Corona virus, Port and the AFL. Part 4.

[wallumi]

You had me in stitches with that line. Are you new to this forum? A word of warning, do not waste your time debating science with woke zealots, it’s a lost cause. They’ll fervently continue to uphold the ridiculous CV-19 narrative that our morally bankrupt governments & prostitute MSM outlets continue to propagate until their dying breathe.

Yeah, maybe I'm a masochist, or perhaps I just have a high pain threshold.
If you want to know the truth, this exercise helps work out how to best deal with this shit face-to-face down at the corner store. In real life thats where things really matter.

This nonsense isn't going away any time soon, as evidenced by the commitment to misplaced faith dominant upon this forum. It's bleakly humorous how those who object to being f*cked up the bum by Scotty from Marketing, or any equivalent, are fine with the same treatment from another direction. It seems I'm afflicted with a generic aversion to unwanted and unnecessarily damaging penetration.

 

[wallumi]

Video


Press article connected

Redirect Notice

What was she probed with?

 

[wallumi]

It puts your data point into context, which turns out to be very helpful because it is otherwise very misleading. Even if we accept that Covid and the flu have identical kill rates (they don’t but let’s say they do) the outrageous reproduction rate/contagiousness of the coronavirus means that it kills a lot more people.

Bigger problems require bigger solutions, so you can’t reasonably expect the Covid vaccine program to operate under the same framework as the flu shot. The measures have to be proportional to the issues in order to be effective.

And now we have come full circle, all the way back to “the flu shot isn’t mandatory.” Yeah well turns out they put bigger brakes on a LandCruiser than they do on a Yaris. Go figure.

I didn't say they were identical. I said Covid was not all that far above. The initial hyperbole, ignited by the Oxford study paper and tenaciously reinforced by the media, was way off and has unduly conditioned the public view of the real risk factors.

The vaccine efficacy issue is huge in context to vaccine mandate. The vaccine injury dimension is seriously problematic in itself but too arcane to fit the metrics of the current system. However the efficacy issue very immediately destroys the fundamental logic of a vaccine mandate. The only effective basis for it now is total narrative control despite the evidence and likely consequences.

 

[tribey]

Hopefully you'll have a sound reply to my response to your cherry picked 'debunk'. Otherwise you're going to look like a XXXXS sized arsehat.

By the way, medical research is still medicine. Do you understand the categorical distinction between clinical practise and research? They can overlap but they need not. Your incisive glibness is both a gift and a handicap.

Guy, for all your slabs of prose on this topic, you chose to cite a retired doctor at the margins who championed a paper that turned out to have more holes in it than Swiss cheese.

That’s it. Game over.

 

[Astronema]

There is an argument to be made that the government shouldn’t be forcing people to get vaccinated - which AFIAK they aren’t. However that argument should be applied to a million other things first. There is no slippery slope, we already live in a police state and being “forced” to get a vaccine is not remotely high on the list of atrocities that accords.

 

[tribey]

Instead of confecting arcane accusations, maybe give or require a precise answer?

That said, I've finally squeezed the issue definition from the band of brothers and its practicably irrelevant as expected.

Yeah, your Nobel Prize awaits.

 

[wallumi]

Ah, once they use the word woke you realise they are a total ignoramus.

If you realise that you are kidding yourself. What is in fact being communicated is a categorically different set of base values. You can deal with that via an exchange of understandings or via a creation of 'otherness' leading to an unresolvable feud. The people who own everything then laugh at the peons fighting each other instead contending their most substantive issues.

We all love diversity as long as it doesn't challenge our sense of identity.

 

[G3TWOTYAD3S3RV]

On NINE this morning they had a graphic that showed that going to prison in Victoria was not permitted if you were unvaccinated.

Deal


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[G3TWOTYAD3S3RV]

There is an argument to be made that the government shouldn’t be forcing people to get vaccinated - which AFIAK they aren’t. However that argument should be applied to a million other things first. There is no slippery slope, we already live in a police state and being “forced” to get a vaccine is not remotely high on the list of atrocities that accords.

