Moderator: 3ne2nr Mods
And I'm still waiting.alfa wrote:adnj wrote:Of course I read it. Do you remember the phrase "out of an abundance of caution" used in conjunction with lock downs? I do.alfa wrote:adnj wrote:Nothing like that was in public discussion before this year. Wait? What?!alfa wrote:1674577070263.jpg
COVID happens to be a disease of the old that can only be contracted from someone else.
Together, our findings establish COVID-19 as an emergent disease of aging, and age and age-related diseases as its major risk factors. In turn, this suggests that COVID-19, and deadly respiratory diseases in general, may be targeted, in addition to antiviral approaches, by approaches that target the aging process.
Did you read the article? Because he was specifically talking about the economic and educational costs of lockdowns as well as the fear mongering
I recall questioning the means of transmission, fatality rate, vaccine efficacy, reinfection period, hospital capacity, PPE reuse, etc. What was known was that there were not sufficient staffing for the number of people being held in the hospital, tests were not adequate, insufficient oxygen availability, etc.
I want to write a story predicting who will win the last World's Cup so that some tuner will post it.
This wasn't you praising the lockdowns and now talking about an abundance of caution just as a medical doctor calls out the lockdowns as damaging ? You should go into politics dude seriously. But what does Dr Bratt know, he's only a doctor and not a BSc/Msc graduate trainee/OJT on an online forum
There is no evidence to go that route.timelapse wrote:Antivaxer logic: Vaccines kill
Also antivaxer logic: Old age kills,not viruses
Just now is death kills,not anything else except probably vaccines.
sMASH wrote:A covidian admitting covid ativaxers were right, and he is worried about suffering effects of the Vax 5 years later.
They keep voting pnm... They like the kool-aid they're sold.adnj wrote:sMASH wrote:https://youtube.com/watch?v=0Qn0DqZeOEI&si=EnSIkaIECMiOmarE
A covidian admitting covid ativaxers were right, and he is worried about suffering effects of the Vax 5 years later.
I'm worried about the effects of sufferers, right now.
sMASH wrote:Biggest cover up : saying deaths after receiving the jab, is unvaxed deaths, because they died before the time span to fall in the vaxed category.
Those deaths don't necessarily have to be labeled As covee deaths.redmanjp wrote:sMASH wrote:Biggest cover up : saying deaths after receiving the jab, is unvaxed deaths, because they died before the time span to fall in the vaxed category.
They have to still test positive for covid to be counted though.
If u really want to know details file a FOI request.
Lol I just select all on my phone and copy while I sit down in trafficaaron17 wrote:Bro u copied the link names as well?
sMASH wrote:Actually linked up with some people and they were filing the FOIR.. Last week.
the problem is, the ministry wasn't collecting the data accurately to present it easily.
They would need to go back tru alll the first jab records and follow up to see if thise peolle died....
That's a lot of resources thst they may say they don't want to allocate.
Thats 600k first jabs.
I have np doing it, but would only be able to spare a few days a week at best.
The difference between that and non vaxed deaths. And to compere to previous years. It would show up as excess.j.o.e wrote:sMASH wrote:Actually linked up with some people and they were filing the FOIR.. Last week.
the problem is, the ministry wasn't collecting the data accurately to present it easily.
They would need to go back tru alll the first jab records and follow up to see if thise peolle died....
That's a lot of resources thst they may say they don't want to allocate.
Thats 600k first jabs.
I have np doing it, but would only be able to spare a few days a week at best.
In 600k you are guaranteed to find deaths. It won’t prove your point. Heart attacks, strokes etc didn’t stop during covid. Occurrence is separate from cause
sMASH wrote:The difference between that and non vaxed deaths. And to compere to previous years. It would show up as excess.j.o.e wrote:sMASH wrote:Actually linked up with some people and they were filing the FOIR.. Last week.
the problem is, the ministry wasn't collecting the data accurately to present it easily.
They would need to go back tru alll the first jab records and follow up to see if thise peolle died....
That's a lot of resources thst they may say they don't want to allocate.
Thats 600k first jabs.
I have np doing it, but would only be able to spare a few days a week at best.
In 600k you are guaranteed to find deaths. It won’t prove your point. Heart attacks, strokes etc didn’t stop during covid. Occurrence is separate from cause
If is not a cause, u should see close figures per capita.
Another way to slice it, to look at periods of high Vax uptake, and compare that to low Vax up take periods, and see if the rates of deaths change.
U dont need any big number of deaths to say the Vax is bad. The Vax is supposed to help not harm. If a person was not made fully aware of the risks and amount of risks in taking it, then they would not have been making a proper decision, of if the risks would be Wirth the benefit.
The risks need to be extremely rare, but it wasn't. But people were not given that info, and made a blind choice.
Some fared well, but too many didn't, and may have made a different choice of they were accurately unformed of the Vax risks, and virus risks.
And then there is the long term follow on effects which are NOT known.
I dint want to be forced to take sumting I am not comfortable with, in the future.j.o.e wrote:sMASH wrote:The difference between that and non vaxed deaths. And to compere to previous years. It would show up as excess.j.o.e wrote:sMASH wrote:Actually linked up with some people and they were filing the FOIR.. Last week.
the problem is, the ministry wasn't collecting the data accurately to present it easily.
They would need to go back tru alll the first jab records and follow up to see if thise peolle died....
That's a lot of resources thst they may say they don't want to allocate.
Thats 600k first jabs.
I have np doing it, but would only be able to spare a few days a week at best.
In 600k you are guaranteed to find deaths. It won’t prove your point. Heart attacks, strokes etc didn’t stop during covid. Occurrence is separate from cause
If is not a cause, u should see close figures per capita.
Another way to slice it, to look at periods of high Vax uptake, and compare that to low Vax up take periods, and see if the rates of deaths change.
U dont need any big number of deaths to say the Vax is bad. The Vax is supposed to help not harm. If a person was not made fully aware of the risks and amount of risks in taking it, then they would not have been making a proper decision, of if the risks would be Wirth the benefit.
The risks need to be extremely rare, but it wasn't. But people were not given that info, and made a blind choice.
Some fared well, but too many didn't, and may have made a different choice of they were accurately unformed of the Vax risks, and virus risks.
And then there is the long term follow on effects which are NOT known.
All that effort better spent on getting trinis to lose weight and stop being so sedentary. You seem to be sold on your theory without the necessary data. Not saying you’re wrong but without the data it’s just an unfounded theory. Even our relatively low uptake is hundreds of thousands of people. Seems adverse reactions to vaccine is statistically insignificant….. you still have the worldwide figures to work with.
sMASH wrote:https://youtube.com/watch?v=sidjKoHS6NE&si=EnSIkaIECMiOmarE
Soooo, the UK ban the Vax fur under 50....
They say targeting groups..
But more like targeted away from most groups.
*adnj: they're wrong*
sMASH wrote:But off the bat, deaths spiked as soon as vaxes were rolled out.... In Trinidad.
When there are spikes of new vaxes administered, those are the periods to look at for increased mortality
Hopefullu this weekend I will get some time to scroll tru some graphs.
Old problem. Better surveillance.sMASH wrote:Okay they blaming the eggs fur it... Ritttte.
All of a sudden eggs causing blood clots.
Return to “Ole talk and more Ole talk”
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 14 guests