Coronavirus Thread

[FoxesDeb]

1 minute ago, shade said:

The use of 'qualified' in a derogatory manner is definitely misplaced in this instance. He was wrong about the second wave, but SAGE and numerous government advisors have been wrong, a lot. Including when they claimed that there would be 7000 deaths a day if restrictions were lifted in the summer. Or when Neil Ferguson took the first lockdown so seriously he repeatedly travelled across London to romance his married mistress. Mike Yeadon's 'qualified' nonsense comes from a position of being:

 

-Senior Principal Scientist, Wellcome Research (1998 - 1995)

-Chief Scientific Officer, Allergy & Respiratory Research, Pfizer (1995 - 2011)

- VP, Allergy & Respiratory Head, Research, Pfizer Global R&D (2005-2008)

- CSO and VP, Allergy & Respiratory Research Head, Pfizer Global (2006 - 2011)

- Consultant Pulmatrix (2011-2016)

- Consultant, Apellis Pharmaceuticals (2011 - 2016)

- Co founder, Ziarco (2011 - 2017)

 

You're welcome to disagree with his views on this pandemic, but shouldn't try and discredit him by implying he isn't qualified. He is a LOT more qualified than almost all government advisors on this particular topic.

I'm not certain that anyone from Sage 'claimed' there would be any number of deaths, I thought they were projections based on varying scenarios. Mike Yeadon however has stated things as fact which were untrue, and it's not the same thing. Anyone can be qualified in a subject, it doesn't stop them from spreading misinformation online or anywhere else. 

 

 

[l444ry]

Debunked: Claims by an ex-Pfizer employee about Covid-19 and vaccines are false and misleading (thejournal.ie)

[danny.]

1 hour ago, shade said:

The use of 'qualified' in a derogatory manner is definitely misplaced in this instance. He was wrong about the second wave, but SAGE and numerous government advisors have been wrong, a lot. Including when they claimed that there would be 7000 deaths a day if restrictions were lifted in the summer. Or when Neil Ferguson took the first lockdown so seriously he repeatedly travelled across London to romance his married mistress. Mike Yeadon's 'qualified' nonsense comes from a position of being:

 

-Senior Principal Scientist, Wellcome Research (1998 - 1995)

-Chief Scientific Officer, Allergy & Respiratory Research, Pfizer (1995 - 2011)

- VP, Allergy & Respiratory Head, Research, Pfizer Global R&D (2005-2008)

- CSO and VP, Allergy & Respiratory Research Head, Pfizer Global (2006 - 2011)

- Consultant Pulmatrix (2011-2016)

- Consultant, Apellis Pharmaceuticals (2011 - 2016)

- Co founder, Ziarco (2011 - 2017)

 

You're welcome to disagree with his views on this pandemic, but shouldn't try and discredit him by implying he isn't qualified. He is a LOT more qualified than almost all government advisors on this particular topic.

 

To quote st albans above.. I'm intrigued (as should you be) why some of the most accredited names in their field (Robert Malone - one of the originators of MRNA technology (himself vaccinated), Mike Yeadon - Chief scientific officer of allergy and respiratory research at PFIZER from 1995 - 2011) would destroy their lives and their careers to oppose the current science?

I always wonder that. What’s in it for them, other than professional suicide. 

[BertFill]

16 hours ago, OrielCaziado said:

There’s plenty of people on this thread who’d like it to keep going for a lot longer yet. 

Oh, don’t be so bloody daft.

[st albans fox]

23 minutes ago, danny. said:

I always wonder that. What’s in it for them, other than professional suicide. 

Some of the stuff accredited to them isn’t actually what they’ve said 

 

I suppose if you are one of those who may have been involved in the early days of mRNA technology, you may think to yourself that highlighting the narrative that it hasn’t been tested to the nth degree may be covering your backside ….

 

I don’t know enough about yeadon to comment - he hasn’t been at Pfizer for a decade though ……..the mRNA tech in the Pfizer jab is from biotech I think. It’s possible that yeadon knows little about it. 

 

 

[Parafox]

9 minutes ago, st albans fox said:

Some of the stuff accredited to them isn’t actually what they’ve said 

 

I suppose if you are one of those who may have been involved in the early days of mRNA technology, you may think to yourself that highlighting the narrative that it hasn’t been tested to the nth degree may be covering your backside ….

