CV19 - Cure Worse Than The Disease? (Vol 19)

Why do we deal in absolutes? Is there no scope for both to be acceptable?

I, too, 'enjoy' the benefits of occasional arrhythmia. Seen various cardiologists over the years, who have variously advised medication A, medication B, ablation, no ablation, pacemaker, no pacemaker. In other words - the specialists cannot agree a treatment schedule. There are various support forums that deal specifically with the experiences of those similarly afflicted, where there are broad discussions on individual treatment experiences, the benefits and detriments of each option based on personal experience. So, which is more useful? Half a dozen specialists who cannot agree, or a broad sweep of personal experiences to debate and discuss the options? I know which I have found more useful and relevant.

Sounds like what you need is one single source of truth...

They have to box you in to a single polarised view which they can then attack. Have you never noticed that there's no 'half-way', or 'nuances' within their arguments?

Playbook stuff. No room for accepting any vaccine damage or deaths and always demanding hard evidence rather than multiple, converging strong correlations. That's why I think some of them do this professionally.

Pretty much that.

Visit the other thread, nod sagely and look interested, 'Yass King' a few of the regular contributors, ingratiate yourself for a few weeks, avoid tinfoil. You'll be back in no time.

I absolutely hated the idea of the "other thread", it is just so "football supporter" mentality, but I suppose that's where we are at at the moment. If that is the level we have to play at to try and discuss things outside of government controlled spheres, that's how we have to do it.

If you only reach one person, or reach one electron of a "normie" brain, you've done well I think.

n+1

If it saves just one life...

Which is more or less what I said isn't it so we're in agreement?

The forum would enable you to discuss their suggestions with your specialist who would hopefully advise accordingly.

Sounds like a winner to me.

You're supposed to be saying you used all of it as part of the government's not so cunning plan to weed out the elderly surely.....

Shhh...*taps nose*

During the pandemic I've administered covid vaccines, both AZ and Pfizer/Moderna. I've also treated patients with Covid.

I have a notable degree of scepticism when it comes to the pharmaceutical industry.

I've linked this before and I do think it's worth a watch:


Pharma is driven by money and profits, not altruism. It was in their benefit for the vaccines to be rolled out to as many people/age groups as possible, additional boosters as well (although I wonder how much was also the government thinking 'oh we've committed to XX number of vaccines, we'd better use them all up). IIRC in the US it was recommended for any child >6months.

At the moment we're seeing record numbers of cases of measles as vaccination rates have dropped off. Unfortunately, actions have consequences. Such a coercive type attitude to the covid vaccinations over the last few years was always at risk to get a push back at some point. Unfortunately the unintended victim may end up being our kids. I'm sure Chromegrill will disagree, but IMO Public Health messed up the handling of a lot of this. The public have lost a lot of confidence. And we seem to have decimated the NHS in the process. Not the best outcome.