Chomper Higgot

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.

So people, many of them children, die of a list of diseases, therefore COVID doesn’t matter.

What you think is entirely up to you, but if you post what you think into a discussion forum then what you think is up for discussion. Correct me if I’m wrong, but you got the jabs. Good choice.

It’s killing people who aren’t vaccinated on a order of magnitude greater than those who are vaccinated, regardless of any other health issue.

Bronchitis is usually, but not always an accompanying infection with a cold or flu but can also be caused by smoking and airborne pollution. Masks are not 100% effective, nor is social distancing, nor is hand washing, nor are vaccine, but you already know that. “I've caught nothing since COVID started.” Haven't you previously stated you were believed you were infected with COVID? Forgive me if, like masks, my memory is not perfect.

‘Chance’ is probability, the vaccines reduce the probability of becoming infected. The statement ‘’Don’t necessarily reduce the chance of getting COVD’ is both illogical and a misrepresentation of factual probability. The failure of a vaccine to provide a protection is already expressed within the probability of it providing protection. The vaccines do (dramatically) reduce the chance (probability) of serious illness. I don’t believe there is such a thing as a ‘bad dose’ of COVID, though there are bad outcomes arising from infection. More often visited upon the unvaccinated. Vaccines do not eliminate the virus nor do the reduce the viral load, but they do provide the immune system with a head start to do so. So I agree, not an outright lie, but mixed truth with fudged facts and an illogical statement.

That’s a very odd thing to say on an Internet forum.

Given that almost all passengers on flights into the US from SA are vaccinated, anyone traveling from SA who is infected with Omicron is almost certainly going to be vaccinated. It’s only path to travel to the US was via vaccinated individuals. However, this is about to change. The appearance of the Omicron is only days old. We’ll come back to this when it’s taken hold in the wider community and data on the infection rate amongst vaccinated and unvaccinated is known.

You should read the article before posting. The people 62 people who tested positive for COVID-19 (14 tested positive for Omicron) all travelled on two flights from SA. The total number of passengers was o we 600. Nobody got on those flights who was not vaccinated and/or had proof of recent recovery from COVID. Therefore the people from which the data of infection relates were all vaccinated and/or recent COVID recovered. Given that vaccination is recommended for those who have had COVID it is a fair assumption that all passengers or very nearly all passengers were at some time vaccinated and that no passengers or very few passengers were unvaccinated. The report you have linked is ambiguous wrt to the numbers stated, as follows: 62 passengers infected with COVID-19 of which 14 infected with Omicron. Or 62 Passengers infected with COVID + 14 infected with Omicron. The infection rate on this 10 hour+ long haul flight is therefore between 10 and 13%. This assumes all infections occurred during the flight. Nothing in the report supports your conclusions.

“Surely we can agree that, in such circumstances, the chances of me catching covid again and giving it to anyone else during my month in the UK in November were as close to zero as they could be.” I’m not sure how you come to the conclusion’ ‘as close to zero as they could be’. Regardless, the probability is not zero. Now multiply that ‘not zero probability by a few hundreds of millions of person to person interactions per day and the probability of transmissions is definitely not ‘as near to zero as they could be’. Wearing a mask is no burden.

Google, Facebook and numerous data colati g companies already have all that.

It’s frightening, they’ll be able to track your every move, locate you within a few meters, monitor who you are interacting with, build a database of your interests. Sent from my IPhone.

Again it’s not an experimental vaccine. There’s a post on misinformation at the top of this sub forum, might want to read it.

The mRNA vaccines are not experimental. Your whole post is blatant misinformation.

I trust you’ll understand when I say I regard your repetitive comparisons of myself and other liberal members in general to ‘militant progressives’ as both baiting and a personal attack.

It is not a necessary or defining characteristic of liberalism to tolerate lies and misinformation, challenging lies and misinformation does not strip anyone of their ‘liberal credentials’.

Among the very many callous lines of argument offered up by anti-vaxxers and COVID deniers has been the observation that this wretched disease has this far predominantly been a threat to the old and people suffering existing long term health challenges (and therefore nothing for the rest of us to worry aboit). The advent of a strain that is showing signs of making large numbers infants ill is going to have profound impacts on public perceptions of this disease and, if infants are indeed made ill in large numbers this will also have political implications wrt to tolerance of anti-vaccine views and adherence. Infants getting sick is a game changer.

Well you haven’t disputed the part deliberate misinformation plays in creating behaviors in people that increase risks to their own health. The reason of course being, misinformation is a driver to these things. The relevance here is the use of other people’s ‘life style diseases’ which are rooted in deliberate misinformation being used as an argument of anti-vaccin, itself largely rooted in deliberate misinformation.

Firstly you rationalize a scale of acceptability of the death of others then you go on to complain about the impact of wearing a mask on you personally. And then you finish with this gem: “I really didn't see why I should continue to wear a mask simply to make other people feel comfortable. By that reasoning, since one can never know whether another person presents a risk, we will all have to wear masks for ever. No thanks.” Well equally one can never know if another person is vulnerable or not. Wearing a mask is not ‘simply to make other people feel comfortable’, it’s a simple and effective means to help prevent the spread of this disease. But of course for some it’s an unacceptable inconvenience to consider others.

The lifestyle choices of smoking and unhealthy diet share a common cause with many of the anti-vaccine arguments. They are both rooted in the deliberate use of misinformation to convince people to make choices that place their own health at risk.