
Jan 14, 2023 -- 3:31PM, lfc1971 wrote:
Those who have not taken the vaxx and were fine Know they were correct . Those who have been vaxxed cannot be sure if it was the best thing to do
lfc - 100% spot on. The jabbed don't know what's ahead for them. What was the purpose of taking it when all the unjabbed are all fit & healthy. What was the medical reason for taking the dart for 99% of the population?










































Jan 14, 2023 -- 3:22PM, Dr Crippen wrote:
Not anti-vax - anti- misinformation.
Sorry to hear you are anti yourself.
Jan 14, 2023 -- 6:46PM, Kriskin wrote:
decades of experience of epidemiologists?
Jan 14, 2023 -- 6:55PM, Dr Crippen wrote:
If only these big pharma sheeple had a little common sense and could think for themselves.They might see that the medical game is mainly about doctor’s pay, and profits.
If only Crappin could stop being an anti-vaccine sheeple and look at the evidence. It's beyond him though.
Jan 14, 2023 -- 7:28PM, Jumping-cuckoo-monk wrote:
How old are you Charlie and do you go jogging?
I'm 70 and no.
Jan 14, 2023 -- 7:41PM, eyeball wrote:
Charlie,Try not being so nasty with your posts. Because you feel the need to insult, It does not make you more correct than others.If you like I can discuss mechanisms of infection and immune response but I doubt you will have a clue what I am talking about. As far as vaccines are concerned, I am not a leading authority on the subject but I would stake my life on the fact that I am more knowledgeable than you.I am also no longer a porker because I did something about it. Maybe you should learn something and take a leaf out of my book.Cheer up
If you think that was nasty then you should open your eyes. I don't have a need to insult but I do have a need to reply as I think fit, if you think that's being insulting then that's your choice.
Perhaps you are more knowledgeable than me about vaccines but are you more knowledgeable than the many thousands of doctors and health experts who developed the vaccine and say they are safe?
I did congratulate you on not being a porker and I have no need to take a leaf out of your book as I'm not and never have been a porker.
It sounds like you need to cheer up and always content and happy.
Jan 14, 2023 -- 7:58PM, Jumping-cuckoo-monk wrote:
They don't nickname Charlie, Chuckles for nowt
It was rather a daft question about jogging. I don't jog I run, three, five or ten miles a day it depends on my mood, sometimes I have a back pack of varying weight - sometimes light sometimes heavy and believe it or not I generally use bags of compost as the weight as it doesn't rub your back too much.


Jan 14, 2023 -- 7:43PM, Kriskin wrote:
Porcu - plenty of top class ones within the signing of the "Great Barrington Declaration"
Again though (for about the millionth time), let just one of them put forward their research for peer review and have others replicate their experiments to see if they also find the same terrifying results.
We've had anti-vax since we've had vaxxes.
I still remember the fuss round MMR 20-25 years ago? What happened to the millions of babies sure to 'catch' autism?
Read into Dr Chris Malyszewuicz who 'discovered' that MRSA could live on smooth surfaces and our hospitals were riddled with it. My mum was a cleaner in a hospital around that time and her job was suddenly twice as hard. Turns out his discoveries were made in his garden shed and as soon as he published them (it took some prodding) they were clearly shown to be a load of old arse.
Check out the hep B vaccine scare in France that was believed by some to cause MS.
Check out the thiomersal scare in the US (autism again), that led some parents to harm their kids with some magic potions instead.
And our own anti-smallpox vaccine brouhaha in the 20s and 30s. Even when Edward Jenner first discovered the vaccine he was treated with suspicion by some.
This sums it up pretty well:
"The success of the anti-vaccinationists has been aptly shown in the results in Zurich where for a number of years, until 1883, a compulsory vaccination law obtained, and smallpox was wholly prevented - not a single case occurred in 1882. This result was seized upon the following year by the anti-vaxxers and used against the necessity for any such law, and it seems they had sufficient influence to cause its repeal. The death returns for that year (1883) showed that for every 1,000 deaths two were caused by smallpox; in 1884 there were three; in 1885, there were 17, and in the first quarter if 1886, 85."
Polio was nearly eradicated in Africa until some knobheads thought it was a US plot to spread AIDS. You can guess the rest.
If there's anything consistent about humanity it's that we're doomed to not learn from our mistakes. Hence you have the ebb and flow of right wing dogma dividing people, and you also have idiots lulled into thinking they're smart by rejecting science and following some blert with a big mouth and magic potions to sell.
Jan 15, 2023 -- 9:19AM, Johnny The Guesser wrote:
The notion that all the vaccinated are sitting around worrying about vaccine safety is ridiculous - it never gets mentioned out there in the real world, only in the parallel universe that exists on here. No doubt you guys feel the need to keep the lies
Jan 15, 2023 -- 11:56AM, Mexico wrote:
Wow DougalAs Carl Hooper would say “That’s amazing “Key statistics: Stroke strikes every five minutes 100,000 people have strokes each yearThere are 1.3 million stroke survivors in the UKhttps://www.stroke.org.uk/what-is-stroke/stroke-statistics
Calm down, your dodgy ticker will give in
Jan 15, 2023 -- 12:56PM, Mexico wrote:
DougalIt is literally a quote from the very data you are misusing.It isn’t from a groomer’s YouTube page, it isn’t some garbage from kkk.com, it is actually from the source you are quoting.OK, one last time. These are small… but the ones out there are far away. Small… far awayhttps://vaers.hhs.gov/faq.htmlLimitations of VAERS:It is generally not possible to find out from VAERS data if a vaccine caused the adverse eventReports submitted to VAERS often lack details and sometimes contains errorsSerious adverse events are more likely to be reported than non-serious eventsNumbers of reports may increase in response to media attention and increased public awarenessVAERS data cannot be used to determine rates of adverse events
I know you are thick as **** but it's called a caveat