Jump to content

Coronavirus


robf

Recommended Posts

11 hours ago, Paul6754 said:

Nothing could be further from the truth as there are lots of questions about the vaccines. However, a statement like, "These miracle vaccines actually do more harm than good" should be backed up by evidence not by a  Bloomberg article that says nothing of the kind..

There are going to be adverse effects and the nature and number of them will increase as more people and more diverse people take the vaccine. It's a question of risk:benefit and the benefits of the vaccines have been shown to massively outweigh the risks.

Would you prefer there were vaccines or not.

LV, I agree with some of the posts you've made on this thread but if you wish to stimulate debate use of words like "Worshippers" won't help".

I agree that the benefits of a vaccine probably outweigh the negative effects for those over the age of 70 or those with serious underlying health issues, just as I would advise people in this age bracket to get the flu vaccine. Even then though, the risk to an individual of being seriously ill with Covid (with or without a vaccine) is extremely small, but still on balance probably worth protecting from. As with any vaccine though, this should always be a personal choice.

For anybody else under 70, the absolute risk reduction is negligible (and we are still seeing more and more adverse reactions as the days go by, so we are not yet fully aware of exactly how much the positives outweigh the benefits) and in the very young it is actually more dangerous to have the vaccine than to get Covid - the JCVI said that 12-18 year old net benefit was negligible yet they still went ahead and did it! It's bizarre, sinister and should be questioned.

I use the term 'worshippers' in a slightly facetious manner but the thrust of my argument is that people have genuinely turned Covid into a religion and any question of the religion is met with fire and brimstone. It has been set as those that agree with the narrative and think that everyone should have the vaccines as 'good and virtuous' and those who rally against the narrative and question the vaccines are seen as 'evil and selfish'. That's what good propaganda does for you.

Edited by leedsvaliant
edit

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It has definitely been like a religion. Dissenters are heretics engaging in blasphemy. Government appointed scientists with a track record of lying or at least gross incompetence are deified (more so in America that one). The truth is asserted, not only without evidence but in some cases in the face of contradictory evidence. The way that any green shoots of debate was immediately turned into a moral/virtuous issue by the people who controlled what could and could not be said.

 

I knew the false narratives would fail. Ultimately there's an incredible natural vaccine to lies and that is the truth. You can suppress it temporarily but you can't stop it. Though it has surprised me just how quickly the house of cards as tumbled. Considering it was only 1 month ago that we all thought we were on the verge of a lockdown and now it seems the restrictions can't be removed quickly enough.

 

The silence speaks volumes right about now.

 

 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sometimes? Try all the time. Their assumptions are the sort you would expect a six year old to make. They're quite frankly dangerous and should never have been used as the basis of policy making. I don't blame the modellers per se, I blame the people that never challenged them and their assumptions until it's too late.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, leedsvaliant said:
1 hour ago, Fosse69 said:

Sometimes? Try all the time. Their assumptions are the sort you would expect a six year old to make. They're quite frankly dangerous and should never have been used as the basis of policy making. I don't blame the modellers per se, I blame the people that never challenged them and their assumptions until it's too late.

An explanation of the process, whether politicians don`t understand or misrepresent is a bigger problem. The projections themselves cause reactions positive or negative.  The alternative is to do nothing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, valeparklife said:

Is this more cognitive dissonance?

 

On 24/01/2022 at 04:32, valeparklife said:
On 17/01/2022 at 03:31, valeparklife said:

On the subject of masks, I was ridiculed and abused on this forum for suggesting they don't actually offer sufficient protection. And it's more of a comfort blanket to make people feel safe, rather than actually keeping them safe.

Now the CDC has confirmed this. Those cloth masks you were all wearing are worthless.

Don't all apologise at once.

VPL, I have not and neither do I wish to ridicule or abuse you in any way but the posts you've made above are simply not true.

The CDC say on their web site, "

  • Masking is a critical public health tool for preventing spread of COVID-19, and it is important to remember that any mask is better than no mask. They then go on to compare different types of mask etc.

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/prevent-getting-sick/types-of-masks.html

As for the post, "So these miracle vaccines actually do more harm than good" and then quote a Bloomberg article which is full of words like "May, maybe and could" and doesn't say anything remotely close to the vaccines do more harm than good.

The vaccines work, they save lives, spare people awful illness and keep people out of hospital and have been a massive weapon in the fight to get life back to normality. There are many peer reviewed articles in the literature to this end.