= sheeple


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[wallumi]

So I manufacture something for a certain use. Someone thinks it may have another use. I strongly suggest for their own health they don't use it for that purpose, backed up by my scientific staff even though I could make a shitload more money for my investors. Why would I do that?

I don't think your comment understands the critical research publication standards regarding conflict of interest and data referencing.

 

[wallumi]

Guy, for all your slabs of prose on this topic, you chose to cite a retired doctor at the margins who championed a paper that turned out to have more holes in it than Swiss cheese.

That’s it. Game over.

Answer my valid queries Galahad or go back to the bleachers.

 

[JimmyBC]

I see there's a new frothing wally in town.

 

[tribey]

Answer my valid queries Galahad or go back to the bleachers.

Your “queries” were invalidated the moment you posted that sophomoric nonsense from Dr Lawrie, here.

Genuinely embarrassing for you.

You should’ve stuck with posting slabs of purple prose and linking endlessly = epitome of a gish gallop.

That would’ve continued to dazzle a few idiots.

 

[wallumi]

Yeah, your Nobel Prize awaits.

There is an argument to be made that the government shouldn’t be forcing people to get vaccinated - which AFIAK they aren’t. However that argument should be applied to a million other things first. There is no slippery slope, we already live in a police state and being “forced” to get a vaccine is not remotely high on the list of atrocities that accords.

Governments are forcing this, at least by increment. Victoria is many increments ahead.

I understand your view of there being worse atrocities. Perhaps there are depending upon the metrics used to evaluate impact. However don't these all have a similar base of disrespect, indeed often complete ignorance, toward invasion and dissolution of personal and local sovereignty?

Each erosion of sovereignty adds to the whole of the loss and to the aggressors' capacity to take yet more.
We should not fight each other as to whose burden is greater. Those of us without adequate individual power need to see the generic character of the threat and band together to disable it.

 

[wallumi]

Your “queries” were invalidated the moment you posted that sophomoric nonsense from Dr Lawrie, here.

Genuinely embarrassing for you.

You should’ve stuck with posting slabs of purple prose and linking endlessly = epitome of a gish gallop.

That would’ve continued to dazzle a few idiots.

An expert statement of evidence to a UK parliamentary enquiry is 'sophomoric nonsense'?
Says who?
Mr Tribey, a bachelor of glib and shallow statement, majoring in retreat camouflaged as victory.

Put up or shut up on my query of your clumsily posted 'rebuttal' of the Ivermectin meta study.

 

[tribey]

An expert statement of evidence to a UK parliamentary enquiry is 'sophomoric nonsense'?
Says who?
Mr Tribey, a bachelor of glib and shallow statement, majoring in unconvincing retreat.

“An expert” whose meta-analysis was predicated on early studies with premature promise that were ultimately debunked, whether you like it or not.

Just admit you goofed by citing her.

Put up or shut up on my query of your clumsily posted 'rebuttal' of the Ivermectin meta study.

“Respond to my reams of endless but superficially impressive nonsense on a football forum so I can reply with my already predetermined ivermectin beliefs at 11:19pm!”

 

[Harlott]

I don't think your comment understands the critical research publication standards regarding conflict of interest and data referencing.

I don't think you understand that I was just after a simple answer. Why would Merck, who manufacture Ivermectin, warn people against using the stuff?

 

[backtozero]

Nov. 9 (UPI) -- Pfizer and BioNTech on Tuesday asked the Food and Drug Administration to expand its emergency use authorization for a COVID-19 booster shot to all individuals 18 years old and older.

The existing EUA for Pfizer booster shots applies only to individuals 65 years old and older; 18 years old and at a higher risk for severe COVID-19 due to existing medical conditions; or those whose jobs put them at a higher risk of contracting the novel coronavirus. The FDA approved the booster shot to be given at least six months after the first two-dose regimen.

