|
|
Post by gashead79 on Jan 28, 2024 21:00:33 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by gashead79 on Jan 30, 2024 10:22:27 GMT
Fairly surprised that nobody has acknowledged the recent accusation that the BBC(therefore all broadcasters) misled the public. Behaviour altering headlines to fool people. Printed in the Telegraph.
It was obvious to some..
|
|
yattongas
Forum Legend
Posts: 15,503 
Member is Online
|
Post by yattongas on Jan 30, 2024 11:24:17 GMT
lol is he still banging on with his nonsense?
|
|
|
|
Post by oldie on Jan 30, 2024 11:27:26 GMT
lol is he still banging on with his nonsense? He clearly has a deep, ingrained, psychological need to try and "win" Even as he makes himself appear more foolish with every claim. |
|
yattongas
Forum Legend
Posts: 15,503
Member is Online
|
Post by yattongas on Jan 30, 2024 11:31:58 GMT
lol is he still banging on with his nonsense? He clearly has a deep, ingrained, psychological need to try and "win" Even as he makes himself appear more foolish with every claim. Maybe I could understand it if he took the vaccine and suffered an adverse effect, but he didn’t or any of his immediate family. Is it out of concern for all of us I wonder ? To put him at ease , I’m fine 79 . So are all my family and wider family who had the vaccine. 👍😃 |
|
|
|
Post by supergas on Jan 30, 2024 11:39:58 GMT
Fairly surprised that nobody has acknowledged the recent accusation that the BBC(therefore all broadcasters) misled the public. Behaviour altering headlines to fool people. Printed in the Telegraph. It was obvious to some.. ...sorry, I was busy out and about enjoying life as i) I'm still alive and ii) there's no longer a global pandemic to disrupt things. So let's examine that accusation - the BBC focused on some information with the aim of keeping a subset of the population safe during a fast-developing global pandemic. A damning accusation if that information was false - but it wasn't, the information was true, just not necessarily placed in the relevant context. Prof Mark Woolhouse is an expert in the field so I'm not going to dismiss his views out of hand, mostly as he has a reputation and book sales to protect...but for every expert at the time with a dissenting opinion there were two or three others in agreement and that's often where the politicians went.... ...and why wouldn't they listen to the majority opinion of their advisors at the time? They were damned if they did lockdown, crippling the economy, annoying millions of people and hopefully stopping the spread *or* damned if they didn't, the disease spread and more and more people continued to die... Yes, Prof Woolhouse has told us what he thought/predicted at the time, he seems quite annoyed he wasn't listened to more, but this is now all hindsight - so of course it's 20:20 and his views now look relevant, but at the time they were an outlier - if the government had followed them and his ideas hadn't worked, thousands, perhaps tens of thousands more people would have died from the virus.... |
|
|
|
Post by oldie on Jan 30, 2024 11:42:36 GMT
Fairly surprised that nobody has acknowledged the recent accusation that the BBC(therefore all broadcasters) misled the public. Behaviour altering headlines to fool people. Printed in the Telegraph. It was obvious to some.. ...sorry, I was busy out and about enjoying life as i) I'm still alive and ii) there's no longer a global pandemic to disrupt things. So let's examine that accusation - the BBC focused on some information with the aim of keeping a subset of the population safe during a fast-developing global pandemic. A damning accusation if that information was false - but it wasn't, the information was true, just not necessarily placed in the relevant context. Prof Mark Woolhouse is an expert in the field so I'm not going to dismiss his views out of hand, mostly as he has a reputation and book sales to protect...but for every expert at the time with a dissenting opinion there were two or three others in agreement and that's often where the politicians went.... ...and why wouldn't they listen to the majority opinion of their advisors at the time? They were damned if they did lockdown, crippling the economy, annoying millions of people and hopefully stopping the spread *or* damned if they didn't, the disease spread and more and more people continued to die... Yes, Prof Woolhouse has told us what he thought/predicted at the time, he seems quite annoyed he wasn't listened to more, but this is now all hindsight - so of course it's 20:20 and his views now look relevant, but at the time they were an outlier - if the government had followed them and his ideas hadn't worked, thousands, perhaps tens of thousands more people would have died from the virus.... Yes Supergas, that is the reasoned and intelligent view in my opinion. |
