Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

FallingAwake

Members
  • Posts

    1,611
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by FallingAwake

  1. A scarier sounding variant? Most of the Greek letters sound fairly tame. Except maybe OMICRON.
  2. For sure, it isn't junk (even though there are still some biologists out there who continue to cling to this notion). I think I was just saying that in the year 2000 (just 21 years ago), the mainstream consensus was that the typical genome was more junk than purposeful. My point was, the human race is still relatively new to all of this. We're still discovering new proteins every year, and new uses for these proteins in unexpected places. This vast leap in scientific knowledge over the last 20 years is why I think we should be proceeding with a lot of caution, especially when injecting genetically modified mNRA / proteins into the body. For example, if it's so good, why has Moderna literally never bought a drug to market before, based on this technology? mRNA technology was mainly all theoretical or tested on very small groups (i.e. cancer patients) until the White House decided to allow them to make a vaccine and sell it to the masses. That strikes me as.... bold
  3. Two reasons... (1) because in the case of the current vaccines, "vaccinated" doesn't mean you don't get covid 🙄... much like all the people who get measles, mumps and rubella after being vaccinated. (Oh, wait...) (2) the "double jabbed" will be treated as "unvaccinated" if they haven't got their six-monthly subscription to Pfizer's Digest renewed. This is already the case in Israel. The Supreme Court in France has just overturned one of Macron's decisions which meant people without their vaxxpasses couldn't enter supermarkets in shopping centres to buy groceries. It's getting interesting out there.
  4. Good catch. I'm sure it'll be approved in the West, once everyone's been quadruple vaccinated.
  5. Maybe we should try... something different?... Hunt goes off script with ivermectin https://spectator.com.au/2021/07/hunt-goes-off-script-with-ivermectin/ (An Australian viewpoint.) Even the Japanese health minister recommended it a few days ago
  6. We really need to be rolling out and publicising other preventatives for covid, especially if a decent proportion of these are vaccinated. It's kind of shocking to think that, despite Operation Warp Speed, how many ways do people know about to lower their risk besides the vaccines and face masks? Vaccines do seem to help, but they're still not keeping people out of hospital (see Israel, for example), which is why more products are coming online over there, but are still virtually unheard of here.
  7. Good article. It's nice to see both sides of the debate. There may be a case for delaying to give other countries our vaccine shots. I was just pointing out that I don't think JCVI are going to be looking at that as a factor. Also, I don't think the public would accept it. After all, little Johnny needs his shot to protect him from long covid, right?
  8. The Pfizer-BioNTech one will have been tested on people 12 and over, since the FDA have given emergency use authorisation for that age group. https://www.fda.gov/news-events/press-announcements/fda-approves-first-covid-19-vaccine
  9. Not to downplay this issue, but the above seems like a New Scientist article dressed up as a science paper, advocating kids not going back to school. It also references the one below... This was a study of 129 children, posted on January 2021. How are the children doing now? What's the follow-up? Do they still suffer from long covid, or have they recovered? Please post the follow-up. Again, to be clear, I'm not trying to minimise what those children went through. It should definitely be a factor in considering whether to vaccinate the younger groups. However, the adverse events databases are also full of people who experienced very weird and debilitating things after vaccines, and this should also be a factor. And if, in the event that nobody is following up on those 129 children, then I'd say... how are we supposed to "follow the science" if the science stops being done? If all 129 have recovered, then that's just as important as if they all still suffer from covid symptoms. Wouldn't you agree?
  10. Well, yes, but I've been scolded as being "anti-vaxx" by @Will! for having that opinion... just letting you know It does make me wonder though, if they can "accelerate" their review, why were they being slower beforehand? Were they being cautious, or just dragging their feet?
  11. Here are the criteria JCVI are using... https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/jcvi-statement-august-2021-covid-19-vaccination-of-children-and-young-people-aged-12-to-17-years/jcvi-statement-on-covid-19-vaccination-of-children-and-young-people-aged-12-to-17-years-4-august-2021 Nothing about shortages worldwide 🤣
  12. I think the reply of @anonguestpretty much sums it up. If we can't even determine which adults have died from the vaccine, how can we evaluate the risk factor for children, very few of whom have died from covid? It only takes about 25 children to die from the vaccine for vaccine deaths to outnumber death from covid. This is a very low threshold. Will the JCVI be deciding on child vaccinations based on an assumption of zero adult deaths from vaccines (or 1 if we count a mid-level BBC journalist)? (I guess @Will! is worth pinging here.) I appreciate other factors are involved, such as illness from covid... but death is an important statistic to measure. I guess my other point is, to a certain extent the data seems skewed in favor of covid, i.e. the deaths reported per day on the government's dashboard at https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk are "Deaths within 28 days of positive test", and yet they are usually attributed by the media as covid deaths. By your logic, many of them could or even should be coincidental. On the other hand, all (or most) of the deaths within 28 days of a vaccine are assumed to be coincidental, simply because the person doesn't die within seconds of the jab. In short, why it matters... (1) because we do need to know how many people are dying from a medication. That's kind of the point of the whole follow-up system. Otherwise what's the point of tracking what happens after a drug is approved? (2) the "death from vaccines" figure is likely to influence the decision to vaccinate children. 0 deaths from the vaccine implies a very different outcome from 1,600 deaths. Clearly the truth is somewhere between those two numbers.
