Covid-19 Discussion (moderated)

Voter fraud or the distinct lack thereof is not a topic here. 

I will also point out that people need to address arguments from this thread...don't attack people here in this thread  for opinions expressed in some other thread, go back to that thread and post there.  If you are addressing a pattern of thinking or trend across threads and can connect them, that is okay, as long as that pattern *is also occurring in this thread*.

In other words, as long as someone remains civil and doesn't break the guidelines given, anyone can post here and expect not to be attacked for it.

Please apply this to your initial foray on the previous page .

Allow for people to post asides or grievances about things that have sprung from this thread.  I made a post about not following conspiracy sites, "Ms. Harding's" reply was based on that, response to conspiracy theories, with examples (but notably, no evangelizing of those examples), and it was over.  Then it got picked up and perpetuated.  And that is when I consider it to have gone off topic.

As I said, voter fraud or the distinct lack thereof is not a topic here.  

I understand that a far more popular covid discussion was closed recently.

The main things people have been talking about relating to covid in real life and in the media are the European Union blundering this pandemic leading to riots across Europe even with watercannon (not something that has ever been used where I live in my lifetime), the invoking of an emergency article called an "incredible act of hostility" by the Irish first minister which would have effected people being vaccinated/lives being saved and the reversing of it within just 15 hours, various EU countries going it alone, calls for the resignation of the president of the European union etc etc. I see that nowhere in these pages. Sort of like a house being on
fire whilst people discuss the colour scheme of the living room.

This is covered by every single major news outlet in the United Kingdom and beyond. So is that within the guidelines or not? There's been plenty of talk of Trump and Bolsonaro (president of Brazil) in these pages it would seem and not a balanced coverage.

Our health service have now offered vaccinations to every elderly person in care homes across the country - a huge milestone. A paper is set to be released later in the month detailing our way back to normalcy. Likewise we have also put effort into public health more generally, as we have an obese population (we can be called the America of Europe in terms of obesity) which has cost us lives. With public health England coming up with various strategies over the last six months to help tackle obesity moving forward.

I know of two people around my age who have unfortunately died from covid-19, and both were morbidly obese.

Somewhat pleased with the response, although I much preferred localized lockdowns to a national lockdown.

This "dark-knight" character also wanted risk-group data to be censored when it's what our government has been basing it's response off of. Wanted cancer patients info censored. Wants everything censored. He's living in cloud cuckoo land.

Think I'll sit out this little chit chat unless this becomes more fair and balanced or someone makes a more serious and popular community thread on this topic.

I cannot recall Bolsonaro/Brazil being mentioned at all in this thread, but I guess if that helps your made-up narrative you'll post it anyway?  I find it amusing that you are complaining about there not being enough talk about the UK, when you could have posted it yourself.  Instead you are whining.

Yes, conspiracy theories and strident misinformation are pretty popular these days.  Quantity is overwhelming quality in many quarters.  I agree, go ahead and sit this one out (and all of my threads out), historically you have nothing to offer but complaints and negativity, and I have no qualms or regrets about losing any possible input that could come from you.  Wave bye-bye to the people you won't be addressing here ...

I have addressed this, by asking a mod to delete your personal attack outright.  I expect it will be gone soon enough.  

Meanwhile, if you are against gender studies and other such forms of "extremism", I suggest you make a sandwich board decrying them in big red lettering and head over to King's Cross station.  See how that goes for you.

Back to science : ) Johnson and Johnson vaccine showed to prevent all volunteers a trip to the hospital (preventing severe covid-19 symptoms). Even if it is not the most effective vaccine, I would still take it in a heartbeat.

They are all fine...I personally prefer the Moderna.  The messenger RNA vaccines (Moderna and Pfizer) are a new technology that allows for faster formulation, so easier to create boosters for new variants.  Single shot and *not* being brand new technology are also worthwhile considerations, though .  Pros and cons.

