Conspiracy theories

[trueblue84]

.

9 times larger, and about 12 times more likely to die. You would assume, if the vax worked, the number of likely to die would be less than the times-larger number...not more. And unvaxxed folk also have co-morbidities.

The boosted death-rate is a worry. @trueblue84 noted around 60-70% are boosted, yet account for 85% of deaths.

month-of-May boosted deaths: 1155
other-vaccinated deaths: 127
unvaccinated deaths: 82


Should we be concerned about this?


And if you're not...why not?

Most booster jabs are issued to the elderly and vulnerable. An anecdotal example is I have a family member who is considered high risk and has significant underlying health issues. They are onto their 5th jab.

I lost a family member this year, who was vulnerable. They went into hospital, caught COVID and died. They had their jabs and the booster.

 

[bcblue1878]

I'm sure you've noticed, oddlad, that many on here claim i get my info from randoms on Facebook or 'far-right' forums...yet i always link my sources, and those sources are often official government info.

You'll also see plenty of labelism...lattery the hilariously-mild "dork".


But what's that about? This instictive dismissal must be coming from somewhere.


Here's a link that'll get laughed at by just about everyone on here, but it's an interesting discussion between Russell Brand and journo Aaron Maté. More about why Corbyn & Assange (for e.g.) got demonised, and generally why/how those with anti-establishment views get shut down before their arguments get proper responses:

You “always link your sources”, then post a video with Russell Brand in ???! You think the “link will get laughed at” is the most sensible thing you’ve posted for quite some time, and that’s not because Russell Brand is funny cos’ he really honestly isn’t!

 

[WA Toffee]

Hit ENTER with the curser at the bit you'd like to chop off.

Ooh nice, I like that

The whole point was comparing C-to-B (i.e. were heat-deaths on the rise?).

The whole point was misleading, by suggesting that there was only one way to interpret the data. The newspaper article should have been clearer, but that was a discussion for a different thread.

I don't need to be right, i discuss things here in detail to hopefully inspire detailed responses in return. A good debate of opposing views is rare these days, but GOT is still up to it (occasionally).

Yes, occasionally it is

I checked several ABC pieces on Covid...reader-comments deactivated in all (i wonder why).

Your other suggestions are localised. "social media" is non-specific. Facebook & Youtube users display a dominant anti-vax sentiment. Twitter somewhat 50/50 (as it's made up of a lot of Establishment types...and their hangers-on).


Feel free to share some specific links which show a mainstream readership pro-vax consensus (say anything from June onwards).

To be honest, I can't really be arsed trawling through. My point wasn't about any specific websites anyway, just a casual observation that I presumed the websites we both visit and read about covid are probably aligned with our own views on it. So it would come as no surprise that I see a decrease in anti vax comments while you see an increase (and please for the love of god, let's not get into a discussion about what increase and decrease mean again)

No.

I think it might be.

 

[dholliday]

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/FP_20211108_influencer_operations_dawson_weinberg_v2.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwiFrrPw9Jj5AhWThFwKHTonA2AQFnoECBcQAQ&usg=AOvVaw3BMmCqMUYazhNCPRs3KkO9

Hey @dholliday what do you think of this?

your link is junk, doesn't work. Plus you'll have to be more specific...what is your point?

When I see some of your posts I can't help but wonder what your reasons are for taking so much time on an Everton Ale House forum to push your Agenda(21)

This is the Conspiracy thread, i believe there are elements to the pandemic & the vaccine that hint at quite disturbing conspiracies.

My 'agenda' is simple. To promote a social & official acceptance of people's right to choose not to take the Covid-19 vaccine. I do this by contrasting the demonisation of the unvaxxed with facts that do not support these attacks...i then ask why these attacks exist...


Other online-places where i can discuss these things are echo-chambers of anti-establishment sentiments, so preaching to the converted. In chambers which have a strong pro-vax following, i've been banned.

Mayhap i'll get banned here too. I'd accept it and move on.

Debating with opposites may further understanding (mine, yours, anyone reading)...so for me it's a stimulating use of time. I guess for others too, as i get many replies, some are really decent.

 

[LostLegend]

 

[dholliday]

I don’t think it does. I’ve probably spent more time looking at the yellow card system than most on here, so it bugs me when I see it misused. I’m advocating rigorous and responsible usage of data. I think you often do the opposite.



People who suspect a side effect should absolutely report it to the appropriate systems.

But until they are substantiated, they remain unsubstantiated by definition. That’s not “convenient”, that’s just how it is. It probably wasn’t convenient for Astra Zeneca that the serious blood clot issue was investigated and substantiated by further evidence, and as a result pretty much shelved in the UK, but that’s what happened.

