Coronavirus and the impact of Lockdown policy

This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.

Coronavirus and the impact of Lockdown policy

Previous Topic | Next Topic

Page 115 of 289 < 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 >

Stirlingsays 24 Jun 23 8.54am
Originally posted by georgenorman Look at what is in front of your nose. I'd imagine, for him, that's quite a distance off. 'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)
Alert a moderator to this post

Stirlingsays

24 Jun 23 8.54am

Originally posted by georgenorman

Look at what is in front of your nose.

I'd imagine, for him, that's quite a distance off.

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Alert a moderator to this post

Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 24 Jun 23 9.10am
Originally posted by Stirlingsays Same. At one point I was 60/40 on these vaccines as I'm diabetic and was carrying a lot of weight at the time. However, there were several reasons why I decided not to take these vaccines. Chief amongst them was the speed at which they were produced. There was only six months of internal testing on them and the vaccine companies were not open about the process....that's not good. Secondly, they were given immunity from prosecution from negative vaccine effects.....that should be a red flag to anyone. It flies in the face of a safety claim. Lastly, I grew suspicious at the sheer amount of state badgering and coercion on these vaccines. What should have always been a free choice turned into no choice for a lot of people. Then there was my age (early 50s) and my immune system that's always seemed to do ok so far. I caught covid, had a rough three days and have been fine since. Don't get me wrong, I looked at the data coming through, the statistical chances before making these decisions....early on I was as concerned as anyone and the evidence is on these boards. However, this was not the Spanish flu.....but it was certainly treated like it was. Regardless, this should always have been a personal choice for each individual (don't get me started on what happened around children). Each individual making their own health decisions in light of their personal situation. I have no criticism whatsoever for anyone who took the vaccines and I can honestly say I hope it was the right decision. I recognise that the vaccines reduced the initial death toll once administrated as that's what the real world statistics show. The reasons for the significant rise in excess deaths is yet to be determined and I make no dog whistle on that as I'm as clueless as the next layman. However, in making no claim I also offer no endorsement either. I fully support those working hard on investigating what's going on. The people who matter are not the wealthy elites and companies who have made a rich killing out of this. What matters are the people impacted by this....what looks like....man made virus.....and how it's thrown a varying degree of destructive bomb into everyone's lives. Edited by Stirlingsays (24 Jun 2023 2.46am) I’ll make some observations on this. Anyone with a comorbidity who was medically advised to refuse the vaccine was justified in so doing. Making a decision based on an uninformed personal scepticism was not. At a time when we were all in a boat full of holes we either rowed or bailed. Only the sick had an excuse not to. Early on we didn’t know the impact of the virus but we learned. This oft repeated claim about the speed of production and short testing regime is evidence of a lack of understanding about these vaccines. They weren’t new. Their basic structure has existed for years and and undergone extensive testing. All these had were the very specific tweaks that enabled them to work and it was known that this could not produce a negative side effect, so total confidence in them existed. Nevertheless a belt and braces approach was adopted to reassure people and testing was done. The length of that was a trade off between the impact of delay, the need to scale up production, and the need to reassure to achieve good take up. These are not drugs. They are vaccines. There is no evidence that any part of them accumulates in the body. They do their job and disappear. Immunity from prosecution was considered necessary to get them produced at speed. Without it the producers may have not been able to sign contracts, being restricted by corporate policies and insurance restrictions causing delays that were unacceptable. You might not have a clue about the reason for the excess death levels remaining high, even if your favourite video maker drops big dollops of prejudice onto your screen regularly, but the ONS does produce the data, which demonstrates just how complex this subject is. The impact of the pandemic, both direct and indirect, is still being felt. [Link] For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.
Alert a moderator to this post

Wisbech Eagle

Truro Cornwall 24 Jun 23 9.10am

Originally posted by Stirlingsays

Same.

At one point I was 60/40 on these vaccines as I'm diabetic and was carrying a lot of weight at the time. However, there were several reasons why I decided not to take these vaccines.

Chief amongst them was the speed at which they were produced. There was only six months of internal testing on them and the vaccine companies were not open about the process....that's not good.

Secondly, they were given immunity from prosecution from negative vaccine effects.....that should be a red flag to anyone. It flies in the face of a safety claim.

Lastly, I grew suspicious at the sheer amount of state badgering and coercion on these vaccines. What should have always been a free choice turned into no choice for a lot of people.

Then there was my age (early 50s) and my immune system that's always seemed to do ok so far. I caught covid, had a rough three days and have been fine since.