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/effectiveness/work.html

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Paul6754 said:

 

VPL, I have not and neither do I wish to ridicule or abuse you in any way but the posts you've made above are simply not true.

The CDC say on their web site, "

  • Masking is a critical public health tool for preventing spread of COVID-19, and it is important to remember that any mask is better than no mask. They then go on to compare different types of mask etc.

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/prevent-getting-sick/types-of-masks.html

As for the post, "So these miracle vaccines actually do more harm than good" and then quote a Bloomberg article which is full of words like "May, maybe and could" and doesn't say anything remotely close to the vaccines do more harm than good.

The vaccines work, they save lives, spare people awful illness and keep people out of hospital and have been a massive weapon in the fight to get life back to normality. There are many peer reviewed articles in the literature to this end.

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/effectiveness/work.html

 

These masks?

Image

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Paul6754 said:

VPL, I have not and neither do I wish to ridicule or abuse you in any way but the posts you've made above are simply not true.

I wasn't going to do this. But why is your first thought about ridiculing and abusing me? Like so many of the other cult members.

https://www.acpjournals.org/doi/10.7326/M20-6817

“Infection with SARS-CoV-2 occurred in 42 participants recommended masks (1.8%) and 53 control participants (2.1%). The between-group difference was −0.3 percentage point (95% CI, −1.2 to 0.4 percentage point; P = 0.38) (odds ratio, 0.82 [CI, 0.54 to 1.23]; P = 0.33). Multiple imputation accounting for loss to follow-up yielded similar results…the recommendation to wear surgical masks to supplement other public health measures did not reduce the SARS-CoV-2 infection rate among wearers by more than 50% in a community with modest infection rates, some degree of social distancing, and uncommon general mask use.”

https://www.poverty-action.org/sites/default/files/publications/Mask_RCT____Symptomatic_Seropositivity_083121.pdf

"A cluster-randomized trial of community-level mask promotion in rural Bangladesh from November 2020 to April 2021 (N=600 villages, N=342,126 adults. Heneghan writes: “In a Bangladesh study, surgical masks reduced symptomatic COVID infections by between 0 and 22 percent, while the efficacy of cloth masks led to somewhere between an 11 percent increase to a 21 percent decrease. Hence, based on these randomized studies, adult masks appear to have either no or limited efficacy.”

https://www.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/2021-11/working-paper-64.pdf

“The available clinical evidence of facemask efficacy is of low quality and the best available clinical evidence has mostly failed to show efficacy, with fourteen of sixteen identified randomized controlled trials comparing face masks to no mask controls failing to find statistically significant benefit in the intent-to-treat populations. Of sixteen quantitative meta-analyses, eight were equivocal or critical as to whether evidence supports a public recommendation of masks, and the remaining eight supported a public mask intervention on limited evidence primarily on the basis of the precautionary principle.”

https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspective/2020/04/commentary-masks-all-covid-19-not-based-sound-data

“We agree that the data supporting the effectiveness of a cloth mask or face covering are very limited. We do, however, have data from laboratory studies that indicate cloth masks or face coverings offer very low filter collection efficiency for the smaller inhalable particles we believe are largely responsible for transmission, particularly from pre- or asymptomatic individuals who are not coughing or sneezing…though we support mask wearing by the general public, we continue to conclude that cloth masks and face coverings are likely to have limited impact on lowering COVID-19 transmission, because they have minimal ability to prevent the emission of small particles, offer limited personal protection with respect to small particle inhalation, and should not be recommended as a replacement for physical distancing or reducing time in enclosed spaces with many potentially infectious people.”

https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMp2006372

“We know that wearing a mask outside health care facilities offers little, if any, protection from infection. Public health authorities define a significant exposure to Covid-19 as face-to-face contact within 6 feet with a patient with symptomatic Covid-19 that is sustained for at least a few minutes (and some say more than 10 minutes or even 30 minutes). The chance of catching Covid-19 from a passing interaction in a public space is therefore minimal. In many cases, the desire for widespread masking is a reflexive reaction to anxiety over the pandemic…The calculus may be different, however, in health care settings. First and foremost, a mask is a core component of the personal protective equipment (PPE) clinicians need when caring for symptomatic patients with respiratory viral infections, in conjunction with gown, gloves, and eye protection…universal masking alone is not a panacea. A mask will not protect providers caring for a patient with active Covid-19 if it’s not accompanied by meticulous hand hygiene, eye protection, gloves, and a gown. A mask alone will not prevent health care workers with early Covid-19 from contaminating their hands and spreading the virus to patients and colleagues. Focusing on universal masking alone may, paradoxically, lead to more transmission of Covid-19 if it diverts attention from implementing more fundamental infection-control measures.”