 

I don’t know enough about yeadon to comment - he hasn’t been at Pfizer for a decade though ……..the mRNA tech in the Pfizer jab is from biotech I think. It’s possible that yeadon knows little about it. 

 

 

Maybe Yeadon is looking for a trip to Barnard Castle. It's a nice place. Even if you can't see it properly...

[Farrington fox]

6 hours ago, danny. said:

That’s how most vaccines have worked throughout the years, but not the Covid 19 vaccines we use in the U.K.

 

Pfizer and Moderna use messenger RNA which instructs your body to make spike proteins that resemble the spike on CoV-SARS-2. The Astra Zeneca is a genetically modified chimpanzee adenovirus. 

Doesn’t the AZ give you a permanent T cell response to the virus. Or am I talking out my arse?

[shade]

1 hour ago, l444ry said:

Debunked: Claims by an ex-Pfizer employee about Covid-19 and vaccines are false and misleading (thejournal.ie)

Almost every single one of the debunks is either arguing semantics or is largely incorrect, itself. It also worries me that journalists are fact checking scientists, it's frankly bizarre and people on both sides of the argument are opposed to the "fact checkers"

 

https://www.thejournal.ie/meet-the-team-thejournal-ie-factcheck-bios-4267874-Oct2018/

[Buce]

25 minutes ago, Farrington fox said:

Doesn’t the AZ give you a permanent T cell response to the virus. Or am I talking out my arse?

 

Nah.

 

Too easy.

[st albans fox]

34 minutes ago, Farrington fox said:

Doesn’t the AZ give you a permanent T cell response to the virus. Or am I talking out my arse?

Supposedly 

but clearly, given the evasion of omicron, it’s not so straightforward (mutations) 

 

14 minutes ago, shade said:

Almost every single one of the debunks is either arguing semantics or is largely incorrect, itself. It also worries me that journalists are fact checking scientists, it's frankly bizarre and people on both sides of the argument are opposed to the "fact checkers"

 

https://www.thejournal.ie/meet-the-team-thejournal-ie-factcheck-bios-4267874-Oct2018/

Each side only like their journos doing the fact checking….

[shade]

2 minutes ago, st albans fox said:

Supposedly 

but clearly, given the evasion of omicron, it’s not so straightforward (mutations) 

 

Each side only like their journos doing the fact checking….

Do you genuinely see mainstream journalists fact checking the established government positions? genuinely? I don't, maybe a handful of fringe alt-right journalists.

 

It's like when Dr Hilary, Lorainne and the bloke from spandeu ballet all claimed on her show that 90% of people in hospital were unvaccinated, before reluctantly admitting the next day it was 36%. When the fact checkers did check it, they didn't just say false, they added the weird caveat that they may have meant 90% needing the most specialist care were unvaccinated, but that figure appears nowhere in official data, they still added it though. 

 

[st albans fox]

3 minutes ago, shade said:

Do you genuinely see mainstream journalists fact checking the established government positions? genuinely? I don't, maybe a handful of fringe alt-right journalists.

 

It's like when Dr Hilary, Lorainne and the bloke from spandeu ballet all claimed on her show that 90% of people in hospital were unvaccinated, before reluctantly admitting the next day it was 36%. When the fact checkers did check it, they didn't just say false, they added the weird caveat that they may have meant 90% needing the most specialist care were unvaccinated, but that figure appears nowhere in official data, they still added it though. 

 

Assume they were trying to save dr Hilary’s face! 
 

it could have been a reasonable stab (prob 15/20% too high though) at ICU occupation but we won’t know for a couple months yet when dec data on icu is available 

I do think mainstream journos attempt to hold govt to account - they just aren’t generally very good at science …….. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Jattdogg]

Saw this posted somewhere...lol..

 

 

Just got my covid results! I'm glad I'm negative!! New year new me!!!

 

[Leicester_Loyal]

This has been said for ages, why are people who have previously said nothing about it, or disagreed with it, suddenly agreeing with it? 

