This corona virus thing...

KeithLard

Forum Patron
Patron
I don't think we are doing science we are discussing why some ideas are acceptable and others not ? Why should a software developer like Bill Gates be listened to and not a scientist like Mike Yeadon ? which is the more malign influence ? Bill and his money?

After Bill Gates responded with "well he's dead now, so..." when asked about his time with Jeffrey Epstein, I'd personally be taking every single thing Bill Gates has done, is doing or will do with a massive pinch of salt.
 

KeithLard

Forum Patron
Patron

Regardless

Forum Patron
Patron
Misinformation from world leader and scientists. And too many people still believe to be true



I am quite certain that the degree of vaccination persuasion/coercion has been supported by propaganda (that’s the government word for “misinformation”!). But I think those clips aren’t (mainly) fair on the speakers. To be fair to the montage-makers, it’s not been put together in a grossly unfair way, as can be the case. eg They generally take care to show the date - and I would say that for most of them, what was said was very reasonable at the time - but would not apply now. For sure, some of them looked guilty of oversimplification and being too definitive.

Tell me if I am wrong, but I believe that with the early variants, vaccines did reduce the chances of infection and spread markedly. And imo that being fact would support many of the people on the montage (especially given that we only see the odd sentence, without context and any clarifications they may have made in the next sentence)

Omicron has come along and changed the landscape- but even then, Biden’s (clipped) final comment about hospitalisation and death still holds pretty much true. Vaccines have played a very important part in getting us to where we are. But I remain very wary about giving them to the younger population- especially bribing/ forcing people to have it.
 

noelpne

Forum Patron
Patron
You say you know what science is, but you conflate it with general debate, which is not what science is.

As a result, some of you guys seem to think you're doing some of sort of "science" on here at times. But science isn't a few people discussing randomly posted social media links on a football forum.

All the science is done elsewhere, away from here. And if, after science has discredited an idea, there are people on here still posting it, and approving of it, or pretending it's still worth debating, that's not science either - it's Covid misinformation.
But Omicron started somewhere , and it wasn't in a Laboratory, but rather in a SA tin-shack Township.
Q. Which science organisation saw it coming?.....
Perhaps we shouldn't critisise debate as to only restrict it to people who work in the higher echelons of Pharma& University life.
 

noelpne

Forum Patron
Patron
A Scottish broadcaster and journalist was on the radio, can't remember her name, talking about when she left Scotland to work in London, she developed really bad eczema, and breathing problems, the problem was so bad she had to stop working and go back to Scotland and working home. The problems cleared after a few weeks of cleanish air, repeat that twice and she wouldn't work anymore in polluted cities, a day or 2 then out.l
Didn't go back to where Billy Connolly came from, presumably.
 

raefil

Dolly Patron
Patron
Thank you to this midwife for providing this interview and credit to the BBC for offering a different opinion…

Mind blowing stuff…

I listened to that very carefully and I still dont know, other than it is mandatory now for NHS staff, exactly what her reasoning is for declining the vaccine.

It also struck me that the whole hospital trust has 37 people taking that stance and that 34 of them are from the one unit!

She would encourage all pregnant women to have the vaccine but wont have it herself.

The midwife talks of bodily autonomy, which is fair enough, but its only been mandated very recently.

So, Im sorry, but her response has left me with a lot more questions than answers, not about the vaccine but about why 34 from one unit are taking a collecting stance whilst only 3 others in the whole trust are.
 

Liberation

Forum Patron
Patron
To be honest, while I do tend to lump things together myself, for convenience, science is not a monolith. And, you are right that the idea of the scientific method is flawed, at times - it works for some disciplines but not for others, which develop their own system.

But, the one constant is that there has to be debate and testing of ideas - from within your discipline but also from other areas to avoid echo chambers, especially when there is now such hyper-specialisation and very narrow fields of research.

And, on the level of individuals and groups, it is still important to question and analyse, and be sceptical while also open to ideas. That applies to scientific debate and to public debate about science - at the end of the day, science is very much a public concern, and the public has a stake in it. If science only happens behind closed doors with everybody else shut out, then we are screwed.