https://aip.scitation.org/doi/10.1063/5.0057100

“Nevertheless, high-efficiency masks, such as the KN95, still offer substantially higher apparent filtration efficiencies (60% and 46% for R95 and KN95 masks, respectively) than the more commonly used cloth (10%) and surgical masks (12%), and therefore are still the recommended choice in mitigating airborne disease transmission indoors.”

https://www.aier.org/article/masking-a-careful-review-of-the-evidence/

“In fact, it is not unreasonable at this time to conclude that surgical and cloth masks, used as they currently are, have absolutely no impact on controlling the transmission of Covid-19 virus, and current evidence implies that face masks can be actually harmful.”

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-3099(20)30985-3/fulltext

“We observed no association of risk of transmission with reported mask usage by contacts, with the age or sex of the index case, or with the presence of respiratory symptoms in the index case at the initial study visit.”

https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/329438/9789241516839-eng.pdf?ua=1

“Ten RCTs were included in the meta-analysis, and there was no evidence that face masks are effective in reducing transmission of laboratory-confirmed influenza.”

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.03.30.20047217v2

“There was insufficient evidence to provide a recommendation on the use of facial barriers without other measures. We found insufficient evidence for a difference between surgical masks and N95 respirators and limited evidence to support effectiveness of quarantine.”

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7680614/

“The existing scientific evidences challenge the safety and efficacy of wearing facemask as preventive intervention for COVID-19. The data suggest that both medical and non-medical facemasks are ineffective to block human-to-human transmission of viral and infectious disease such SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19, supporting against the usage of facemasks. Wearing facemasks has been demonstrated to have substantial adverse physiological and psychological effects. These include hypoxia, hypercapnia, shortness of breath, increased acidity and toxicity, activation of fear and stress response, rise in stress hormones, immunosuppression, fatigue, headaches, decline in cognitive performance, predisposition for viral and infectious illnesses, chronic stress, anxiety and depression.”

https://swprs.org/face-masks-evidence/

“Most studies found little to no evidence for the effectiveness of face masks in the general population, neither as personal protective equipment nor as a source control.”

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.05.18.21257385v1

“Mask mandates and use are not associated with slower state-level COVID-19 spread during COVID-19 growth surges.”

https://www.globalresearch.ca/twenty-reasons-mandatory-face-masks-are-unsafe-ineffective-and-immoral/5735171

“A CDC-funded review on masking in May 2020 came to the conclusion: “Although mechanistic studies support the potential effect of hand hygiene or face masks, evidence from 14 randomized controlled trials of these measures did not support a substantial effect on transmission of laboratory-confirmed influenza… None of the household studies reported a significant reduction in secondary laboratory-confirmed influenza virus infections in the face mask group.” If masks can’t stop the regular flu, how can they stop SAR-CoV-2?”

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32371574/

“Conclusion: The COVID-19 pandemic has led to critical shortages of medical-grade PPE. Alternative forms of facial protection offer inferior protection. More robust evidence is required on different types of medical-grade facial protection. As research on COVID-19 advances, investigators should continue to examine the impact on alternatives of medical-grade facial protection”

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.05.18.21257385v2

“Calculated total COVID-19 case growth and mask use for the continental United States with data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation. We estimated post-mask mandate case growth in non-mandate states using median issuance dates of neighboring states with mandates…did not observe association between mask mandates or use and reduced COVID-19 spread in US states.”

https://www.aier.org/article/the-cdcs-mask-mandate-study-debunked/

“Thus, it is not surprising that the CDC’s own recent conclusion on the use of nonpharmaceutical measures such as face masks in pandemic influenza, warned that scientific “evidence from 14 randomized controlled trials of these measures did not support a substantial effect on transmission…” Moreover, in the WHO’s 2019 guidance document on nonpharmaceutical public health measures in a pandemic, they reported as to face masks that “there is no evidence that this is effective in reducing transmission…” Similarly, in the fine print to a recent double-blind, double-masking simulation the CDC stated that “The findings of these simulations [supporting mask usage] should neither be generalized to the effectiveness …nor interpreted as being representative of the effectiveness of these masks when worn in real-world settings.”

