O/T:- ⚠️Impressed with the leadership [The UK Party Politics Thread]

[upthemaggies]

I

It's one thing to say "I don't trust experts"... it's another to then move to "...so I trust these guys on the internet instead."

You're assuming all sceptics are uneducated and unable to process anything more challenging than a tweet by Right Said Fred or Ian Brown. The internet is more than just 30 second tik tok videos and social media spats, it's basically everything the MSM, radio, TV, the written press, libraries, places of learning have to offer plus tenfold more in addition. It's all there, good and bad, just with less censorship as a result of governments or companies with the power to withdraw massive sums in advertising revenue should those accepting their money dare to platform those that question the logic and motivation behind all of this.

Do you really believe people are going to come out more educated about vaccines having watched a pantomime edition of "Question Time" with the audience booing anybody daring to go against the narrative than those listening to a 3 hour nuanced respectful calm and considerate podcast between a doctor and somebody who's spent their career in MRNA development or working in the industry, lawyers in litigation cases against pharmaceutical companies, people who have been employed in senior roles by the WHO etc. etc?????

Canada sums the whole debacle up perfectly. We were told lockdowns, masks and so on was all to "save granny", in other words the lives of those who were on deaths door and vulnerable, the Canadians are now pushing for euthanasia for the exact same people the general public were sacrificing everything to save.
Absolute clown world.

[Newish Pie]

You're assuming all sceptics are uneducated and unable to process anything more challenging than a tweet by Right Said Fred or Ian Brown. The internet is more than just 30 second tik tok videos and social media spats, it's basically everything the MSM, radio, TV, the written press, libraries, places of learning have to offer plus tenfold more in addition. It's all there, good and bad, just with less censorship as a result of governments or companies with the power to withdraw massive sums in advertising revenue should those accepting their money dare to platform those that question the logic and motivation behind all of this.

Do you really believe people are going to come out more educated about vaccines having watched a pantomime edition of "Question Time" with the audience booing anybody daring to go against the narrative than those listening to a 3 hour nuanced respectful calm and considerate podcast between a doctor and somebody who's spent their career in MRNA development or working in the industry, lawyers in litigation cases against pharmaceutical companies, people who have been employed in senior roles by the WHO etc. etc?????

Canada sums the whole debacle up perfectly. We were told lockdowns, masks and so on was all to "save granny", in other words the lives of those who were on deaths door and vulnerable, the Canadians are now pushing for euthanasia for the exact same people the general public were sacrificing everything to save.
Absolute clown world.

I agree, I don't think anyone emerges any the wiser from 'Question Time' debates. 'Pantomime' is exactly right.

But that's hardly comparing like-with-like. There are a lot of excellent long-form podcasts with interviews like you describe, and some are a lot more credible than others. It rather depends on who's hosting, whether there are balanced panels, whether the host can ask critical questions, whether the guests are straying beyond their areas of expertise, and what the ideological assumptions are (if any). In particular, I'd be very suspicious of any "lawyer in litigation cases" on any topic except the law. They're not an expert or anything else, and the whole point of paid lawyers is to advance their clients' cases - they're all about PR and spin. If someone worked at the WHO, I'd want to know what exactly they did. If they're a doctor, what's their specialism and so on.

All of these content creators also have their own commercial imperatives. Conspiracy theorists make an extremely good living out of producing conspiracy theory content for those who are on the lookout for that sort of thing. Some of it obvious nonsense, but some of it is much more sophisticated and superficially plausible. It's easy to fall down rabbit holes, and a lot of smart people do it.

As for Canada... I'm not clear how legalising voluntary euthanasia (if that's what's going on) is related to a policy of trying to save the lives of vulnerable people (many of whom are older) who do very much want to continue to live.

[upthemaggies]

I agree, I don't think anyone emerges any the wiser from 'Question Time' debates. 'Pantomime' is exactly right.

