CV19 - Cure Worse Than The Disease? (Vol 19)
Discussion
Elysium said:
This is where the problem lies for me. If we had stopped everything after those 15m jabs it would have been OK.
But we didn’t.
The reason was that the elderly vaccinated still got infected and many of them still died.
Instead of accepting that was the best we could do, we went through increasingly desperate attempts to jab everyone on the planet, before eventually realising that it made no difference.
The first 15m vaccines saved lives in the UK. The other 30m achieved almost nothing.
I can’t disagree with your last sentence - in fact most people should be able to go along with it.But we didn’t.
The reason was that the elderly vaccinated still got infected and many of them still died.
Instead of accepting that was the best we could do, we went through increasingly desperate attempts to jab everyone on the planet, before eventually realising that it made no difference.
The first 15m vaccines saved lives in the UK. The other 30m achieved almost nothing.
Like you, it all goes wrong when there was what almost amounted to coercion for all and sundry to be vaccinated aided and abetted by the media and celebrities. The idea of mandates was clearly wrong but any one who dared to oppose then was almost branded as a right wing racist facist. The level that people like being told what to do still frightens me if I am honest.
The other question, which we will never get an answer to, is why exactly did the policy change from the 15m jabs to freedom to what we saw? The Covid Inquiry won’t find out I suspect………..
PRTVR said:
I get the impression that they limit what they say for obvious reasons.
Thanks,Wife had her operation and it went very well, just waiting for radiotherapy, must say from a person who has had a lot of problems with the NHS over the years her care and treatment has been fantastic .
In my experience of taking a lot of people to and from radiotherapy treatment over the last 5 years as a volunteer driver the cancer care and treatment is pretty damn good and I have not had anyone complaining at all. Thanks,Wife had her operation and it went very well, just waiting for radiotherapy, must say from a person who has had a lot of problems with the NHS over the years her care and treatment has been fantastic .
Hants PHer said:
jameswills said:
Let’s not forget, nearly every game once the Prem restarted resulted in being stopped because of “an incident in the crowd”. This happened weekly.
Utter rubbish. A very small number of games were interrupted, no more. Perhaps those that were, were caused by the virus. Or lack of NHS treatment. Or the stress of lockdown. "Nearly every game"
Another anecdote, Captain Tom did OK during Covid not very well after the vaccine. Same for Prince Philip, the Queen, and maybe the new King and Kate. Obviously anecdotal nonsense, but it actually bares stark similarity to what I saw. 2020, all people had cash to burn and nice tans, after I went to funerals, saw strokes, cancers and general malaise.
Oh come off it. Captain Tom was 100+ years old. Did you think he'd live forever? Our beloved Queen wasn't much younger but for you to insinuate she died due to Covid vaccination is pathetic. Have another Oh, and I haven't been to any funerals, nor seen any strokes or 'general malaise, whatever that means. Anecdotes, eh? They can show whatever you want them to.
The “vaccine” in my eyes did absolutely nothing to improve the health of the nation, and that is the end of it for me.Nonsense. The data is very clear that Covid vaccines had a dramatic positive effect on mortality in elderly patients and that's a fact.
Sorry James but you're sounding almost as unhinged as r3g. Almost.Utter rubbish. A very small number of games were interrupted, no more. Perhaps those that were, were caused by the virus. Or lack of NHS treatment. Or the stress of lockdown. "Nearly every game"
Another anecdote, Captain Tom did OK during Covid not very well after the vaccine. Same for Prince Philip, the Queen, and maybe the new King and Kate. Obviously anecdotal nonsense, but it actually bares stark similarity to what I saw. 2020, all people had cash to burn and nice tans, after I went to funerals, saw strokes, cancers and general malaise.
Oh come off it. Captain Tom was 100+ years old. Did you think he'd live forever? Our beloved Queen wasn't much younger but for you to insinuate she died due to Covid vaccination is pathetic. Have another
Oh, and I haven't been to any funerals, nor seen any strokes or 'general malaise, whatever that means. Anecdotes, eh? They can show whatever you want them to.The “vaccine” in my eyes did absolutely nothing to improve the health of the nation, and that is the end of it for me.Nonsense. The data is very clear that Covid vaccines had a dramatic positive effect on mortality in elderly patients and that's a fact.
jameswills said:
What’s odd though, going back to anecdotes, is that I didn’t know anyone who was ill or had “Covid” in 2020 until they started doing the mass testing. Then once the “vaccines” came along the statistics got all out of whack, and suddenly people were ill left right and centre. Not saying due to vaccines, but certainly I’d say something psychological was going on in the population.
