Re: Coronavirus
 

https://www.wsj.com/articles/covid-o...-leak-807b7b0a

Extraordinary if true. Still not confirmed, it's 'low-confidence', but now more likely than not according to the U.S Energy Department anyway.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Why would the Energy Department be in a position to determine anything about a virus?

Re: Coronavirus
 

Well, there are of course two sides to any "lab leak" in that the leak may have been intentional or it might have happened by accident.


It's interesting how this turns around when the facts are yet to be ascertained about something though. When most people were saying (and still with no proof) that it came from bats then to pangolins then spilled over to humans in the wet market, this was the definitive version of what had happened and anyone even remotely suggesting otherwise was no doubt dismissed by some as a conspiracy theorist.



All of a sudden more research and investigation lands more weight on the lab leak theory and maybe this will become the truth.


I daresay if you'd said this maybe 2 1/2 years ago people would be telling you you're a covidiot or something. Like the abuse some people got for questioning the effectiveness of various mitigations such as lockdowns, masks, school closures, distancing, then you'd get people washing their shopping and refusing to touch deliveries for days, etc etc, the whole thing was full of possible responses some of which probably did work and some of which might have made the issues worse or not made any difference. It seems the only thing which really worked is having some immunity, vaccines helped with severing the link between infection and more severe illness in a lot of people, but clearly aren't perfect or weren't meant to be as you can still get and spread covid when you are vaccinated. And who knows how that will end up long term if there are any effects we don't know about in say 10-20 years time?


Shows the importance of keeping open mind and not just spouting the official line without thinking about it.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Well, yeah. Probably why it's not a massive story yet. But still interesting.

Re: Coronavirus
 

https://www.newsmax.com/newsfront/co...26/id/1110185/

Re: Coronavirus
 

I guarantee you in a few years time (if this is actually what happened) that it will be presented as the truth, and that no other scenarios were anything but a conspiracy theory, and that it was believed at the time.


Along with ridicule for governments insisting people stay at home for a virus or wear a bit of cloth over their mouth to stop it.


If you look back, then doctors used to use leeches to bleed patients to try and get the bad blood out of them. Then they died which was presumably blamed on the illness not that the attempt to fix it made it worse. Naturally this is ridiculed now as it never stood a chance but the benefit of hindsight and modern medicine knows better; the same will apply here.


Of course, there's the valid excuse we were dealing with a new virus but in actual fact what we had was an evolution of the original SARS which could still be as deadly but in actual fact was 1. more transmissible 2. milder in a lot of infections, which helped it spread more.



But it's very 1984 to bend the narrative retrospectively, with the benefit of hindsight.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Pretty sure you can’t guarantee that…

The actual article doesn’t reflect the headline…

Readers don’t learn until the end of the third paragraph that the Energy Dept holds a minority view, and in the fifth paragraph that its conclusion is rated “low confidence”

How does that match up with the WSJ headline announcing that Covid “most likely” came from a lab leak?

To be clear, I’m not ‘against’ the lab leak theory — I’m for sticking to the known facts (and not distorting them in headlines or social media posts) while investigation of the pandemic continues.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Ummm....
https://www.nationalgeographic.co.uk...ally-heres-why

Re: Coronavirus
 

I’m not a big believer in coincidence.

Having listened to many knowledgeable people on the subject, such as Matt Ridley.

I believe it is the most likely cause.

Re: Coronavirus
 

I hope he's better at science than he is at finance!

(He was chair of Northern Rock when it was rescued by the government in 2007 and a board member since 1994.)

Re: Coronavirus
 

he isn’t.

But his co-author of the book “Viral” Alina Chan, is.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Another booster (for some) in the spring.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-64876657

Re: Coronavirus
 

Clearly they work well then...

Re: Coronavirus
 

Looking at death rates in less vaccinated areas, yes they do work well.
https://www.bmj.com/company/newsroom...d-communities/

Re: Coronavirus
 

Unfortunately, such has been the lies and coercion from officialdom and the medical experts over three years. I wouldn’t trust any particular study right now. It’ll be years before the real truth ever comes out, if it ever does.

Re: Coronavirus
 

My husband has been contacted but he's vulnerable because he's been treated for lung cancer.

Re: Coronavirus
 

I know some of you do not like Doctor John Campbell but this is more for the speech

Make of this what you will

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JvSHD_n3Lyg

Re: Coronavirus
 

A bit about him and why he was labelled a crank. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Campbell_(YouTuber)

Re: Coronavirus
 

Yeah he says very little in that video. I posted it for the speech in Parliament.

I never go to Wiki and expect facts just so you know but I do know the reason

Re: Coronavirus
 

We can choose to believe what Wikipedia says about a subject or not but it usually points to some good links so we can read the original article.

Re: Coronavirus
 

still not the point of my post

Re: Coronavirus
 

It responds to your wikipedia point.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Oh for crying out loud. Do you like to be difficult or do you do it for the kick?

Re: Coronavirus
 

I watched this video, well as much as I could stand. The man he showcases, Bridgen, is a proven idiot, he continually uses pejorative terms like "experimental vaccines", etc. He then adds AstraZeneca in with Pfizer & Moderna as mRNA vaccines which I, from memory, it is not. He brings no authoritative facts to the debate and relies on anecdotal evidence to base, and spread, his scare story.

He is treated with distain by his fellow MPs and it is well deserved.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Interesting testimony from a court in Helsinki by UK cardiologist Dr Aseem Malhotra:
My name is Doctor Aseem Malhotra. I am a consultant cardiologist. I've been a qualified doctor since 2001. I have held various roles both in academic health policy.

In England, in the United Kingdom, and of the various roles, I won't bore you with all the details. I think three of the most relevant and prominent are the fact that I was an ambassador for the Academy of Medical Royal Colleges for six years, which represented every doctor in the UK. I served a full term of six years as a trustee of the King's fund. I was the youngest member to be appointed to this body which advises government on health policy. I was a founding member of Action on Sugar and a first science director. And through that role I'm considered the lead campaigner on bringing about a sugary drinks tax in the UK. And also, finally I served for five years as visiting professor of evidence based medicine at the Bahiana School of Medicine in Salvador, Brazil.

In early 2020, at the beginning of the pandemic I was most vocal doctor on the mainstream, making the link very early on between COVID and those who are vulnerable to suffering serious complications from COVID In fact, in March 2020, I was asked to go on Sky News to explain my initial research findings of the link between especially obesity and COVID, but also to give people an opportunity and to suggest to the government this was a great time for them to implement public health policy to help people enhance or optimise their immune system, which could happen within just a few weeks of dietary changes and optimising vitamin D. This was later also backed up by medical journal publications a few months later. And I was first to mention on the back of an article I published in the Daily Telegraph newspaper, which became a front page commentary and was picked up by BBC News and Good Morning Britain, where I had said that it's likely our prime minister, Boris Johnson, was hospitalised because of his weight. As a result of that, the then secretary for health, Matt Hancock, and this was publicised in the news, had asked me to advise him on the link between COVID and obesity.

