You just make empty statements, you're full of it but there's no substance.

I read the second of the links. It was nothing but an opinion piece looking to discredit and should be seen within the prism of funding as I said earlier.

Then oh look, at the end of the article this section is included by the BMJ.

The author is:

'Gavin Yamey, Professor of Global Health and Public Policy, Duke University; Director, Center for Policy Impact in Global Health, Duke Global Health Institute.

David H. Gorski, Professor of Surgery and Chief, Breast Surgery Section, Michael & Marian Ilitch Department of Surgery, Wayne State University School of Medicine, and Managing Editor, Science-Based Medicine (https://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org.

Competing interests: GY has received research funding from Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance (Gavi) and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, both of which support COVID-19 vaccine development and deployment. He was an unpaid member of the World Bank’s COVID-19 Vaccine Development Taskforce and an unpaid adviser to Gavi in the design of COVAX. He has written articles, including in TIME, in support of public health measures to curb COVID-19 (including masks; test, trace, isolate, and support; distancing; workplace and school safety measures; and ventilation of buildings). He was a co-author of a Lancet correspondence, “Scientific consensus on the COVID-19 pandemic: we need to act now” (Lancet 2020;396:E71-E72) that was the basis for the Jon Snow Memorandum. DHG has no competing financial interests. He does however, edit a weblog that has published many posts pushing back against COVID-19 and antivaccine misinformation and has been critical of the GBD in particular.'

As for who funded the GBC,. On that matter this article had to be amended due to its claims.

To quote to:

'This article was revised further on 23 September 2021. The phrase, “this is not the first time billionaires aligned with industry have ‘funded’ proponents of herd immunity was changed to “‘provided support'” to proponents of herd immunity; to clarify that the GBD arose out of a conference hosted and heavily promoted by the AIER instead of being sponsored by the AIER; that the AIER received funding from the Charles Koch Foundation rather than being part of a network of organisations funded by Charles Koch; and that Scott Atlas’s association with AIER was as a contributor.'

I have little doubt that if I took the time to go through the rest of your links I could pick obvious holes. Unlike you I can actually find these rather than just make empty claims like you do.

However, while showing you up has some worth it's also a waste of time as everyone knows your opinions are stuck in cement.

Edited by Stirlingsays (07 Mar 2023 11.33pm)

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

I watched the Lotus Eaters(?) Lockdown Files and heard this mentioned. It seems the buffoon had the right idea at first, but bottled it and went with the (non)science. He was in charge, he should have called it out as wrong, so is as culpable as Hancock in my opinion.

Systematically dragged down by the lawmakers

By all means judge the probity of who provides the funding and what what their motivations are. Those who support vaccine developments or those who deny climate change? You choose who are likely to have the interests of the people at heart?

Then judge the validity of the conclusions, and the validity of the criticisms.

The GBD was debunked and sunk. Only people like you trawl it up and trying to present it as a boat that floats and can support their know-it-all ideas. It doesn't. It's full of holes. I don't need to find them. They are all laid out in the criticism.

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.

A simple look on the NHS official website:

[Link]

Why should I risk any of these side effects? I had covid twice and was absolutely fine! Infact I've never been vaccinated and I am completely healthy!

The Libertarian ideological GBD has been so thoroughly debunked it’s embarrassing to find people still banging on about it.
[Link]
[Link]

Or if you prefer a more humorous slap down.
[Link]

Let's remember what 'honest Joe Biden' said about you being unvaccinated.

[Link]

Apparently you were facing a winter of severe illness and death.....It seems to honest Joe having antibodies from previous infections apparently wasn't going to help you. Being young and healthy wasn't going to help you.

He was doing what the elites always do today....treat the public like scared children who can't deal with nuance and who have to be nannied.

Lowest common denominator politics.....which is a criticism I have of all politics today, left or right.

Only the political ideologies that favour and promote objectivity (as much as that is possible) and freedom of thought and speech have a chance of turning the tide in America....but unfortunately what the west is in the grip of is capital liberalism on the right and social liberalism and progressivism on the left.....It's just decline all the way down.

I'm a social conservative but I'd settle for a saner world free of these ideas. I don't see where that's coming from though, all I see ahead is a collaspe.

We need something more objective....libertarianism left or right is one route, whether it's Russell Brand's form or Stefan Molyneux's.

I have criticism for libertarianism....mainly because it doesn't work though it has principles worthy of respect. Libertarianism doesn't work in the same respect that the much inferior but more successful communism doesn't work....because it doesn't account for natural human behaviour but instead only an idealised form....dooming it to repeated failure.

Still, it's several dozen leagues better than this.

Edited by Stirlingsays (08 Mar 2023 2.30pm)

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