The thing is though that almost for everyone on here that knows people dropping like flies left, right and centre there are those like me and Hants who haven't noticed any appreciable difference.I don't know anyone with the litany of issues that have been reported by others when surely, if it was so widespread, I would do.
amongst almost 150 people, I don't know anyone with blood clots, turbo cancers, dropping dead of heart attacks, etc, etc, etc.
Does that honestly not strike you as odd? I have no skin in the game, if I could go back I would have stuck to my guns and not had had 2 juice jabs.
jameswills said:
Elysium said:
Earlier this week I shared a link to the UKHSA vaccine surveillance reports. They include incredible amounts of data and references to external studies that back up what I am saying. The vaccines did provide a benefit for everyone that took them prior to their first exposure to COVID.
This is public health benefit at population scale. It’s never going to be possible to point at an individual and say that they were the ones who would have died.
I took the vaccine before having COVID. The official figures said I had a 4% chance of hospitalisation. I felt pretty bullish about that, but decided on balance that I had more to risk from the disease than the vaccines.
I am pleased to say the jabs didn’t kill me and that when I eventually had COVID that didn’t kill me either. Although it did tire me enough that I came away with an understanding of why some people had struggled to see it off.
Did I gain from the vaccine? No idea. It was certainly overplayed even then. The whole thing felt like a political propaganda campaign rather than a matter of public safety. But it was my choice.
I was however very directly coerced into having a booster I didn’t want or need. At that point I was already double vaccinated and had recovered from COVID. It was obviously going to do nothing to benefit me or anyone else. I asked my MP why I should have it and he could not say. He asked others, including the CMO and Lord Bethell. Neither could say.
How did they measure “prior exposure to Covid”? Did they compare it to 2020 when pretty much no one died of it if they weren’t in a care home, ventillated or given end of life treatment?This is public health benefit at population scale. It’s never going to be possible to point at an individual and say that they were the ones who would have died.
I took the vaccine before having COVID. The official figures said I had a 4% chance of hospitalisation. I felt pretty bullish about that, but decided on balance that I had more to risk from the disease than the vaccines.
I am pleased to say the jabs didn’t kill me and that when I eventually had COVID that didn’t kill me either. Although it did tire me enough that I came away with an understanding of why some people had struggled to see it off.
Did I gain from the vaccine? No idea. It was certainly overplayed even then. The whole thing felt like a political propaganda campaign rather than a matter of public safety. But it was my choice.
I was however very directly coerced into having a booster I didn’t want or need. At that point I was already double vaccinated and had recovered from COVID. It was obviously going to do nothing to benefit me or anyone else. I asked my MP why I should have it and he could not say. He asked others, including the CMO and Lord Bethell. Neither could say.
I have followed your posts for a few years now, and you’ve been great. I hate talking personal as it skews points and is just a point scoring exercise, and that serves no purpose, not for me anyway. I would just say now you’re starting to talk in the double speak that I see now from people who have come to believe in the last 4 years was actually real. “Booster”, “double vaccinated”, these aren’t normal talk for our health, certainly wasn’t a few years ago. I too was deep deep in the statistical, I’ve since given up as the more I gathered the more it became murky and distorted. Not that it didn’t fit my hypothesis, it just got messier and messier and confusing. I mean look how they present the latest ONS death stats, why the hell anyone would change it to be represented like that is crazy. I could write macros to sort it out, but I’ve given up, and it makes me question any of the data I’ve collected before.
I believe this is why people played down infection derived immunity. They worried that we would refuse the vaccine if we thought we were already immune. So they told what they thought were white lies. They said only vaccines could bring immunity. It was obvious nonsense, but medics and health professionals lined up to endorse it. Because they thought it was better, on balance, to risk the jab than the virus.
This is where it started to break down.