...before I explain my journey and in many ways U-turn on my understanding in terms of the benefits and harms of the COVID vaccine, my experience in this area over the last couple of years has made me realise more than ever that even for that the greatest barrier to the truth are not factual or intellectual barriers, but psychological. I think all of us as human beings are vulnerable to these psychological barriers and we should have compassion for ourselves.

And I will just very briefly summarise those three psychological barriers before I get into my detailed account of what I was involved in in regards to the COVID vaccine. The first psychological barrier is one of fear. And many of us understandably, and I still remember from early on in the pandemic, we were all scared. We did not know what we were dealing with. The issue with fear is that when people and populations are in a state of fear, we are less likely to engage in critical thinking and we are more likely to be compliant.

Although COVID was particularly devastating for vulnerable groups in the elderly and I even have managed and still manage people with long COVID, the fear was grossly exaggerated. And one of the examples of that is that when we had good information on the mortality rate of COVID in the United States, one survey in 2020 revealed that 50% of Americans believed that if they caught COVID, the risk of 19 hospitalisation was 50% one and two, when the actual figure, certainly an average for people in middle age, was less than 1%. The second barrier to the truth, which I think is very relevant to the situation we find ourselves in now, is one called willful blindness. This is when human beings, all of us, are vulnerable to this, turn a blind eye to the truth in order to feel safe, avoid conflict, reduce anxiety and to protect prestige and fragile egos. Some examples of this include, on a personal level, willful blindness can occur when a spouse turns a blind eye to the affair of their partner. On an institutional level, some great examples of willful blindness include Hollywood and Harvey Weinstein, the Catholic Church and child molestation. I believe the current situation we find ourselves in, with much of the mainstream narrative and the medical establishment and policy makers not acknowledging quite horrific, serious and common harms from this vaccine, is another example of willful blindness. And I also say this with full empathy, because I was one of those people that was for a very long time, willfully blind to the harms of the COVID vaccine.

In January 2021, I was one of the first people to take two doses of the COVID mRNA vaccine because I volunteered in a vaccine centre. I still believe that traditional vaccines are some of the safest amongst all pharmacological interventions in medicine and I could not conceive of any possibility whatsoever of this vaccine causing harm. As a public figure and respected doctor in the UK, I have built relationships across the board with many other public figures, including celebrities and politicians, who often come to me for medical advice.

One of those people was film director Gurinder Chadha, who you may be familiar with some of her work, including the movie "Bend It like Beckham", who had asked me whether or not she should take the vaccine and had sent me blogs which I dismissed and regarded as anti vax nonsense. I was then asked to go on good morning, Britain because Gurinder Chadha, the director herself tweeted that I had convinced her to take the vaccine.

The main reason for this TV appearance was to help tackle vaccine hesitancy, which was very prominent amongst people from ethnic minority groups in the UK. I made the point on that programme that I understand where vaccine hesitancy was coming from because of the history that I have been involved with over many years in highlighting the shortcomings of pharmaceutical industry influence over medicine. And I even made the point, if I remember correctly, that they have been found guilty of fraud on many occasions, that the third most common cause of death, prepandemic after heart disease and cancer, is prescribed medications.
I, however, reassured the public and said that despite these figures, of everything we do in medicine, traditional vaccinations are amongst the safest. I still believe this to be the case.

A few months later, in April 2021, I met with a colleague and friend of mine who I regard as one of the brightest cardiologists in the United Kingdom. I was surprised when he told me that he had not taken the COVID vaccine. He explained to me that he had concerns because he had seen in the supplementary appendix of Pfizer's original trial that there were four cardiac arrests in the vaccine group and only one in the placebo.

These numbers were small and did not reach statistical significance. So this could be random chance, or his concern was it could represent a signal of problems in the future. And if this was the case, we are going to have a huge problem. He said he'd rather wait and see what happens before taking the vaccine.

On July 26, 2021, my father, aged 73, who was a very prominent, well known doctor in the UK, including being the honorary vice president of the British Medical Association and had received honours from the Queen of England with an OBE, suffered an unexpected sudden cardiac arrest. I was particularly devastated by this happening and I was also I find it difficult to understand why my father, who was a fit and well man, I knew his cardiac history and his cardiac status, would suffer a cardiac arrest. But also my initial investigation was to try and understand why there had been a 30 minutes ambulance delay arriving to his apartment.

Two weeks later, the deputy chief nurse of NHS England, a government health body, called me up. She was very upset, she knew my father very well and she was crying and she told me, Aseem, there's something I need to tell you. She in effect told me that throughout the country, for the last two months prior to my father's cardiac arrest in most regions of the UK, ambulances were not getting to patients in time for heart attacks and cardiac arrests.

And there had been a deliberate, and I will use these words because I mentioned it, I've mentioned it before, a cover up involving the government and the Department of Health to withhold this information from doctors and the public.

I worked with an investigative journalist with the I newspaper in the UK to write an article and a news story that became BBC News headlines a few months later, exposing this. Just before I exposed this, I messaged a professor of cardiology who I trust in the UK. He has a leadership role to explain to him what had happened and what I was about to do. I have text message evidence of this. He told me not to do this because it would make me enemies. I explained to him that I had a duty to patients and the public. I'm highlighting this as one example and I'll give you more examples of a cultural problem within medicine.

The next part of this story is the post mortem findings of my father. They did not make any sense to me. I am considered a leading expert, maybe in the world, on the development and progression of coronary artery disease. My father had two severe blockages in his coronary arteries. There was no actual evidence of heart attack and likely there was a rhythm disturbance because of reduced blood supply that led to his cardiac arrest.

Then in, within the space of a few weeks, around October and November, 3, different sources of information was brought to my attention that made me realise that there was probably a significant problem with the COVID mRNA vaccine. The first in October 2021. I remember I was giving lectures in Stockholm. I was contacted by a journalist with a Times newspaper who reported to me and said, Dr Malhotra, we have reports of an unexplained 25% increase in heart attacks in hospitals in Scotland and asked me what I thought was going on. I explained to her that at that time, with the evidence I knew in my own experience, I said that two likely contributory factors were lockdown stress. We know that when populations undergo severe stress after war, for example, there is an increase in heart attacks and strokes that can last for many years. She asked me whether I thought that there was a contribution. I was surprised when she asked me whether I thought there may be a contribution of the COVID vaccine to these heart attacks. I said to her, a good scientist should never exclude any possibility. But I felt at the time it was unlikely to be related to the COVID vaccine. But we should watch this space and keep our eyes open.