But that's hardly comparing like-with-like. There are a lot of excellent long-form podcasts with interviews like you describe, and some are a lot more credible than others. It rather depends on who's hosting, whether there are balanced panels, whether the host can ask critical questions, whether the guests are straying beyond their areas of expertise, and what the ideological assumptions are (if any). In particular, I'd be very suspicious of any "lawyer in litigation cases" on any topic except the law. They're not an expert or anything else, and the whole point of paid lawyers is to advance their clients' cases - they're all about PR and spin. If someone worked at the WHO, I'd want to know what exactly they did. If they're a doctor, what's their specialism and so on.

All of these content creators also have their own commercial imperatives. Conspiracy theorists make an extremely good living out of producing conspiracy theory content for those who are on the lookout for that sort of thing. Some of it obvious nonsense, but some of it is much more sophisticated and superficially plausible. It's easy to fall down rabbit holes, and a lot of smart people do it.

As for Canada... I'm not clear how legalising voluntary euthanasia (if that's what's going on) is related to a policy of trying to save the lives of vulnerable people (many of whom are older) who do very much want to continue to live.

Firstly, respect to you for coming at this from a position of good faith.

For me it basically comes down to whether or not to trust the government making the decisions for the right reasons rather than vested interests (financial deals they personally benefit from) and to trust an industry with an appalling track record, or to trust people who have retired from the industry - ie not afraid to lose their jobs - and were willing to put their life long reputations on the line. Podcasters too risk being de-platformed, demonetised or cancelled for simply raising concerns and asking questions.

With the call for mandatory vaccines hopefully behind us, it isn't something that I ought to be wasting much energy on anymore and with every week that goes by, I'm feeling more and more vindicated, but I do have a close vaxxed family member in their 40s recently diagnosed with stage 4 cancer with no previous health issues (Anecdotally "Turbo cancer" or the vaccine "taking the breaks off cancer" seems to becoming a bit of a thing), another family member immediately post booster has had issues that the doctors cannot explain and I'm concerned for all other family members who've had the jab, so I'm certainly NOT feeling smug about this.

[Magpies1959]

The thing is, 'these guys on the internet', have been proved to be right. They were just guys, that the establishment didn't want their views to be heard.

[BanjoPie]

🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

[Newish Pie]

Firstly, respect to you for coming at this from a position of good faith.

For me it basically comes down to whether or not to trust the government making the decisions for the right reasons rather than vested interests (financial deals they personally benefit from) and to trust an industry with an appalling track record, or to trust people who have retired from the industry - ie not afraid to lose their jobs - and were willing to put their life long reputations on the line. Podcasters too risk being de-platformed, demonetised or cancelled for simply raising concerns and asking questions.

With the call for mandatory vaccines hopefully behind us, it isn't something that I ought to be wasting much energy on anymore and with every week that goes by, I'm feeling more and more vindicated, but I do have a close vaxxed family member in their 40s recently diagnosed with stage 4 cancer with no previous health issues (Anecdotally "Turbo cancer" or the vaccine "taking the breaks off cancer" seems to becoming a bit of a thing), another family member immediately post booster has had issues that the doctors cannot explain and I'm concerned for all other family members who've had the jab, so I'm certainly NOT feeling smug about this.

I'm really sorry to hear about your family member's cancer diagnosis and your other relative's booster issues. It sounds horrific, especially a stage 4 cancer apparently out of nowhere. I'm not surprised that people link health issues with the vaccine, but I don't think the evidence supports a link. Seems to me that a lot of people had the vaccine, and given those numbers, it's inevitable that a subset will go on to develop unexpected health problems. I'm not sure the evidence supports a casual link. But I'm sure you've heard all this before, and I don't expect to persuade you or vice versa.

I really appreciate your comment about coming from a position of good faith (that's something important to me) and you doing the same - overwise we get nowhere.

The question about whether I trust the government or the pharmaceutical industry is a really difficult one. We know for a fact that both have behaved very badly in the past, and continue to behave very badly. I have no problem believing that people/companies have used their position to enrich themselves against the public interest - look no further than the PPE scandals.