Our disagreement is that you think the vaccine was entirely pointless and/or actively dangerous. Whereas I think it was likely to have been beneficial to vulnerable people in specific circumstances, but wrongly forced onto people that did not need it.
I think we also agree that the people it was forced onto may have been harmed by it.
Unfortunately, I do think that the last 4 years was real. We faced a new disease that was very little threat to most of us, but a significant danger to the elderly and vulnerable. I think our response to that did far more harm than good.
Elysium said:
Your opening question is a good one. It was impossible to say who had already been exposed to COVID when the vaccines were first offered. Because we did not have testing.
I believe this is why people played down infection derived immunity. They worried that we would refuse the vaccine if we thought we were already immune. So they told what they thought were white lies. They said only vaccines could bring immunity. It was obvious nonsense, but medics and health professionals lined up to endorse it. Because they thought it was better, on balance, to risk the jab than the virus.
This is where it started to break down.
Our disagreement is that you think the vaccine was entirely pointless and/or actively dangerous. Whereas I think it was likely to have been beneficial to vulnerable people in specific circumstances, but wrongly forced onto people that did not need it.
I think we also agree that the people it was forced onto may have been harmed by it.
Unfortunately, I do think that the last 4 years was real. We faced a new disease that was very little threat to most of us, but a significant danger to the elderly and vulnerable. I think our response to that did far more harm than good.
Remember the testing was absolutely useless for what it was designed to do. Also you have to factor in that a virus is just a theory, so the whole “variant” thing is pretty much made up science to go along with that. I believe this is why people played down infection derived immunity. They worried that we would refuse the vaccine if we thought we were already immune. So they told what they thought were white lies. They said only vaccines could bring immunity. It was obvious nonsense, but medics and health professionals lined up to endorse it. Because they thought it was better, on balance, to risk the jab than the virus.
This is where it started to break down.
Our disagreement is that you think the vaccine was entirely pointless and/or actively dangerous. Whereas I think it was likely to have been beneficial to vulnerable people in specific circumstances, but wrongly forced onto people that did not need it.
I think we also agree that the people it was forced onto may have been harmed by it.
Unfortunately, I do think that the last 4 years was real. We faced a new disease that was very little threat to most of us, but a significant danger to the elderly and vulnerable. I think our response to that did far more harm than good.
We will just have to agree to differ, I think we suffered a bout of mass hysteria, I don’t really blame anyone for that, it’s been building for many years. Too little time to discuss all of that in full here. I’m not sure I believe the “vaccines” to be nefarious, I’m also investigating that they are a total red herring currently, so probably did no harm at all physically. I’m pretty much on the “nothing is off the table” part of a venn diagram!
So in short, I’m probably not adding much to this thread am I
jameswills said:
Elysium said:
Your opening question is a good one. It was impossible to say who had already been exposed to COVID when the vaccines were first offered. Because we did not have testing.
I believe this is why people played down infection derived immunity. They worried that we would refuse the vaccine if we thought we were already immune. So they told what they thought were white lies. They said only vaccines could bring immunity. It was obvious nonsense, but medics and health professionals lined up to endorse it. Because they thought it was better, on balance, to risk the jab than the virus.
This is where it started to break down.
Our disagreement is that you think the vaccine was entirely pointless and/or actively dangerous. Whereas I think it was likely to have been beneficial to vulnerable people in specific circumstances, but wrongly forced onto people that did not need it.
I think we also agree that the people it was forced onto may have been harmed by it.
Unfortunately, I do think that the last 4 years was real. We faced a new disease that was very little threat to most of us, but a significant danger to the elderly and vulnerable. I think our response to that did far more harm than good.
Remember the testing was absolutely useless for what it was designed to do. Also you have to factor in that a virus is just a theory, so the whole “variant” thing is pretty much made up science to go along with that. I believe this is why people played down infection derived immunity. They worried that we would refuse the vaccine if we thought we were already immune. So they told what they thought were white lies. They said only vaccines could bring immunity. It was obvious nonsense, but medics and health professionals lined up to endorse it. Because they thought it was better, on balance, to risk the jab than the virus.
This is where it started to break down.
Our disagreement is that you think the vaccine was entirely pointless and/or actively dangerous. Whereas I think it was likely to have been beneficial to vulnerable people in specific circumstances, but wrongly forced onto people that did not need it.
