|
|
Post by see2 on Aug 23, 2023 20:20:51 GMT
Explain how they are conspiracy theories when the BMJ have confirmed it?
Are you saying the BMJ are conspiracy theorists?
PS ^^ This is NOT misinformation, it is directly from the British Medical Journal, unless they are misinforming people, which I very much doubt.
The trouble with many conspiracy theories is that some posters will defend the theory long after it has been debunked. Almost as though the theory is more important than reality. There is no conspiracy theory here, it has been confirmed by the BMJ, you do know the British Medical Journal is our own medical professional.
The moment this sort of information is exaggerated or misrepresented it becomes a conspiracy theory. Nothing wrong with the actual information and concern shown by the BMJ. |
|
|
|
Post by see2 on Aug 23, 2023 20:25:54 GMT
I made this point a while ago on a forum far far away and it didn’t seem to sink in. Partygate and Beergate is pretty compelling evidence that the people who were privy to COVID ‘ experts ‘ at the highest level( at the time ) were not frightened of the disease and didn’t feel that COVID was dangerous enough to heed the instructions given to the public. Personal opinions as apposed 228,622 deaths down to Covid. |
|
|
|
Post by Bentley on Aug 23, 2023 21:08:12 GMT
I made this point a while ago on a forum far far away and it didn’t seem to sink in. Partygate and Beergate is pretty compelling evidence that the people who were privy to COVID ‘ experts ‘ at the highest level( at the time ) were not frightened of the disease and didn’t feel that COVID was dangerous enough to heed the instructions given to the public. Personal opinions as apposed 228,622 deaths down to Covid. As they privy to the advice of ‘ experts’ at the time , their opinions would have reflected the advice of the experts , so not ‘ personal’ opinions so much as informed opinions . Every covid rule , every piece of advice , every decision to heed that advice would have been subject to opinion . You like to use the word ‘ opinion’ as a rebuttal in the same way as the uninformed use the word’ theory ‘. |
|
|
|
Post by sheepy on Aug 24, 2023 5:55:17 GMT
There is no conspiracy theory here, it has been confirmed by the BMJ, you do know the British Medical Journal is our own medical professional.
I've no idea how you have translated that article into "more people are dying of vaccine side effects than died of Covid". Even a look at the title tells you that isn't what it's saying. Metabolism, works faster the younger you are a medical fact for you. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 24, 2023 9:21:51 GMT
I made this point a while ago on a forum far far away and it didn’t seem to sink in. Partygate and Beergate is pretty compelling evidence that the people who were privy to COVID ‘ experts ‘ at the highest level( at the time ) were not frightened of the disease and didn’t feel that COVID was dangerous enough to heed the instructions given to the public. Personal opinions as apposed 228,622 deaths down to Covid. Yeah, well, maybe. Covid seems to have killed or been involved in the deaths of less than 1 in a thousand people in the world. The pandemic in 1920 killed 7 times more people of a population that was about a quarter of what it is now. Therefore it was about 28 times more lethal and mostly killed young people, not the old. 1920 was a really nasty pandemic. Covid was not, hence partygate and MPs with Covid on trains, exceptions for government and essential workers kids to go to school. Oh, and the use of psy-ops to tell us how deadly it all was and frighten us to stay indoors. |
|
|
|
Post by andrewbrown on Aug 24, 2023 10:15:30 GMT
Personal opinions as apposed 228,622 deaths down to Covid. Yeah, well, maybe. Covid seems to have killed or been involved in the deaths of less than 1 in a thousand people in the world. The pandemic in 1920 killed 7 times more people of a population that was about a quarter of what it is now. Therefore it was about 28 times more lethal and mostly killed young people, not the old. 1920 was a really nasty pandemic. Covid was not, hence partygate and MPs with Covid on trains, exceptions for government and essential workers kids to go to school. Oh, and the use of psy-ops to tell us how deadly it all was and frighten us to stay indoors. Do you believe that medical advances played any part in the differences between 1920 and 2020? Rather strangely you omitted to mention it. |
|
|
|
Post by Fairsociety on Aug 24, 2023 10:28:56 GMT
Yeah, well, maybe. Covid seems to have killed or been involved in the deaths of less than 1 in a thousand people in the world. The pandemic in 1920 killed 7 times more people of a population that was about a quarter of what it is now. Therefore it was about 28 times more lethal and mostly killed young people, not the old. 1920 was a really nasty pandemic. Covid was not, hence partygate and MPs with Covid on trains, exceptions for government and essential workers kids to go to school. Oh, and the use of psy-ops to tell us how deadly it all was and frighten us to stay indoors. Do you believe that medical advances played any part in the differences between 1920 and 2020? Rather strangely you omitted to mention it. You could say that about Cancer, but women still die today with Breast Cancer, going back Hitler's mother died of Breast Cancer over a 100 years ago, in fact they've found Breast Cancer on scans of Egyptian mummy's, your argument doesn't stack up, if that were the case our medical advances in Breast Cancer over 100 years should have completely eradicated the disease. |
|
|
|
Post by Orac on Aug 24, 2023 10:30:36 GMT
The moment this sort of information is exaggerated or misrepresented it becomes a conspiracy theory. Nothing wrong with the actual information and concern shown by the BMJ. You seem to have a poor grasp on what a conspiracy theory is A conspiracy theory is not false or misleading information. We already have a traditional word for that category - it's called 'wrong' A conspiracy theory is a significant world view which has as its central premise a conspiracy. |
|
|
|
Post by andrewbrown on Aug 24, 2023 10:31:14 GMT
Nobody is claiming that breast cancer has been eradicated, but do you think that the survival rates now are the same as 100 years ago.
