Corona virus

Bloke · 2021-09-10 11:36:14

Destry wrote #331524:

Can’t help myself.

Haha. Highly entertaining. Very well researched too, apart from the bit about not having the jab meaning you’ll pass it onto someone who might die. The jab doesn’t stop anyone catching it, nor transmitting any strain. Just sayin’.

I’m not going to counter. Instead, I’ll let Christian Elliot raise ~~a few~~ many questions and inconsistencies I’d love answered.

etc · 2021-09-10 13:19:36

Bloke wrote #331552:

I’ll let Christian Elliot raise ~~a few~~ many questions and inconsistencies I’d love answered.

While I share many of his doubts, some of the conclusions look biased:

only 6% of the deaths being attributed to covid are instances where covid seems to be the only issue at hand.

In other words, reduce the death numbers you see on the news by 94% and you have what is likely the real numbers of deaths from just covid.

What is death from just covid? Shouldn’t we worry if a certificate mentions both covid and respiratory failure? Or covid and influenza/pneumonia?

Pro and anti vax seem equally unconvincing. Lies, big lies and statistics.

Bloke · 2021-09-10 14:50:47

etc wrote #331555:

Pro and anti vax seem equally unconvincing. Lies, big lies and statistics.

That’s the only truth!

Vienuolis · 2021-09-11 11:16:12

etc wrote #331555:

What is death from just covid? Shouldn’t we worry if a certificate mentions both covid and respiratory failure? Or covid and influenza/pneumonia?

If a Corona is a virus, one of millions we have, you are right. But Covid is officially considered a separate coronavirus disease, so Christian is right.

etc · 2021-09-11 13:02:56

Vienuolis wrote #331561:

If a Corona is a virus, one of millions we have, you are right. But Covid is officially considered a separate coronavirus disease, so Christian is right.

I leave it with Christian, but if he considers, say, death from fluid loss as a separate case, Ebola becomes a rather inoffensive disease. I’m not defending the mandatory covid vaccination in any way, just saying some arguments look unfair.

zero · 2021-09-11 18:15:38

Here’s a convincing, scientific analysis that I don’t think is anywhere unfair. You may think otherwise of course:-) It’s quite long but it is science all the way through so I hope you read it all. (Published today)

Why Covid-19 Vaccine Mandates Are Now Pointless/ Nina Pierpont, MD, PhD

etc · 2021-09-11 21:28:27

zero wrote #331569:

Here’s a convincing, scientific analysis that I don’t think is anywhere unfair. You may think otherwise of course:-) It’s quite long but it is science all the way through so I hope you read it all. (Published today)

Why Covid-19 Vaccine Mandates Are Now Pointless/ Nina Pierpont, MD, PhD

Thank you. This looks fair and confirms that provax partisans use unfair arguments as much as antivax do. Who should we believe? On one hand,

Vaccination has protected against severe disease and death with all the other variants, and may well do the same with the Delta variant.

On the other hand,

the principal reason for COVID-19 vaccine mandates—protecting others from infection—has evaporated with the ascendance of the Delta variant

Vax old dogs, leave the kids alone looks like a consensus.

A funny thing is that www.google.com/search?q=Nina+Pierpont+Why+Covid-19+Vaccine+Mandates+Are+Now+Pointless returned no result for me (other SE did). There is also no mention of this study on her site.

zero · 2021-09-12 13:41:44

etc wrote #331571:

A funny thing is that www.google.com/search?q=Nina+Pierpont+Why+Covid-19+Vaccine+Mandates+Are+Now+Pointless returned no result for me (other SE did). There is also no mention of this study on her site.

Thanks for pointing that out. I can’t find this study elsewhere either. The references at the bottom of the article are there but I’d have to go through them all to analyse and draw conclusions and see if they match Pierpont’s. That’s a lot of hard work I’m not willing to do.

I notice that some studies referred to are pre-prints so I think maybe Pierpont has given Meryl Nass a preview of her study and allowed her to print it prior to it being published or peer-reviewed. I trust Meryl Nass, having read many of her articles, but that’s subjective and unscientific and therefore unfair and unconvincing to those who want undisputable facts.

EDIT: I just found this Pierpont PDF

Last edited by zero (2021-09-12 13:50:55)

zero · 2021-10-02 15:44:09

No one could have missed noticing how politicians and “science experts” in the “pandemic” and “vaccine” roll-out have strongly presented statistics as facts in their attempts to persuade us that their restrictive measures are justified by the “science”. I hope many people will have also noticed that actual evidence of the facts, that the stats appeared to point to, has usually been withheld or presented in an obscure fashion. I hope most people will at least be aware that many things “don’t add up”.

Some of those restrictive measures prevent free speech, discussion and rational debate and thousands of scientists who question the “stats and facts” have been shut down, ridiculed by a hostile press, labelled “anti-vaxxers”, ignored or put at the end of the priority queue by the powers-that-be. So it is very difficult for most people to see the wood for trees.

Fortunately, there are many heroic deeds being done by those who value the truth and who also have positions of respect amongst their peers and colleagues. As they keep revealing factual evidence, more of their communities are listening rather than ignoring them and are themselves starting to question what is going on. One such person is John Dee who is an independent statistician, consultant analyst and former head of clinical audit at an NHS hospital, with regional influence too. He has analysed data from official sources to reveal what the authorities should be telling us about the COVID-19 pandemic but are not.

His finding are powerful enough make the statistics, that the government are using to justify their actions, crumble into sand. That is, of course, if the reader is open, impartial and not themselves a willing part in the government narrative. The UK enquiry into the government handling of everything related to covid, which is supposed to start in early 2022, should use this evidence in their investigations. I wonder if they will or will the enquirers be government appointed with vested interests, like the whitewash WHO enquiry into the origins of covid?

There is no pandemic. Unfortunately, like many others, the report will be attacked as unscientific fake news. John Dee is a pseudonym because does not want to get him/herself or source into serious trouble, but if the NHS does not come clean about the information and procedures indicated, it will be a strong sign of their guilt.

gaekwad · 2021-10-06 13:23:38

Folks, it’s time to close this thread. It’s attracting vitriolic outsiders and I’ve just zapped another new user who spammed 3 inappropriate posts before I could remove them. Ugh.

Thanks for all your contributions. Please be safe, and stay well.

Textpattern CMS

Textpattern CMS support forum

#349 2021-09-10 11:36:14

Re: Corona virus

Destry wrote #331524:

#350 2021-09-10 13:19:36

Re: Corona virus

Bloke wrote #331552:

#351 2021-09-10 14:50:47

Re: Corona virus

etc wrote #331555:

#352 2021-09-11 11:16:12

Re: Corona virus

etc wrote #331555:

#353 2021-09-11 13:02:56

Re: Corona virus

Vienuolis wrote #331561:

#354 2021-09-11 18:15:38

Re: Corona virus

#355 2021-09-11 21:28:27

Re: Corona virus

zero wrote #331569:

#356 2021-09-12 13:41:44

Re: Corona virus

etc wrote #331571:

#357 2021-10-02 15:44:09

Re: Corona virus

#358 2021-10-06 13:23:38

Re: Corona virus

Board footer