https://rationalground.com/dangerous-pathogens-found-on-childrens-face-masks/

“Masks were contaminated with bacteria, parasites, and fungi, including three with dangerous pathogenic and pneumonia-causing bacteria.”

https://www.globalresearch.ca/medical-doctor-warns-bacterial-pneumonias-rise-mask-wearing

“I’m seeing patients that have facial rashes, fungal infections, bacterial infections. Reports coming from my colleagues, all over the world, are suggesting that the bacterial pneumonias are on the rise…Why might that be? Because untrained members of the public are wearing medical masks, repeatedly… in a non-sterile fashion… They’re becoming contaminated. They’re pulling them off of their car seat, off the rear-view mirror, out of their pocket, from their countertop, and they’re reapplying a mask that should be worn fresh and sterile every single time.”

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Fosse69 said:

An explanation of the process, whether politicians don`t understand or misrepresent is a bigger problem. The projections themselves cause reactions positive or negative.  The alternative is to do nothing.

One of many alternatives is to do nothing. There are an infinite number of other alternatives. It was the direct opposite of a binary choice between doing what we did and doing nothing. 

 

The bomb shell was a few weeks ago when one of the SAGE modellers admitted that they don't model "likely" or "best case" scenarios because whats the point? - his logic was that they would not inform policy decisions if their models were that nothing bad would happen.

 

In fact, what we were left with, was a worst case scenario model (which was quite obviously wrong anyway in my completely unqualified opinion) meaning that Government were creating policies despite not having any knowledge of likely or best case scenarios. The models don't hide this...they all have some form of..."without measures" or "if we don't do anything". They've been proven wrong categorically over Xmas on those claims. 

 

This article is despicable by the way. Absolutely smacks of arse covering now that the great covid narrative has fallen. People were getting banned from social media for posting completely true statements whilst those in control willfully spread lies surrounding covid and then gaslighting everyone who had alternative views. Now they are planting the seeds to defend their lies and justify wrecking the education of millions of children, the mental health of many people, the physical health of others, the economy, the remaining trust in Government. 

 

 

 

 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, valeparklife said:

I wasn't going to do this. But why is your first thought about ridiculing and abusing me? Like so many of the other cult members.

https://www.acpjournals.org/doi/10.7326/M20-6817

“Infection with SARS-CoV-2 occurred in 42 participants recommended masks (1.8%) and 53 control participants (2.1%). The between-group difference was −0.3 percentage point (95% CI, −1.2 to 0.4 percentage point; P = 0.38) (odds ratio, 0.82 [CI, 0.54 to 1.23]; P = 0.33). Multiple imputation accounting for loss to follow-up yielded similar results…the recommendation to wear surgical masks to supplement other public health measures did not reduce the SARS-CoV-2 infection rate among wearers by more than 50% in a community with modest infection rates, some degree of social distancing, and uncommon general mask use.”

https://www.poverty-action.org/sites/default/files/publications/Mask_RCT____Symptomatic_Seropositivity_083121.pdf

"A cluster-randomized trial of community-level mask promotion in rural Bangladesh from November 2020 to April 2021 (N=600 villages, N=342,126 adults. Heneghan writes: “In a Bangladesh study, surgical masks reduced symptomatic COVID infections by between 0 and 22 percent, while the efficacy of cloth masks led to somewhere between an 11 percent increase to a 21 percent decrease. Hence, based on these randomized studies, adult masks appear to have either no or limited efficacy.”

https://www.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/2021-11/working-paper-64.pdf

“The available clinical evidence of facemask efficacy is of low quality and the best available clinical evidence has mostly failed to show efficacy, with fourteen of sixteen identified randomized controlled trials comparing face masks to no mask controls failing to find statistically significant benefit in the intent-to-treat populations. Of sixteen quantitative meta-analyses, eight were equivocal or critical as to whether evidence supports a public recommendation of masks, and the remaining eight supported a public mask intervention on limited evidence primarily on the basis of the precautionary principle.”

https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspective/2020/04/commentary-masks-all-covid-19-not-based-sound-data