In what way does that argument not stack up?
|
|
|
|
Post by Fairsociety on Aug 24, 2023 10:44:43 GMT
There is no conspiracy theory here, it has been confirmed by the BMJ, you do know the British Medical Journal is our own medical professional.
The moment this sort of information is exaggerated or misrepresented it becomes a conspiracy theory. Nothing wrong with the actual information and concern shown by the BMJ. You also overlook the fact that the BMJ are not in charge of the full facts, most Vaccinations have trials of five years or more, COVID had a trial of 12 months.
The data and statistics of the COVID Vaccine are still in its infancy, give it five years and the true scale of side-effects/deaths due to the Vaccine will be clearer.
Right now the BMJ are confirming YES there is a link between the COVID vaccine and deaths in young people.
No conspiracy theory, so far it's a case of ... 'what you don't want to hear'.
|
|
|
|
Post by andrewbrown on Aug 24, 2023 11:51:35 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Fairsociety on Aug 24, 2023 12:02:49 GMT
We went down the vaccine route, which has made lots of individuals and companies mega wealthy, big money in Vaccines.
Another thing worth remembering a lot of these medical agencies are funded by the vaccine makers, so one could argue a conflict of interest, they are hardly likely to bite the hand that feeds them.
I believe we could tapped in to our own natural immune defenses without the mass vaccination, that should have been given to the weak, vulnerable and those with underlying health issues that couldn't natural fight off disease's, 'young healthy fit' people were given a vaccine they didn't need, and lots have either died, or become young unhealthy people.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 24, 2023 13:28:48 GMT
Yeah, well, maybe. Covid seems to have killed or been involved in the deaths of less than 1 in a thousand people in the world. The pandemic in 1920 killed 7 times more people of a population that was about a quarter of what it is now. Therefore it was about 28 times more lethal and mostly killed young people, not the old. 1920 was a really nasty pandemic. Covid was not, hence partygate and MPs with Covid on trains, exceptions for government and essential workers kids to go to school. Oh, and the use of psy-ops to tell us how deadly it all was and frighten us to stay indoors. Do you believe that medical advances played any part in the differences between 1920 and 2020? Rather strangely you omitted to mention it. Well, Andrew, some people have become so confused by the lies that have been told over that 3 years that it's difficult to answer that one very meaningfully. There are so many un-jabbed people still alive, which is amazing, isn't it? |
|
|
|
Post by Fairsociety on Aug 24, 2023 13:35:24 GMT
There is one common denominator that stands out by these young vaccine deaths, almost every single one describes the victim as previously being 'fit and healthy'.
They young people who are victims of the vaccine it never says they already had underlining health issues, or they had COVID, they almost always say 'previously fit and healthy', so why the hell did they have the jab in the first place?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 24, 2023 13:54:29 GMT
There is one common denominator that stands out by these young vaccine deaths, almost every single one describes the victim as previously being 'fit and healthy'. They young people who are victims of the vaccine it never says they already had underlining health issues, or they had COVID, they almost always say 'previously fit and healthy', so why the hell did they have the jab in the first place? They may have had it out of a sense of social responsibility as the jab sales people said it would stop their granny getting it, whilst the jab neither prevented infection or transmission. Despite the fact Pfizer had earlier said that theirs did. Evidence suggests that the jab may have reduced the effects of the virus, however there was a constant watering down of scariant variants as time progressed. |
|