A few weeks later, a publication appeared in the Journal Circulation, which is considered the highest impact cardiology journal in the United States that revealed a potentially very strong link between the COVID mRNA vaccines and acceleration in heart attack risk. Very specifically, in several hundred people of middle age, there was a plausible mechanism, by use of inflammatory markers in the blood, that increased the baseline risk of those people having a heart attack in five years, from 11% to 25%, just within two months of having the COVID mRNA vaccines.

Of course, this is one bit of data, but even if partially true, that is a huge increase in risk in a very short space of time. And for me now made me think and link back to why my father may have suffered a cardiac arrest six months after having two doses of the vaccine. I remember thinking and speaking to a colleague, that if this was true, then we were going to see an increase in cardiac arrests, heart attacks and excess deaths in heavily vaccinated countries for the next few years.

Then within a few weeks, I was called up by a whistleblower at a very prestigious british institution. I will name that institution, which I have not done publicly before as a University of Oxford. This cardiologist explained to me that a group of researchers in his department had accidentally found, through the use of very specialised imaging of the heart, that there was a signal of increased inflammation of the heart arteries, which was there in the vaccinated, but not there in the unvaccinated.

The lead researcher of that group had sat down, the juniors, and had said that we are not going to explore these findings any further because it may affect our funding from the pharmaceutical industry.

At that point, with these three bits of information, I then felt it was my ethical duty to speak out. And I went on GBNews to talk about what I'd found what I'd heard and I'd asked for the Vaccine Committee of the UK on TV to investigate this, to see whether there was a real problem with the vaccine in relation to heart issues.

Around the same time which I found very strange is that the Secretary of State for Health at that stage, who was not Matt Hancock, was Sajid Javid, had announced in parliament that we are going to introduce legislation to ensure that all healthcare workers are mandated to have the COVID vaccine.

For me, this, by that stage had no ethical or scientific justification, because certainly after the summer of 2021, it had become very apparent that the COVID mRNA vaccine was not stopping infection and it certainly was not stopping transmission. It was understood that approximately 80,000 NHS workers had refused at this stage to have the COVID vaccine. And now they were threatened with losing their job if by April the following year they had not been fully vaccinated.

Many of these people were very concerned and contacted me around that time, I was also conducting many interviews, both through the BBC and Sky News and GBNews in regards to what happened with my father's ambulance delay. And I used it as an opportunity on the mainstream media to call for Sajid Javid, the secretary for health, to U-turn on the introduction of a mandate for healthcare workers based upon the fact that I felt it was not scientific and it was unethical. I also received my own personal backlash from these comments where I was contacted by the Royal College of Physicians who I had an affiliation with, and they asked me to respond to anonymous complaints from doctors that I was spreading, in quotes, antivax disinformation. I felt with my own knowledge and experience of the healthcare system that this was a direct response probably fueled by a combination of willful blindness and institutional corruption.

To elaborate a bit further, when I say institutional corruption, I mean that my view was that the complaints were likely being fueled by academics with financial ties to the pharmaceutical industry. I felt very concerned about the potential introduction of the vaccine, well, the vaccine mandate. And therefore I decided there were two things that I decided to do. The first was I made a phone call to the chairman of the British Medical Association in December 2021. I had a good relationship with him and he respected my opinion. And I spent 2 hours on the phone explaining to him everything that I knew up to that stage about my concerns of the COVID mRNA vaccine. He said to me, "Aseem, nobody appears to critically appraise the evidence on the COVID mRNA vaccine as well as you have from our conversation, he said, most of my colleagues are getting their information on the benefits and harms of the vaccine from the BBC".

This was replicated by the former chair of the CDC in the United States, Rochelle Walensky, who in an interview later on had said that her initial optimism of the vaccine benefits came from CNN News report. I say this just to emphasise that we should all accept our vulnerabilities to where we receive health information. Even doctors, policymakers, judges and lawyers are all influenced on the public massively by mainstream media. The chairman of the BMA also agreed with me. There was no ethical or scientific justification for mandating the COVID vaccine. He said the BMA also did not support it. And he said because of my conversation with him, he would speak directly to the secretary for health, Sajid Javid.

One month later, at the end of January 2022, the COVID vaccine mandate for healthcare workers was overturned. I at that stage, given the fact that there was some backlash happening towards me, I realised that because this is a very big issue and area, and not my initial area of expertise, I needed to carry out my own critical analysis of the COVID mRNA vaccines. I spent six to nine months critically appraising the data, including speaking to two Pfizer whistleblowers, three investigative medical journalists and eminent scientists from the University of Oxford, Stanford and Harvard.

The most critical bit, the most critical research that was published on this issue, which I think the whole court should acknowledge in August 2022, was published in the journal Vaccine. That research was conducted by some of the world's top independent of drug industry influence academics. That research, we was able to reanalyze the original randomised control trials conducted by Pfizer and Moderna. They were able to do this because new information was made available on the FDA's website and Health Canada's website.

The conclusions of that paper were really very disturbing. The original trials that led to the drug regulatory approval of these vaccines revealed that you were more likely to suffer serious harm from taking the vaccine, specifically hospitalisation, life changing event or disability, than you were to be hospitalised with COVID That rate of harm at two months was very high at 1 in 800.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Just to give you some perspective, historically we have suspended other vaccines for much less. In 1976, the swine flu vaccine was pulled because it was found to cause a neurological syndrome called Guillain-Barre syndrome In one in 100,000 people. In 1999, the rotavirus vaccine was suspended because it was found to cause a form of bowel obstruction in children affecting 1 in 10,000. This was 1 in 800.

In my view, it was very clear that given this information, published in the highest impact Vaccine journal in the world, peer reviewed, and has not had any significant rebuttals, that this vaccine now, in my view, should never have been approved for use in a single human being in the first place.

In my view, this very important court case in some ways, actually is a distraction from the much bigger issue, which is there should be court cases around the world with a full inquiry into the pharmaceutical industry and an inquiry as to how we got this so very wrong. Of course, one could argue this is just one bit of research, but actually, unfortunately, there are different, many different strands of research that are showing a signal of considerable and common serious harm from these vaccines.

From pharmacovigilance data that is reporting what we call yellow card reports from the public. We have plausible biological mechanism of harm. We have other research called observational data. We have autopsy data also confirming that certainly with the majority of people who died within a short space of time of having the vaccine in relation to the heart, was definitively caused by the vaccine.