“We agree that the data supporting the effectiveness of a cloth mask or face covering are very limited. We do, however, have data from laboratory studies that indicate cloth masks or face coverings offer very low filter collection efficiency for the smaller inhalable particles we believe are largely responsible for transmission, particularly from pre- or asymptomatic individuals who are not coughing or sneezing…though we support mask wearing by the general public, we continue to conclude that cloth masks and face coverings are likely to have limited impact on lowering COVID-19 transmission, because they have minimal ability to prevent the emission of small particles, offer limited personal protection with respect to small particle inhalation, and should not be recommended as a replacement for physical distancing or reducing time in enclosed spaces with many potentially infectious people.”

https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMp2006372

“We know that wearing a mask outside health care facilities offers little, if any, protection from infection. Public health authorities define a significant exposure to Covid-19 as face-to-face contact within 6 feet with a patient with symptomatic Covid-19 that is sustained for at least a few minutes (and some say more than 10 minutes or even 30 minutes). The chance of catching Covid-19 from a passing interaction in a public space is therefore minimal. In many cases, the desire for widespread masking is a reflexive reaction to anxiety over the pandemic…The calculus may be different, however, in health care settings. First and foremost, a mask is a core component of the personal protective equipment (PPE) clinicians need when caring for symptomatic patients with respiratory viral infections, in conjunction with gown, gloves, and eye protection…universal masking alone is not a panacea. A mask will not protect providers caring for a patient with active Covid-19 if it’s not accompanied by meticulous hand hygiene, eye protection, gloves, and a gown. A mask alone will not prevent health care workers with early Covid-19 from contaminating their hands and spreading the virus to patients and colleagues. Focusing on universal masking alone may, paradoxically, lead to more transmission of Covid-19 if it diverts attention from implementing more fundamental infection-control measures.”

https://aip.scitation.org/doi/10.1063/5.0057100

“Nevertheless, high-efficiency masks, such as the KN95, still offer substantially higher apparent filtration efficiencies (60% and 46% for R95 and KN95 masks, respectively) than the more commonly used cloth (10%) and surgical masks (12%), and therefore are still the recommended choice in mitigating airborne disease transmission indoors.”

https://www.aier.org/article/masking-a-careful-review-of-the-evidence/

“In fact, it is not unreasonable at this time to conclude that surgical and cloth masks, used as they currently are, have absolutely no impact on controlling the transmission of Covid-19 virus, and current evidence implies that face masks can be actually harmful.”

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-3099(20)30985-3/fulltext

“We observed no association of risk of transmission with reported mask usage by contacts, with the age or sex of the index case, or with the presence of respiratory symptoms in the index case at the initial study visit.”

https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/329438/9789241516839-eng.pdf?ua=1

“Ten RCTs were included in the meta-analysis, and there was no evidence that face masks are effective in reducing transmission of laboratory-confirmed influenza.”

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.03.30.20047217v2

“There was insufficient evidence to provide a recommendation on the use of facial barriers without other measures. We found insufficient evidence for a difference between surgical masks and N95 respirators and limited evidence to support effectiveness of quarantine.”

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7680614/

“The existing scientific evidences challenge the safety and efficacy of wearing facemask as preventive intervention for COVID-19. The data suggest that both medical and non-medical facemasks are ineffective to block human-to-human transmission of viral and infectious disease such SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19, supporting against the usage of facemasks. Wearing facemasks has been demonstrated to have substantial adverse physiological and psychological effects. These include hypoxia, hypercapnia, shortness of breath, increased acidity and toxicity, activation of fear and stress response, rise in stress hormones, immunosuppression, fatigue, headaches, decline in cognitive performance, predisposition for viral and infectious illnesses, chronic stress, anxiety and depression.”

https://swprs.org/face-masks-evidence/

“Most studies found little to no evidence for the effectiveness of face masks in the general population, neither as personal protective equipment nor as a source control.”

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.05.18.21257385v1

“Mask mandates and use are not associated with slower state-level COVID-19 spread during COVID-19 growth surges.”

https://www.globalresearch.ca/twenty-reasons-mandatory-face-masks-are-unsafe-ineffective-and-immoral/5735171

“A CDC-funded review on masking in May 2020 came to the conclusion: “Although mechanistic studies support the potential effect of hand hygiene or face masks, evidence from 14 randomized controlled trials of these measures did not support a substantial effect on transmission of laboratory-confirmed influenza… None of the household studies reported a significant reduction in secondary laboratory-confirmed influenza virus infections in the face mask group.” If masks can’t stop the regular flu, how can they stop SAR-CoV-2?”