But there's a point beyond which huge claims about government misbehaviour just don't seem credible - either I just don't think they're capable of organising such a thing competently or securely; or I think the risks of getting caught aren't worth the benefits; or I don't see what they have to gain from it. There's also a line I like about extraordinary claims requiring extraordinary evidence. And often the evidence is just lacking, fragmentary, or contradictory. Another is: when it's clock up or conspiracy, it's normally a clock-up. I suspect where we differ is just in where we'd draw that line between what's credible in terms of what government might do/have done and what isn't credible.

For what it's worth, I'm also against mandatory vaccination because it's counter-productive and because I don't think that's the kind of country we want to be.

[Jampie]

https://ourworldindata.org/explorers/coronavirus-data-explorer?zoomToSelection=true&time=2020-03-01..latest&uniformYAxis=0&country=AUS~GBR&pickerSort=asc&pickerMetric=location&hideControls=true&Metric=Cases+and+deaths&Interval=7-day+rolling+average&Relative+to+Population=false&Color+by+test+positivity=false

If you look at cases and deaths before and after vaccines it's extremely clear that vaccines were/are very effective at keeping people alive.

Australia's had nine recorded deaths from vaccines and more than 20,000 from the virus, and that's a very low number of covid deaths for an OECD nation.

If anyone has evidence for a different conclusion, please share by all means.

[PedroTheFisherman66]

https://ourworldindata.org/explorers...sitivity=false

If you look at cases and deaths before and after vaccines it's extremely clear that vaccines were/are very effective at keeping people alive.

Australia's had nine recorded deaths from vaccines and more than 20,000 from the virus, and that's a very low number of covid deaths for an OECD nation.

If anyone has evidence for a different conclusion, please share by all means.

fantastic graph , I've no idea what it means though ..?!

[Jampie]

fantastic graph , I've no idea what it means though ..?!

The top graph is confirmed cases, the bottom is confirmed deaths. Red line is Australia, Green is the UK.

A few things are notable:

1. In both cases the ratio of deaths to cases collapsed after mass vaccination of the population. Both populations let the virus in bigtime after vaccination but had dramatically fewer deaths per infection. i.e. the vaccines work.
2. Australia had far, far, fewer cases and deaths per capita prior to vaccination, largely due to quarantine and lockdown policies working

[upthemaggies]

Australia's had nine recorded deaths from vaccines and more than 20,000 from the virus, and that's a very low number of covid deaths for an OECD nation.

.

20,000+ excess deaths in Australia (12% increase) in 2022, they're claiming 51% were OF Covid, up to 66% Covid related. but if you accept that, then that still leaves 7,000 odd of non-Covid related excess deaths, 20k deaths two years after the pandemic broke out and roughly a year after vax roll out. This is in all age groups.

FWIW, I'm not seeing any stats or anybody presenting stats to show cancer deaths are on the increase. Cancer can develop over many many years, but as the heart scars rather than repairs, it would be the heart issue signal you'd expect to see first and then cancer some way down the line.

I suspect my relative would have got a cancer diagnosis anyway, though whether it would been at the incurable stage without the vax coming into play I'm not so sure, they did have a very bad reaction to their first jab and then incredibly had the 2nd to be able to go abroad. No cancer symptoms, found a lump, then got told it had already spread.
The only time we've spoken about the jab since I've lied and told them I don't think there is a link between the jabs and cancer, because it's going to be of no help to them now thinking they might have made things worse. I'm by no means convinced there is a link, but obviously if there was to be a very significant increase in cancer in the coming years, I would be inclined to blame that.

https://www.actuaries.digital/2023/04/06/covid-19-mortality-working-group-confirmation-of-20000-excess-deaths-for-2022-in-australia/

[Jampie]

20,000+ excess deaths in Australia (12% increase) in 2022, they're claiming 51% were OF Covid, up to 66% Covid related. but if you accept that, then that still leaves 7,000 odd of non-Covid related excess deaths, 20k deaths two years after the pandemic broke out and roughly a year after vax roll out. This is in all age groups.

FWIW, I'm not seeing any stats or anybody presenting stats to show cancer deaths are on the increase. Cancer can develop over many many years, but as the heart scars rather than repairs, it would be the heart issue signal you'd expect to see first and then cancer some way down the line.

I suspect my relative would have got a cancer diagnosis anyway, though whether it would been at the incurable stage without the vax coming into play I'm not so sure, they did have a very bad reaction to their first jab and then incredibly had the 2nd to be able to go abroad. No cancer symptoms, found a lump, then got told it had already spread.
The only time we've spoken about the jab since I've lied and told them I don't think there is a link between the jabs and cancer, because it's going to be of no help to them now thinking they might have made things worse. I'm by no means convinced there is a link, but obviously if there was to be a very significant increase in cancer in the coming years, I would be inclined to blame that.

https://www.actuaries.digital/2023/0...-in-australia/

My 20k figure is all covid deaths throughout the entire pandemic in Australia, not just 2022. In point of fact it's up to 21k now.

You should read the page you linked... "In this context, we note that vaccination is highly unlikely to be a cause of excess mortality in 2022."

I'm sorry your relative is suffering from cancer. Cancer is horrible, and there's no link in any study I've seen between vaccines and cancer diagnosis.

[upthemaggies]

You should read the page you linked... "In this context, we note that vaccination is highly unlikely to be a cause of excess mortality in 2022."
.

I have read it, that is an assumption, they don't offer any evidence, they speculate "natural variation" at one point but that the difference is "worthy of investigation". So I can take from that they're just hoping the vax hasn't got anything to do with excess deaths rather than knowing that it doesn't. This pattern is being seen in other developed countries, all at the same time.

[countygump]

I have read it, that is an assumption, they don't offer any evidence, they speculate "natural variation" at one point but that the difference is "worthy of investigation". So I can take from that they're just hoping the vax hasn't got anything to do with excess deaths rather than knowing that it doesn't. This pattern is being seen in other developed countries, all at the same time.

Hopefully some good news:


For the first time since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, there were no excess deaths in the EU, according to data from February.

While the figure is an average across all EU countries and there is no guarantee that it won’t rise again, the return to pre-pandemic level marks a significant moment as countries debate whether COVID-19 should still be considered an ongoing pandemic.

Excess mortality figures have been an essential tool to understand how many additional people were dying above the levels that would have been seen under ‘normal’ situations. The statistic takes the number of people who died from any cause during a particular period and compares it with figures from previous years when there wasn’t a COVID-19 pandemic.

In February, two-thirds of EU countries recorded no excess deaths, according to data from Eurostat, compared with the average over the same period in 2016-2019. However, several countries did see excess mortality, including Greece, Cyprus, Portugal, the Netherlands and France. At its worst levels in November 2020, the EU saw excess deaths at 40 percent above its baseline.

The data comes as the World Health Organization — the body that classifies whether COVID-19 is still a public health emergency of international concern — increasingly indicates that the end of the public health emergency is imminent. In March, WHO chief Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus said he was “confident” that this year COVID-19 would no longer be classified as such.

https://www.politico.eu/article/eu-excess-deaths-back-to-pre-pandemic-levels/

[BigFatPie]

He mentions that in the discussion UTMs, here's the link for the Rogan pod with Robert Kennedy Jr
https://open.spotify.com/episode/3DQ...SkSRRFUYi1g1Hw

An excerpt from that podcast cropped up in my Twitter feed. In it Kennedy, a long term anti vaxxer, claims WiFi opens up the blood brain barrier to toxins in your body. Rogan, apparently, says nothing to correct him.

https://twitter.com/rottenindenmark/status/1670885788782051328?s=46&t=aBxODiyEI24Jmfa0Vu8-qg

[countygump]

An excerpt from that podcast cropped up in my Twitter feed. In it .https://twitter.com/rottenindenmark/...I24Jmfa0Vu8-qg

Excuse me, just gonna plug a direct connection to my router in.

https://ehtrust.org/wi-fi-wireless-radio-frequency-radiation-can-damage-the-blood-brain-barrier/