The request seeks to expand the EUA to all individuals 18 and older regardless of risk.

Pfizer said clinical trials of its vaccine show that a booster shot increases protection against symptomatic infections to 96%.

Unnamed health officials told The Washington Post the request could be approved by the end of November.

 

[El_Scorcho]

If be okay with this on basis that people with children pay a tax levy to subsidise. Personally I’m pretty sick of the family hand out mentality and being asked to subsidise the life choices of others. You want to bring children into the world - fine - but at least have the self respect to bear the cost yourself rather than foisting it on to others

That's a good way to completely root us in a generation. Today's kids are tomorrow's taxpayers. The better you support families, the higher proportion of today's kids become taxpayers. Not to mention supporting parents while they have little kids keeps them working longer and earning more, therefore paying more tax.

 

[wallumi]

“An expert” whose meta-analysis was predicated on early studies with premature promise that were ultimately debunked, whether you like it or not.

Just admit you goofed by citing her.



“Respond to my reams of endless but superficially impressive nonsense on a football forum so I can reply with my already predetermined ivermectin beliefs at 11:19pm!”

At risk of feeding the troll, the simple response is:

Your 'rebuttal' reference falsely cited retraction of a review paper.
This is specifically evidenced in the author's response to a similar 'debunking' article. This includes a statement by the author of allegedly withdrawn paper.

Made up facts are not facts.
Even worse, blatantly demonstrable untruths are not facts.

I don't expect any creditable reply from you. You're hollow. You can only echo the same empty chorus.
You're right. 11.19pm is way past your bedtime.

 

[wallumi]

I don't think you understand that I was just after a simple answer. Why would Merck, who manufacture Ivermectin, warn people against using the stuff?

Quite possibly because they have an active commercial interest in this product:

Merck and Ridgeback’s Molnupiravir, an Oral COVID-19 Antiviral Medicine, Receives First Authorization in the World - Merck.com

U.K.’s Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency Authorizes Molnupiravir for the Treatment of Mild-to-Moderate COVID-19 in Adults With a Positive SARS-CoV-2 Diagnostic Test and Who Have at Least One Risk Factor for Developing Severe Illness Applications Remain Under Review by Other...

www.merck.com

 

[wallumi]

Pfizer said clinical trials of its vaccine show that a booster shot increases protection against symptomatic infections to 96%.

They omitted to declare that alleged protection is only valid for 6 months.
Given the data available from Israel, the FDA's oversight of that parameter would be criminal. Well in a sane world it would be.

A bit like the old 20/20 used car warranty: 20 minutes or 20 miles - aka out of sight, out of mind.

 

[PowerBaz]

They omitted to declare that alleged protection is only valid for 6 months.
Given the data available from Israel, the FDA's oversight of that parameter would be criminal. Well in a sane world it would be.

A bit like the old 20/20 used car warranty: 20 minutes or 20 miles - aka out of sight, out of mind.

Have bantered with Janus yet?

 

[Harlott]

Quite possibly because they have an active commercial interest in this product:

Merck and Ridgeback’s Molnupiravir, an Oral COVID-19 Antiviral Medicine, Receives First Authorization in the World - Merck.com

U.K.’s Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency Authorizes Molnupiravir for the Treatment of Mild-to-Moderate COVID-19 in Adults With a Positive SARS-CoV-2 Diagnostic Test and Who Have at Least One Risk Factor for Developing Severe Illness Applications Remain Under Review by Other...

www.merck.com

Doesn't really answer the question. They also have a commercial interest in Ivermectin.

 

[wallumi]

Doesn't really answer the question. They also have a commercial interest in Ivermectin.

Ivermectin is out of patent and can be produced as a generic medicine by anyone. It is available at a very low dosage price. Merck's new drug is in patent and they can produce and sell it with monopoly rights and pricing. If their licensing and PR is effective they can move past the whole confabulated quagmire around Ivermectin's efficacy and safety. It seems they see benefit in adding to that quagmire in the process of moving past it.