Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

FallingAwake

Members
  • Posts

    1,063
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by FallingAwake

  1. No, no, no... I definitely don't want to see that. I'm glad to see their numbers are low... although I don't see how you can attribute that to the vaccine... isn't it ZeroCovid(tm) that achieved it? But ZeroCovid is clearly unsustainable. Despite the stompiest boots-on-your-face policies, even Australia has given up. Just China is left, which managed to defeat the virus through Glorious Vigilance (and not numberwang).
  2. While we're here, how's ZeroCovid(tm) Australia doing? Oh. Not so well.
  3. I see we're trapped in circular reasoning at this point. Let's try this a different way. Can you tell me how many vaccines over the years have been approved in a matter of months, if calendar months don't matter? OK, maybe a quick one or two line summary of what the FDA / Pfizer etc did differently? If you don't know, that's fine, you can just say you don't know. I won't hold it against you, because most people on here probably don't know either. I've heard they all meet at Mrs Miggins' Pie Shop But seriously, isn't that what our Yellow Card system is for? Reporting adverse effects? So you'll find them there. I'm not claiming this. It actually exists 👀
  4. That would mean having access to information on vaccines never approved, which I don't have. What matters is approved vaccines, because that's what we're talking about. Fair enough. I'm curious to know, then, what they did differently for the coronavirus vaccines to get them approved in a matter of months, compared with other vaccines. From my layperson's eyes, it seems the only thing they did differently is cut short the trial times and skip the later phase(s)? If you can tell me what they did differently, I'd be sincerely interested to know. Perhaps the flu vaccines are easiest to compare, at least conceptually, because they are also given out in large quantity. In the US they are given between 150 and 200 million doses, but the adverse effects are much, much lower than what we've seen so far for these coronavirus vaccines. Could that be because the problem is with mRNA technology, or something else? I don't know, but surely if all vaccines were roughly equal, we'd be seeing roughly the same proportion of adverse effects from flu vaccines, but we don't. The top figures are for a period of FIFTEEN YEARS, i.e. the flu vaccines in the US (150-200 million per year) kill an average of 38 people a year... or rather, presumably 38 deaths a year are reported on their adverse events system. By the way, if nothing else, here's a good reason to administer Ivermectin. Even if it doesn't work, looks like it would make a good placebo
  5. Don't you mean, "no other APPROVED vaccine in the history of vaccination"? That's my point. The approved ones have been tested for several years before they are released to the general public. For me, 3-5 years would probably be good enough. However, I do at least acknowledge the dilemma this creates, in that, if you're in the middle of a pandemic, you might not have the luxury of 3-5 years. This is why I can't be an ardent "anti-vaxxer" here, because clearly something needs to be put out quicker, or its kind of pointless. My simple point is, you are making your comparison with vaccines that have been tested for several years. Is that not at least a fair point?
  6. Precisely. It's self-fulfilling, isn't it Well, she's the boss of the CDC, so her Science is clearly better than her board's Science. I love how it's "just" 3 years later 🤣
  7. Also a point that just occurred to me: These "other vaccines", how long on average did they take to get approved, so we could know they're safe?
  8. OK, sure. Name a previous mRNA vaccine and we'll compare notes.
  9. If they do that, it'll be proof it's no longer about The Science.
  10. I appreciate that scientists and politicians saw that something must be done about coronavirus, and produced a vaccine as quickly as they could. However, they cut short a process that would normally take many years down to about one year or less. By definition, we don't know the long-term effects. This is part of the problem. It's "safe and effective" based on six month to one year of trial data (and even then the list of adverse effects has grown to be rather long, although I guess most of the really bad ones are rare.) At the same time, there are several warnings about what could potentially go wrong with causing the body to produce trillions of Spike proteins, ranging from effects on the blood, through to lowered immunity and even cancer. Unfortunately, the politics of vaccination means these warnings have been drowned out. Anyway, it's going to be a fascinating couple of years. We're essentially going to have three groups whether we like it or not: (1) The "fully vaccinated" who keep up with their xth booster, (2) The "two shots and I'm done" group. If scientists and politicians are serious about science, they should not be considered unvaccinated, because what happens to these people will be of particular scientific interest. (3) The non-vaccinated, i.e. people who have never received a coronavirus vaccine. The trials that (1) and (2) are currently participating in (in lieu of actual clinical trials) will continue to produce data for us to determine whether the current crop of vaccines were good or not, in a wider sense and longer sense. I'd imagine this kind of science would be important to people who plan to keep getting their boosters every 5-6 months. Will it turn out to be a Clint Eastwood scenario, where 5 boosters don't effect you, but say, the sixth paralyses you for life? 😮
