lockdownsceptics morphing into anti-vaxers

9markshaw1
Posts: 16
Joined: Sun Sep 06, 2020 5:32 pm

Re: lockdownsceptics morphing into anti-vaxers

Post by 9markshaw1 »

ID: 9markshaw1

Hi, I disagree.

Lockdownsceptics.org. are doing a great job of scrutinizing all the data related to Cov-19. The governments around the world are taking actions and making laws that have huge ramifications. Lockdownsceptics.org have to be consistent and unbiased so cannot ignore these principles when also dealing with the issue of mass vaccinaction, especially when the usual rules for these vaccination programmes are being altered.

It is right to ask questions. Why for example has it just been announced that Doctors and Nurses will not now be expected to be the first to take the vaccine alongside the elderly and clinically vulnerable? Is it because recent polling has shown that this group of health care professionals would rather wait several months or even years before committing? If, as is almost certainly the case, much more knowledge will have been gained, any adverse reactions documented, and a better vaccine produced in a year or so, how can you blame such a group with probably such a small chance of dying from it, wanting to 'wait and see'. Why should they be the guinea pigs? Let the poor vulnerable do that for them?

Dr Mark Shaw

swinchard
Posts: 184
Joined: Sat Oct 31, 2020 10:57 am

Re: lockdownsceptics morphing into anti-vaxers

Post by swinchard »

Sussex Fox wrote: Sat Dec 05, 2020 5:28 pm Swinchardlefty handbooks
ha ha, that made me chuckle, if you knew me you would realise how absurd that is, I am no lefty, Sussex Fox, that's the last thing I am!

swinchard
Posts: 184
Joined: Sat Oct 31, 2020 10:57 am

Re: lockdownsceptics morphing into anti-vaxers

Post by swinchard »

Splatt wrote: Sat Dec 05, 2020 5:51 pm
swinchard wrote: Sat Dec 05, 2020 11:12 am
The link is pure bullshit, the vaccine cannot alter your dna. that is impossible.
This board has attracted far too many ranting lunatics now unfortunately.
Good work, splatt, I respect you but suspect you sometimes waver. There comes a time in the realtime run of politics, when one must plump for one thing or the other, if you fail to do that, you become a Boris, stuck wavering between two possible realities for an indeterminate length of time, wringing your hands. I think I know where your instincts lie, you think it's an overeaction, but want to be sure... you can never be sure until it is too late to matter.
You're stuck mate.

Bremer dan Gorst
Posts: 125
Joined: Sat Sep 12, 2020 9:12 pm

Re: lockdownsceptics morphing into anti-vaxers

Post by Bremer dan Gorst »

Splatt wrote: Sat Dec 05, 2020 5:51 pm
Generally now if i see anyone mention "great reset", "Kill Gates", "dna" or linking to any website with the word "truth" in the domain i mark them as an idiot and dont waste time even trying to respond.
FTFY.

Don't forget "big pHARMa," and images of that stock crying baby with loads of needles photoshopped into them.

Also, pointing out that anti-vaxxers, sorry, Nurgle's Little Helpers, are fractally wrong makes you an enemy of free speech, it seems. On the contrary, I support the right of anti-vaxxers to scream into the void. Nobody says we have to listen to them. In fact, making anti-vax peddling an offence would be counterproductive as it allows them to go all "tHeY PeRsECutED gALiLeO!!!!!1" - case in point, this place.

miahoneybee
Posts: 1358
Joined: Tue Sep 22, 2020 8:26 pm

Re: lockdownsceptics morphing into anti-vaxers

Post by miahoneybee »

A good post Dr mark shaw.
Thanks.
:D

jmc
Posts: 403
Joined: Mon Sep 21, 2020 9:01 am

Re: lockdownsceptics morphing into anti-vaxers

Post by jmc »

Bremer dan Gorst wrote: Sat Dec 05, 2020 12:37 pm Has it occurred to you that it was because of thalidomide that drug regulation and approval processes became so much tighter? It is entirely because of that that we have the Medicines Act 1968. But, yeah, because of one incident of lax regulations 70 years ago, vaccines will turn you into a cabbage. That makes sense.
And its obvious that you did not listen to the interview I quoted. I suppose it was in French and Anglophones are not noted for their language skills. The Professor covered all the relevant points regarding exactly how little existing regulations covered the new vaccines. And the potential side effects of two of the vaccines in particular. The guy has been doing exactly this stuff for many decades. Even at the regulatory level.

Ah yes, the Medicines Act 1968. The same act that did not prevent many thousands of NHS patients from getting Hepatitis and Aids from contaminated blood products in the decades afterwards. And if I remember correctly there was quite an attempt at cover up too. Which went on for many years.

So far I have read nothing in the literature, or in any official pronouncements, that gives me the slightest confidence that we will have any safe or effective human corona virus vaccine that satisfies any realistic risk / benefit analysis in the foreseeable future. Its not like they have not been trying to create one for the last forty odd years. With zero success to date.