I think we also agree that the people it was forced onto may have been harmed by it.
Unfortunately, I do think that the last 4 years was real. We faced a new disease that was very little threat to most of us, but a significant danger to the elderly and vulnerable. I think our response to that did far more harm than good.
We will just have to agree to differ, I think we suffered a bout of mass hysteria, I don’t really blame anyone for that, it’s been building for many years. Too little time to discuss all of that in full here. I’m not sure I believe the “vaccines” to be nefarious, I’m also investigating that they are a total red herring currently, so probably did no harm at all physically. I’m pretty much on the “nothing is off the table” part of a venn diagram!
So in short, I’m probably not adding much to this thread am I
Boringvolvodriver said:
Elysium said:
This is where the problem lies for me. If we had stopped everything after those 15m jabs it would have been OK.
But we didn’t.
The reason was that the elderly vaccinated still got infected and many of them still died.
Instead of accepting that was the best we could do, we went through increasingly desperate attempts to jab everyone on the planet, before eventually realising that it made no difference.
The first 15m vaccines saved lives in the UK. The other 30m achieved almost nothing.
I can’t disagree with your last sentence - in fact most people should be able to go along with it.But we didn’t.
The reason was that the elderly vaccinated still got infected and many of them still died.
Instead of accepting that was the best we could do, we went through increasingly desperate attempts to jab everyone on the planet, before eventually realising that it made no difference.
The first 15m vaccines saved lives in the UK. The other 30m achieved almost nothing.
Like you, it all goes wrong when there was what almost amounted to coercion for all and sundry to be vaccinated aided and abetted by the media and celebrities. The idea of mandates was clearly wrong but any one who dared to oppose then was almost branded as a right wing racist facist. The level that people like being told what to do still frightens me if I am honest.
The other question, which we will never get an answer to, is why exactly did the policy change from the 15m jabs to freedom to what we saw? The Covid Inquiry won’t find out I suspect………..
By the time the vaccines arrived, western economies that had indulged in lockdown were haemorrhaging badly. They desperately needed a way out.
Vaccines looked like the answer, but they didn’t stop enough deaths. The comment I posted from Birx earlier today could actually be the truth. The authorities hoped that vaccinating more and more people might somehow change the game.
But it didn’t. They were wrong and in the end we finally got out of it because we ripped off the plaster and rode out the exit wave.
jameswills said:
So old people didn’t die in 2020, but did die in 2021, but conversely the vaccine in 2021 had a positive effect on mortality on elderly patients even though the average age of dying with Covid was higher than the UK average, and plus after the vaccine a higher proportion of younger people started dying yet the rate of the elderly remained largely the same?
What? "Old people didn't die in 2020"? Are you serious? There were around 1400 daily deaths at the peak in April 2020. A similar number in January 2021. The bulk of those deaths were the very elderly and highly vulnerable (e.g. immuno-compromised) in both cases. Then we got the vaccines, and deaths from Covid reduced massively.Covid disproportionately killed the very old and the very sick: fact. In those groups, the vaccine greatly reduced the mortality rate: fact.
Elysium said:
jameswills said:
How did they measure “prior exposure to Covid”? Did they compare it to 2020 when pretty much no one died of it if they weren’t in a care home, ventillated or given end of life treatment?
I have followed your posts for a few years now, and you’ve been great. I hate talking personal as it skews points and is just a point scoring exercise, and that serves no purpose, not for me anyway. I would just say now you’re starting to talk in the double speak that I see now from people who have come to believe in the last 4 years was actually real. “Booster”, “double vaccinated”, these aren’t normal talk for our health, certainly wasn’t a few years ago. I too was deep deep in the statistical, I’ve since given up as the more I gathered the more it became murky and distorted. Not that it didn’t fit my hypothesis, it just got messier and messier and confusing. I mean look how they present the latest ONS death stats, why the hell anyone would change it to be represented like that is crazy. I could write macros to sort it out, but I’ve given up, and it makes me question any of the data I’ve collected before.
