You do realise that the author of this piece is a video games reporter? Which means he spends most of his life in front of a screen playing endless amounts of hours of computer generated nonsense. If this is the kind of information you use to determine your opinions, you are more oafish than I realised.

Brand may well be a despicable character, but he at least has better researching skills than you.

Systematically dragged down by the lawmakers

Sorry, but some of the sh1te printed online has been deliberately edited. I have done extensive research into the anti vax movement and it is fundamentally aimed at making money.

The guy who fronts it, Andrew Wakefield, was the idiot who linked the MMR vaccine to autism. His data was non-existent and made up. He did it because he was the "doctor" presenting evidence for those whose children had autism who were suing the makers of the MMR vaccine for millions!! He was struck off. Fast forward and he joined the anti-vax movement. He now makes millions from donations to'fight' the use of vaccines.

My favourite piece of made up sh1te was the 'covid vaccine causes men and women to become sterile'. At the time the only people getting the vaccine were over 60.........

And the other one, a very impressive looking document from the CDC (US Centre for disease control). This document claimed that 100's of people had suffered serve reactions to the covid vaccines and that dozens had died. It was on CDC headed paper and looked very convincing.

Until you search for the original document and looked closely at the edited fake one. At the bottom in small print it said 'The views and data published in this document are the views of the author and are not endorsed by the CDC'.

The headings and numbers had been changed i.e. shifted along. The original document had no recorded deaths and a few people that had reacted badly to it. But these were people who had a history of reacting to vaccines. Hence they started asking if you had previously reacted badly to a vaccine.

I challenged them on their facebook group and posted the original doc. My post was promptly deleted and I was blocked!!

I therefore reported them to facebook. So I was probably one of the reasons they got banned!

Andrew Wakefield then tried to sue Facebook and twitter. Why? Because he was losing millions in donations............. Says it all.

Edited by The groover (20 Jan 2023 11.31am)

The same point has been made to you numerous times, something of which you can hardly be unaware.

The emperor has no clothes, though I certainly hope you took some for your cruise.

Edited by Stirlingsays (20 Jan 2023 11.46am)

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

Which is why I set the context of bias and history. Any piece can possess it’s own merit. When someone, like Brand for instance, writes copious amounts which then get exposed for various reasons, there is good reason to be sceptical.

Edited by Wisbech Eagle (20 Jan 2023 11.54am)

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.

Less 'ad hominem' than actual observation.

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

Is just another excuse and no reason to direct opinions at the writer and not the arguments.

If I continually directed my comments at your character you would have been shredded years ago, and/or me being banned.

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.