Bottom line, to protect yourself and others, be sure to get vaccinated and boosted against Covid-19.
1 ( +1 / -0 )
To be very clear, these long lasting developmental issues are directly related to the systemic overreaction propagated by media and public health authorities. The Conversation is a garbage publication.
3 ( +4 / -1 )
"if the experts everywhere keep saying vaccines reduce the risk even from Omicron how did you figured you must know better than them?"
Because the experts being deferred to for policy making are corrupted by ulterior motives. As with many policy making institutions.
Here's a study that support my argument.
-1 ( +6 / -7 )
"you are just assuming these deaths would be in the same league without vaccines, which can be demonstrated as false."
Please demonstrate. Please provide solid evidence that despite the milder strains of the virus and growing natural immunity that more people definitely would have died without a vaccine program. I don't think you can.
-1 ( +7 / -8 )
"Not the one who parrots the same, debunked lies and disinformation with no evidence supplied, even when challenged."
Lies and disinformation like 15 days to slow the spread, you cannot catch or spread covid after being vaccinated, 4 million deaths from covid, children should wear masks, or that science somehow serves the greater good? Are those the lies you're referring to?
-1 ( +7 / -8 )
The goalposts have been moved all the way from 'you won't catch covid, you're a viral dead-end' to 'help prevent long covid'. I could present a huge amount of early 2021 propaganda insisting the vaccine would prevent the spread. But it doesn't. The variants got weaker. It's also impressive that any criticism of this very particular health policy is brushed off as general 'anti-vax' or disinformation. The propaganda worked amazingly well on so many people. They now beg for censorship. A beautiful lie versus an uncomfortable truth.
5 ( +12 / -7 )
The vast majority of people I know who got covid got it after having 2 or 3 shots. So my lying eyes would have me believe a different trend than the proposed "helps prevents infection" narrative that even this article claims.
That's said, those that did catch a case after receiving mRNA shots had very mild experiences. I also had a very mild experience too without any mRNA immune priming. Only a few lingering symptoms that went away after about a week. So my own reality must be so deceptive as to be an unreliable source of information to base my personal choices.
Or the "vaccine" might do little to nothing for most people with healthy immune systems. No, it couldn't be the case.
Guess it's best to just do what the news says.
4 ( +12 / -8 )
The CDC published data on this distinction already. 94% with, 6% from. The CDC director just says stuff on TV. Most of that is pandemic theater.
1 ( +3 / -2 )
If only the topic at hand had anything to do with malnutrition. But it doesn't. It's specifically about the very important distinction between death from covid versus death with covid. That distinction was used to justify locking healthy people in their homes or at quarantine centers and challenging people's ability to provide for themselves and their families. 94% of related deaths were with covid not from covid. Very similar to every other disease that affects those with challenged immune systems. How is covid different in that sense?
1 ( +3 / -2 )
What's the difference? Something like 94%
That means the official death count is likely alarmingly low compared to the ridiculous mitigation measures the world witnessed the past two years.
1 ( +3 / -2 )
It's just 15 days to slow the spread. We need to flatten the curve. Stay home. Get vaccinated. It's just 2 weeks.
4 ( +9 / -5 )
Ian, fortunately not in Japan but they are very much required under many otherwise normal circumstances. If you want to travel to the USA as a non-citizen they're required. If you want to enter many venues in Europe, they're required. They're required in a lot of places where their utility is questionable at best.
2 ( +4 / -2 )
The argument seems to be whether it's safe and or effective. One side reading from the sacred peer reviewed scrolls, the other side grasping at straws. When the real question is whether or not vaccines against coronavirus are needed at all. The entire crisis was conjured by reports of how deadly the virus could be for certain people. It was deadly for some, and almost nonexistent for others (98% or so). As we are two years down the road, multiple rounds of injections and boosters, rapid mutations of new variants and still the virus spreads. Is it slower because of the vaccine program, is it slowing in spite of the vaccine programs? If the vaccines do little to slow the spread of a virus that will most likely not render people sick enough to require medical care, is it a good policy to mandate them? If not, why are they being required? Lots of better questions and nuanced points to consider, imho.
4 ( +5 / -1 )
2 weeks to flatten the curve. Just comply. It's only temporary.
1 ( +1 / -0 )
CNN is fake news.
