Coronavirus Pandemic

Bart V

straw materialist
Member
Do you think that some deaths have occurred due to vaccines?
Yes, we know that AZ and J&J had the blood clotting/ low level platelet problem, which caused deaths to about one in a million.
But even with that, for some countries who do not have another choice, the benefits still outweigh the risks.
Pfizer and Moderna don't seem to have similar problems, so their use is a no-brainer to me.
If so, shouldn't there be ethical and moral concerns over the wide scale push for them to return to a normal life?
No! let us not forget that the virus still kills much more people than any vaccine. It would therefore be completely immoral to not pursue the highest level of vaccination possible.
Vaccination is a game off simple statistics, the more you get vaccinated the more lives you save.
And if we get to herd immunity, we get a bonus in that the vaccin even works for those who refuse to believe in it.
 
Do you really believe this? (the tone is without my usual bluster btw).

What do you make of the UK government employing nudge teams to work out how best to manipulate people into taking them? Do you think it was based on pure safety reasons? Or more likely to be a controlling reason. Or a bit of both? That concerns me because people shouldn't need convincing of the reasons to get a vaccine.

I will need to get it myself for my career, but surely if you want to convince people to get it, you wouldn't employ all the propaganda and advertisements etc. It should be obvious IMO. It just makes me really really suspicious. Doesn't necessarily have to be a grand conspiracy. But maybe its a way to easily profit from the situation?
Are you referring to my commentary on conflicts of interest when you asked "Do you really believe this?"? I'll assume that's the case, but you can correct me if I'm misunderstood.

You also brought up the issue of marketing or its darker name "coercion". They seem to go hand in glove anyway (conflicts of interest and marketing).

I do think both are very real challenges to societies. They are two edged swords that can be deployed with noble intentions and with extremely dubious intentions. Campaigns designed to reduce smoking and reduce big tobacco's advertising freedoms, for example, were extremely well designed and highly effective at altering the populace's mindset over time. Absolutely elements of coercion in that. But most folks seemed supportive as the underlying goal was to combat serious illness and disease. Conversely, we can all think of examples of similar campaigns designed to get people to buy lottery tickets or go to casinos; notably people of modest or even compromised financial statures.

Its just the world we live in IMO, so I don't judge a governmental campaign designed to increase vaccination rates as inherently evil or malignant. Obviously, that's not to say it couldn't be; its just not enough for me to make a judgement.

All that said, I'm not familiar with the UK governmental nudge teams.
 
Yes, we know that AZ and J&J had the blood clotting/ low level platelet problem, which caused deaths to about one in a million.
But even with that, for some countries who do not have another choice, the benefits still outweigh the risks.
Pfizer and Moderna don't seem to have similar problems, so their use is a no-brainer to me.

No! let us not forget that the virus still kills much more people than any vaccine. It would therefore be completely immoral to not pursue the highest level of vaccination possible.
Vaccination is a game off simple statistics, the more you get vaccinated the more lives you save.
And if we get to herd immunity, we get a bonus in that the vaccin even works for those who refuse to believe in it.
But the vaccine is being forced upon age groups that do not really need it i.e. young ages.

One in a million that dies from something forced upon them is still not right. Remember the 'if it saves one life' mantra, and the importance of savings lives in general. This should not change just because there is a vaccine. It should be a choice. COVID never really was a big threat to younger people, so why should they have to suffer the chance to die from a blood clot on the basis of protecting older folk?

I know the quoted statistics bear out that very low risk, but it's a question that younger people have been asking in the UK, and is tied into resentment towards the so called 'boomers', who are seen to have benefited from much in the past 30/40 years. The housing market, lockdowns to save them, whilst the young are increasingly feeling that there is no future for them and no chance to enter into the housing ladder due to stagnating wages not keeping up with inflation, and house prices exceeding the average wage by ~8 times.

It's a complicated situation. You might not think that there should be any reasonable connection there, but this is what I'm seeing. Anecdotal I know, but still. It appears it is the lay of the land.....
 
Last edited:
Are you referring to my commentary on conflicts of interest when you asked "Do you really believe this?"? I'll assume that's the case, but you can correct me if I'm misunderstood.

You also brought up the issue of marketing or its darker name "coercion". They seem to go hand in glove anyway (conflicts of interest and marketing).