This is really a very, very, very horrific situation we find ourselves in. One would hope and expect that the regulators should be independently evaluating all medications. But of course, the evidence reveals this is far from true. There was an investigation by the BMJ, also published in the summer of 2022, which revealed that most of the major regulators across the world were taking most of their money from the drug industry.

For example, the MHRA in the UK receives 86% of its funding from the drug industry, and the FDA in America receives 65% of its funding from the drug industry, A fact that most doctors do not know. And therefore, I would not expect members of the court to know this either, is that very, very rarely do drug industry sponsored research get independently evaluated.

Clinical trial data can often involve thousands of pages of information on individual patients. The drug companies hold onto that raw data. They then give summary results to the regulator, who are then paying, who have an incentive to approve the drugs, and the drugs are then approved.

I made these points in my peer reviewed article published in the Journal of Insulin Resistance in September 2022, where I concluded that we should pause and investigate the issue around the COVID mRNA vaccines.

I have since then been campaigning and advocating for a return to ethical evidence based medical practise around the world. Some of the clear solutions moving forward would be changes in the law that are required so that patients, doctors, members of the public can have greater confidence in the information they receive to make decisions about their health.

Two very clear, low hanging fruit solutions, which are both ethical, scientific and democratic, would be that the drug industry should be allowed to develop drugs, but they shouldn't be allowed to test them themselves. And they certainly shouldn't be allowed to design their own research to and hold onto the raw data. Their information needs to be independently evaluated. One other clear solution would also be that the medical regulators, again, should not be taking any money from the industry, as this is a gross conflict of interest. I also want to highlight for people to understand the bigger picture.

Prior to the pandemic, I had realised that there was a big problem with the reliability of clinical research, where invariably the results of clinical trials on all drugs sponsored by the drug industry, grossly exaggerate their safety and benefits.

I have taken this information to the European Parliament, where I spoke in 2019, and I spoke to very senior politicians in the UK government. But although they were sympathetic, they felt that the issue was much bigger than them as individuals, and therefore it also needed media attention to get public awareness on the importance of such an inquiry. Before we continue with further questions, as I've been speaking for quite a long time now I'll just finish with two references just for the court and the judges to understand just how bad this problem is.

Prepandemic the man who I call the Stephen Hawking of medicine is Professor John Ioannidis from the University of Stanford. The reason I call him the Stephen Hawking of Medicine is he's the most cited medical researcher in the world and is a mathematical genius. In 2006, he published a paper which was entitled why most published research findings are false. In that paper, he makes a point that the greater the financial interests in a given field, the less likely the research findings are to be true.

I say this in context of the Pfizer mRNA vaccine which has made the company $100 billion. The other point that he makes in a further paper in 2017 is, again, the reason the system continues as it is is most doctors are unaware of the information they receive when they make clinical decisions has been corrupted by commercial influence.

The other credible name I will mention is the editor of the Lancet, Richard Horton, who I personally know. In 2015, he wrote an article in the Lancet in relation to a secret meeting that had taken place with himself and some of the world's top medical academics. In that, he wrote that possibly half of the medical published literature may simply be untrue. And he said that science has taken a turn towards darkness. But who's going to take the first step to clean up the system? I believe in this case and in this court today, this is going to be a very pivotal potential moment in history for that first step.

https://x.com/TiinaKeskimki/status/1779424128212009176

Re: Coronavirus
 

AstraZeneca are retiring their original vaccine.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-68977026

Re: Coronavirus
 

Wonder how all the people trying to coerce others into vaccines are feeling now.


So it was clear enough early doors that there were issues with AZ but the stocks were easier to get and there were fewer issues on delivery/storage than with Pfizer and it was considered in older age groups that the risks of this were worth it as opposed to the risks of getting covid; but it was clear also in younger groups that this wasn't the case which is why under 40s were given Pfizer or Moderna instead (the urgency having eased a bit).


For a lot of people vaccination was probably still the right thing to do and especially at the time but pressurising young healthy adults and teenagers probably wasn't right..

Re: Coronavirus
 

It’s hard to see what they could have done differently based on the data that was available at that time. The Oxford/AZ vaccine was rapidly available and relatively easy to handle, and the trial results absolutely supported its emergency certification.

As for ‘pressuring’ young healthy adults, well vaccine efficacy isn’t just about what it does directly for the individual receiving it, but how it impedes spread of a pathogen in the population. Herd immunity is achieved by preventing the disease from spreading, which means vaccinating as many people as you can, even those who would not personally suffer significant illness from it.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Yes, hindsight is wonderful, but still. People were saying at the time about all of these things, lockdowns, masks, vaccine effects, lab leaks, and were being handed tin foil hats and being called covidiots and the like.


For the older groups the benefit/risk was much clearer and that was where AZ did most of its work.


And it's a true point about herd immunity but the vaccine was never provided to stop covid making people ill or infected but to prevent serious illness, as it later ended up with the omicron variants anyway, but these groups weren't at risk of that really anyway, and so the vaccine didn't really achieve as much when they ended up getting a milder illness in general anyway.



Spreading it to the older or more at risk groups is a moot point when they have already been vaccinated first.


Also, vaccinating people who aren't at risk because they might give it to others is a bit odd, it's not necessarily sensible to give others a treatment to have an effect on others, though the risks of vaccine escape and spillover infections are still there. It's an interesting point though.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Exactly the same as before I would think.

Every drug/medicine/vaccine etc has potential side effects, sometimes serious, generally not - even paracetamol can have rare but serious side effects.

Re: Coronavirus
 

They do but the point that the covid vaccines were new (how couldn't they be, when a year before the virus didn't really exist or was stuck in a lab or a pangolin or whatever one believes) and based on new/not particularly largely used technology (the viral vector ones ironically being the more conventional) especially with mRNA vaccines, nothing had been mass vaccinated like this before, the mass delivered vaccination programmes tend to be something which is given to something like kids at a certain age or like flu vaccines to people in a certain risk profile and it's not particularly the case that the general population is immunised with something new and all largely at the same time (I think we'd basically gone from the point at the start of Jan 2021 where no-one had been vaccinated at all to the summer where pretty much all adults had been given at least one dose).



Don't get me wrong, it had to be that way and it had to be the case that everyone who wanted a vaccine could get one. And the vaccines presumably had to pass the various stages to be certified, though there's no doubt these were sped up but without cutting corners for regulation. But it does mean that whilst side effects may have been noted in the sample groups, it would not have been clear how this translated into the general population, and in what frequency, as well as if there were any longer term effects of using the vaccines 1, 3, 5, 10 etc years later - indeed some of this isn't known yet. But with something like paracetamol it's known which side effects are rare, which are common, which happen years later if it's used extensively, etc etc, because it's a commonly used drug and it's been used for decades.