-1 ( +4 / -5 )
Posted in: The number of people who believe in false rumors about the coronavirus cannot be ignored. Books and videos that preach false rumors continue to appear, and with all of society watching, anxiety might work like a body blow. See in context
The fact that there is evidence of active suppression of debate in sources like the FOIA emails detialing Dr. Collins's "devastating takedown" of opposing public health views does lend credence to the notion that the narrative is being controlled to a degree. This doesn't prove nefarious intent, but it does show that the media is an effective tool in propagating viewpoints that serve a vested interest. Debate and testing is the core of scientific thought. An idea absent that debate is simply a dogma regardless of its veracity.
-4 ( +3 / -7 )
A magic pill that can help significantly reduce the severity of the disease only if taken during a short and early window of opportunity... We heard this conspiracy theory before, didn't we? Oh wait, that was other tried and proven drugs like ivermectin and others not owned by Pfizer. Those simply won't do. Best to discredit those via flagrant propaganda and lies.
4 ( +8 / -4 )
We'd be so much freer if we could just control the narrative. The sheep, er I mean the people can't be trusted with information that isn't approved by the ministry of truth.
3 ( +3 / -0 )
What happens tomorrow when the quasi emergency is lifted? Do we keep getting updated on case counts forever?
-2 ( +8 / -10 )
What's this 2 billion people metric you are referring to?
2 ( +5 / -3 )
it is difficult to decree when masks would no longer be necessary as they were deemed fundamental in the fight against the pandemic
So it's hard to change your opinion on your opinion on masks? They're optional now and forever. Also, Japan's general healthier lifestyle and vastly lower obesity is why it fared so well. The masks are just Kabuki.
4 ( +7 / -3 )
Do they do the 3 day quarantine, the 7 day or do they get the fast pass no quarantine? Also, are they required to install a data mining/tracking application on their own smartphone?
-1 ( +0 / -1 )
Under the worst-case scenario, new unpredictable variants build into repeated damaging virus waves, requiring the return of harsh restrictions.
Is it okay to now admit that the restrictions were in fact harsh? I was once criticized for making this claim. "They're not harsh. Just temporary revocations of personal freedoms and liberties due to an emergency situation." It's not like there's been centuries of philosophical debate and bloodshed that have lead us to our democratic models and protections of human rights or anything. Rights and freedoms are outdated. What about my right to not get sick or die?
1 ( +2 / -1 )
positive COVID-19 diagnoses were meanwhile shown to increase the risk of suicidal thoughts
Good thing these positive cases aren't being repeatedly and persistently reported in the media. The media's obsession on reporting positive cases could be linked to mental health problems!
3 ( +4 / -1 )
Hopefully the idiots will get the message before the last option but if they don't... Meh.
That message being? "if you don't comply with our arbitrary and authoritarian 'safety' measures, we will cause you physical harm and or death?"
That your response to that would be "...Meh" is pretty depressing and quite telling. Compliance with tyranny does not get you a pass when they come after you.
3 ( +10 / -7 )
fortunately ethical considerations already consider this
I'm so glad finally science and ethics have merged. It's a good thing too, because once we learned that data trends favorably toward the totally decided and agreed upon "greater good", we don't have to deal with pesky control groups anymore. It's much better to use favorable data early in the experiment to derail the entire experiment before any unfavorable data might emerge.
2 ( +3 / -1 )
If someone pulls a fire alarm
False equivalence much? There was enough data by March 2020 because that's when they "pulled the fire alarm". Unless you think that it's possible for the fire alarm to be pulled, the building evacuated, work halted, and lives interrupted when there isn't a fire? That's criminal.
-1 ( +1 / -2 )
And what evidence was available since March 2020 about the safety in short, medium and long term for children?
I think you're confused again. There wasn't ANY evidence that covid was dangerous to children at all in March 2020, yet school still closed. So, the argument then was that closing schools without evident danger is an unreasonable reaction. That argument still holds today.
Which is completely irrelevant for the decision to close schools, by using this non-argument you are implicitly accepting your argument is wrong.
I don't accept my argument is wrong. It isn't and the data proves it. I've always been on the side of the data, not the fearful emotional appeal for more authoritarianism.
-1 ( +2 / -3 )
Good thing NZ has mRNA vaccines now. 2022 would have been so much worse than 2021 and 2020 combined! Really dodged a bullet!
2 ( +4 / -2 )