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32371574/

“Conclusion: The COVID-19 pandemic has led to critical shortages of medical-grade PPE. Alternative forms of facial protection offer inferior protection. More robust evidence is required on different types of medical-grade facial protection. As research on COVID-19 advances, investigators should continue to examine the impact on alternatives of medical-grade facial protection”

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.05.18.21257385v2

“Calculated total COVID-19 case growth and mask use for the continental United States with data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation. We estimated post-mask mandate case growth in non-mandate states using median issuance dates of neighboring states with mandates…did not observe association between mask mandates or use and reduced COVID-19 spread in US states.”

https://www.aier.org/article/the-cdcs-mask-mandate-study-debunked/

“Thus, it is not surprising that the CDC’s own recent conclusion on the use of nonpharmaceutical measures such as face masks in pandemic influenza, warned that scientific “evidence from 14 randomized controlled trials of these measures did not support a substantial effect on transmission…” Moreover, in the WHO’s 2019 guidance document on nonpharmaceutical public health measures in a pandemic, they reported as to face masks that “there is no evidence that this is effective in reducing transmission…” Similarly, in the fine print to a recent double-blind, double-masking simulation the CDC stated that “The findings of these simulations [supporting mask usage] should neither be generalized to the effectiveness …nor interpreted as being representative of the effectiveness of these masks when worn in real-world settings.”

https://rationalground.com/dangerous-pathogens-found-on-childrens-face-masks/

“Masks were contaminated with bacteria, parasites, and fungi, including three with dangerous pathogenic and pneumonia-causing bacteria.”

https://www.globalresearch.ca/medical-doctor-warns-bacterial-pneumonias-rise-mask-wearing

“I’m seeing patients that have facial rashes, fungal infections, bacterial infections. Reports coming from my colleagues, all over the world, are suggesting that the bacterial pneumonias are on the rise…Why might that be? Because untrained members of the public are wearing medical masks, repeatedly… in a non-sterile fashion… They’re becoming contaminated. They’re pulling them off of their car seat, off the rear-view mirror, out of their pocket, from their countertop, and they’re reapplying a mask that should be worn fresh and sterile every single time.”

Don't provide people with evidence, they prefer to believe in 'belief'! Or in Tommy Tunstall's case, laugh, as he clearly has no comeback to it. Just been to two shops and I think I was the only person not wearing a mask - it seems that it will take some time for people to be convinced that it's safe out there. Actually, probably like last time, within 2 weeks I'll see less and less masks as people realise they don't need them.

There has been very little research done into the harm on masks, particularly wearing them for sustained periods of time or not changing them frequently. It stands to reason that putting a piece of cloth over your nose and mouth is a breeding ground for germs and bacteria, but again nobody wants to face up to these uncomfortable truths.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, Regal Beagle said:

One of many alternatives is to do nothing. There are an infinite number of other alternatives. It was the direct opposite of a binary choice between doing what we did and doing nothing. 

 

The bomb shell was a few weeks ago when one of the SAGE modellers admitted that they don't model "likely" or "best case" scenarios because whats the point? - his logic was that they would not inform policy decisions if their models were that nothing bad would happen.

 

In fact, what we were left with, was a worst case scenario model (which was quite obviously wrong anyway in my completely unqualified opinion) meaning that Government were creating policies despite not having any knowledge of likely or best case scenarios. The models don't hide this...they all have some form of..."without measures" or "if we don't do anything". They've been proven wrong categorically over Xmas on those claims. 

 

This article is despicable by the way. Absolutely smacks of arse covering now that the great covid narrative has fallen. People were getting banned from social media for posting completely true statements whilst those in control willfully spread lies surrounding covid and then gaslighting everyone who had alternative views. Now they are planting the seeds to defend their lies and justify wrecking the education of millions of children, the mental health of many people, the physical health of others, the economy, the remaining trust in Government. 

 

 

 

 

This is what annoys me. People say to me 'should we have just done nothing?'. Well, no, we could have instigated sensible precautions as detailed in our pandemic plan that was torn up. Instead, Italy followed China on their insane 'Zero Covid' policy and then we followed suit through ridiculous pressure from the media and a general public with zero knowledge. The evidence coming out now through ONS is stuff I've been talking about for the past 2 years, the massive oversell of deaths, the ignorance of non-Covid deaths caused by the restrictions, the pushing of ill/old people out of hospitals at the start, the mental health deaths - these all contributed to way more deaths than Covid would ever have caused. Yet I was called a liar, a conspiracy theorist, selfish, right wing, anti-vaxx, a nutter...and I said all along that I can't wait to say I told you so.

