Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 12, 2023 11:56:57 GMT
The risk/benefit equation is very much current age and health weighted. Some people are having healthy children jabbed, which is their choice, but I would be very hesitant. Not at all hesitant with an obese, unhealthy 65 year old who would have been at high risk with the original Wuhan version, which is now absent.
|
|
|
|
Post by Fairsociety on Jan 12, 2023 12:04:37 GMT
Are people so easily lead.
Will people not have the Covid vaccine because of what this MP has said?
I mean did any normal human being take any notice of Trump suggesting injecting disinfectant as treatment?
I think the debate should be on how stupid people must be if they take the word of someone without researching it.
Just like anyone can research what this MP has said and does it have any validity.
It's not what this MP has said that has shocked me, but how ill-informed people are, can't they find some source to fact check these things?
|
|
|
|
Post by patman post on Jan 12, 2023 12:38:42 GMT
Are people so easily lead. Will people not have the Covid vaccine because of what this MP has said? I mean did any normal human being take any notice of Trump suggesting injecting disinfectant as treatment? I think the debate should be on how stupid people must be if they take the word of someone without researching it. Just like anyone can research what this MP has said and does it have any validity. It's not what this MP has said that has shocked me, but how ill-informed people are, can't they find some source to fact check these things? All rational points — to which, unfortunately, the honest reply has to be that the gullibility of the general public is growing. And it’s this growing gullibility that allows people like Andrew Wakefield to enjoy themselves, and others to be led into harming themselves by taking Trump’s recommended fish-tank cleanser as a Covid cure. Countering the mass of misinformation about Covid is a massive undertaking and, as soon as anyone tries, they come under attack from the whole panoply of trolls and conspiracy theorists who get their kicks from controversy… |
|
|
|
Post by Fairsociety on Jan 12, 2023 12:49:49 GMT
Are people so easily lead. Will people not have the Covid vaccine because of what this MP has said? I mean did any normal human being take any notice of Trump suggesting injecting disinfectant as treatment? I think the debate should be on how stupid people must be if they take the word of someone without researching it. Just like anyone can research what this MP has said and does it have any validity. It's not what this MP has said that has shocked me, but how ill-informed people are, can't they find some source to fact check these things? All rational points — to which, unfortunately, the honest reply has to be that the gullibility of the general public is growing. And it’s this growing gullibility that allows people like Andrew Wakefield to enjoy themselves, and others to be led into harming themselves by taking Trump’s recommended fish-tank cleanser as a Covid cure. Countering the mass of misinformation about Covid is a massive undertaking and, as soon as anyone tries, they come under attack from the whole panoply of trolls and conspiracy theorists who get their kicks from controversy… How do we know it's 'misinformation' when there is no real data to back it up either way.
The Covid vaccine is in its infancy, so therefore the short/long term side effects are not available.
We wont really know for at least 5 years.
I would prefer to replace misinformation with 'unfounded', misinformation suggests that the vaccine makers know for absolute 100% certainty there is no side effects to the vaccine, which we know is untrue.
|
|
|
|
Post by andrewbrown on Jan 12, 2023 13:00:45 GMT
There is of course multiple vaccines, and more than one vaccine technology. They work in different ways. I would suggest that anyone who refers to "the vaccine" and making allegations without being specific probably needs to do a little more research.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bentley on Jan 12, 2023 13:05:12 GMT
There is of course multiple vaccines, and more than one vaccine technology. They work in different ways. I would suggest that anyone who refers to "the vaccine" and making allegations without being specific probably needs to do a little more research. That isn’t necessarily reassuring. |
|
|
|
Post by Fairsociety on Jan 12, 2023 13:11:27 GMT
There is of course multiple vaccines, and more than one vaccine technology. They work in different ways. I would suggest that anyone who refers to "the vaccine" and making allegations without being specific probably needs to do a little more research. Well this is official data, but not much to go on really.
"As of 23 November 2022, for the UK, 177,925 Yellow Cards have been reported for the monovalent and bivalent COVID-19 Vaccine Pfizer/BioNTech, 246,866 have been reported for the COVID-19 Vaccine AstraZeneca, 47,045 for the monovalent and bivalent COVID-19 Vaccine Moderna, 52 for the COVID-19 Vaccine Novavax and 2,130 have been reported where the brand of the vaccine was not specified.
For the monovalent and bivalent COVID-19 Vaccine Pfizer/BioNTech, COVID-19 Vaccine AstraZeneca and monovalent and bivalent COVID-19 Vaccine Moderna the overall reporting rate is around 2 to 5 Yellow Cards per 1,000 doses administered.
