and old, who have had Covid. It  is far more than  a mere chest infection. Other than that , I agree with your points about  the figures , and especially freedom .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Reporting Posts and Ignoring Users

    • Admin don't read everything. Don't assume we'll spot rule breaking. Please report posts and we'll act ASAP. If you're logged in use the orange report post button. If you're not logged in, please - Contact us here
    • If you can't get on with another user you can "ignore" them. Follow the link, type in their username and save - Click here
    • Check with admin if you wish to sell/auction any items. We're happy to support good causes but check first - Contact us here
  • Friends of OVF




×
×
  • Create New...