There appears to be a lot of this distancing and backpeddaling...it has the hallmarks of Nazi Germans only following orders and believing they were doing the right thing. Once the true cost of this insane policy comes out in the next few years, I hope some people feel very ashamed in their support of it. Particularly its affect on children.

There are still people wanting to push measures on children, push vaccines on them, stop them from seeing their friends, forcing them to wear masks all day, ruining their school experience, stopping field trips, stopping school/parent activities...these people are mentally ill and need counselling. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Paul6754 said:

 

VPL, I have not and neither do I wish to ridicule or abuse you in any way but the posts you've made above are simply not true.

The CDC say on their web site, "

  • Masking is a critical public health tool for preventing spread of COVID-19, and it is important to remember that any mask is better than no mask. They then go on to compare different types of mask etc.

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/prevent-getting-sick/types-of-masks.html

As for the post, "So these miracle vaccines actually do more harm than good" and then quote a Bloomberg article which is full of words like "May, maybe and could" and doesn't say anything remotely close to the vaccines do more harm than good.

The vaccines work, they save lives, spare people awful illness and keep people out of hospital and have been a massive weapon in the fight to get life back to normality. There are many peer reviewed articles in the literature to this end.

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/effectiveness/work.html

 

'Any mask is better than no mask' is not a very scientific way of proving their efficacy. What if their efficacy is 0.00000001%? Is that still worth it? It would still make that statement technically true.

In terms of the vaccines, I think we've all been over this point many times. Yes, for those over a certain age or highly vulnerable, they are on balance probably worth having. I don't think anybody would question that. Even then, the chances of an old or vulnerable person dying from Covid is extremely small, so people should still have the choice, even if they know they may be putting themselves at a small risk.

For the rest of the population, I believe that coercing them into taking a vaccine that they do not need and with not yet fully understood side effects, is dangerous. We are learning now that they only potentially reduce transmission slightly and that doesn't last very long, so it's not like taking the vaccines is helping other people. The other argument I hear is that unvaccinated people would take up hospital beds - what I would say is that the vast majority of people who have refused vaccines would never likely get ill enough from Covid to require a hospital bed in the first place.  Additionally, we don't treat alcoholics or smokers as outcasts because they require medical treatment due to a lifestyle choice do we?

Edited by leedsvaliant
edit
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, leedsvaliant said:

This is what annoys me. People say to me 'should we have just done nothing?'. Well, no, we could have instigated sensible precautions as detailed in our pandemic plan that was torn up. Instead, Italy followed China on their insane 'Zero Covid' policy and then we followed suit through ridiculous pressure from the media and a general public with zero knowledge. The evidence coming out now through ONS is stuff I've been talking about for the past 2 years, the massive oversell of deaths, the ignorance of non-Covid deaths caused by the restrictions, the pushing of ill/old people out of hospitals at the start, the mental health deaths - these all contributed to way more deaths than Covid would ever have caused. Yet I was called a liar, a conspiracy theorist, selfish, right wing, anti-vaxx, a nutter...and I said all along that I can't wait to say I told you so.

There appears to be a lot of this distancing and backpeddaling...it has the hallmarks of Nazi Germans only following orders and believing they were doing the right thing. Once the true cost of this insane policy comes out in the next few years, I hope some people feel very ashamed in their support of it. Particularly its affect on children.

There are still people wanting to push measures on children, push vaccines on them, stop them from seeing their friends, forcing them to wear masks all day, ruining their school experience, stopping field trips, stopping school/parent activities...these people are mentally ill and need counselling. 

True, you could see the pressure in real time when people got offended by the idea of herd immunity. Now we all throw that term around whilst we're causally having a brew break. That was the start of the complete and utter disinformation campaign. 

It was a bunch of complete idiots who knew what they were saying was untrue, but they pushed this idea that "herd immunity" was some eugenicist plot by the UK Government to deliberately kill thousands of their own population. (conspiracy theory much?)

That's when Boris caved and locked down despite saying in the week or two before hand that he would trust the british people to act responsibly and maintain the freedom that is the greatest export in our history.