What I'm mainly on about is the people who were saying that the unvaccinated people would not be permitted from doing certain things, those advocating vaccine passports, etc, all because in some cases they would want to be careful about what they're taking, as opposed to being crackpots opposed to the vaccine (mainly looking at people like Novak here). If people didn't want to be vaccinated, weren't at massive risk from not doing so, nor was this a risk to others (e.g. if they weren't in contact with known risk people) but only did so because they wanted to be allowed to go to the shops or the football or a concert or something, this seems a bit wrong, and especially if the vaccine then caused them adverse effects. (But then covid can do this too).


Chris made the point about herd immunity too but you can achieve that with a certain percentage where the virus doesn't transmit anyway without sufficient vulnerable hosts to move around, and also, this immunity can (albeit not without risk) be attained by infection as well as vaccination. As another slightly related point on this, the increased herd immunity can sometimes also lead to the virus wanting to gain more of a competitive edge which results in variants with more vaccine escape becoming more prominent, which is what happened (although I don't think the actual evolution of omicron was a lot to do with vaccination).

My best friends who turned n me still havent come back,even though I know they can now see I was right what I told them about this!!

The mother accused me of spreading "vaccine lies"

The father who I think is very sick now said to me "Take your head out of your ass and do your research about this shot" in 2020 (I told him I did thats why I didnt want it (HE DIDNT DO ANY RESEARCH THATS APPARENT!!!))

Now they know I didnt lie but still they wont stop this..... They have been horribly cruel to me about this..... Tried to force me to get it,etc.......

Re: Coronavirus
 

There was nothing wrong with the vaccines though. Also there was no vaccine in 2020.

Well when they first came out........

Re: Coronavirus
 

You were wrong then and you are wrong now.

We have 4 years of data from population scale use of covid vaccines in countries all over the world. They were safe, they are safe. Even the Oxford/AstraZeneca vaccine is safe by any ordinary use of the word. The number of cases of blood clots associated with it is a minuscule fraction of the doses given. Ox/AZ is being withdrawn now because its underlying technology makes it more cumbersome to update for new variants of covid than the newer mRNA vaccine classes produced by Moderna and others. It’s a commercial decision.

We had the opportunity to stop a pandemic in its tracks in 2020 and 2021 by vaccinating everyone, regardless of their personal risk of serious symptoms, thereby giving the virus nowhere to go. Most people understood this and were happy to participate because they understood they were caught up in something bigger than themselves, in which they owed it to their neighbours to play their part. Sadly some people did not. You, apparently, were one of the ones who mulishly insisted on your personal freedoms whilst cheerfully ignoring the wider society within which your personal freedom is expressed. A pity.

Re: Coronavirus
 

It transpired that it was all about personal choice and personal safety.

Not everyone needed the vaccine, if you were fit and healthy and under 50-60 years of age you most likely didn't need it and you had to weigh up the risks of, what was then, an under tested vaccine v's the risks of fighting it off yourself.

I took the vaccine, not for wider society, but because I wanted to travel abroad to play golf. I was also mid-fifties, not unfit but could be fitter etc.

There was no way I was going have my kids vaccinated, as they didn't need it.

As it turned out the vaccines didn't stop you from getting COVID, didn't stop you from spreading COVID and future strains were milder so you probably didn't need it for them.

There was a claim that the vaccines made you "less ill" but there was no way to verify that, as I say, future strains were milder.

So to chastise someone for not getting the vaccine, comes across as a bit churlish.

If you got vaccinated good for you but no one else owes you that they should do it.

Re: Coronavirus
 

That right there is the problem. People not understanding how all vaccines work. They are not cures, they don't stop you from ever getting the virus, whether its covid Polio, Hep B, Flu etc.

They provide your body with the tools to create antibodies. This then allows your body to fight off whatever it is. Either with zero symptoms or very minimal symptoms. It also great reduces your chances of passing said virus to others.

A normal healthy immune system in many cases will fight off common viruses and you never notice. For example with my being a transplant recipient I have a weakened immune system. There is a virus called CMV that most of the world's population have and its relatively simple and our bodies fight it off without a sweat. However I got it in October last year and was in hospital 4 days because my immune system struggled to cope.

Had it been a much more infectious and worse illness it could have been much worse. That's why there are vaccines for certain viruses as it gives our bodies the extra help it needs to protect itself.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Shoppers were being asked to volunteer for a COVID LFT a couple of days ago. Most asked seemed happy to have one done. The results were given in a sealed envelope that matched a random number they were issued at the time of testing. All they needed was a rough idea of your age, and you didn't have to collect the results.

The missus had had the sniffles for a few days, and tested positive. I wasn't offered a test as their quota for my age group was complete. Our daughter developed a snotty nose yesterday, and I was bunged-up this morning. Neither of us have any other symptoms.

Re: Coronavirus
 

I understand how vaccines work.

The Polio vaccine has an efficacy of 99%, Smallpox was 95%, Hep B 98% and they stop you from getting ill. They bolster your immune system to fight the infection.

I had the vaccine and got COVID, and practically everyone I know that had the vaccine also got it and were quite ill with it.

Re: Coronavirus
 

"quite ill" is a bit vague though and could mean a variety of things. For some it could be that they were lying in bed for a few days but I think clinically they define mild as something which doesn't require ventilation in hospital. There's a massive difference.



Plus it also depends on what vaccine you have and when you had it.


I think the "strains are milder now so it doesn't matter as much" argument may be coincidental too - so in general since omicron it is true that the hospital admissions and deaths from people getting covid has gone down and also that quite a few people have other symptoms like that of a cold and actually have covid. But we are dealing with a group now who have largely speaking some immunity whether that's from having a vaccine (or several) or having one or more covid infections, or both. This would be sufficient in a lot of people to give an immune recognition even if the next infection was a different strain so that it would help to minimise a more severe infection. So it is potentially the case that omicron is milder anyway but vaccinated people or previously infected people would probably get a milder illness than someone who generally speaking hasn't had it or been vaccinated.


I know that the newer bivalent vaccines are different but these also haven't been offered to the general population. Most people had the initial two shots sometime in early-mid 2021 and most likely either AZ in older groups or Pfizer at the start then later with younger people, then when omicron arrived and they weren't sure how bad it would be everyone was offered a 3rd which was usually either Pfizer or Moderna. All of these were based off the original strain of covid for which they were high-90s effective against any type of infection, and also alpha, but slightly less effective on beta, gamma and delta (of which we really only got delta here). But the virus has changed a lot which makes the original vaccines less effective and this seems to be the case for the newer ones too as they're often a few months behind.


I think if we hadn't vaccinated that there would have been more people even in supposed not at high risk groups who would have been ill with covid for a while, which might have progressed to a more severe illness or post-viral conditions, whatever issues there were the vaccination did limit the damage here...

Re: Coronavirus
 

I did a little digging a while back on if the COVID vaccines reduce transmission and they do to some extent. Here is a review of the clinical trials - https://assets.publishing.service.go...pid-review.pdf

It’s quite long and very dull as epidemiology studies tend to be but the key pages are from page 8. The two measures are SAR which is the rate of spreading to others and RR which is risk reduction for spreading to others compared to unvaccinated. The effect is modest but seems real. The study also looks at viral load which is how much virus is present in someone in COVID and the load was always lower in the vaccinated which explains why the chance of transmission is less.


By the way, if paracetamol was launched now, it would NEVER be approved. The dose gap between useful pain killing and toxic effects is way to small for a modern drug.

Re: Coronavirus
 

I have to admit i don't take it because it never really does anything for me. Whereas ibuprofen or diclofenac usually does work and paracetamol also has suggested adverse effects with alcohol which might put some people off

Yes and I guess I cant talk about this here...

I dont wanna make anyone mad.. (Thats very important to me)

Re: Coronavirus
 

My immune system is all over the place due to cancer. I still have the booster vaccines and in fact have just had my booster last week.

Re: Coronavirus
 

I've got mine on the 21st. Week immune system from immunosuppressive drugs after my kidney and pancreas transplant last year.

Re: Coronavirus
 

I've been up for a few hours, and I feel perfectly normal. But I just said hello to the postie. I sound like Barry White! COVID symptom #246....

Re: Coronavirus
 

I hope you are doing ok.

Re: Coronavirus
 

According to the covidiots I should have died by now. Type 2 Diabetic so I’ve recently had my 4th or 5th booster (can’t remember now) and I’m still going.

Conspiracy theorists can get in the sea as far as I’m concerned.

---------- Post added at 18:24 ---------- Previous post was at 18:24 ----------

+1

Re: Coronavirus
 

Thanks, am actually doing great now. 7th May was my 1yr anniversary since transplant. Organs working perfectly and classed as non diabetic now. Not needed to inject insulin since the transplant and eating and drinking whatever I want now. Kidney function of 65 which is really good for a single kidney.

Think next week is my 6th since the vaccine was introduced.

Sick of conspiracy theorists. Sadly my biological mum and her since are two such people. The amount of total rubbish they share on fb is insane.

Latest is that TV doctors like Dr Ranj were paid to promote vaccines on TV. Simply because a number of them received payments from AZ. They have no evidence other than records of payments to people, more than likely for research work or consultancy work.

Re: Coronavirus
 

I agree it sounds like crap but in actual fairness to either side there's no clear, indisputable facts which is right yet.


It sounds to me as well like those stories are simply absolute tosh (JVT had shares in Glaxo, who were working on a vaccine too, but we didn't go for it, and it was only because he used to work for them) but I'm sure you'll agree that the covid pandemic was strange times. Some of the ways people were behaving and asking others to, some of the things which were said, some of the things which were said and done and then this was kind of tried to be changed by revisionists later... It will probably not, but it could well turn out to be true.


It's like a few years back when people who thought that the virus came from a lab leak were being told they were nutcases whilst the official line was that it probably came from a bat or a pangolin or something and that anyone who questioned it was immediately given dismissal and funny looks. But most people are now at least open to the lab leak idea or think it was what happened including states.


And the stuff about vaccine side effects, OK so whenever a footballer collapses on the pitch the anti vaxxers are on it (didn't stop them even when Christian Eriksen wasn't vaccinated) which is going too far but the vaccines are known to damage some people's hearts and other parts of their body and that this has been known since the start (it is listed in the label as a minor side effect), but it is only in a small group of people that this happens. It is possible that say if a sportsman collapses tomorrow that the vaccination had contributed but it might not have done and they're just using that as traction for their argument even if it's not true.



After all, who knows what will be the answer in a few years and they will probably be looking back and saying "oh back in 2022 they thought it came from a bat and that the vaccines didn't cause a spike in heart disease" as though we should have seen it coming. It's not known.


It's good to hear your kidney is doing well. Transplants are always a bit nervy until it's seen that your body has taken the new organ and is using it properly which isn't always the case. Hopefully you're near the end of getting back to normal...

Re: Coronavirus
 

These days whenever a story is on FB about someone dying suddenly the usual covidiots pop and make pissy comments about “safe and effective”.

You know, as if people didn’t suddenly die before the vaccine.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Thanks yeah getting there. Next will come trying to get back to work after five years of not working:shocked:

100% those who are 'awake' seem to have totally forgotten that every single medication and vaccine ever created has side effects ranging from mild to serious. Blaming every sudden death especially young adults or people that appear healthy on the jab or convid vaxx is just dumb.

However many of these so called experts seem to have been intelligent people at somepoint, and wether lockdown drove them crazy and they went down a rabbit hole never to emerge has yet to be seen. Chem trails, jabs, 15 mins cities, EVs and HAARP controlling weather seem to all go hand in hand with them.

Re: Coronavirus
 

It’s a fact that unfortunately some people did die from adverse reactions to the vaccines, specifically the non mRNA which I believe was the AZ vaccine.

And the group most affected was young women aged 12-29, who probably didn’t even need the vaccine. So anyone in that cohort that died wouldn’t have “suddenly die before the
vaccine”

The numbers, compared to how many doses of the vaccine were administered…...6 in every 100,000. Could be considered small. But there were 2 billion AZ vaccines administered.

So 2 billion divided by 100,000 divided by 6 and divided by 2 (because it only affected women)

= 1,500 dead young women that didn’t need to be.

Would you admonish a covidiot if that was his wife or daughter? That died unnecessarily?

I accept that given the volume of vaccines administered, that these numbers may be in the acceptable side affect window, or not, but the issue is no one knew, and they pushed the roll out, and they pushed it to the demographics that didn’t need it…..anyone under 50 in good health.

Mistakes were made, but no one is accountable because the vaccine producers had non-liability clauses in their contracts.

People have died unnecessarily and their loved ones have a right to be angry and they’re not “covidiotes” which is a very glib and dismissive term to a genuine concern.

Given that you experienced glib and dismissive remarks to your real experiences of ADHD, I thought you may have had a more pragmatic view on such things.

https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulat...020to25may2022

https://www.astrazeneca.com/media-ce...approval.html#

AstraZeneca Sued Over Covid-19 Vaccine Clinical Trial Injury
 

AstraZeneca is being sued by a woman who claims she was disabled by the companys Covid-19 vaccine during a clinical trial and that the drugmaker has failed to live up to its contractual obligations to cover her medical costs.

http://news.bloomberglaw.com/health-...l-trial-injury

I dont think anyone can sue as they made people sign something didnt they??

Re: AstraZeneca Sued Over Covid-19 Vaccine Clinical Trial Injury
 

That something is the contract which she believes - rightly or wrongly - they are not honouring. So she can sue.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Not at all. Most covidiots spouting bollards about this were not personally affected by those dying during the pandemic, or since. They just see a report of someone “dying unexpectedly” then shriek “The Vaccine!!!” as if nobody ever died unexpectedly before it. Conspiracy-based hand-wringing.

The effing state of it.

Re: Coronavirus
 

I am at the hospital next Monday for a camera inspection. I am so hoping it has not come back. If it has not i have been clear for a year.

I hope it comes out good Sirius :)

Re: Coronavirus
 

Best of luck.

I'm in the day after my booster for a procedure on my esophagus to stretch it with a balloon due to long term swallowing issues.normally in and out but due to all my other health things ill need to stay overnight for observation.

Oh my Stevie that sounds aweful........I hope it goes ok!!

Re: Coronavirus
 

Have death certificate, aggravated by covid injection or words to that effect.doctor was more plain, the jab cause death:mad:

Re: Coronavirus
 

By the injection or the actual vaccine?

Re: Coronavirus
 

The vaccine.

Re: Coronavirus
 

In that case I wouldn’t consider you a covidiot. Real covidiots are those types who have not been personally affected by the side effects but contribute any illness or unexpected death to “the vaccine!!!!”. Like, trawling through social media for any stories about sudden deaths and suddenly they become a “reesurcher” and spout absolute bollards about it.

It’s tragic for anyone who lost a loved one from the side effects. My only involvement with the whole thing is one of my mother’s elderly neighbours, she’s type 1 diabetic and she caught Covid, laying her up for 2 weeks but the doctors said had she not been vaccinated she most likely wouldn’t have survived. I get the impression this sort of thing has happened en masse.

Re: Coronavirus
 

I had a friend who was also waiting on a kidney transplant when I was first diagnosed and in mod 2020 he caught covid and sadly died.

I caught it a few months later 2 weeks after I got the vaccine and was pretty rough but really not too ill. I can only say that the vaccine saved my life otherwise I may not still be here.

Re: Coronavirus
 

It's official. I was offered an LFT as I entered Morrisons. Positive for covid. But the sniffles and slightly sore throat are almost clear.

Re: Coronavirus
 

The doctor who's "company's "have yearly medical with said that" its the last person l would have expected to have had a stroke "

Re: Coronavirus
 

fyi:

"We found that 73.9% of deaths were directly due to or significantly contributed to by COVID-19 vaccination.
Our data suggest a high likelihood of a causal link between COVID-19 vaccination and death."
https://www.sciencedirect.com/scienc...79073824001968


".....suggests that there is a high likelihood of a causal link between COVID-19 vaccines and death from myocarditis."
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38221509/

Re: Coronavirus
 

73.9% of what deaths and how many was that?

What is that site and are the official studies? Some people will believe anything!

Re: Coronavirus
 

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers....act_id=4496137

https://vaxopedia.org/2024/06/23/tha...9-vaccination/

Re Peter A McCullough, one of the authors…

https://www.medpagetoday.com/special...clusives/93936

https://www.factcheck.org/2024/02/sc...d-19-vaccines/

Yes its very sad isnt it??
 

Re: Yes its very sad isnt it??
 

Yes people that fall for all the conspiracy theory nonsense are embarrassing.

Re: Yes its very sad isnt it??
 

I think your comment will go right over Dudes head. Lol

Re: Coronavirus
 

The research has been re-reviewed and accepted by the Lancet.

---------- Post added at 10:26 ---------- Previous post was at 10:25 ----------

This is published research. It's not a conspiracy theory.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Do you have a link to the new Lancet paper, please, as I’ve searched on The Lancet and on papers.ssrn.com (where it was before), and can’t find an updated version…

Also, when you state it is published research, it’s important to note the caveat on papers.ssrn.com (where it initially appeared before it was removed)

Re: Coronavirus
 

It's not been re-released yet. Imminent.


Here's another: Long term follow up and outcomes of Covid-19 vaccine associated myocarditis in Victoria, Australia: A clinical surveillance study
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38154991/

Re: Coronavirus
 

The CDC had this to say about it
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019...ocarditis.html
They still recommend people get vaccinated against COVID-19. They are all still continuing to study it.

However as with any medication or vaccine there are always varying side effects.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Yes, I know. I suspect that they will have a day of reckoning for that advice.


Difference is that previously, vaccines with this many adverse effects have been pulled.

Im glad I am not the only one here who isnt afraid to speak against MSM on this!!

God bless you Ramrod!!

Re: Coronavirus
 

Not a lot have been removed.from market Some were replaced with newer versions safer version Some were taken off market as no longer required.

Not to mention the myocarditis can be treated and most patients will recover with no lasting effects.

Re: Coronavirus
 

My point was that previously, a few deaths due to a vaccine resulted in that vaccine being pulled.
Once your heart is damaged it isn't the same again. You carry your injuries...

Re: Coronavirus
 

But just because there were injuries or deaths after a vaccine doesn't mean the vaccine was the cause.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Yes it does.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Medically speaking, no it doesn't. Unless proven otherwise it's simply a coincidence.

Much like if I broke out in a rash within 24 hours of having a vaccine. Did the vaccine cause it? No it didn't. I just happened to eat something I didn't know I was allergic to that very same day.

Symptoms could be unrelated, but just happened to develop around the same time.

Re: Coronavirus
 

How exactly?

Re: Coronavirus
 

You’re talking hypotheticals. So I repeat, yes it does.

You aren’t medically qualified to determine having a vaccine or eating something caused the rash & in the health industry, someone having a rash, after a drug being administered, would cause a patient to require medical intervention. I work in the health industry, as does Ramrod, we know what we are talking about, we won’t take lectures from armchair know it alls.

Covid vaccine injury and death is a thing.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/202...e-side-effect/

---------- Post added at 01:01 ---------- Previous post was at 00:59 ----------

Same applies to you.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Of course it doesnt, unless there is direct proof otherwise.

In fact I'm curious how any vaccine (or any drug) can actually cause an injury.

If someone takes Ibuprofen for a headache, and dies of a heart attack the next day, that doesnt mean Ibuprofen is the casue.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Adverse reactions in all drugs exist. What does not effect millions of people, can effect an handful, in a serious way. That’s my point, Stephen was making a blanket statement saying “someone dying after having a vaccine, doesn’t mean it was the vaccine” which is categorically not true, as in the handful of cases, the vaccine was the direct cause.

It’s a moot point now anyway because AstraZeneca-Oxford has admitted, in a court document that it’s vaccine, in rare cases, can cause thrombosis, (blood clots) & no one wants one of those travelling to the brain.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Thank you. The exact same point I was making.

All medications have side effects and can be deadly. People can be allergic to asprin or paracetamol even and can die from it too.

As for your response Mick, I've been in and out if hospital that often over the past 5 years that I have gotten to know quite a bit about drug reactions, allergies and what can happen. From bring advised on things and from asking many questions. I've been through 6 operations in the past 13 months, on and off different medications. Had allergic reaction to different antibiotics and other drugs. So I'm no armchair know it all. I have dealt with many consultants and doctors and other medical staff over numerous hospitals.

Proving that one thing caused that reaction can be hard. You trying to claim that covid-19 vaccines or any vaccines for that matter are 100% to blame in all cases is just wrong. I also never made a blanket claim of any kind, that was on you interpreting it incorrectly. Such things must be investigated and proven.

Re: Coronavirus
 

No, excuse me, nowhere did I say 100% to blame. I’m throwing this back at you & suggesting you’re saying, no deaths, or serious injuries have been caused by the vaccine, when in many many cases, they absolutely have.

I repeat AstraZeneca have admitted in court documents, that their vaccine, in rare cases can cause thrombosis, anybody suffering a thrombosis, is a medical emergency.

---------- Post added at 02:14 ---------- Previous post was at 01:59 ----------

https://www.leighday.co.uk/news/news...e-side-effect/

Re: Coronavirus
 

Of course, thats not in question.


It may have been your intended point, but your reply came over otherwise.


Well unfortunately, you kinda did.Your response directly disagreed with what was said, thus indicating you believe injuries or deaths after a vaccine mean the vaccine was the cause.

Again, that may not have been your intention, but it is what you said - which is why had to disagree with you.
I do however agree with your since clarified point, vaccines and drugs can (and do) sometimes have adverse effects.

Re: Coronavirus
 

In the wider context, my reply to Stephen isn’t suggesting 100% blame, he suggested something as a fact, I merely stated, it isn’t a fact at all.

And I’m not an antivaxxer, I had my vaccines at the time and they made me very ill, the second dose a lot more than the first, I refused to take the follow-ups.

Re: Coronavirus
 

In some cases it's clear cut but in others it's more open to debate. This is why we have qualified doctors assessing bodies after people die to try and understand the cause of death. I would assume there's a high chance they're not always right.


Reading the last few posts in this thread I don't think any of you are wrong, or that the incorrectness of any statements can't really be proven.


Everyone is different. Everyone's body reacts differently to any medicines or indeed anything else (some people could die if they eat a nut). Some people won't react at all to the vaccines (including an immune response providing the actual designed effect). Others will potentially go into shock and die within minutes whilst being healthy before. Others may develop side effects over time, but in those cases, it may not be clear cut that the vaccine is the cause. Covid itself has been known to cause heart issues which is one thing often slung at the vaccines.


It's difficult to prove the effects were down to the vaccines but it's unknown what the effects of them over even 5 years are as we haven't used them that long yet. So it's also hard to say for sure how safe they are. This doesn't mean that vaccinating wasn't the right thing to do.


Just because something is against the established narrative at the time, where full facts have not been proven, it doesn't mean they are wrong. Early in the pandemic everyone was on about how it came from bats or pangolins and those who mentioned a lab leak were dismissed as nutters. Now the lab leak theory has much more traction even though it's not proven. And there were people early on saying we'd be in lockdowns for ages when they said only a few weeks and there would be things like people fined for not wearing masks (long before this happened) and not getting vaccinated (this happened too) and again these were dismissed at the time for being nuts. I think there's a fair chance the vaccines, whilst safe for most people, could cause long term health issues in others, not because of anything being rushed, but because that is simply the situation. It's not medically comparable to them giving thalidomide to all those pregnant women years ago, but there are some parallels, they didn't know the other form did that and couldn't presumably separate it out before it caused a lot of damage.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Having not been vaccinated for a while (had 3, all different with only minor symptoms) as I fell outside the protected characteristics, getting COVID fairy recently was no fun at all. worse than flu and lasted a lot longer.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Again Mick, it's on you. No ehere at all have I stated that vaccines have not caused any injury or death.

All medications and vaccines pose a risk. Everyone is different. But in many cases it's not easy to prove. I took adverse reactions to an antibiotic and it took the staff in the hospital over 7 days to decide that was the root cause of my symptoms. After which I got another bought of same infection, I was then given a different antibiotic that I was assured would be fine as was told noone is allergic to both due to being in different groups.

Well just my luck, it transpired I was allergic to that one too.

So yeah it is possible that vaccines can cause reactions in some people. Especially when so many doses were given to much of the world population in a short space of time.

I have had 6 doses and never had more than a sore arm and slight headache. Only had covid once and while it was not nice it actually affected my wife much worse, at the time was still awaiting her vaccine shot. While a friend with the same health issues as me died from covid before the vaccine was around.

So I'm still all for getting vaccinated. It's worth any small risks

Re: Coronavirus
 

One of our neighbours is in the same situation as a couple of others nearby. They live with their aged mothers who were fully vaccinated. But they all refused the vaccines due to their bizarre beliefs (lizard people, the WEF, vaccines being used to inject chips, etc.).

His mother was taken to hospital after developing breathing difficulties. Positive LFT, then positive PCR test. Oxygen and antiviral therapies started immediately. On day 6 of her stay, her son was brought in with the same symptoms, and got the same therapies.

After 9 days she was ready to leave, but could not as she had no-one at home to care for her. She had to block a bed until her son was released a few days later.

She looks OK, but her son looks thin, pale and weak. I asked after her, and it was obvious that he still holds his bizarre beliefs.

Re: Coronavirus
 

It's such a shame and so sad that people get like that. Unfortunately my biological mum and her sister are like that. Sharing all sorts of conspiracy nonsense on Facebook believing all the bilge of the day. WEF, weaponised weather, chemtrails etc.

You'd think after he got so ill from covid and she didn't he might actually have realised how wrong he was about the vaccine.

Re: Coronavirus
 

A bit like when somebody tested positive for Covid and died of a heart attack, cause of death was put down as Covid?

Re: Coronavirus
 

Well at one point, if you tested positive then died in a car accident, I believe you were counted as a covid death. I think they fixed that though ?