Conspiracies The Covid Narrative

[Deleted member 521610]

im dropping out of the system fuck the bullshit communists ill live in a forest with my own commune. Cant believe i have this fucking bullshit shot in me

 

[Fire&Water]

What game?

I'll dare to say he's referring to the submission to healthcare of our own bodies, its the tip of the iceberg

"Its for everybodys protection - its for your convenience"

How many times have we heard that and it turned out to be just the opposite

If you cant see whats going on you need some major enlightenment

 

[alasdairm]

@thujone - you made a specific claim. i'm just trying to understand the veracity of "a large portion".

if it is, indeed, a simple fact it should be straightforward, no?

if you can't or won't address the question, that's an answer too...

thanks.

alasdair

 

[birdup]

@Fire&Water

I fail to see how Alasdair is playing a game. He appears to be asking a simple straight forward question.

Nobody is playing games with @thujone. He made a statement and (predictably) he failed to back it up. There's a lot of that going on with anti-vaxxers.

I can make all sorts of outrageous statements if I don't have to back them up.

1) There are more emperor penguins than stars in the sky.
2) The sequel trilogy is better than the prequel trilogy.
3) Hyenas give the best blowjobs.
4) 1+1=4
etc.

The simple fact is a large portion of people on the frontlines of this pandemic, people who doubtless know better than I do about vaccines, are digging their heels in and refusing.

What does large mean?

Are we talking about 90% of healthcare workers?

If you can't explain your reasoning, I don't see how this is a "simple fact", let alone a fact at all.

Nobody is playing games with you. Nobody is asking you to defend your rights.

Your statement is either true or false.

 

[Mr. Krinkle]

as of Dec.1st, you have to show proof of anti-vaccination in these threads

 

[Fire&Water]

@Fire&Water

I fail to see how Alasdair is playing a game.

What th?

 

[Zopiclone bandit]

Both of these sentences epitomize the disingenuous nature of the debate coming from the government and its supporters.

The technology might have been ready, that's not the point. The point is this specific formulation has not gone through the safety testing regime that vaccines have to go through. This is a live experiment, which is why the pharmaceuticals were insistent on the liability clause in the contracts, so they can't be held responsible if it all goes pear shaped down the road. Over the past year they have desperately tried to play down and ignore the myocarditis risk, and it's now got to the point where the public can literally see the pattern of high exertion athletes collapsing on an almost daily basis. Proper safety trials would have caught this, and not only that but this is more than enough to immediately discontinue the vaccines as they clearly have a dangerous fault. But no.. we're now going full steam ahead pumping this into children. It's a crime against humanity in action and those involved are going to hang, if they're lucky and don't get ripped apart by the public first that is.

Legality is not morality, nor is democracy an arbiter of truth. If 51% of the voters decide to legalize murder that does not mean murder is right.

The Nuremberg code is relevant because what it boils down to is consent and coercion. All the worlds governments are guilty of the latter.. in the UK this week we have Sajid Javid coercing a news reporter live on air to get the jab (personally I think it was staged though). We also now have Austria and Germany both making this experimental emergency authorized product compulsory by law, which is a clear violation of Nuremberg, but anyone with an ounce of self awareness doesn't need a piece of paper to know that forcing people to take something into their bodies they don't want is immoral. It is state sanctioned rape, with the possibility of severe injury or even death. Again, no rational moral person would ever argue that is acceptable under any circumstance. A human being has sovereign choice of their body, not the state, and to argue otherwise means you have lost the fucking plot quite frankly.

Amen.

More clearly put over than I could & you got my point 100%

 

[F.U.B.A.R.]

You can't tease us like that and then not say it.

If it's so crazy that you are hesitant to even mention it, I'm intrigued.

Bet you wish you hadn't asked now eh?

 

[AutoTripper]

Bet you wish you hadn't asked now eh?

That's what the blue pill is for.

 

[thujone]

@thujone - you made a specific claim. i'm just trying to understand the veracity of "a large portion".

if it is, indeed, a simple fact it should be straightforward, no?

if you can't or won't address the question, that's an answer too...

thanks.

alasdair

Fine, I will show you, why I'm tired of sources and questions and being expected to justify my own healthcare decisions.

At a news conference, Quebec Health Minister Christian Dubé announced that the province was moving away from a strategy of mandatory vaccination toward one of compulsory testing for unvaccinated employees.

