Quote Originally Posted by frogmiller View Post
Piers Morgan was behind the mass media campaigne to get vaccinated and was very critical of those that didn't

Everyone on that video spent time on TV or other Media to encorrage people to get the vaccine. Over time they have changed their minds.

You again just concentrate on denouncing someones character without seemingly taking into account what they are saying at any given time. When Morgan was advocating the vaccine you probably had a different view of him.

How can someone who says they investigate things be trusted to have a nuetral base if they're not displaying it?
Morgan, interested in attracting viewers was absolutely hyperbolic on stating that everyone should rush out and get jabbed without truly understanding the way viruses work. He is now saying that there is 'not much difference' in terms of transmission rates - but of course doesn't go into what the research tells us on the extent that transmission is reduced or tell us where he is getting his factual information on which he bases these claims? Probably the same overstated hysteria that led him to make the claims that transmission completely stops transmission. He clearly isn't very good at research. Can't be bothered. Just reads headlines and forms an eye catching narrative to get views and hits. He's good at that. But I wouldn't link him to anything that supported an argument I was trying to make. And he's a knob.

Do you accept that having the virus has any effect on reducing your own personal syptoms, regardless of transmission? If not, what medical research is informing that?

Do you deny that having the virus has any impact on reducing transmission? None at all? If you are in agreement with Morgan and say it's 'not much difference' that must indicate that there has been a study that shows this? Morgan doesn't provide us with this - can you or Mr Optimist?