  11. Why do you think "egomaniacs" are "more likely to be staunch anti vaccine"? If they believe the vaccine is "safe and effective", wouldn't they be some of the first to rush out and get it, to keep THEMSELVES safe? Anyway, here's a few other pointers for reasons why people do things in relation to vaccines, since it's clearly important to you. (I hate labels but I'll use them, to keep things simpler.) (1) Trust in authority. Pro-vax people probably have more trust in Authority. They are more likely to believe a message when delivered by someone in authority, especially in fields where they think people wouldn't lie to them or obfuscate, i.e. scientists. (2) Psychological reactance. People don't like being told what to do, or have their choices limited. (3) Commitment and consistency. (See Cialdini's "Influence"). When people make a commitment, they are likely to feel a psychological pull to act consistently with their commitment. Having a vaccine means you've made a commitment to yourself, so you are inclined to see what you did in a certain way. (4) One-sided messaging. As has been pointed out on this forum many times, the official message is almost exclusively one-sided, all about how "safe and effective" these things are, with virtually nothing to balance this message. For people who are inherently suspicious (and we all have that side of us, otherwise we'd all fall for Indian phone scams every month), this sets off alarm bells. It comes across more like propaganda, especially over time as more negative effects / results appear to be swept under the carpet or dismissed. (5) Vested interests. This may be obvious in the case of, say, a study done by a drug company... but there is also an indirect effect, i.e. lots of the mainstream media in the US is sponsored by drug companies, "Brought to you... by Pfizer." Are you going to bite the hand that feeds you? Same with research, much of it funded in part by governments. Same for hospitals. How much were hospitals getting for each coronavirus patient (especially in the US, where they are profit driven)? Do you bite the hand that feeds you? No. (6) Polarities. Some things in life are "problems to be solved". Other things are "polarities" where "poles" co-exist and are meant to co-exist, i.e. there is no north without a south to help define the north. An example of a polarity in the human sphere would be our needs as an individual, versus our needs as a species. If you push too hard on one side of a polarity, you will eventually get pushback, since nature seeks balance in a polarity. Both are valid and necessary. I hope this helps, and I don't mean that in a sarcastic way. These things explain a lot of why some people are vaccine hesitant or vaccine lovers.
  12. Thou shalt not have any other Vaccines before Pfizer. And the people said, Ahhpffffffff.
  13. Here is a lady who was paying attention. Her video is from Sept 20th, 2019. If you think "things just happen", you're going to keep getting fleeced.
  14. I think you missed the part where we locked down for months on end, isolated people, practiced social distancing, wore face masks, and 90% got vaccinated? So the old and the vulnerable were actually the first to be protected, shielded, vaccinated etc. Hardly a case of "first they came for the old..."
  15. True, but when the BBC and Guardian are doing it simultaneously for several days in a row, it looks like an agenda.
  16. Looks like the Guardian has just stepped up its fearmongering...
  17. That is also the case with all covid deaths, so you're not really making any point. It's well-known that most people dying from covid have at least one underlying condition.
  18. @anonguest It's all part of some weird narrative, a kind of hangover from the "Orange Man Bad" era. Don't forget, Trump was put into power by Putin, and the media spent four years following every development and possible impeachment of Trump and his involvement with Russia... until it all turned out to be a damp squid. Four years on nothing. Putin was also responsible for slandering all the Western vaccines, and stoking vaccine hesitancy, through some shadowy social media outfit that put out some crappy tweets 🤣 In reality, like him or loathe him, Trump was elected by the American public, and Putin probably doesn't give two hoots about "Western vaccines". It's like people have taken the "fool me once" proverb and said, "OK, keep on fooling me over and over and over again..." Switch off the TV, people!
  19. I was being sarcastic I thought I'd make that graph to pre-empt what we'll be hearing from the media over the next several weeks. Mine will probably look modest compared with Ferguson's.
  20. It's pretty clear if the government doesn't Do Something (tm), the graphs will look like this: Something Must Be Done. (tm)
  21. Coronavirus was originally so bad, people in China would be lying dead in the streets. But fortunately, through vigilance and numberwang, they managed to eliminate the virus altogether.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.