Your opening question is a good one. It was impossible to say who had already been exposed to COVID when the vaccines were first offered. Because we did not have testing.I have followed your posts for a few years now, and you’ve been great. I hate talking personal as it skews points and is just a point scoring exercise, and that serves no purpose, not for me anyway. I would just say now you’re starting to talk in the double speak that I see now from people who have come to believe in the last 4 years was actually real. “Booster”, “double vaccinated”, these aren’t normal talk for our health, certainly wasn’t a few years ago. I too was deep deep in the statistical, I’ve since given up as the more I gathered the more it became murky and distorted. Not that it didn’t fit my hypothesis, it just got messier and messier and confusing. I mean look how they present the latest ONS death stats, why the hell anyone would change it to be represented like that is crazy. I could write macros to sort it out, but I’ve given up, and it makes me question any of the data I’ve collected before.
The testing process was a joke - Mrs BC ended up in Hospital in lockdown - (she'd already had it but quite mild) was tested daily on a mixed ward (people who tested positive for covid and those that didn't test positive) None of them were being treated for covid they were all in there for other issues - the lady in the bed next to her who was covid positive had a broken hip.
The testing was so sensitive that it would pick up traces well after infection and recovery - I really agreed with Ivor C who was one of the earliest people to call it out as a pingdemic rather than pandemic
Elysium said:
I believe this is why people played down infection derived immunity. They worried that we would refuse the vaccine if we thought we were already immune. So they told what they thought were white lies. They said only vaccines could bring immunity. It was obvious nonsense, but medics and health professionals lined up to endorse it. Because they thought it was better, on balance, to risk the jab than the virus.
This is where it started to break down.
It broke down for me well before then - I had to write a letter to my GP to get them to stop phoning me, texting me and writing to me telling me to book up my Covid Vaccination - Asking (when they called) to be removed from whatever "register of unvaccinated" they were using had no effect. The letters I could easily ignore but the phone calls were a PITA they stopped trying to ask me to book up for my first vaccine and moved onto trying to book me in for my second and then a booster. total waste of resources and while all that was going on you couldn't get to see a GP for any reason. This situation has continued driving people to seek medical attention at A&E for things that should be dealt with by a GP. This is where it started to break down.
Middle of June 2020 I finally got a GP to refer me to a Hospital - via on-line referral process they wouldn't see me face to face - the hospital was like a ghost town!!!!
All we were hearing about in the media was the number of cases and number of deaths - nothing I saw matched the media coverage
Shortly after that we had eat out to help out - Utter madness
Elysium said:
Our disagreement is that you think the vaccine was entirely pointless and/or actively dangerous. Whereas I think it was likely to have been beneficial to vulnerable people in specific circumstances, but wrongly forced onto people that did not need it.
I think we also agree that the people it was forced onto may have been harmed by it.
I agree the coercion was very over the top - miss-guided or as a result of excessive purchase qtys and the fear of having to admit vaccines going to wasteI think we also agree that the people it was forced onto may have been harmed by it.
Elysium said:
Unfortunately, I do think that the last 4 years was real. We faced a new disease that was very little threat to most of us, but a significant danger to the elderly and vulnerable. I think our response to that did far more harm than good.
Now that I 100% agree with - the "cure was worse than the disease"On the positive side I've just worked out it's been 870 days since I last watched a news broadcast - I decided I no longer was interested in their content when the broadcast Chris Witty saying we know very little about Omicron variant but what we do know is not good" and Plan B was introduced.
BigMon said:
The thing is though that almost for everyone on here that knows people dropping like flies left, right and centre there are those like me and Hants who haven't noticed any appreciable difference.
That's because all those people clearly had the good sense to give the magic juice a miss whilst telling you they were fully jabbed and boosted for the social acceptance and to not be labelled CTers.Hants PHer said:
jameswills said:
So old people didn’t die in 2020, but did die in 2021, but conversely the vaccine in 2021 had a positive effect on mortality on elderly patients even though the average age of dying with Covid was higher than the UK average, and plus after the vaccine a higher proportion of younger people started dying yet the rate of the elderly remained largely the same?
What? "Old people didn't die in 2020"? Are you serious? There were around 1400 daily deaths at the peak in April 2020. A similar number in January 2021. The bulk of those deaths were the very elderly and highly vulnerable (e.g. immuno-compromised) in both cases. Then we got the vaccines, and deaths from Covid reduced massively.Covid disproportionately killed the very old and the very sick: fact. In those groups, the vaccine greatly reduced the mortality rate: fact.