Don't get me wrong, I looked at the data coming through, the statistical chances before making these decisions....early on I was as concerned as anyone and the evidence is on these boards. However, this was not the Spanish flu.....but it was certainly treated like it was.

Regardless, this should always have been a personal choice for each individual (don't get me started on what happened around children). Each individual making their own health decisions in light of their personal situation.

I have no criticism whatsoever for anyone who took the vaccines and I can honestly say I hope it was the right decision.

I recognise that the vaccines reduced the initial death toll once administrated as that's what the real world statistics show.

The reasons for the significant rise in excess deaths is yet to be determined and I make no dog whistle on that as I'm as clueless as the next layman.

However, in making no claim I also offer no endorsement either. I fully support those working hard on investigating what's going on.

The people who matter are not the wealthy elites and companies who have made a rich killing out of this. What matters are the people impacted by this....what looks like....man made virus.....and how it's thrown a varying degree of destructive bomb into everyone's lives.

Edited by Stirlingsays (24 Jun 2023 2.46am)

I’ll make some observations on this.

Anyone with a comorbidity who was medically advised to refuse the vaccine was justified in so doing. Making a decision based on an uninformed personal scepticism was not. At a time when we were all in a boat full of holes we either rowed or bailed. Only the sick had an excuse not to.

Early on we didn’t know the impact of the virus but we learned.

This oft repeated claim about the speed of production and short testing regime is evidence of a lack of understanding about these vaccines. They weren’t new. Their basic structure has existed for years and and undergone extensive testing. All these had were the very specific tweaks that enabled them to work and it was known that this could not produce a negative side effect, so total confidence in them existed. Nevertheless a belt and braces approach was adopted to reassure people and testing was done. The length of that was a trade off between the impact of delay, the need to scale up production, and the need to reassure to achieve good take up.

These are not drugs. They are vaccines. There is no evidence that any part of them accumulates in the body. They do their job and disappear.

Immunity from prosecution was considered necessary to get them produced at speed. Without it the producers may have not been able to sign contracts, being restricted by corporate policies and insurance restrictions causing delays that were unacceptable.

You might not have a clue about the reason for the excess death levels remaining high, even if your favourite video maker drops big dollops of prejudice onto your screen regularly, but the ONS does produce the data, which demonstrates just how complex this subject is. The impact of the pandemic, both direct and indirect, is still being felt.

[Link]

For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.

Alert a moderator to this post

eaglesdare 24 Jun 23 10.23am
Originally posted by Stirlingsays Same. At one point I was 60/40 on these vaccines as I'm diabetic and was carrying a lot of weight at the time. However, there were several reasons why I decided not to take these vaccines. Chief amongst them was the speed at which they were produced. There was only six months of internal testing on them and the vaccine companies were not open about the process....that's not good. Secondly, they were given immunity from prosecution from negative vaccine effects.....that should be a red flag to anyone. It flies in the face of a safety claim. Lastly, I grew suspicious at the sheer amount of state badgering and coercion on these vaccines. What should have always been a free choice turned into no choice for a lot of people. Then there was my age (early 50s) and my immune system that's always seemed to do ok so far. I caught covid, had a rough three days and have been fine since. Don't get me wrong, I looked at the data coming through, the statistical chances before making these decisions....early on I was as concerned as anyone and the evidence is on these boards. However, this was not the Spanish flu.....but it was certainly treated like it was. Regardless, this should always have been a personal choice for each individual (don't get me started on what happened around children). Each individual making their own health decisions in light of their personal situation. I have no criticism whatsoever for anyone who took the vaccines and I can honestly say I hope it was the right decision. I recognise that the vaccines reduced the initial death toll once administrated as that's what the real world statistics show. The reasons for the significant rise in excess deaths is yet to be determined and I make no dog whistle on that as I'm as clueless as the next layman. However, in making no claim I also offer no endorsement either. I fully support those working hard on investigating what's going on. The people who matter are not the wealthy elites and companies who have made a rich killing out of this. What matters are the people impacted by this....what looks like....man made virus.....and how it's thrown a varying degree of destructive bomb into everyone's lives. Edited by Stirlingsays (24 Jun 2023 2.46am) I honestly couldn't have put it better myself. Thank you. Myself and my partner had opposing views but we respected each other and each other's personal choice. We never pushed each other to get or not to get it either. I did put the foot down when it came to the kids.
Alert a moderator to this post

eaglesdare

24 Jun 23 10.23am