advertisement


Anti-vaccine protesters… why?

Because vaccines were typically developed slowly and carefully.. but with Covid, due to urgency, several aspects of testing were run in parallel, to reduce timescales. I don't claim to understand the rest, but these newer types of vaccines are simply quicker to create, modify and test.

Also, you are confusing the time it takes to assemble volunteers, test the vaccine on them and produce results, with the timescale of any side effects. As I understand it, there is no correlation, and any side effects tend to be pretty quick to appear. In my case, I felt a bit shit after the first AV dose. Chills, poor sleep, headaches, for a few days. But compared to what a few acquaintances have experienced with Covid... it's nothing.

My youngest daughter's partner has so far refused the jab. I'm not happy, but I can't force him. They have a 3-4 month old baby. Daughter refused the jab while pregnant..I can understand that, because the urge to protect the baby is all consuming, but it was reorted early on that the jab did not harm pregnant women, and could even protect the unborn baby. She's now had the jab.. twice. AFAIK, partner hasn't had it yet. His seems to be a mix of a general Carribean reluctance, his reliance on The Lord.etc.. The weakness in his argument is that he intends to get the jab 'When he is ready'..but 'He is not ready yet.'. So... what will make him ready?

Also sadly.. reports indicate that pregnant women are presently one of the major groups of unvaccinated people dying from Covid.
 
Because it doesn't really take that long. Does it ?

The scientific vaccine development for coronavirus began 20 years ago with SARS and MERS coronaviruses, so no…….it is not unbelievable that the vaccine has been developed in such a short period of time, what is novel is that the worldwide scientific community has cooperated and pooled research along with free financial reign to achieve one goal, that is to produce a safe and effective vaccine.

And as for posting VAERS papers without the understanding of statistical analysis to interpret the raw data?………pfffft :rolleyes:, means absolutely £@(% all

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-03626-1

 
Its not a about the mRNA technology, its how it has been implemented. Vaccinations where developed and passed for use in less than 18 months, unheard of in the history of science. What has been left out of the equation in the testing of the vaccines ? Time. Which either is or is not a factor in the testing of a specific vaccine.
 
64-E96-C22-3-EE3-4-B00-9-E5-E-F807-E3-F1-B4-AD.jpg
70-DF23-D6-08-BA-4-D8-B-B587-8-FE74-FD8-B195.jpg
318110-E7-778-A-4-C21-B3-BD-66-DD564-CEBBA.jpg
 
Sad.
I for one trust scientists.
I was more than happy to receive my first jab in April. I had been expecting it and was relieved when I got my second one.
Honestly I gave up trying to convince those FB informed people. They prefer being tested every other day and nothing will change their brainwashed minds.
Sad.
 
To answer Tony’s original question, Mark Zuckerberg is undoubtedly culpable for the widespread belief of anti vax and other conspiracy type theories as he chooses to turn a blind eye to the issue in the pursuit of huge profits.

we are long past the time to regulate Facebook down to size. It is causing huge damage to society

As to where these types of conspiracies originate from, i suspect troll farms run by Putin have played a large part.
 
Its not a about the mRNA technology, its how it has been implemented. Vaccinations where developed and passed for use in less than 18 months, unheard of in the history of science. What has been left out of the equation in the testing of the vaccines ? Time. Which either is or is not a factor in the testing of a specific vaccine.
Another bulshit answer.
Read the replies to your post upthread.
Jesus, you can take a horse to water...
 
You won’t convince brainwashed people.
Thing is, they think we are brainwashed by our governments.
Any major step in science bring those people up to the front.
5G anyone?
 
Last edited:
As somebody posted on here years ago.. the internet allows everyone to post an opinion, but does not ensure that anyone posts an informed opinion. Worse, many of those frantically Twittering and F'booking now, are simply not equipped to apply basic 'filtering' or 'discrimination' to sources, and end up propagating shite, often in innocent good faith.

I’ve seen very little as, well, my friends are pretty bright! On the few occasions I have (usually someone correcting idiocy from outside my group, commenting on that dumb Lighthouse paper etc) I notice Facebook themselves post links to government covid advice etc. I’ve been quite impressed with that. In some ways I’m libertarian enough to allow dickheads to be dickheads and die on that field should they wish, but good to see the platform distancing itself from such idiocy.
 
You won’t convinced brainwashed people.
Thing is, they think we are brainwashed by our governments.
Any major step in science bring those people up to the front.
5G anyone?

Quite. Try pointing them towards fact-checking sites, and the response is 'Yeah, but who's funding those guys?'
 
Someone close to me won't have the vaccine because "it's not properly tested". But he will go to the pub, buy any old rubbish off some bloke he's never met before and stick it up his nose...
Attempts to discuss this are "interfering with his life". Sometimes you just can't argue with stupid, I only hope he understands before it is too late.
 
To answer Tony’s original question, Mark Zuckerberg is undoubtedly culpable for the widespread belief of anti vax and other conspiracy type theories as he chooses to turn a blind eye to the issue in the pursuit of huge profits.

we are long past the time to regulate Facebook down to size. It is causing huge damage to society

As to where these types of conspiracies originate from, i suspect troll farms run by Putin have played a large part.
Facebook and all other social media channels are undoubtedly used by any number of sociopathic parties pursuing self-interests without any degree of concern for human society. It has always happened (17th century pamphlet wars onwards, at least).
  • Product sales are boosted by raising and drip-feeding high levels of paranoia, however unfounded, amongst your customer base and offering them solutions, however ineffective.
  • Individual egos are boosted and personal advertising revenues too by telling scary stories that magnify flea-sized risk into elephantine proportions.
  • Political opponents are trashed by throwing mud which sticks all the more for being sensationally false because people enjoy reading it.
  • State advantage is obtained by promoting disruption amongst your economic competitors and ensuring stability at home.
  • And more ...
With modern social media it has become so inexpensive to reach an immensely wide audience with marketing messages that tiny numbers of susceptible people gradually influence their own circles and the effects add up.

And not many people are prepared to believe they have been fooled. I am quite sure I am not immune in areas where I have little direct knowledge, but I cannot tell how and by how much I have been influenced.
 
It strikes me that a lot of these people are influenced by the internet equivalent of "Well this bloke down the pub said..."
 
It's fascinating to observe how they casually discount the mainstream scientific evidence, but swallow wholesale any anti-vax propaganda, however dubious or discredited the source. It's the Michael Gove 'We've heard enough from experts' thing taken to its logical extreme; why trust someone who's been researching disease spread and containment for decades, when there's some snake-oil salesman with bizarre ideas he's just pulled out of thin air telling you 'it's all a con'?
 
What took a day, now takes mere minutes

Sometimes, I'd go look at the fiche, realise our library didn't hold stock of the journal paper I needed, andcid need to order from the British Library - usually took around 3 to 4 days to arrive.
 


advertisement


Back
Top