CDC illegally inflated the COVID fatality number by at least 1,600 percent as the 2020 presidential election played out, according to a study published by the Public Health Initiative of the Institute for Pure and Applied Knowledge. The study, “COVID-19 Data Collection, Comorbidity & Federal Law: A Historical Retrospective,” was authored by Henry Ealy, Michael McEvoy, Daniel Chong, John Nowicki , Monica Sava, Sandeep Gupta, David White, James Jordan , Daniel Simon, and Paul Anderson.

https://jdfor2020.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/adf864_165a103206974fdbb14ada6bf8af1541.pdf

[The "article" cited was not a study and is not in a peer reviewed publication-UpbeatAngle]

Neither the "news" source nor the originator of the study (more importantly) meet the credibility test.

When you cannot find for certainty who the authors of the "study" are and their areas of expertise or degrees or where they currently work or  find out where on earth IPAK actually is or if there is even a phone number- you have your self a "source" whose "study" is not even worth discussing except to mock.

This study is a waste of time, not a scientifically vetted source.

You my friend are now full of it.  Have you read the 25 page meticulously detailed scientific report I posted just 2 minutes ago.  NO!  Get back to me when you have a point of contention from the actual report.  Geez, unbelievable.  So much for a supposed scientific discussion.  

Btw, don't need to read that sham article, I know what a legit scientific paper looks like since I have experience reading them (will be a part of my profession), could tell right away that it was not credible by just glossing over it, took me less than one minute. Not that the information in it was credible in any form anyways, they sure tried really hard to make it look scientific with all those neat colorful graphs. 

Get exposed mate, paper is a sham:

https://newsregister.com/article?articleTitle=county-covid-resolution-comes-under-attack-from-residents--1608064026--38914-- 

In it:

The paper was created by the Institute for Pure and Applied Knowledge, a nonprofit started by Dr. James Lyons-Weiler, that purports to show CDC data on COVID-19 mortality is wrong.

Kulla said an error in the resolution, which understates the percentage of Oregonians who have died from COVID-19 by a factor of 10, had not been corrected in this week’s packet, as of Monday.

Commissioner Rick Olson said Thursday he disapproved of how Governor Kate Brown delegated the state Occupational Health and Safety Administration enforce business regulations with regard to COVID-19 requirements.

The self-published IPAK report neither lists the authors’ credentials nor appears to have been peer-reviewed. The News-Register was unable to find credentials for most authors, although at least one appears to be a naturopathic physician.

Lyons-Weiler is a former University of Pittsburgh research scientist known as a prominent voice in the anti-vaccine movement.

In October, the United States Court of Federal Claims rejected Lyons-Weiler’s testimony in a lawsuit alleging vaccine injury, noting that “Mr. Lyons-Weiler is not a medical doctor. Instead, he has a Ph.D. in ecology,” and stating that his testimony did not rely on medical records, and “was largely unpersuasive.”

Oh, I see after the report was released and they were called on the carpet they issued corrections I love it.  Keep it coming   Of course, those that are guilty of inflating statistics, would never attack a report that implicates them.  I see Katey delegated everything so of course she holds no responsibility somewhat like a current NY governor who decided to have a covid nursing home party.

??? So I proved your article was not credible or vetted, and this is your best comeback? Lmao. Guess this conversation is over then right mate? Good job, you tried at least.

Where do you work Dark Knight and what are your credentials?  I tell you what, why don't we actually let people read the article and then decide.  Would that be okay with you?  

The whole premise of the article is inaccurate data.  If incorrect data was submitted on the part of Oregon (just one of the offending states), and then corrected by Oregon after the report was released, what does that tell you?  By the way still would like to know what your credentials are.

I don't owe you credentials of any kind, not that an online chess forum claim means anything anyways, so spare me. What I will say is that I am educated enough to know that I cannot allow such misinformation to spread without being checked. 

Thought so   The scientific study is there for those so inclined.

I see you are one of those special ones that believes I should take a snapshot of my undergraduate degree and post it here for all to see, to get your personal validation. Of course, we all know you wouldn't believe my credentials anyways, so why bother playing such a one-sided game my friend. I am glad you got your kick out of it however