I do think both are very real challenges to societies. They are two edged swords that can be deployed with noble intentions and with extremely dubious intentions. Campaigns designed to reduce smoking and reduce big tobacco's advertising freedoms, for example, were extremely well designed and highly effective at altering the populace's mindset over time. Absolutely elements of coercion in that. But most folks seemed supportive as the underlying goal was to combat serious illness and disease. Conversely, we can all think of examples of similar campaigns designed to get people to buy lottery tickets or go to casinos; notably people of modest or even compromised financial statures.

Its just the world we live in IMO, so I don't judge a governmental campaign designed to increase vaccination rates as inherently evil or malignant. Obviously, that's not to say it couldn't be; its just not enough for me to make a judgement.

All that said, I'm not familiar with the UK governmental nudge teams.

Perhaps.

I'm in two minds at the minute about the vaccine and the past year. Lockdown was too far.

And so I severely doubt that the past year was worth all of the pain and despair, and I don't think much will convince me otherwise. We will be dealing with the effects like a form of PTSD for years to come.....

But the vaccine I'm not sure. Perhaps there really is unknown long term effects that will crop up and basically screw us all, and by that point, there's not much we can do about it. The world that would be left probably won't be much to shout about either.

But so far, I'm exploring the idea that the vaccines are safe, to a certain extent. With millions vaccinated already.....

I think I'm having trouble with the coercion side of things though. It's not right. I doubt I would ever be swayed on that regard....
 
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/20...live-tv-show-everyone-safe-dies-2-days-later/
Sorry but you gotta laugh. I imagine his death was registered as coincidental and nothing to do with the vaccine.
I read the COVAXIN fact sheet for vaccine recipients and caregivers.


It does say that

These may not be all the possible side effects of COVAXIN . Serious and unexpected side effects may occur. COVAXIN is still being studied in clinical trials
Serious and unexpected side effects? Still being studied in clinical trials?

How should one read that and not get annoyed with the coercive nature of all of this?

Can Bart V answer this?
 
No one has the right to impose any mandate as to what I put into my physical body (or any other form of energetic embodiment). This is black and white. If anyone is so afraid of my physical body then perhaps they should have thought better "the risks" of incarnating in a world filled with other physical expressions of being before so doing.
 

Bart V

straw materialist
Member
I read the COVAXIN fact sheet for vaccine recipients and caregivers.


It does say that



Serious and unexpected side effects? Still being studied in clinical trials?

How should one read that and not get annoyed with the coercive nature of all of this?

Can Bart V answer this?
Don't know much about it, but this one seems rushed to me too, from this BMJ article:

Covaxin’s phase I trial to assess safety and immunogenicity is published.5 All 375 subjects who received the vaccine had notably elevated antibody response.6

The phase II trial result has not yet been published in a peer reviewed journal, but a preprint has been posted on MedRxiv.7 The provisional data indicate enhanced immune response and tolerable safety outcomes.

Since November, 25 800 participants have been enrolled in ongoing phase III trials. Bharat Biotech released interim efficacy data on 3 March 2021, which showed a clinical efficacy of 81%.8
Or:

The Central Drugs and Standards Committee (CDSCO), India’s top drug regulator, issued an emergency approval for Covaxin on 3 January 2021, even though phase III clinical trials are still ongoing and phase II studies are unpublished.14 The regulator cited the need for protection against the potential spread of the UK variant. No peer reviewed evidence is available to show that the vaccine would be effective against this strain, although a preprint indicates promising results.15

The vaccine is currently being administered in India to people over 60 and those over 45 with comorbidities, as well as to health workers. At the time of writing, India had administered more than 100 million vaccinations, although it is not clear how many are Covaxin (most are Covishield, India’s version of the Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine manufactured in Pune by the Serum Institute of India).
India is being hit very hard though, maybe they felt they had no other option than to approve.
And i do not understand why you feel this has a coercive nature, nobody is really forced to take a vaccine.
Maybe in countries with some less democratic regimes, do you know of any country where people are forced to be vaccinated?
 
Interesting. Thanks for the additional info.

India is being hit very hard though, maybe they felt they had no other option than to approve.
Is the case of India not down to statistics too though? Over 1 Billion people, so naturally there would be more deaths and cases? Plus, I'm certain I read that the media were pretty guilty of manipulating things by showing images of the dead being cremated in the traditional way in India, as if it were not a common thing, under the guise of no spaces left for burial (or to that effect).

Bart V said:
And i do not understand why you feel this has a coercive nature, nobody is really forced to take a vaccine.
Maybe in countries with some less democratic regimes, do you know of any country where people are forced to be vaccinated?
Forced, as in if you do not take the vaccine, you will be deemed as anti vaxx and disreputable and may have trouble getting jobs that require it (for whatever reason).

