Yep, I forgot to mention this.

I still can't quite believe it, literally pulling the ladder up to many in the working class demographic who would make excellent nurses but see the risk of degree level debt in this country and make alternative career choices.

So they import and then tell us we have no choice when they created the situation.

Edited by Stirlingsays (10 Dec 2022 10.57am)

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

The great Barrington declaration contained over 60 thousand signors of medical & public health scientists and medical practitioners.

While you rubbish the signers of that declaration as not being at the 'highest medical levels at all' let me tell people whose signatures are on that declaration.

Dr. Martin Kulldorff, professor of medicine at Harvard University, a biostatistician, and epidemiologist with expertise in detecting and monitoring infectious disease outbreaks and vaccine safety evaluations.

Dr. Sunetra Gupta, professor at Oxford University, an epidemiologist with expertise in immunology, vaccine development, and mathematical modeling of infectious diseases.

Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, professor at Stanford University Medical School, a physician, epidemiologist, health economist, and public health policy expert focusing on infectious diseases and vulnerable populations.

I could go on but this answer would go on at huge length as there are many high level professional signers to this declaration available to all to see....here is the link to them where you can also read the declaration itself.

[Link]

As regards the censorship to which you say there was 'absolutely no censorship of alternative voices' I ask the reader just how aware were they of this declaration from the mainstream media. I suspect most of them weren't...Instead of alternative voices being heard what coverage happened was mainly negative. Yet, in contradiction to what you say these are in fact very high level people. .Indeed, the recent twitter file release prove that its signers had their tweets shadow banned from trending.

You just continue to mislead people.

The worrying fact that a significant amount of the medical regulatory and related professions are funded by and chaired by pharmaceutical representatives and their financial backers. The same pattern is also found in the US and western media and academic fields. It creates a considerable concern on both silencing concerns and hence creating a false impression as to the extent of those concerns within industries.

Personally I believe that a time will come when this is looked back on as a serious conflict of interest that has parallels to how the medical and other professions were in hoc to the smoking industry.

Russell Brand has done much good work highlighting this and he is amplifying concerns that many ethical people around the medical profession raise.

What available science are you talking about?

Considering what we have now been told on actual transmission what science are you referring to that accurately told you that it stopped transmission?

I know I was told this, but what science?

This country built and staffed Nightingale hospitals at the very height of these infection concerns. Not only were these never fully utilized...which never even got close to happening but they started to be used for other hospital cases and/or taken down after concerns about coping subsided.

I have been hearing about the NHS not being able to cope for decades and while I certainly believe that a version of this is true I also think it's plainly never been about pandemics but a cause of political choices made....some of which I've already covered in this thread.

The speed of which these new hospitals were created and staffed shows just how disconnected your words are from the reality of how fast a rich country like ours can create provision.

Edited by Stirlingsays (10 Dec 2022 3.11pm)

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

My wife is a British citizen who trained in the UK and has a nursing degree.

The places are there. There is a lot of help available to get the qualifications, and various routes possible, including apprenticeships where folk can earn whilst they learn.

The barriers are largely imaginary. If someone wants to enter nursing and possesses the necessary skill sets then a way can be found.

That's not the problem. It's the pressure, the pay and the hours when alternative, better paid work is available in supermarkets.

International nurses are prepared to do the job at the rates of pay, as it's better than they get at home. There is no easy, short term, affordable solution.

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.

The post that contained the above is far too long and convoluted to all be repeated. So I will pick out a few glaring errors.

The most blatant of which is above, which is totally untrue. We have covered "The Great Barrington Declaration" and it's debunking several times before. So it's quite surprising to see it surface again as a justification for an attitude that has been so comprehensively destroyed. Rather than pick it apart myself the Wiki entry does it very effectively and can be read here:-

[Link]

Far from having 60,000 medical & public health scientists and medical practitioners signatories it had a check click box in which people self certified themselves. No verification took place and many were obvious frauds. I could have signed it using anyone's name. The list is worthless propaganda. Yet you suggest I am misleading people! Look in the mirror!

The report was commissioned by a right wing organisation with an agenda. They are also climate change deniers and are funded by the Koch brothers. The published as an open letter because no scientific journal would touch it. It was not peer-reviewed.

The 3 primary authors, as mentioned in the original comment, all have question marks over their associations and stances on other issues.

The report was condemned as dangerous by the WHO and just about every leading health expert in the world, including Dr Fauci and our own Patrick Vallance. There were many others, some of who used strong language.

In short, it's dangerous nonsense which was quickly dismissed as misleading and doing a grave disservice to those trying to handle the pandemic.

Why did the mainstream media not cover it more fully? Possibly because they could see it was misleading and dangerous?

Yes research is funded by the pharma industry. That's what happens in the commercial world. It is also regulated and peer reviewed. That's what happens in a democracy. Sure, mistakes have been made, and lessons learned and there will be more, but on balance it works. New discoveries are made, and our populations get healthier.

I would have to search again to find the precise reasoning why it was believed the original virus had restricted transmission after vaccination. From memory, it came from early data sets and was the best evidence then available. Some being better than none.

Yes we built the Nightingale hospitals, almost certainly as part of a pre-ordained response to a pandemic. You don't create such things overnight otherwise. That they were found to be largely unnecessary doesn't mean that was wrong. It was all part of a steep learning curve in a new situation for which no amount of planning provided the answers.

No-one pretends that the NHS wouldn't be having problems but for Covid. The fear was that runaway Covid would cause it to collapse, something that so far has just about been avoided.

Had we followed your preferred route a collapse seems to have been a much more likely outcome. I cannot prove it, but I am very thankful we didn't.

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.

How exactly will you prove it? I do hope youre not planning on posting pics of yourself on the nudie beach???.
I accept that maybe just maybe you are going on holiday, so am I, Tomorrow!

That’s worthy of Trump! Anything you don’t like is fake news. A thoughtfully assembled list of facts is dismissed as coming from “leftist activists”. Facts don’t do politics.

By all means compare the list of signatures on the report with those at the very top of their professions who have rubbished it. Then also ask if those signatures are real!

Those highlighted are indeed well known but not by their peers for their work in the industry. They are well known for holding discredited opinions and being sponsored by dubious sources.

The science didn’t turn out to be false at all. The virus mutated and the variants started behaving differently. Don’t let the facts get in the way of a good conspiracy though.

Of course it’s been destroyed. Only Sweden took the kind of route they recommended and they had to backtrack.

No-one with any level of responsibility takes these kind of ideas seriously. They might have provided a debate worth having in the early days, I remember Dominic Cummings proposing herd immunity as the way forward until he was put in his place by the professionals. Considered, rejected, binned. Except by know-it-alls with wider agendas.

Clinging to this kind of nonsense to try to justify an approach which could not work and to support irresponsible behaviour is not something I would be proud to own.

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.