Nothing specific to say relating to the rest of your post other than that the “long term effect/lack of long term MRNA testing” arguments which you make in reference to menstrual cycle issues and heart issues, can be a bit of a double edged sword.

It’s obviously true that we don’t have “long term data” on this specific MRNA vaccine. But how long term is long term? This is a can which could be kicked down the road for a lifetime - in the year 2035 - “Sure the vaccines are safe for the first 15 years, but in year 16 everyone could drop dead”. This is technically true, but science is necessarily based on inductive evidence.

The other point is that we don’t have long term data in relation to Covid 19 yet, and what the differential would be between negative long term Covid effects between vaccinated and unvaccinated. Maybe anyone unvaccinated who gets Covid drops dead in year 16, but everyone vaccinated is fine. Any can that you kick down the road in relation to long term effects of a vaccine, you could do the same in terms of the virus itself.

Solid post, i do appreciate your effort.

But again, we're left with the conundrum: how do vax-victims get their claims substantiated?

Will @Tramps_mate and his dodgy arm be able to turn up in official data?

Is a rise in heart-issues, micarriages & still-births due to Long Covid or the vaccine? How to substantiate? Who will assist them to do so, and how?

These are the real-world issues facing many millions of [self-reported] vax-victims worldwide.


As for Astra Zeneca, do you feel it's a coincidence that the only vacine not made-for-profit is the one that gets its dodgy side-effects officially substantiated?

There's a whole bunch of interesting 'co-incidences' surrounding the pandemic, that is one. The other is famously the Wuhan Lab being a stone's throw from the initial case outbreak.

Conspiracy sounds like a dirty word, but maybe there's something to some of the more logical claims out there.

 

[dholliday]

Most booster jabs are issued to the elderly and vulnerable.

True. An age-breakdown, and co-morbidities, separated by vaxxed/unvaxxed status, would be useful.

Let us know if you can find something like this.

I lost a family member this year, who was vulnerable. They went into hospital, caught COVID and died. They had their jabs and the booster.

I'm sorry to hear that. Rest in peace.

You “always link your sources”, then post a video with Russell Brand in ???! You think the “link will get laughed at” is the most sensible thing you’ve posted for quite some time, and that’s not because Russell Brand is funny cos’ he really honestly isn’t!

What did you think about his discussion with the targeted journalist?

Ooh nice, I like that

The whole point was misleading, by suggesting that there was only one way to interpret the data. The newspaper article should have been clearer, but that was a discussion for a different thread.

Yes, occasionally it is

To be honest, I can't really be arsed trawling through. My point wasn't about any specific websites anyway, just a casual observation that I presumed the websites we both visit and read about covid are probably aligned with our own views on it. So it would come as no surprise that I see a decrease in anti vax comments while you see an increase (and please for the love of god, let's not get into a discussion about what increase and decrease mean again)

I think it might be.

i disagree, but appreciate your agreeable tone

 

[Amw79]

Solid post, i do appreciate your effort.

But again, we're left with the conundrum: how do vax-victims get their claims substantiated?

They report them, and the MHRA and other scientific bodies do the work. As has happened with a variety of now substantiated side effects.

Will @Tramps_mate and his dodgy arm be able to turn up in official data?

Yes.

Is a rise in heart-issues, micarriages & still-births due to Long Covid or the vaccine? How to substantiate? Who will assist them to do so, and how?

See the first answer.

These are the real-world issues facing many millions of [self-reported] vax-victims worldwide.


As for Astra Zeneca, do you feel it's a coincidence that the only vacine not made-for-profit is the one that gets its dodgy side-effects officially substantiated?

It’s not “the one”. Side effects of Pfizer and other vaccines have also been officially substantiated, as is expected with any other vaccine / drugs. So no spooky coincidence here.

There's a whole bunch of interesting 'co-incidences' surrounding the pandemic, that is one. The other is famously the Wuhan Lab being a stone's throw from the initial case outbreak.

If there’s evidence for a lab leak, that’s fine. Most studies have so far proved inconclusive, although there was one posted today in the Covid thread. Here. https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.abp8715

 

[PKwalnuts]

My 'agenda' is simple. To promote a social & official acceptance of people's right to choose not to take the Covid-19 vaccine.

Surely though this is a pointless exercise given the percentage of the population already vaccinated and the fact that this choice already exists.

I think the promote bit you refer to is to promote an anti vax agenda and all of the conspiracy stuff that goes with that, correct me if I am wrong.

Again, considering the percentage of people vaxxed and the fact that you have been banned from so many places, aren't you wasting your time, I mean it isn't that stimulating, I can think of other things like.