It's coercive because there are so many sources around telling you to get vaccinated, or else. That's pretty coercive purely on that basis.
 

Bart V

straw materialist
Member
Is the case of India not down to statistics too though? Over 1 Billion people, so naturally there would be more deaths and cases? Plus, I'm certain I read that the media were pretty guilty of manipulating things by showing images of the dead being cremated in the traditional way in India, as if it were not a common thing, under the guise of no spaces left for burial (or to that effect).
They were not hit very hard before, but now they had a serious bump.
Seems the press portrayed the spike in India fairly honest over here.
If you look at these graphs, you can see that my country (Belgium) was hit very hard a few times.
This is one of the reasons i hope we get vaccinated fast, and in high numbers. So we can start living again, instead of dying.

coronavirus-data-explorer.png coronavirus-data-explorer (1).png
 
Good and fair question. I don't have any guidance however; perhaps others will.

No doubt the vaccine was rushed. No doubt conflicts of interest exist (in all aspects of life for that matter). We should demand rigor in the ongoing evaluation of the COVID vaccines in terms of both efficacy and, most importantly, safety.
I'm looking at COVID Anti Vaxx debunking videos, and I'm seeing the same hysteria in the comments about the Anti Vaxxers, as I do on channels I frequent about the Pro COVID Vaxx people.

Isn't this a problem? I don't think having foaming at the mouth mobs of people, all wanting to force you get vaccinated is a good idea. I'd just like the facts, and an actual rational and considered ethical/moral discussion on COVID vaccines.

It seems that as one side ramps it up, the other ramps it up, and no-one wins.
 
I'm looking at COVID Anti Vaxx debunking videos, and I'm seeing the same hysteria in the comments about the Anti Vaxxers, as I do on channels I frequent about the Pro COVID Vaxx people.

Isn't this a problem? I don't think having foaming at the mouth mobs of people, all wanting to force you get vaccinated is a good idea. I'd just like the facts, and an actual rational and considered ethical/moral discussion on COVID vaccines.

It seems that as one side ramps it up, the other ramps it up, and no-one wins.
For sure. Its why I've asked others how they can have such conviction about supposed anti-mainstream views when the source of supporting evidence is simply a different authority (i.e., anti-mainstream). No one here, as far as I know, is a virologist for example. Doubt regarding the mainstream view is one thing; conviction in an alternative view is another.
 

Bart V

straw materialist
Member
I'm looking at COVID Anti Vaxx debunking videos, and I'm seeing the same hysteria in the comments about the Anti Vaxxers, as I do on channels I frequent about the Pro COVID Vaxx people.
Hysteria and Youtube comments are almost synonymous, better not to put very much weight on them.
Isn't this a problem? I don't think having foaming at the mouth mobs of people, all wanting to force you get vaccinated is a good idea. I'd just like the facts, and an actual rational and considered ethical/moral discussion on COVID vaccines.
If you really want to have that discussion, i do not think comments are the best place.
And if we know a vaccine works, is tested and found to be safe, wouldn't it be unethical/immoral to not promote it?
I admit, the attempts to promote vaccination, are sometimes a bit cringe-worthy.
Maybe it is time to spread some myths on facebook, some reverse psychology. Why not warn people that one of the unwanted side effects is losing a lot of weight? is that the moral thing to do?
What i am trying to say is that you can always make a lie much simpler than the truth, which is almost always more complicated than we think.
It seems that as one side ramps it up, the other ramps it up, and no-one wins.
If you are after the facts, why then does somebody have to win?

If you really just like the facts, there are a lot of things you can do.
First question you should ask yourself would be: Why should i believe this anonymous blogger/Youtuber/Facebook post etc.
What are the motivations? Are they making money from their anti-Science website, supplements, clicks for advertising, whatever?
Check the sources that are quoted, try some fact checking sites like Snopes.
Look out for cherry picking. Sometimes it is useful to put piece of a paragraph with quote marks at the ends into a google search, and see what comes out. Or you can do an image search too see the original context of pictures that are used.
Beware of people who confuse googling with "doing research". And how can we ever check an argument that throws every counterargument into the conspiracy?
 
Last edited:
I guess we'll see Shane.

I still don't see the evidence for nor the endgame that is to stem from this notion of a "plandemic". Many other explanations still seem to fit the data; even if it ends up being shown that the virus escaped a lab in Wuhan (or elsewhere for that matter).