  13. Yes, the article @Bruce Bannerposted is a pretty interesting one (I'll repost the link)... Why some people don't want a Covid-19 vaccine https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20210720-the-complexities-of-vaccine-hesitancy The 5C's are interesting: This is probably the most challenging one, I would imagine. A lot of "hesitant" or "anti-vaxx" people are more familiar with the history of drug companies, drugs and the regulatory agencies than the average person. There's a lot of drugs that were fully approved but then withdrawn years later. (That's because it took several years for the damaging effects to be known, and/or for the regulatory agencies to take action.) I agree with the concept, but this is a bit of a loaded word. Is a 15 year old complacent if they choose not to have the vaccine, based on their risk profile? This one should probably be called "Risk" but it would mess up their C-C-C-C-C thing. Yes. Hesitant people probably do more of their "homework" in this regard than the average person, although it also means they may also be subjected to a lot of hysteria and nonsense from the "anti-vaxx" side, along with some genuine truths. It's definitely a "mixed bag" Yes. We live in a convenience society, so make it convenient. This is an interesting one. I think they hoped the vaccines would be more effective at stopping transmission than they actually are, so this one is a bit harder to argue now. Plus, with more low-cost treatments and preventatives on the way or becoming available now, hopefully people who choose not to get these new pharmaceutical drugs will have other options to protect themselves and others.
  14. Yeah, actually I take your point. The vaccine campaign seems to have been pretty successful so far. We've done well in that regard. Or just vaccine hesitant. You don't have to be "anti" something to not want to take it.
  15. So you're only concerned when it affects you? I expect to see daily "Stupid Fat Person Dies Of Obesity" posts from you, please. After all, they probably could have avoided death if only they'd lost weight. I hope you're not one of those anti-fatlossers.
  16. I'm not an "antivaxxer". I have never told anybody not to take the vaccine. I am vaccine hesitant because I don't believe the mRNA ones have been tested enough. You know for a fact there has never been an mRNA based drug or vaccine before. Why is this? Because it's new technology, even if the theoretical knowledge has been around for a while. I concede that adenovirus-based ones may be safer, because they're the more traditional methods we've used for vaccines. But I'm still hesitant because these ones are being pulled from some markets (i.e. AstraZeneca). Maybe it's just politics, but I'll wait and see. Sorry if I don't have blind credulity in governments, drug companies and regulatory agencies.
  17. It's their personal religion. Just wait until they move onto obesity... god help us all.
  18. Take-up of second Covid jab in England levelling off https://www.theguardian.com/society/2021/aug/29/take-up-of-second-covid-jab-in-england-levelling-off I wonder if this is partly to do with personal anecdotes? While in "Official World" all is well, vaccines are "safe and effective" and nobody has died from them... in the real world, plenty of adverse affects have been reported by ordinary people. And people talk. If you've been knocked out or suffered strong adverse effects by your first jab, I wonder how likely you are to put yourself through that a second time. And you'll probably tell your friends and family about what happened to you. Obviously this has to be weighed up with the potential risks of getting covid. This is going to be an interesting challenge for authorities to overcome, especially as we get into 3rd and 4th (etc) jab stages.
  19. I know it's a bit morbid, but you can read a user-friendly version of the VAERS database (which contains the adverse reports in the US) here: https://openvaers.com/covid-data/covid-full-data Some of the "death" ones seem very bizarre, i.e the physicians saying the person's death can't be linked to the vaccine. Take a look at this one as an example (my highlights): https://www.openvaers.com/covid-data/covid-full-data/1589982 So did this person die from the vaccine? We'll probably never know. An interesting question I could ask the medical experts here is: how could we find out if his death was caused by the vaccine? If only there were some way we could find out. Is there? There are tens of thousands of stories just like his. Sorry to be morbid, but it seems as if these people deserve a bit more than just, "Ah well, probably coincidence." @scottbeard @Will! Edit: Here's one more, which sounds even more bizarre to me.
  20. OK, I read that (while gnawing my tongue a little at the same time ) It explains the mechanism but doesn't talk about viral load, etc. Serious question: do you think getting one particle of coronavirus in your throat is better than a million particles ( to begin with)?
  21. I didn't suggest doing an autopsy on everyone who dies ... just the 1,600 who died after the vaccine. At the very least, why not do it anyway? Compared to the cost of rolling out vaccines and all the other stuff the government have spent money on during this pandemic, what's the cost of 1,600 autopsies?
  22. OK, well thanks for sharing that. That's good to know.
×
×
  • 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.