Chomper Higgot

PM sent

The problem is nobody has any faith in Johnson. The public have done remarkably well and suffered greatly in the fight against this wretched disease, only to learn the PM and his cronies have been taking the proverbial.

I this morning visited our local immigration office to request a ‘Confirmation of address letter’, I need this to meet requirements of an application am submitting to my own country’s embassy. The answer I got was: We don’t issue confirmation of address letters. Odd because I have, on a number of occasions. received these from the same immigration office. Next came the question, ‘what do you need the letter for?’ Followed by, ‘Show me the application papers’. My response was, I don’t have them with me. I stated I wanted the same letter they provided me when I registered my car. The answer ‘we don’t issue address confirmation letters’. I had a copy of the last letter (now two years out of date) in my file but no way was I going to invite the response to proving the jobs worth wrong. So what next. Are these letters really no longer issued? If they are still issued can I get this letter at another immigration office?

I wouldn’t put much store in what Johnson has to say, he doesn’t obey his own dictates within the UK so I don’t think they are worth the slightest consideration from Thailand. We are planning our usual Christmas eve dinner, with all the trimmings but it will be on the terrace and only four of us at table.

CDC advice on how minimal this risk is has already been posted. The transmission path you need to worry about is airborne and the safe and effective means to reduce the chances of infection, serious illness, hospitalization and death is vaccination. If the minor risk bothers you, don’t go to restaurants. But if the risk of infection by any means bothers you, definitely get the vaccine.

A waiter who is vaccinated is less likely to be infected than a waiter who is not. A waiter who is vaccinated but still gets infected will remain infected for a shorter time than a waiter who is not vaccinated. Less likely to be infected and if infected will remain so for a shorter period. You did do math at school?

“the effectiveness of vaccines and if and how they prevent transmission is totally irrelevant to my observation.” The effectiveness of vaccines and if and how they prevent transmission is totally relevant to my observation. That you don’t understand the relevance does not negate the relevance.

If a waiter is vaccinated, s/he is less likely to be infected, less likely to have a breakthrough infection, and will recover in a shorter period. Less likely to be infected and infected for a shorter period = less likely to be infectious at any given time.

Says who? https://www.newscientist.com/article/2294250-how-much-less-likely-are-you-to-spread-covid-19-if-youre-vaccinated/

But they do reduce the probability of both catching and spreading the virus.

Assange is facing trial in an open court, he’ll have legal representation and Constitutional rights. Now I know Assange is an Australian but what’s all this imaginary nonsense about kangaroos?

Absolutely no need to have an offshore account. Stick with a UK bank, use online banking and make all your communications paperless.

If Assange has only engaged in journalism then he has nothing to fear. The charges angus at him are espionage, these charges will be tested in an open court trial. There isn’t going to be another Trump administration and the terms of his extradition are binding. He has one last hope. If he has dirt on the UK Government he might have his extradition quashed by the Home Secretary.

Snowden and Farage are completely different.

And what Farage was up to meeting with Assange directly after returning from meetings with theses same convicted criminals.

Assange has lost his appeal to prevent his extradition to the US. https://www.theguardian.com/media/2021/dec/10/julian-assange-can-be-extradited-to-us-to-face-espionage-charges-court-rules

It his facts are bang up to date.

The FDA have a very practical reason to seek protection of the confidentiality of documents submitted to them during drug trials and drug authorizations. The task of review and authorization requires full and candid disclosure of findings, which will inevitably include data useful to competitors of the applicant, without assured confidentiality of data submitted there is a commercial risk to applicants and therefore a commercial imperative to be less candid in their submissions.

The misrepresentation of facts, data and reports by anti-vaxxers is a thing. What we never get to see is where the OP found this ‘accusation’, he surely did not happen upon a court judgement by chance then immediately stumble across an obscure risk assessment procedure.

Excellent post, thank you.

Well the information is released now. Let us know what you think they were trying to keep from us (with quotes from the released report please).

Industrial secrets may be legally kept indefinitely, they are not ‘public property’. I, and I have no doubt many other members here, have personally signed confidentiality agreements that forbid me discussing the information I have regarding the businesses I have worked for or with, these secrecy agreements run indefinitely. I assure you of this, nothing I ever came across is being withheld from anyone for sinister reasons. If you allege sinister reason you need to prove sinister reasons. I suggest you start by trying to find a disparity between this released report and the published safety data. After all, if there is something being hidden that something is in the report. My observation is the only thing not revealed is the number of doses to which the reported ‘adverse events’ relate. References (b) (4) are missing from the OP.

I don’t support the ‘fact’. I point out that it is very normal practice. You need to produce evidence of sinister intent that is a bit more substantial than half baked innuendo.

You are misrepresenting a vaccine assessment methodology as being proof of a vaccine risk existing. If you’ll tell us who’s feeding you this utterly ingenious conclusion we’ll know who to blame.

Confidentiality of industry/business information is nothing new and without proof of sinister intent your innuendo regarding this information being withheld is just that ‘innuendo’. You’ve taken pains to quote numbers of reported ‘adverse events’, which may be anything between a headache to severe reaction. What is not provided in this report is the total of vaccinations to which these ‘adverse events’ relate. The safety data sheet for the vaccine is published and has been available since the vaccines were released for use. Unless the reactions and incidence of reactions in this report is significantly different from that recorded in the published data sheets there is no scandal, nothing being hidden no conspiracy.