Recent Posts

Nothing I said in that thread was insulting without twisting yourself into being offended. 

So, what you're saying is, you didn't REALLY want to see proof,  you were just using that as another asinine way to dismiss. Just like you twisting yourself into an offended pretzel on my thread in order to diminish anything I say.
Got it. 

Well look at it off of Tapatalk. 
Or ask for proof and continue to find asinine ways to dismiss the proof without even looking at it. That's fine, it's just more proof. 

As far as my thread being an insult, it is only if you want to twist it into that. And you clearly NEEDED to. It's almost pathological with you these days. 

Plenty of people didn't see it as an insult and appreciated the thread.  

I posted a thread in order to pay it forward and create good will. A thread that people were appreciating. YOU were the one lecturing in order to diminish anything I say. 


I gave undeniable proof - my posts on page 29 of this thread.  You don't have to count anything. 

I've questioned his judgement since the Senate ignored his sexual harassment of his employees before they bestowed the honor of Supreme Court Justice on him.

That are 90% vaccinated.

Uh huh. That's what did it. It had nothing to do with a government refusing to listen to the hardships that ordinary citizens were facing in extraordinary times.

Ordinary people. Men and women who actually go out and work for a living. You know, the ones who brought food and vaccines and even toilet paper to people who were told to stay in their homes and not come out without an acceptable excuse.



One thing you can count on is that people around the world are watching how the Canadian government responds.

So far, looks like Truckers 1, Government 0.

  

It is hard to keep up with these threads so thought I might post this in both threads as they now seem to be over lapping.

I notice that some of the conversation has turned to vaccine effectiveness amongst all the other tangents.

It is all a learning curve , for me anyway.

It is not unlike a situation where I have found myself in before.

I used to think that science was absolute but I found that the devil is in the detail . ( I learned this whilst home - researching a post viral health condition over many years )

There are shades of grey

I have only taken a quick glance at vaccine effectiveness but if I were to take a more serious look ( which I am not ) then I would take the following factors into consideration -

Epidemiological data from various countries .

Comparison of above data and why variations may occur -

In an earlier post I linked to data including tables that showed 2 shot vaccine effectiveness in the UK was lower than that reported by the US .
The UKHSA ( UK Health Security Agency )showed roughly 40% ish effectiveness compared to 60% ish from the CDC. ( US Centre for Disease Control )
A potential reason for this could be because the UK used both Astra Zeneca and Pfizer ( confirmed ) in comparison to the US which used Moderna and Pfizer ( at least I think so but have not double checked )

Other things to take into consideration might be -

Different vaccine types

Timescales of waning immunity

Number and timing of shots .

Covid variants as vaccine efficacy for Delta was higher than for Omicron.

Immunosuppressed individuals

Rates of infection for different areas .


Through previous personal experience of home research there a few things I picked up along the way including -

Taking into consideration the ranking of a journal. Some are more respected and high profile than others. They are rated regarding their impact factor. Even high ranking journals sometimes have a controversial history on certain subjects.

I also came to realise that any meta analysis is only as good as the original articles which reviewers may take at face value. If the original articles were unreliable or biased in the first place than the conclusion of any meta analysis may reflect this and could be potentially flawed leading to misleading conclusions . Decent meta analysis should highlight any weaknesses and issues concerned. In my experience this can vary.

The devil in the detail is to be found in between the abstract and the conclusion of the article. There have been times when headers don’t always stand up to closer scrutiny.

Going off topic slightly -

The type of misleading research that I am most familiar with has thankfully since been discredited due it’s poor practices .
Unfortunately the same discredited researchers have turned their attention to Long Covid.

I have huge respect for the patients/ families (affected by this particular post viral illness )- dubbed as citizen scientists who have collaborated with decent medical/scientific researchers to co-author papers in order to get them published in peer reviewed journals . Amongst other researchers, they have contributed to altering particular Health guidelines in the UK and elsewhere. The new guidelines have turned the old ones upside down.
This could also influence Long Covid health guidelines in the future due to their similarity.

As a non-scientist I have come across information ( post viral ) that I found difficult to understand and wanted to learn more about clinical findings . As such I contacted a few biomedical researchers to ask if they could help explain things. I have been so lucky because they took the time and trouble to help.

Going back to Covid , things are emerging and constantly changing medically, scientifically and politically. Information is fast moving and often contradictory .

Online abuse is rife.

Hate speech / crimes online have increased.

I am from the UK but I read that New Zealand has a campaign to encourage people to stop and think before they press send.
They try to show people that disagreement can occur and strong views expressed without resorting to personal attacks. Winding back online rage.

www.theguardian.com/world/2022/feb/11/what-would-your-mother-say-new-zealand-urges-citizens-to-wind-back-online-rage


I might just hide under the duvet now !

These are not lies. The top doctors are not lying to you. They have nothing to gain from doing so. The people whose advice you're taking have everything to gain and that's the difference but you're not seeing it. 

I don’t agree with either party on all the issues.

I have to pick the issue I find most important because it will impact my family the most and vote on that.

Right now, that’s not CRT or public education.

The fact that I’m voting based on a different issue doesn’t mean anything about my beliefs on this issue.

I am definitely not an epidemiologist or have a background in any of these things other than University science. I'm truly sorry if I'm coming across as "high and mighty" or something. I think I'm just losing my patience which is not a good thing at all. I should really just stick to reading these boards rather than commenting.

I honestly just want to share information because I feel that others could benefit from it. I don't want to argue or fight with anyone. Maybe I bristle because I'm not used to people talking this way to one another.

Here's how it works: they discuss peer-reviewed science in the podcasts. 

I honestly can't with these responses.

Neither is a person in a coma. That has NOTHING to do with it, imo.

Whether the person is capable of making decision or not NO ONE has the right to USE THE BODY, blood, bone marrow of another person. NO ONE.

Does anyone know what corporation this is?


“ Say the people supporting the corporation responsible for killing tens of millions of minority children.”

I hate to point out the obvious here but it also affects the fetus. If you would have preferred to be the result of an abortion then I could see how you would agree with it, otherwise you're a hypocrite.