"In the 28 days since the previous summary for 26 October 2022 we have received a further 2,499 Yellow Cards for the monovalent and bivalent COVID-19 Vaccine Pfizer/BioNTech, 228 for the COVID-19 Vaccine AstraZeneca, 1,099 for the monovalent and bivalent COVID-19 Vaccine Moderna, 15 for the COVID-19 Vaccine Novavax and 154 where the brand was not specified. The increase in reports for Pfizer and Moderna COVID-19 vaccines is due to the bivalent vaccine use in the national autumn booster campaign. Our review to date of suspected adverse events since the launch of the campaign has not revealed any new safety concerns".
|
|
|
|
Post by jonksy on Jan 12, 2023 13:12:13 GMT
There is of course multiple vaccines, and more than one vaccine technology. They work in different ways. I would suggest that anyone who refers to "the vaccine" and making allegations without being specific probably needs to do a little more research. Well it seems people have done a little research. The only ones who haven’t are you and your ilk. |
|
|
|
Post by Steve on Jan 12, 2023 13:22:09 GMT
Except the BBC did not say that and had you followed the hyperlink under the words you've misrepresented you would know that. And as for your 'would be alive today' that's total bollocks too as that's to ignore the death rate of those that refused the vaccine, got infected and died. 1447 in just the first 5 months of 2022 I am trying to cut down my posting here but when you post the deceitful and dangerous anti vax shite you've tried elsewhere then some things have to be said. I won't reply any further to your misrepresentation of my post because of the proboards policy. I don't know what I can say. I merely quoted the BBC "fact check". I think, as you would say, not just a river in Egypt, then. No misrepresentation, you said it and it was not true The BBC said '59 deaths involving the vaccines'You wildly exaggerated that to 'So 59 people killed by the vaccine according to the BBC "fact check". 59 people who would be alive today.'Both sentences of which were untrue. |
|
|
|
Post by jonksy on Jan 12, 2023 13:27:08 GMT
I won't reply any further to your misrepresentation of my post because of the proboards policy. I don't know what I can say. I merely quoted the BBC "fact check". I think, as you would say, not just a river in Egypt, then. No misrepresentation, you said it and it was not true The BBC said '59 deaths involving the vaccines'You wildly exaggerated that to 'So 59 people killed by the vaccine according to the BBC "fact check". 59 people who would be alive today.'Both sentences of which were untrue. FFS are you for real? |
|
|
|
Post by jonksy on Jan 12, 2023 13:28:53 GMT
All rational points — to which, unfortunately, the honest reply has to be that the gullibility of the general public is growing. And it’s this growing gullibility that allows people like Andrew Wakefield to enjoy themselves, and others to be led into harming themselves by taking Trump’s recommended fish-tank cleanser as a Covid cure. Countering the mass of misinformation about Covid is a massive undertaking and, as soon as anyone tries, they come under attack from the whole panoply of trolls and conspiracy theorists who get their kicks from controversy… How do we know it's 'misinformation' when there is no real data to back it up either way.
The Covid vaccine is in its infancy, so therefore the short/long term side effects are not available.
We wont really know for at least 5 years.
I would prefer to replace misinformation with 'unfounded', misinformation suggests that the vaccine makers know for absolute 100% certainty there is no side effects to the vaccine, which we know is untrue.
Do you think these lefty pricks were born like that or did they have to have lessons?…..Frigging unbelievable FFS |
|
|
|
Post by Fairsociety on Jan 12, 2023 13:29:01 GMT
No misrepresentation, you said it and it was not true The BBC said '59 deaths involving the vaccines'You wildly exaggerated that to 'So 59 people killed by the vaccine according to the BBC "fact check". 59 people who would be alive today.'Both sentences of which were untrue. FFS are you for real? LOL
anyone would have thought he said 59 million FFS lol  |
|
|
|
Post by Bentley on Jan 12, 2023 13:31:12 GMT
I won't reply any further to your misrepresentation of my post because of the proboards policy. I don't know what I can say. I merely quoted the BBC "fact check". I think, as you would say, not just a river in Egypt, then. No misrepresentation, you said it and it was not true The BBC said '59 deaths involving the vaccines'You wildly exaggerated that to 'So 59 people killed by the vaccine according to the BBC "fact check". 59 people who would be alive today.'Both sentences of which were untrue. Seems to mirror the deaths due to COVID that were recorded. When I suggested that those deaths should be treated as such then iirc there was some resistance from some posters . |
|
|
|
Post by Fairsociety on Jan 12, 2023 13:33:48 GMT
How do we know it's 'misinformation' when there is no real data to back it up either way.
The Covid vaccine is in its infancy, so therefore the short/long term side effects are not available.
We wont really know for at least 5 years.
I would prefer to replace misinformation with 'unfounded', misinformation suggests that the vaccine makers know for absolute 100% certainty there is no side effects to the vaccine, which we know is untrue.
Do you think these lefty pricks were born like that or did they have to have lessons?…..Frigging unbelievable FFS They've had a lot of practice at it, they don't seem to be able to fact find anything for themselves, they just follow the leftie narrative and think it's Gospel, any one who disagrees gets insults hurled at them, and it's just a losing battle trying to get them to understand. |
|
|
|
Post by Steve on Jan 12, 2023 13:37:11 GMT
No misrepresentation, you said it and it was not true The BBC said '59 deaths involving the vaccines'You wildly exaggerated that to 'So 59 people killed by the vaccine according to the BBC "fact check". 59 people who would be alive today.'Both sentences of which were untrue. FFS are you for real? Yes, are you? |
|