How old are most of the people that die every day in the UK - around 98%
Not wanting a fight over this but when the media focused on the number of daily deaths thro the pandemic a big problem I had with it was they never put it in context - the human race is not imortal - babies are born children grow up people age and people die.
B'stard Child said:
Hants PHer said:
jameswills said:
So old people didn’t die in 2020, but did die in 2021, but conversely the vaccine in 2021 had a positive effect on mortality on elderly patients even though the average age of dying with Covid was higher than the UK average, and plus after the vaccine a higher proportion of younger people started dying yet the rate of the elderly remained largely the same?
What? "Old people didn't die in 2020"? Are you serious? There were around 1400 daily deaths at the peak in April 2020. A similar number in January 2021. The bulk of those deaths were the very elderly and highly vulnerable (e.g. immuno-compromised) in both cases. Then we got the vaccines, and deaths from Covid reduced massively.Covid disproportionately killed the very old and the very sick: fact. In those groups, the vaccine greatly reduced the mortality rate: fact.
How old are most of the people that die every day in the UK - around 98%
Not wanting a fight over this but when the media focused on the number of daily deaths thro the pandemic a big problem I had with it was they never put it in context - the human race is not imortal - babies are born children grow up people age and people die.
Elysium said:
Watch the Unherd interview with Giesecke from April 2020. When asked how the UK could get out of lockdown he scoffs and says quite simply “you can’t”
By the time the vaccines arrived, western economies that had indulged in lockdown were haemorrhaging badly. They desperately needed a way out.
Vaccines looked like the answer, but they didn’t stop enough deaths. The comment I posted from Birx earlier today could actually be the truth. The authorities hoped that vaccinating more and more people might somehow change the game.
But it didn’t. They were wrong and in the end we finally got out of it because we ripped off the plaster and rode out the exit wave.
Thanks .By the time the vaccines arrived, western economies that had indulged in lockdown were haemorrhaging badly. They desperately needed a way out.
Vaccines looked like the answer, but they didn’t stop enough deaths. The comment I posted from Birx earlier today could actually be the truth. The authorities hoped that vaccinating more and more people might somehow change the game.
But it didn’t. They were wrong and in the end we finally got out of it because we ripped off the plaster and rode out the exit wave.
My best theory is that the vaccine was the only way for the politicians to look like they had actually done something to get out of the mess that their over reactions had caused.
B'stard Child said:
How many people die every day in the UK - around 1600
How old are most of the people that die every day in the UK - around 98%
Not wanting a fight over this but when the media focused on the number of daily deaths thro the pandemic a big problem I had with it was they never put it in context - the human race is not imortal - babies are born children grow up people age and people die.
This was my beef at the time - strangely the older you are and the more things that you have wrong with you, the more likely that anything will hasten your death. People and the media forgot about that fact and a 90 year dying “of covid” was bashed as a tragedy. Yes, it was for the family concerned but to try and say that they would have had another 5 years of a good life was debatable.How old are most of the people that die every day in the UK - around 98%
Not wanting a fight over this but when the media focused on the number of daily deaths thro the pandemic a big problem I had with it was they never put it in context - the human race is not imortal - babies are born children grow up people age and people die.
Undoubtedly more people were dying, but who knows how long they may have lived if not for covid or indeed maybe flu.
jshell said:
pavarotti1980 said:
jshell said:
1. Well, that just means we shouldn't look at non-performing pseudo-vaccines and excess deaths though, right?
2. They all worked together, US led and everyone heard the same message... Splitting hairs when the response and message was GLOBAL is diversionary. It took an Italian hearing to find out that Pfizer never tested for preventing transmission.
You seem to be making conclusions from posts which show no indication of that. 2. They all worked together, US led and everyone heard the same message... Splitting hairs when the response and message was GLOBAL is diversionary. It took an Italian hearing to find out that Pfizer never tested for preventing transmission.
Actually UK & Europe led and the USA sort of followed.
I'm sure you will move onto something else now
king folly. What has been done to people is utterly criminal and the numbers show it.Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff