Corona virus, Port and the AFL. Part 4.

[EskimoPAFC]

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?

Someone asked this earlier in the thread and I added this as a response:

After a quick look in to it:

Buyers clamor for Merck's COVID-19 antiviral molnupiravir, but pricing is already controversial | FiercePharma

"The report cites an analysis by Harvard School of Public Health and King’s College Hospital in London, which found that it takes about $17.74 to produce a five-day course of molnupiravir. Earlier this year, Merck agreed to supply 1.7 million courses to the U.S. government at $700 each." (note: actually $712)

When you sell ivermectin, you are selling it to customers, normal people. The contracts are in place, the customers are paying a set amount that they have personal choice in. Its an established, mature market. But when you sell covid med, you're selling it to desperate governments, who get to splash around taxpayer money. Merck already has licensing agreements with 105 countries for molnupiravir. The US has already committed to purchasing $1.2 billion worth. Australia alone has paid for 300,000 doses. All at what looks like a massive premium.

But it gets even better. Because for Merck, they partnered with Ridgeback Biotherapeutics on developing the drug. Where did Ridgeback get their money? From federal funding provided under Trump (I'm assuming as part of Operation Warp Speed). So they didn't even have to spend most of the money it took to create it. They took money from the government to make something, then sell it back to the same government for billions in profit.

FYI I'm not an ivermectin guy, I have no idea if it does anything wrt covid. I'm also a fan of molnupiravir, because its been specially created and tested and could be a great tool in the fight against covid. But it is pretty easy to see that this could all be just very smart business by Merck. From a profit perspective if they assume covid remedies are gonna be needed for the next 5-10 years, having a pill that works better and makes them more money is a no brainer. And business decisions will guide which scientific studies are funded for which drugs, to prove or disprove their efficacy.

 

[Lagooner]

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.

And you are still completely wrong in stating that Covid is “not all that far above.”

Again, Covid killed at least 5-10 times more people in its first year than the flu has historically despite the unprecedented global restrictions that were put in its path (EDIT: worth noting the flu has almost disappeared under these conditions). It would’ve killed multiples more without these restrictions.

Seriously did you even read my posts? Do you understand how numbers work? How did you get 18 months into the pandemic, spending a large portion of that time apparently trawling the internet for anti-vax propaganda, without bumping into the concept of the reproduction number?

I’m guessing the answers are…

No.
No.
What do you mean, R = Rate, explain your arcane confabulations!

 

[OneGreatClub]

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.

Sorry but woke is a term picked up by the far right as a derogatory term, similar to the term sheep and wake up used by the anti vaxers anti everything. You would know this if you are as intelligent or worldly as you are trying to portray.
I notice your posts are getting more and more rude and almost irate because most aren’t buying in to your little alternate reality.
Have you listened to the podcast I linked?
Also, when one looks at the types of and history and behaviour of the majority expressing your type of views it is hard to have faith that they have the best interests of their fellow humans at heart. They serve to disrupt, divide and outrage.
In fact all this stuff could well be a created distraction by the Crypto cult. I think we have more to fear from the Mercers, Kochs etc of this world than scientists doing their job.
Did you listen to my podcast link? Also have a listen to TWIV.

 

[OneGreatClub]

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.

I think though, surely you have to admit that coming before the British Parliament with a paper with debunked references does eat into her credibility and shows poor research on her part.

 

[Holden Hillbilly]

Fully vaccinated people who visit Covid exposure sites will likely face relaxed quarantine rules, under official plans.
The state government is expected to release later this week, or early the next, detailed information about quarantine requirements after borders reopen on November 23.

It is likely to include a relaxation of self-isolation rules for the vaccinated to partly help with QR code check-ins compliance.

Officials have been told to work towards a Friday announcement but it could be delayed until after Tuesday’s transition committee.

 

[pastmyprimus]

This is a classic. Press releases from state officials are given the status of fact whilst published medical research papers with non-conforming findings are put into the griller.

Show me the data.

A state official who happens to be an epidemiologist, so someone who specialises in the study of the outbreak of diseases. Not bad credentials to speak on the subject compared to many others

 

[Holden Hillbilly]

 

[Holden Hillbilly]

It’s emerged that Hawks youngster Finn Maginness, who’s tested positive to Covid-19, trained with players from up to six clubs last week including several stars.