Censoring science goes against everything I stand for - much better to make them defend their position.

A quote you may like from the great Carl Sagan:


That brought an age old memory back...Was it " Cosmos " ?.. I thought it was brilliant and extremely interesting. I know little about him but he didn't seen to be too popular with some of his peers. He certainly was with me and more programmes like his would be very welcome.
 

Mer5eywhite

Forum Patron
Patron
I listened to that very carefully and I still dont know, other than it is mandatory now for NHS staff, exactly what her reasoning is for declining the vaccine.

It also struck me that the whole hospital trust has 37 people taking that stance and that 34 of them are from the one unit!

She would encourage all pregnant women to have the vaccine but wont have it herself.

The midwife talks of bodily autonomy, which is fair enough, but its only been mandated very recently.

So, Im sorry, but her response has left me with a lot more questions than answers, not about the vaccine but about why 34 from one unit are taking a collecting stance whilst only 3 others in the whole trust are.
Well Raef, I found at least two moments in there which told me exactly why she isn’t having the jab.

This woman has had Covid.
She is tested regularly, including for antibodies.
She still has antibodies.
Her vaccine doesn’t protect her patients.
The original NHS advice was that people with her condition shouldn’t have the vaccine. Typically, that has changed.
She has weighed up the benefits of the vaccine to her, at her age, in her circumstances, with her antibodies, with the NHS initial advice and made an informed decision.

Her employer has now taken ownership of her body.

If that doesn’t get under your skin then fair enough. It disgusts me and worries me hugely.
 

26-0

Forum Patron
Patron
I listened to that very carefully and I still dont know, other than it is mandatory now for NHS staff, exactly what her reasoning is for declining the vaccine.

It also struck me that the whole hospital trust has 37 people taking that stance and that 34 of them are from the one unit!

She would encourage all pregnant women to have the vaccine but wont have it herself.

The midwife talks of bodily autonomy, which is fair enough, but its only been mandated very recently.

So, Im sorry, but her response has left me with a lot more questions than answers, not about the vaccine but about why 34 from one unit are taking a collecting stance whilst only 3 others in the whole trust are.

Are NHS front line staff not already expected to have other vaccinations for health protection - eg Hepatitis B, TB, chickenpox ?

I’m sure I’ve heard one of my NHS friends tell me that in the distant past.
 

raefil

Dolly Patron
Patron
Well Raef, I found at least two moments in there which told me exactly why she isn’t having the jab.

This woman has had Covid.
She is tested regularly, including for antibodies.
She still has antibodies.
Her vaccine doesn’t protect her patients.
The original NHS advice was that people with her condition shouldn’t have the vaccine. Typically, that has changed.
She has weighed up the benefits of the vaccine to her, at her age, in her circumstances, with her antibodies, with the NHS initial advice and made an informed decision.

Her employer has now taken ownership of her body.

If that doesn’t get under your skin then fair enough. It disgusts me and worries me hugely.
Which is all fair comments but, and its a very big but, it still doesnt answer the nagging question that i have, I dont expect you to answer it because the BBC journo didnt pursue it, "Why out of 37 refuseniks in that hospital trust, do 34 of them come from her dept?"

Its entirely her choice and Im 100% against the policy but that fact seems very odd.
 

raefil

Dolly Patron
Patron
Are NHS front line staff not already expected to have other vaccinations for health protection - eg Hepatitis B, TB, chickenpox ?

I’m sure I’ve heard one of my NHS friends tell me that in the distant past.
Im sure many are but it could be argued that they knew that requirement before accepting their positions, this new vaccine is one that they didnt sign up to.
 

Doyler

Advisor to the Owner
Are NHS front line staff not already expected to have other vaccinations for health protection - eg Hepatitis B, TB, chickenpox ?

I’m sure I’ve heard one of my NHS friends tell me that in the distant past.
Are you still longing for lockdowns, btw? What are your thoughts on Wales opening stadiums again? Will you sleep ok tonight?
 
Top