 

[dholliday]

They report them, and the MHRA and other scientific bodies do the work. As has happened with a variety of now substantiated side effects.

We shall see how that develops.

It’s not “the one”. Side effects of Pfizer and other vaccines have also been officially substantiated, as is expected with any other vaccine / drugs. So no spooky coincidence here.

I meant "the one" that then gets side-lined. In EU it was made unavailable, effectively banned. The media weren't shy about reporting AZ-issues.

Did EU having a secretive contract with Pfizer have more to do with that than AZ being a more dangerous vaccine? More here, and here.

Is AZ a more dangerous & risky vaccine than Biontech/Moderna? Is it more or less effective?

if there’s evidence for a lab leak, that’s fine. Most studies have so far proved inconclusive, although there was one posted today in the Covid thread. Here. https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.abp8715

So just a coincidence that the Lab studying coronaviruses was just a stone's throw away then?

Jon Stewart had a think about that:

 

[dholliday]

Surely though this is a pointless exercise given the percentage of the population already vaccinated and the fact that this choice already exists.

I think the promote bit you refer to is to promote an anti vax agenda and all of the conspiracy stuff that goes with that, correct me if I am wrong.

Again, considering the percentage of people vaxxed and the fact that you have been banned from so many places, aren't you wasting your time, I mean it isn't that stimulating, I can think of other things like.

If the colder seasons bring a return of rules for the unvaccinated (no flying, no partaking in events etc) and people - including the vaccinated - aren't up in arms about it, then of course it will still be a major issue.

If you don't find the discussion stimulating, you can talk about other stuff.

 

[Daveysgingerlovechild]

we may be talking about the biggest conspiracy in history here.

so on-topic.


what's yr take, luv?

That you are desperately trying to position scientific uncertainty as a grand conspiracy for reason I'm not entirely clear on. I'd guess for attention or possibly for kicks.

Which I guess is a conspiracy of sorts. An N = 1 conspiracy. So on topic.

 

[Amw79]

We shall see how that develops.


I meant "the one" that then gets side-lined. In EU it was made unavailable, effectively banned. The media weren't shy about reporting AZ-issues.

Did EU having a secretive contract with Pfizer have more to do with that than AZ being a more dangerous vaccine? More here, and here.

Is AZ a more dangerous & risky vaccine than Biontech/Moderna? Is it more or less effective?




So just a coincidence that the Lab studying coronaviruses was just a stone's throw away then?

Jon Stewart had a think about that:

This is just now gish galloping and speculation.

I suspect the quick time it took you to reply, you probably didn’t read, digest and understand the study showing the market as the epicentre, and have thrown back a Jon Stewart video as a rebuttal. Not particularly scientific.

We can probably leave it there. I will continue to post to correct where you’re misusing data, but I’m not trying to have a debate or convince you otherwise, as you clearly have your conclusions and are trying to work backwards from there.

Example from your previous post.

“how do vax-victims get their claims substantiated?”

A textbook example of begging the question, your conclusion has already been snuck into your premise. I.E. an unsubstantiated claim is already a vax-victim, prior to it being substantiated, when that’s what you’re trying to establish.

 

[dholliday]

Example from your previous post.

“how do vax-victims get their claims substantiated?”

A textbook example of begging the question, your conclusion has already been snuck into your premise. I.E. an unsubstantiated claim is already a vax-victim, prior to it being substantiated, when that’s what you’re trying to establish.

When there's literally millions of self-reported claims of dodgy side-effects, yet only a handful get officially verified due to a convoluted uninviting bureaucratic process, then the vast majority of those claims will remain 'unsubstantiated'.

Textbook whitewashing tactic.


As to believing that the nearby location of the Coronavirus Lab was just an incredible coincidence...well...


As to your claim that i'm "misusing data", i note with interest you haven't tackled this one yet:

The boosted death-rate is a worry. around 60-70% are boosted, yet account for 85% of deaths.

month-of-May boosted deaths: 1155
other-vaccinated deaths: 127
unvaccinated deaths: 82


Should we be concerned about this?


And if you're not...why not?

 

[dholliday]

That you are desperately trying to position scientific uncertainty as a grand conspiracy for reason I'm not entirely clear on.

'Scientific uncertainty' would err on the side of caution and not roll out an untested (long-term) new-tech Vaccine on the whole world, to combat a disease which - statistically - appears to be as dangerous for healthy 12-50 year olds as other viruses already out there.


This, pre-2020, would be regarded as a totally common-sense approach.


Moreover, i'm interested in your position: what are your views on folk not getting the Covid-vaccine in 2022 (and beyond) and should there be rules or laws to sanction them? Are you planning to partake in further shots and what is your reasoning?