Multiple reports state Maginness took part in a session last Friday with the likes of Collingwood pair Taylor Adams

3

Taylor Adams

Age

32

Ht

181cm

Wt

85kg

Pos.

M/F

Career

Season

Last 5

D

24.9

5star

K

13.5

5star

HB

11.4

5star

M

4.0

4star

T

4.8

5star

CL

5.0

5star

D

20.4

5star

K

12.4

5star

HB

8.0

4star

M

4.0

4star

T

5.9

5star

CL

5.9

5star

D

18.2

5star

K

11.0

4star

HB

7.2

5star

M

4.4

4star

T

3.0

5star

CL

2.2

4star

and Brayden Maynard

4

Brayden Maynard

Age

29

Ht

189cm

Wt

93kg

Pos.

Def

Career

Season

Last 5

D

17.4

4star

K

11.6

4star

HB

5.9

4star

M

3.9

4star

T

3.6

5star

MG

327.8

4star

D

20.7

5star

K

14.0

5star

HB

6.7

4star

M

3.9

4star

T

3.0

4star

MG

417.4

5star

D

13.8

4star

K

8.6

4star

HB

5.2

4star

M

2.8

3star

T

3.6

5star

MG

205.8

4star

, Essendon midfielder Andrew McGrath

1

Andrew Mcgrath

Age

27

Ht

180cm

Wt

83kg

Pos.

Def

Career

Season

Last 5

D

22.7

5star

K

11.6

4star

HB

11.1

5star

M

1.6

2star

T

6.4

5star

MG

252.9

4star

D

22.7

5star

K

11.6

4star

HB

11.1

5star

M

1.6

2star

T

6.4

5star

MG

252.9

4star

D

22.0

5star

K

11.0

4star

HB

11.0

5star

M

1.2

2star

T

6.4

5star

MG

219.0

4star

, Carlton forward Harry McKay

10

Harry Mckay

Age

27

Ht

200cm

Wt

106kg

Pos.

Fwd

Career

Season

Last 5

D

9.9

3star

K

7.5

3star

HB

2.4

2star

M

5.5

5star

T

1.6

4star

G

1.4

5star

D

6.6

1star

K

4.6

2star

HB

2.0

1star

M

3.6

4star

T

1.4

2star

G

1.4

5star

D

8.8

3star

K

6.8

3star

HB

2.0

2star

M

4.4

4star

T

0.8

3star

G

2.0

5star

and his twin brother Ben from North Melbourne.

New details emerge in Hawk’s positive Covid case as up to six clubs exposed

New details emerge in Hawk’s positive Covid case as up to six clubs exposed

www.foxsports.com.au

 

[G3TWOTYAD3S3RV]

View attachment 1278036

well done lad NO DEAL X


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[EskimoPAFC]

And you are still completely wrong in stating that Covid is “not all that far above.”

Again, Covid killed at least 5-10 times more people in its first year than the flu has historically despite the unprecedented global restrictions that were put in its path (EDIT: worth noting the flu has almost disappeared under these conditions). It would’ve killed multiples more without these restrictions.

Seriously did you even read my posts? Do you understand how numbers work? How did you get 18 months into the pandemic, spending a large portion of that time apparently trawling the internet for anti-vax propaganda, without bumping into the concept of the reproduction number?

I’m guessing the answers are…

No.
No.
What do you mean, R = Rate, explain your arcane confabulations!

Yes but how many does a novel flu kill relative to population in its first year?

 

[EskimoPAFC]

Sorry but woke is a term picked up by the far right as a derogatory term, similar to the term sheep and wake up used by the anti vaxers anti everything. You would know this if you are as intelligent or worldly as you are trying to portray.

The right creates a strawman of anybody who espouses anything remotely left-wing or outside of their groupthink by calling them "woke", "bullies", "snowflakes", "libtards", "sjws"

The left creates a strawman of anybody who espouses anything remotely right-wing or outside of their groupthink by calling them "anti-vaxers", "MAGAs", "Trumpers", "nazis"

The real problem is that most current ways of communicating are based around creating echo chambers and clickbait that focuses on dehumanising those on the other side.