However, new employees will be required to get vaccinated and all unvaccinated health-care workers will be ineligible for retention bonuses.

Out of the 17,140 unvaccinated health-care workers, Dubé said 5,000 are likely to be in direct contact with patients. He said 97 per cent of active health-care employees have received at least one dose.

"It's exceptional, but it still isn't perfect," Dubé said.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/mandatory-vaccination-new-health-workers-1.6235760

Similar numbers were bandied about for Ontario, which likewise cancelled the mandate.

17,140 is 3% of ~580k, which includes administrative staff.

Now I draw your attention to this:

We are told exactly how many healthcare workers are vaccinated, albeit in a roundabout way. There is no ambiguity about the fact that 97% vaccinated leaves 3% unvaccinated, and if 3% is 17,140 than 97% is close to 600k.

What we are specifically not told in a clear way is how many front-line workers are unvaccinated. Instead, what they tell us is how many of the unvaccinated are front-line workers - 5000. So we know 30% of the unvaccinated are front-line workers. If we had the total number of front-line workers, you could work out the percentage.

I said what I know - that the government had to back off a "non-negotiable" mandate. That was fact. It's also fact that enough front-line healthcare workers refused that it made a difference. Instead of focusing on those, which I think is the main point, you chose to focus just on the one trifling detail that is most difficult to verify (though likely not impossible).

@birdup This is the game I'm tired of - argument for argument's sake. Trying to extrapolate greater meaning out of literally one freaking word while completely ignoring the bigger picture.

Personally, I don't give a rat's ass what percentage of the front-line workers refuse, I just care that enough of them refused that it made the power-mad bureaucrats blink. They are there in the thick of it. We are not. Any of them refusing the vaccine says something, doesn't it?

And why do you care about the percentage? What does it matter if it's 1%, or 50%? If it's just 1%, does that make it OK to kick them out of civil society, shrug and carry on? I just don't see how this line of reasoning can lead anywhere good.

 

[birdup]

argument for argument's sake

I don't think that's a fair assessment. It's not a game. You made a statement on a discussion forum and someone challenged it.

Let's assume it's 3%, like you said.

Any of them refusing the vaccine says something, doesn't it?

Not to me, no. I would have to enquire as to their reasoning.

I am a frontline healthcare worker. I have colleagues that didn't want the jab. They aren't geniuses. They don't have medical degrees. I don't consider their opinion - or mine - to be expert simply because we work with vulnerable people on a daily basis.

If 97% of the medical profession get jabbed, am I concerned about the 3% that refuse? No. Absolutely not. Why would I care more about a minority opinion than a majority opinion.

The same argument is used to justify climate change denial.

There are some scientists in the world that think the world is flat.

You have to keep in mind: there are a lot of highly educated people on the planet that are fucking morons.

I don't give a rat's ass what percentage of the front-line workers refuse

You said portion. I don't want to have a long discussion about the word portion. You could have just said right at the beginning that you made a mistake. Only God is infallible and (honestly) I'm not sure about that either.

And why do you care about the percentage? What does it matter if it's 1%, or 50%? If it's just 1%, does that make it OK to kick them out of civil society, shrug and carry on?

That's a different discussion, but it's certainly easier to remove 1% of the population than it is to remove 50%.

I don't think the vaccine mandates will work, unfortunately.

I took a severely disabled person on an outing today. They told me he needs to use his phone to check in. I said he doesn't have a phone, but I have a printed version of his vaccination. They asked for photo ID and checked his name against the vaccination certificate. Then they argued with each other about whether or not to let him in.

I know another guy who is unvaccinated because he had COVID and the government told him he can't get jabbed until 6 months after his positive test date. Everywhere he goes, they ask him for proof of vaccination. He has to argue with "COVID marshals" (what a fucking joke of a position that is) that he has natural immunity. Most of the time, they don't let him in.

It's all a fucking shit show, but that is besides the point.

It is not a large percent of frontline healthcare workers who are refusing to be vaccinated.

 

[alasdairm]

indeed.

with respect, the claim was not "a portion". it was "a large portion".

if you - @thujone - had said "a portion" i would have agreed and not given it a second thought. because that is an undeniable fact.

but "a large portion"? your own numbers demonstrate that is simply untrue.

alasdair

 

[AutoTripper]

in a word, no. i'm tired of playing this game and i'm tired of being expected to defend my right not to take medicine i don't want.