 

 

Party political lies have directly contributed to the <ovf censored> show that is coming up round the next corner. The people who engaged it in will face no consequences. In fact they will use it to leverage their own political advantage, again. The same people who pressured the Government to wreck the futures of millions of children will very soon be championing the compensation claims, the inequality, the cancers etc. Exactly as they will use the staff shortages in the NHS as a political pawn even whilst supporting the sacking of 80k NHS staff.

 

And this may sound like a defensive on this Government. It most certainly isn't.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, leedsvaliant said:

Don't provide people with evidence, they prefer to believe in 'belief'! Or in Tommy Tunstall's case, laugh, as he clearly has no comeback to it. Just been to two shops and I think I was the only person not wearing a mask - it seems that it will take some time for people to be convinced that it's safe out there. Actually, probably like last time, within 2 weeks I'll see less and less masks as people realise they don't need them.

There has been very little research done into the harm on masks, particularly wearing them for sustained periods of time or not changing them frequently. It stands to reason that putting a piece of cloth over your nose and mouth is a breeding ground for germs and bacteria, but again nobody wants to face up to these uncomfortable truths.

Sadly it won't even be a realisation. It's sheep mentality. People will follow the crowd be it putting a mask on or taking them off. I find it fascinating that there is a complete and utter lack of mask wearing at Vale, including the pubs before and after the game. Despite it being mandatory in some indoor settings, people either gladly accept that the Government is on to something when it mandates masks in a shop but not a pub, or they don't want to risk being the odd one out in a pub full of maskless faces. 

 

I'm not sure if I've already told this story but a couple of weeks before Christmas I was on a train to Manchester and there were a load of football fans, the table next to me was a group of young lads drinking cans but had their masks on until one of them said "no <ovf censored> on this train has a mask on, I'm taking mine off" and hey presto, they all sat their maskless for the rest of the journey.

 

It was such a perfect example of what has gone on in the last 2 years for me.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sadly it won't even be a realisation. It's sheep mentality. People will follow the crowd be it putting a mask on or taking them off. I find it fascinating that there is a complete and utter lack of mask wearing at Vale, including the pubs before and after the game. Despite it being mandatory in some indoor settings, people either gladly accept that the Government is on to something when it mandates masks in a shop but not a pub, or they don't want to risk being the odd one out in a pub full of maskless faces. 
 
I'm not sure if I've already told this story but a couple of weeks before Christmas I was on a train to Manchester and there were a load of football fans, the table next to me was a group of young lads drinking cans but had their masks on until one of them said "no on this train has a mask on, I'm taking mine off" and hey presto, they all sat their maskless for the rest of the journey.
 
It was such a perfect example of what has gone on in the last 2 years for me.
I thought the same in the red lion the other week. People cheek to jowel and then later on they nip into tesco on the way home and put a mask on even now they are no longer required. The mental gymnastics of these people to justify their actions must be something to behold.
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought the same in the red lion the other week. People cheek to jowel and then later on they nip into tesco on the way home and put a mask on even now they are no longer required. The mental gymnastics of these people to justify their actions must be something to behold.
All of you in the red lion chose to go to the pub. Vulnerable Betty has no choice but to go to Tesco to get her bread and milk. By wearing your mask in tesco you are less likely to pass the virus onto Betty. Hardly mental gymnastics. Your cloth mask may not offer you any protection but does reduce the chance you make Betty ill.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, leedsvaliant said:

Don't provide people with evidence, they prefer to believe in 'belief'! Or in Tommy Tunstall's case, laugh, as he clearly has no comeback to it. Just been to two shops and I think I was the only person not wearing a mask - it seems that it will take some time for people to be convinced that it's safe out there. Actually, probably like last time, within 2 weeks I'll see less and less masks as people realise they don't need them.

There has been very little research done into the harm on masks, particularly wearing them for sustained periods of time or not changing them frequently. It stands to reason that putting a piece of cloth over your nose and mouth is a breeding ground for germs and bacteria, but again nobody wants to face up to these uncomfortable truths.

LV just to remind you I stated weeks ago that was not posting on this thread because of disgusting claims. I do look and still see the mistruths you are still posting. I am sure other OVF posters feel the same as myself.

Thank goodness for people like the music icon Neil Young, who has left Spotify because of the cranky info they are putting out, just like yourself RB and VPL, still spreading the fake info, and doing your utmost to ensure that Covid continues, goodbye and hopefully you will stay silent, but I doubt it.

  • Haha 1

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 on ASAP. If you're logged in use the orange report post button. If you're not logged in, please use the contact form

    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...