Because it turns out if the Influenza vaccine problem is really difficult ( a good year is 50% efficacy even after many many decades of trying) then the human corona-virus vaccine problem is basically impossible. If you want safe and effective that is.

jmc
Posts: 403
Joined: Mon Sep 21, 2020 9:01 am

Re: lockdownsceptics morphing into anti-vaxers

Post by jmc »

swinchard wrote: Sat Dec 05, 2020 2:52 pm
The first link was pure bonkers bullshit
jmc wrote: Sat Dec 05, 2020 12:18 pm
the possible side effects of "gene therapy" vaccines
The genomics involves isolating the part in the DNA of the corona virus that creates the protein spike. That genetic code from the DNA of the corona virus is put in the vaccine, and that gets into some of you cells. Those cells grow a protein spike, and that arms your immune system.Hence the flow of causality can never effect your DNA. It cannot happen.
Thalidomide babies.
For those too worried, wait for ADZ1222, which does not involve "gene therapy", it's more traditional, not as good but much cheaper.
I am very aware of how all this works. One of my projects about two decades ago was an attempt to formalize the step wise processes involved in one particular type of virus breaching a cell wall so it could be modeled computationally. A result of discussions with a friend who held some of the key bio-tech industry patents from the very early days in the 1970's. You cannot beat learning the nuts and bolts of such a fascinating subject from a world class biochemist with a wicked sense of humour. So yeah, I've read a few virology textbooks in my time.

As for your main point, the French Professor of Immunology says otherwise. So I will go with his opinion on this particular subject. I think I have a pretty good idea of what exactly he was referring to. I think its the same reason why you have to sign a very thick liability waiver document when you get gene therapy in the US. This is nothing like a MMR jab.

rob.brassil@gmail.com
Posts: 2
Joined: Sun Oct 25, 2020 3:50 am

Re: lockdownsceptics morphing into anti-vaxers

Post by rob.brassil@gmail.com »

'Outlandish conspiracy theories'

A few observations:

The term 'Conspiracy Theory' is one of many casualties of the Groupthink culture wars, and symptomatic of the erosion of critical thinking and free speech.

1) Conspiracies exist. Theories and review are the foundation of the scientific method (which is the best we have for the moment).

2) Peer review requires engagement with the evidence, and is antithetical to confirmation bias. The Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle? Sounds like complete bollocks until you investigate with an open mind. (You may want to refresh your understanding of the term 'sceptic', btw, which espouses critical engagement and is closer in meaning to Intellectual Caution than it is to intellectual hubris.)

3) Any form of labelling, dogma, polarisation or presumption of intent, enmity or bias is inherently evasive, lazy, contrary to the pursuit of truth, and normally the refuge of the partisan (eg 77th), who for reasons known to themselves, seek easy justifications not to engage with the evidence. Otherwise, they would simply debunk the opposing view rather than name-calling.

4) A couple of Logical Fallacies, off the top of my head - straw man, authorial intent, guilt by association.... (Available online to look up; strangely incongrousruous with your detailed 'engagement' with the (cutnpaste) SAGE rhetoric.) Love to discuss in person.

5) i may be wrong, but as far as I know, you are the only contributor here (I don't want to disrespect you by presuming that you identify as a 'person' - that would be somewhat remiss) to use the term 'Anti-v' here. I suggest that this is not accidental. If you truly believe that the label 'Anti-V' is counterproductive, and you are sincerely 'concerned' that our cause might be undermined by the use of that term, why introduce it, when it is a crude simplification of the issue? You are a liar.

6) I notice that Remembrance Sunday this year deprived our genuine heroes of the chance to pay respects to their fallen friends. Were they consulted? Do they need or want to be protected? Or were our tyrannical leaders worried that the old boys might just have nothing to lose and speak truth to power?

7) if you purport to present evidence while simultaneously hiding behind logical fallacies, I feel that contradiction is so inconsistent as to be obviously borne of pure mendacity..

8) Information warfare is not legitimate, is it? Come to my house and look me in the eyes. I'll die for freedom; I expect you'll just lie, snitch and posture. I've got news for you though: ultimately you won't be able to hide behind patriotism, or 'common purpose', and you definitely don't ''know more'. There's no honour among thieves, and you too will end up as human cattle. It will be my complete pleasure to drill down into your views face to face if possible. Who knows, perhaps we might bump into each other on a train or in some lovely communal showers.

9) For evil to flourish, it takes only good people to do nothing. Game on.

Sussex Fox

Re: lockdownsceptics morphing into anti-vaxers

Post by Sussex Fox »

[quote="Bremer dan Gorst"

You must have been well vaccinated in your time for it has clearly mutated you into a burbling moron.

And there, the silly pillock confirms and contradicts itself! Too many vaccinations = stupidity?

Checkmate pal!

Sussex Fox

Re: lockdownsceptics morphing into anti-vaxers

Post by Sussex Fox »

Just thought I'd add this too about Pfizer's awful track record

https://youtu.be/al-SZ7cii-g

Post Reply