|
|
|
Post by DrFaustus on Jan 30, 2024 16:09:28 GMT
He clearly has a deep, ingrained, psychological need to try and "win" Even as he makes himself appear more foolish with every claim. Maybe I could understand it if he took the vaccine and suffered an adverse effect, but he didn’t or any of his immediate family. Is it out of concern for all of us I wonder ? To put him at ease , I’m fine 79 . So are all my family and wider family who had the vaccine. 👍😃 More context then. Of the 6 or 7 people who post on this thread, all but one have had the vaccines. I've had 5 and am not fine, so it's not everyone doing hunky dory. |
|
yattongas
Forum Legend
Posts: 15,503
Member is Online
|
Post by yattongas on Jan 30, 2024 16:16:24 GMT
Maybe I could understand it if he took the vaccine and suffered an adverse effect, but he didn’t or any of his immediate family. Is it out of concern for all of us I wonder ? To put him at ease , I’m fine 79 . So are all my family and wider family who had the vaccine. 👍😃 More context then. Of the 6 or 7 people who post on this thread, all but one have had the vaccines. I've had 5 and am not fine, so it's not everyone doing hunky dory. It’s read by quite a few more than the few posters who post on here, I’m guessing that if others had problems with the vaccine they may well have joined this thread. Like all vaccines, nothing is full proof and a percentage will have adverse effects. Just don’t think it’s noticeable more for this vaccine than others. |
|
|
|
Post by oldie on Jan 30, 2024 19:07:39 GMT
Maybe I could understand it if he took the vaccine and suffered an adverse effect, but he didn’t or any of his immediate family. Is it out of concern for all of us I wonder ? To put him at ease , I’m fine 79 . So are all my family and wider family who had the vaccine. 👍😃 More context then. Of the 6 or 7 people who post on this thread, all but one have had the vaccines. I've had 5 and am not fine, so it's not everyone doing hunky dory. I have had 4, and had pre existing conditions none of which have been excaserbated by the vaccine. Not sure where 5 comes from. |
|
|
|
Post by DrFaustus on Jan 30, 2024 20:11:49 GMT
More context then. Of the 6 or 7 people who post on this thread, all but one have had the vaccines. I've had 5 and am not fine, so it's not everyone doing hunky dory. I have had 4, and had pre existing conditions none of which have been excaserbated by the vaccine. Not sure where 5 comes from. I've had 5 Covid jabs. Am designated as highly vulnerable. If you are calling me a liar, then there's little point in me engaging with you. |
|
|
|
Post by oldie on Jan 30, 2024 20:17:07 GMT
I have had 4, and had pre existing conditions none of which have been excaserbated by the vaccine. Not sure where 5 comes from. I've had 5 Covid jabs. Am designated as highly vulnerable. If you are calling me a liar, then there's little point in me engaging with you. No, no. I had no idea why you should receive 5 and why. I didn't mean to infer anything at all. Taken at face value. My personal vulnerability was age, and diabetes (T2) What came to light around potential heart conditions happened around the 2nd jab. I still went ahead, as I have for two more. Personal stuff which I would not, knowingly, transcribe on to the lives of others |
|
|
|
Post by DrFaustus on Jan 30, 2024 20:34:56 GMT
I've had 5 Covid jabs. Am designated as highly vulnerable. If you are calling me a liar, then there's little point in me engaging with you. No, no. I had no idea why you should receive 5 and why. I didn't mean to infer anything at all. Taken at face value. My personal vulnerability was age, and diabetes (T2) What came to light around potential heart conditions happened around the 2nd jab. I still went ahead, as I have for two more. Personal stuff which I would not, knowingly, transcribe on to the lives of others Ditto. Because of my various heart issues, 5 jabs. Anyway, this is circular. Doubtful they'll be 6 for me. Not convinced they're helping. We all have different ideas of course. |
|
|
|
Post by aghast on Jan 30, 2024 21:57:43 GMT
I'm not denying a tiny percentage of the population have, unfortunately, experienced problems due to the vaccine while the remaining millions are just fine. These things happen, sadly.
I'm intrigued still though about the fraud that has been imposed on us, and the reasons behind it. Several accusations but nothing clear, and no motive given. The idea that the BBC would enter into a pact with the powers that be to support a massive confidence trick to boost the profits of Big Pharma seems ludicrous. Beyond ludicrous actually.