As for the near term outlook on mask wearing, I get the sense that it will pass pretty quickly into a no or few mask wearing world; again at least here in the U.S. I don't have any great evidence to offer as its just a sense of what I see in my own community. Both the vaccinated and the unvaccinated are eager to dispense with the masks. Further, I don't see private places of business invoking draconian policies to try and segregate the vaccinated from the none.

As for the potential resurgence of infection rates from COVID, who knows? But even if there is a resurgence, is it logically incompatible with the concept of communities not having achieved a level of herd immunity either through vaccination or prior infection?
Many things are powder kegs in life. We might not all be in love with the ideology behind the Fourth of July, but we all love fireworks, right? Do you remember the one called "the flower"? It looked like a short stick, but if you light it, HOLY, it spun a show like nothing else in the box!

The draconian measures were already attempted throughout the entire world. They weren't simply attempted, they were demonstrated and enforced.

Rather, let us lighten up, and think of all those other things that are now normal, which were once "face mask mandates."

Also, brother, you and I agreed to talk about the weather! :)
 
Sneaky one by Eu with vaccines imo.
- Italy figures are saying covid positive cases down 80% amongst young people and it is being put out there that it is due to the vaccines.
Is summer time and as was plainly obvious from last year cases go way down in the warmer months. Though covid is more serious than normal colds (other coronaviruses) and flus (influenzas) it behaves in a similar manner being much more prevalent in the colder months.


Uk population being vaccinated obviously shows a different and much clearer imo picture on vaccine rollout as 40 million people or so and about 95% of people over 50 did the vaccine in the relatively short period of time between Dec 8th 2020 - March 7th 2021. The general death rate figures should be noted in these months also, see link to goverment statistics website in post #2163 in this thread.
Dirt and a smokescreen to cover the other vaccines imo has been thrown on the Astra Zeneca vaccine as even if there are higher amounts of side effects and deaths with that particular vaccine, the difference between that and the Phizer vaccine, for example, is minimal compared to the total side effects and deaths from either of those two vaccines.
See post #2163 in this thread which goes into more detail with the above and particularly the 2 different equations which are used or not used in the clinical trials's data that is presented.
The general death rate in the Uk actually went up from when the vaccination program started even when taking into account the rise in the general death rate during the winter months every year, see official ONS general death rate figures linked in post #2163 in this thread.
Also the Uk government Sage report dated 31/3/21 pointing out that most new hospitalisations are amongst people that where vaccinated, see posts and link to Sage report in posts #2164 and #2165 in this thread.
See post #2192 in this thread where in this link it points out the huge increase in miscarriages in the uk was mainly amongst women that had had the Phizer vaccine (particularly the government report cited and linked in the from the initially linked article as well as discussed in both the linking articles).
Only a small percentage of the people who had taken the vaccine in the Uk had the Phizer vaccine and the rest where mostly Astra Zeneca which has it's own dangers particularly if used inappropriately, see post #2165 (imo) in this thread.


Basically some people in the EU are lying imo and imo trying to sneak one in (vaccine success when given to all indiscriminately 'strategy') now that societies are opening up after lockdowns.
The EU has purposefully delayed it's vaccination program all winter imo, see post #2164 in this thread, and are now trying to sneak in an imo false success story, which the warmer months do naturally, as well as covering up side effects and deaths amongst their populations from their vaccine rollouts, imo.
It would be bad and very wrong if it was a one off vaccine and set of lies that they (EU) have furthered (even if only done ideologicaly or mistakenly by some, without forgeting some individuals knew very well what they were doing and so consequentialy falsifying imo) . . but these things (covid vaccines) need doing every year, if not less.