That IS it. It IS seen as irresponsible, selfish, neglectful, ignorant...DANGEROUS! To society, the vulnerable.

Even though....the vaccinated contract and transmit equally to unnies (as in- as much, about time for a new word too.

It is still scorned upon by so many, at least privately but pretty damn vocally also.

The arguments for why we must, why it's such a clever idea, the proposd benefits, blah blah stack up like wet hay.

But...you did say "a portion". Tut tut tut, comeon now. For that you have officially been disqualified. Your word can now no longer ever be substantiated or taken seriously. And we will quote you on this forever now, next time you say...


"My shoelaces, I swear the left one is way longer on the right side"

We may say back, excelt I'm not very good at this fype of thing but I'll have a go..

"How can you quantify the variation between the laces or exoect anyone to take you seriously when you clearly said "a large portion" and failed to justify that quantification with firm empirical data and evidence, on 7th Dec 2021?"

 

[alasdairm]

The arguments for why we must

exactly.

the argument stood on the claim of "a large potion". well, it's demonstrably not a large portion. it's a tiny portion. so the argument? we both the answer.

you can mock all you want. words matter. it's ok to be wrong.

as someone who appears to receive at least his fair share of mocking, i assumed you'd be above that.

alasdair

 

[arrall]

the vaccinated contract and transmit equally to unnies

Regardless of your position on mandates, this is completely false.

An Israeli study on vaccination and Delta variant infection rates in adolescents found a 90% reduction of infection and 93% reduction of symptomatic infection 1-3 weeks after the 2nd dose.

Here is another study on the effectiveness of vaccines in preventing symptomatic Covid infection. These are the results of the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine:

With the BNT162b2 vaccine, the effectiveness of two doses was 93.7% (95% CI, 91.6 to 95.3) among persons with the alpha variant and 88.0% (95% CI, 85.3 to 90.1) among those with the delta variant.

In early 2021, a UK study found that transmission between household members was reduced by 40-50% with ONE DOSE OF VACCINE.

Another study found the household contact transmission rate with the delta variant to be 38% transmission to unvaccinated household members vs. 25% to vaccinated household members. This study did find that those who were vaccinated and infected with Delta-variant Covid did infect others at approximately the same rate as those unvaccinated and infected.

However, this still does not mean that the vaccine does not decrease transmission. As we've already seen, vaccinated people are significantly less likely to catch Covid and people who do not have Covid cannot transmit it, therefore vaccinated people are still overall much less likely to transmit Covid to family members.

A big point you are also missing is how drastically symptom severity is reduced in vaccinated people. The risks of hospitalizations and death both plummet with vaccination.

The question here is not whether or not vaccines work. A quick search on Google Scholar will find a mountain of evidence proving their efficacy. The only debate is if mandating vaccines that we know work is ethical and to what degree said mandates should exist.

EDIT: Evidence for risk of hospitalizations and death decreasing below.
According to the British Columbia CDC:

The B.C. analyses found vaccine effectiveness (VE) of 2 doses of any COVID-19 vaccine was about 95 per cent against hospitalization. Translated simply, this means that for every 100 hospitalizations due to COVID-19 in unvaccinated people, 95 could have been prevented through vaccination.

The analysis also examined VE against any infection and found that receiving two doses of either mRNA vaccine was more than 90 per cent effective at preventing SARS-CoV-2 infection.

In Ontario, the full vaccination rate in people 12+ is 87%, with 3% being partially vaccinated and only 10% of people being unvaccinated. Despite that, fully vaccinated people only accounted for 3.3% of deaths from December 14 2020 to November 14 2021. Even the fully vaccinated people who catch Covid are still drastically less likely to die from it.

Over the 11-month period, no deaths were reported in fully vaccinated individuals who had a breakthrough COVID-19 infection between the ages of 12 and 39.

Two fully vaccinated people between the ages of 40 and 49 died from a breakthrough COVID infection and four fully vaccinated people between the ages of 50 and 59 died from the virus.

When it came to those who were unvaccinated, there was one person in the 12 to 17 age group, 26 people aged 18 to 29, 63 people aged 30 to 39, 131 people aged 40 to 49 and 359 people aged 50 to 59, who all died after being infected with COVID.

According to the data, vaccination is literally saving lives.