|
|
|
|
Post by gashead79 on Jan 30, 2024 22:53:48 GMT
He clearly has a deep, ingrained, psychological need to try and "win" Even as he makes himself appear more foolish with every claim. Maybe I could understand it if he took the vaccine and suffered an adverse effect, but he didn’t or any of his immediate family. Is it out of concern for all of us I wonder ? To put him at ease , I’m fine 79 . So are all my family and wider family who had the vaccine. 👍😃 What does that have to do with the accusation against the BBC? Fwiw, most of the people I know who took jabs are fine aswell. It's just that I also know a few who have fallen ill. Safe and Effective, they said. There's much evidence to suggest that's not the case and countries around the world are asking questions, including ours thankfully. |
|
|
|
Post by gashead79 on Jan 30, 2024 22:59:20 GMT
I'm not denying a tiny percentage of the population have, unfortunately, experienced problems due to the vaccine while the remaining millions are just fine. These things happen, sadly. I'm intrigued still though about the fraud that has been imposed on us, and the reasons behind it. Several accusations but nothing clear, and no motive given. The idea that the BBC would enter into a pact with the powers that be to support a massive confidence trick to boost the profits of Big Pharma seems ludicrous. Beyond ludicrous actually. It's not ludicrous. It's a scandal. Driven by greedy people in high positions. The media is bought and paid for. Everything you see on the news is what they want you to see. People are reluctant to want the truth and I get it. It's horrible. I suppose if we really believed that pharmaceutical manufacturers wanted us all to be fit and healthy, without illness, then it makes sense... but they don't! Otherwise they'd cease. Who else invests in these companies? I do and I reckon others on here do too. We want profit. |
|
|
|
Post by gashead79 on Jan 30, 2024 23:05:19 GMT
Fairly surprised that nobody has acknowledged the recent accusation that the BBC(therefore all broadcasters) misled the public. Behaviour altering headlines to fool people. Printed in the Telegraph. It was obvious to some.. ...sorry, I was busy out and about enjoying life as i) I'm still alive and ii) there's no longer a global pandemic to disrupt things. So let's examine that accusation - the BBC focused on some information with the aim of keeping a subset of the population safe during a fast-developing global pandemic. A damning accusation if that information was false - but it wasn't, the information was true, just not necessarily placed in the relevant context. Prof Mark Woolhouse is an expert in the field so I'm not going to dismiss his views out of hand, mostly as he has a reputation and book sales to protect...but for every expert at the time with a dissenting opinion there were two or three others in agreement and that's often where the politicians went.... ...and why wouldn't they listen to the majority opinion of their advisors at the time? They were damned if they did lockdown, crippling the economy, annoying millions of people and hopefully stopping the spread *or* damned if they didn't, the disease spread and more and more people continued to die... Yes, Prof Woolhouse has told us what he thought/predicted at the time, he seems quite annoyed he wasn't listened to more, but this is now all hindsight - so of course it's 20:20 and his views now look relevant, but at the time they were an outlier - if the government had followed them and his ideas hadn't worked, thousands, perhaps tens of thousands more people would have died from the virus.... Speculation. That's fine and hindsight is great. As for your enjoying life remark..well yeah, so are most people but this mobile technology stuff has a way of getting info to you 24/7 if you allow it to. Obviously if the headline was a 180 view, the residents would be letting me know, however... There's plenty of this to unravel yet. |
|
|
|
Post by gashead79 on Jan 30, 2024 23:06:34 GMT
Dr Aodhán Breathnach, a Consultant Global Health Microbiologist at UKHSA and a Consultant Medical Microbiologist at St George’s University Hospitals, recently published a study which found masks in hospitals had little impact on Covid transmission in the omicron wave. Spring 23.
Probably not expert enough😐
|
|
|
|
Post by popuppirate on Jan 31, 2024 0:13:57 GMT
Dr Aodhán Breathnach, a Consultant Global Health Microbiologist at UKHSA and a Consultant Medical Microbiologist at St George’s University Hospitals, recently published a study which found masks in hospitals had little impact on Covid transmission in the omicron wave. Spring 23. Probably not expert enough😐 There's so many things wrong with your post I wouldn't know where to start. Why are you seeking information about masks anyway ? Yeah we know people made money disgracefully from them, but please get over the fact it was mandatory to wear them in public places. Most people were happy to wear them and it reassured others our awareness of transmission. People who chose not to wear one weren't demonstrating their independence, they were letting everyone know they were a d1ckhead. You've alluded to COVID being some ludicrous hoax, but stopped short of denying massive worldwide deaths. Maybe you do have some insight left, but if you do start here on that angle I'd be prepared for more hostile reactions. |
|
|
|
Post by oldie on Jan 31, 2024 6:51:18 GMT
Dr Aodhán Breathnach, a Consultant Global Health Microbiologist at UKHSA and a Consultant Medical Microbiologist at St George’s University Hospitals, recently published a study which found masks in hospitals had little impact on Covid transmission in the omicron wave. Spring 23. Probably not expert enough😐 There's so many things wrong with your post I wouldn't know where to start. Why are you seeking information about masks anyway ? Yeah we know people made money disgracefully from them, but please get over the fact it was mandatory to wear them in public places. Most people were happy to wear them and it reassured others our awareness of transmission. People who chose not to wear one weren't demonstrating their independence, they were letting everyone know they were a d1ckhead. You've alluded to COVID being some ludicrous hoax, but stopped short of denying massive worldwide deaths. Maybe you do have some insight left, but if you do start here on that angle I'd be prepared for more hostile reactions. Correct. This is heading into wild conspiracy theories way beyond just COVID. |
|