A pandemic year of disgusting lies lies lies imo. Fucking disgraceful but to be expected.
said in above post a quoted figure that 95% of people over the age of 50 had been vaccinated in the Uk (this was quoted as one of the figures that has been used when putting government reports together, lets hope it's not like the graphs that have been done by the media and so called health sites which portray the general death rate in the Uk to have gone down when in fact it went up in from when covid vaccinating commenced) which was a while ago as well. I would have estimated about 80% of over 50's would have gone with a vaccine. Does anyone know about this figure of people over 50?
Everyone makes their own choices. Had suggested about Peg antibody tests, allergy tests etc and a full doctors assessment, and only to people with serious health conditions and frail elderly people) but it also seems or at least it could be that people who are having more adverse reactions to these different covid vaccines have had a relatively recent covid 19 infection (almost everyone has had it at least once over the last year or so) and their natural immunity and antibody levels are high (a season of covid is about 6 months, at least it has been till now, with antibody etc levels waining towards the latter part of that 6 month period) so when they overly top up with the vaccine style immunity along with a high natural immunity the body seems to be getting overloaded and is one of the factors that results in adverse reactions.
Also all the talk about how there has been 20 times or whatever more adverse reactions to these covid vaccines than all the other vaccines (up to 72 of them) put together in the last 20 years, or whatever, is a load of serious bullshit imo. There probably are some extra adverse reactions compared to one of the other vaccines, which includes serious shit and death but the difference between the covid ones and the other 72 vaccines is that the other 72 are given to babies and kids from the day they are born and in their first years of life. Adverse reactions which include serious stuff and death happens at a young age and is put down to childhood diseases as well as the longterm effects being put down to an individuals general heath. Chronic disease in children is up from a few percent in the 70's to over 50% in the present day which coincides with the massive increase in the types and numbers of vaccines utilized. The 72 vaccines that start pumping from the day of birth (along with the rest of babylon) have nothing to do with it according to some 'experts'. Just like the VAST improvement (which is still shit) in hygiene (personal and societal) which is supposed to have played no role in humanity getting over much of diseases that have plagued it in our recent past. Rockerfeller and Gates's corrupt and culling style medicine has saved the fucking day. Of course that is what has happened. You dumb fucking idiots, though obviously and as part of the synthetic medical psyop there are some things which have helped humanity on a relative scale as things were so bad and health knowledge and hygiene almost non-existent within societies before the early 1900's. So along came the synthetic, patentable, trillion pound churning industry and unnavoidable victims (300K people plus die from synthetic style medicine 'mistakes' every year in the US alone, and thats just the figures confirmed by the 'medical' companies nedalone the 'they've done all they can do' copout after poisoning someone with a supposed cure, eg chemo deaths which are in the millions and millions every year) to the medicines make up that is provided and held in law (as well as dogmatically and fervently by some ideoligical, well intended, but stupid people) as the only way to cure anything. Fuck you, fuck you and fuck you.
Anyone got a headache, dont worry Nurofen will sort it out (irony) and you won't carry on getting headaches (more irony)
Still sometimes a hospital is better than nothing and 'could' save your life.
Have got a bit worked up about the general 'medical' industry which i don't want to take away from the points raised in the first parts of the post
Peace
 
Last edited:
Hysteria and Youtube comments are almost synonymous, better not to put very much weight on them.

If you really want to have that discussion, i do not think comments are the best place.
Probably not. But since lockdown, everyone was basically on the internet 24/7, along with the TV, so it was bound to produce a hysteria of all kinds.

Funny. I used to think that social media and the internet should be completely unregulated. I still probably do but..........maybe people just cannot handle the amount of information (factual or untrue) that is found. The amount of Flat Earthers and other nonsense I think has real consequences. I just can't bring myself to say that I'd be in favour of regulation though....

Extremely complex ethical discussion (to my mind) to be had here I think.

Bart v said:
And if we know a vaccine works, is tested and found to be safe, wouldn't it be unethical/immoral to not promote it?
I just have such resistance to this idea.

Could the skeptics break down perhaps why I have this resistance? How do you see it? Could it be, that there might be a genuine reason to be weary of this though?

Bart V said:
If you are after the facts, why then does somebody have to win?
I meant that society doesn't win. It doesn't produce a good society to live in.

Bart V said:
If you really just like the facts, there are a lot of things you can do.
First question you should ask yourself would be: Why should i believe this anonymous blogger/Youtuber/Facebook post etc.
What are the motivations? Are they making money from their anti-Science website, supplements, clicks for advertising, whatever?
I've been focusing on this recently and putting more emphasis on credibility.

Bart V said:
Check the sources that are quoted, try some fact checking sites like Snopes.
I don't know if Snopes is all that great tbh. I can't remember what it was, but I recall being put off by a 'fact check' that they done which was false. Kinda pointless without the exact thing I know, but I do remember it.
 
Sorry if this stuff is redundant. Too many posts to read. Tedious topic anyway.
18 Reasons I Won't Be Getting a Covid Vaccine
https://www.deconstructingconventional.com/post/18-reason-i-won-t-be-getting-a-covid-vaccine
That is a really well-argued piece with plenty of references to magazines such as Science, literature put out by Moderna, etc. It certainly underscores why neither of us accepted vaccination, even though we are technically at the threshold age of 70.

David
 
Top