 

[AutoTripper]

exactly.

the argument stood on the claim of "a large potion". well, it's demonstrably not a large portion. it's a tiny portion. so the argument? we both the answer.

you can mock all you want. words matter. it's ok to be wrong.

as someone who appears to receive at least his fair share of mocking, i assumed you'd be above that.

alasdair

You are right. I HAVE lowered myself. I should not mock in any way.

I just can't bear the circus any more. 2021 has been a hell of a destroying year. For so much and so many.

Personally I expect 2022 not to be worse just something else completely.

Ouch as I type lol. One vicious case of haemorrhoids from IBS ultimately, cannot sleep nor bear to evacuate its driving me nuts for the mo so am semi fasting but still can't sleep or relax or eat, eating 7 days in a row last week basically didn't help.

Very hungry but more tired.

So, no excuse, but I react to feeling. I feel it was petty and pointless, by many, no single one, to keep using Grimez' lost bet in every other argument, like a testament of weak character and unreliable testimony.

He came back. He disagrees with many, is agreed with by many, not on all ofc both ways.

And rhetorical questions I love, I get making the point firmly that way. But it can be a way to simply evade speaking one's own mind straightforwardly, at least mixing it up.

No wrong in pointing out blatant innacuracies, or potentially misleading, cconsequential untruths. But it doesn't have to be like "the prosecution", was MY angle and personal objection.

I have partly lost my mind of late too. Not mentally, thoughts, beliefs, cognition etc.

Just too many multiple pains and illnesses crammed in like an assault course that never ends. Still some mileage to go.

So my tolerance has been low, irritability monstrously high, that's "my bad", I have dropped and make no defence.

 

[AutoTripper]

Regardless of your position on mandates, this is completely false.

An Israeli study on vaccination and Delta variant infection rates in adolescents found a 90% reduction of infection and 93% reduction of symptomatic infection 1-3 weeks after the 2nd dose.

Here is another study on the effectiveness of vaccines in preventing symptomatic Covid infection. These are the results of the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine:


In early 2021, a UK study found that transmission between household members was reduced by 40-50% with ONE DOSE OF VACCINE.

Another study found the household contact transmission rate with the delta variant to be 38% transmission to unvaccinated household members vs. 25% to vaccinated household members. This study did find that those who were vaccinated and infected with Delta-variant Covid did infect others at approximately the same rate as those unvaccinated and infected.

However, this still does not mean that the vaccine does not decrease transmission. As we've already seen, vaccinated people are significantly less likely to catch Covid and people who do not have Covid cannot transmit it, therefore vaccinated people are still overall much less likely to transmit Covid to family members.

A big point you are also missing is how drastically symptom severity is reduced in vaccinated people. The risks of hospitalizations, ICU hospitalizations, and death all plummet with vaccination.

The question here is not whether or not vaccines work. A quick search on Google Scholar will find a mountain of evidence proving their efficacy. The only debate is if mandating vaccines that we know work is ethical and to what degree said mandates should exist.

The same people and organisations who produce and present and verify those statistics and narratives are the same ones who continue to out right deny that Chemtrailing is a real thing over planet Earth. For one.

They jail people for making safe effective electromedicine devices and especially anybody working in the field of rife frequencies. Wherever they can under red tape watching scrupulously.

The same television set and news channels broadcasting this narrative and these figures also presented 911 as a terrorist attack by a lunatic in a cave!

I don't buy anything that comes from the mainstream it's pretty cleverly conjured and dotted up in nice pretty graphs for everybody under mind control and be which meant to simply reiterate around the planet.

 

[alasdairm]

when people characterize a simple, civil request for substantiation of a claim as an attack or "prosecution" what on earth does that say about the veracity of the claim or, indeed, the person making it?

just think about that for a second.

alasdair

 

[arrall]

The same people and organisations who produce and present and verify those statistics and narratives are the same ones who continue to out right deny that Chemtrailing is a real thing over planet Earth. For one.

I'm not sure about the relevance of chemtrails in proving that basic hospital data and scientific research is forged.

However, I'd be happy to look at any proof you have of the existence of chemtrails contrasted with any record of their denial by researchers from Cilat Health Services, the Boston Children's Hospital, Harvard's T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Public Health England, the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine's Department of Disease Control, the British Columbia CDC, or Public Health Ontario.

 

[Fire&Water]

A quick search on Google Scholar will find a mountain of evidence proving their efficacy

Oh shit
then it has to be true