[CosbehFox]

Looks like a crucial few days in hospitalisations. Fingers crossed 

[Dunge]

29 minutes ago, Leicester_Loyal said:

This has been said for ages, why are people who have previously said nothing about it, or disagreed with it, suddenly agreeing with it? 

Presumably because of its relevance to the response.

 

A less infectious but more deadly virus will logically result in fewer cases coming into hospitals for other reasons, but those cases would have theoretically relatively serious outcomes.

 

A more infectious but less deadly virus will logically result in more cases coming into hospitals for other reasons, but those cases would have theoretically relatively less serious outcomes.

 

I’m guessing the guy who’s screaming blue murder in the tweet is someone who is more ideologically against restrictions and doesn’t care for the nuance, just hoping to label his foe as a hypocrite.

[Zear0]

1 hour ago, Jattdogg said:

Saw this posted somewhere...lol..

 

 

Just got my covid results! I'm glad I'm negative!! New year new me!!!

 

Public Lice?

[Babylon]

1 hour ago, shade said:

Do you genuinely see mainstream journalists fact checking the established government positions? genuinely? I don't, maybe a handful of fringe alt-right journalists.

 

It's like when Dr Hilary, Lorainne and the bloke from spandeu ballet all claimed on her show that 90% of people in hospital were unvaccinated, before reluctantly admitting the next day it was 36%. When the fact checkers did check it, they didn't just say false, they added the weird caveat that they may have meant 90% needing the most specialist care were unvaccinated, but that figure appears nowhere in official data, they still added it though. 

 

You literally just posted a link that says whilst what Yeadon said is currently unproven (he was stating it as fact and thus WRONG) potentially it could happen. It’s called being neutral and adding context. 
 

 

[Babylon]

1 hour ago, Leicester_Loyal said:

This has been said for ages, why are people who have previously said nothing about it, or disagreed with it, suddenly agreeing with it? 

Who disagreed with it?

[Babylon]

2 hours ago, shade said:

Almost every single one of the debunks is either arguing semantics or is largely incorrect, itself. It also worries me that journalists are fact checking scientists, it's frankly bizarre and people on both sides of the argument are opposed to the "fact checkers"

 

https://www.thejournal.ie/meet-the-team-thejournal-ie-factcheck-bios-4267874-Oct2018/

The journalists aren’t fact checking them, they are using the actual facts provided and agreed by the scientific community at large FFS. 

[Babylon]

 

7 hours ago, Sol thewall Bamba said:

How's the Sage modelling looking against actual case numbers? 

[Sol thewall Bamba]

4 minutes ago, Babylon said:

 

Pressumably those models assumed everyone in hospital was admitted to hospital because of Covid, rather than people catching it whilst being in there for something else?

[reynard]

8 minutes ago, Sol thewall Bamba said:

Pressumably those models assumed everyone in hospital was admitted to hospital because of Covid, rather than people catching it whilst being in there for something else?

Is this the case or is everyone who goes into hospital tested and some then discovered to be covid positive? it isn't clear to me how many are in this category and how many are actually catching it in hospital?

The way infections are going we're going to be effectively unable to operate hospitals and businesses etc very efficiently as so many staff will be off isolating.

 

[reynard]

11 hours ago, shade said:

How is me having the vaccine protecting society? My wife gave it to our family, she's vaccinated, the selfish mare.

Well it does reduce the chance of you ending up in hospital and greatly reduces the chance of you ending up in a high dependency bed which could have been used for someone else who might need it for another life threatening condition. You are also less likely to need medical attention which in turn frees up resources for other people. Whilst vaccinated people can, of course end up in hospital, there are many unvaccinated people there who had they been vaccinated probably wouldn't have required medical hospital treatment which in turn is helping to protect society. I think you could in your own words call them selfish?

Obviously it is your choice. Of course if everyone was as nervous as you about the vaccine we would be in even more sh*t than we are now.

 

Just our of interest if you ever need to go to the doctor and require medication will you be asking for the efficacy report of the drug you are given, checking the number of people who have died from it , whether it is new drug just brought into use and if so can you see the full clinical trial reports? 

Truth is no drug/vaccine however, well tested and tried is going to be either 100% effective or indeed 100% safe for everyone who takes it.

[brucey]