 

[EskimoPAFC]

well done lad NO DEAL X


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[OneGreatClub]

The right creates a strawman of anybody who espouses anything remotely left-wing or outside of their groupthink by calling them "woke", "bullies", "snowflakes", "libtards", "sjws"

The left creates a strawman of anybody who espouses anything remotely right-wing or outside of their groupthink by calling them "anti-vaxers", "MAGAs", "Trumpers", "nazis"

The real problem is that most current ways of communicating are based around creating echo chambers and clickbait that focuses on dehumanising those on the other side.

Well, anti vaxers is a true term is it not? They are anti vax.

 

[EskimoPAFC]

Well, anti vaxers is a true term is it not? They are anti vax.

Anti vaxer is a term that used to have a clear meaning: People who were against vaccinations and would fight to refuse them and stop others from using them.

Its currently a term used to describe a whole range of beliefs:
1. People who would prefer to wait for more empirical data before committing to a vaccine
2. People who take vaccines, but don't want to take one of the current crop of covid vaccines
3. People who are willing to take some covid vaccines (eg protein subunit), but not others (eg viral vector)
4. People who are pro-vaccines, but are also pro-medical choice
5. People who are pro-vaccines and pro-vaccine mandates in some industries, but not in others
6. People who have taken the vaccine, but are against booster shots
7. People who are accepting of current covid vaccines and current government policy, but are also willing to point out the issues with the current crop of covid vaccines
8. People who believe vaccines cause autism and the new covid vaccines have 5G chips in them so Bill Gates and the satanists can spy on us all

So when you use comments that only really apply to those in point 8 and apply them to everybody in points 1-7 (I'm not saying you do this, but I've certainly seen it happen), its a massive oversimplification. All it does is divide people further and prevent meaningful conversation because to them you are now a "woke snowflake" attacking them, and they are now a crazy anti vaxer.

 

[tribey]

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

‘Everyone that doesn’t agree with me is a troll ’

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.

At the risk of feeding your pathological need for attention, here are the dot points to cut through your evasive gish gallop dancing:

• Doctor who specialises in obstetrics, hasn’t practised since 2013 and hasn’t done any direct research on COVID, publishes a meta-analysis which cites, among others, an Egyptian study which was found to be full of holes (plagiarism accusations, etc)

• Said doctor starts her own NFP called ‘British Ivermectin Research Development (BIRD)’ and is later quoted as saying: “Ivermectin works. There's nothing that will persuade me."

• After the vanguard Egyptian study’s problems arise, said doctor is undeterred, and merely removes it from her data set — relying on the other low quality studies she’s collated.

Is any of this sinking in, or are you too busy cooking up another quip?

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

Exactly! So maybe go easy with using a flimsy meta-analysis as a cudgel to try to beat, well, the consensus on Ivermectin, that currently sees you standing with alt-luminaries such as Joe Rogan, Robert F Kennedy Jnr and the Yosemite Sam element of the Republican Party?

I don't expect any creditable reply from you. You're hollow. You can only echo the same empty chorus.

Given your form, this reads as projection.

You're right. 11.19pm is way past your bedtime.

Whereas you stayed up past midnight arguing with strangers like a big boy!

 

[G3TWOTYAD3S3RV]

Well, anti vaxers is a true term is it not? They are anti vax.

And a junkie is just that.


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Lagooner]

Yes but how many does a novel flu kill relative to population in its first year?

Is the answer in the millions in spite of a highly restricted global environment?

 

[tribey]

So when you use comments that only really apply to those in point 8 and apply them to everybody in points 1-7 (I'm not saying you do this, but I've certainly seen it happen), its a massive oversimplification.

It’s also a simplification to assume everyone giving reasoning 1-7 is a rational actor in good faith.

Many of those reasons have long been part of the anti-vax playbook, well before COVID.

 

[EskimoPAFC]

Is the answer in the millions in spite of a highly restricted global environment?

I mean you're never gonna get a direct comparison, but I'd say so.

 

[EskimoPAFC]

It’s also a simplification to assume everyone giving reasoning 1-7 is a rational actor in good faith.

Many of those reasons have long been part of the anti-vax playbook, well before COVID.

Really? Can you give me an example of this happening? Before covid the anti-vax playbook was to be against vaccinations and to try to stop them so I'm not sure how this could be possible.

This is the point I'm getting at. People have stopped listening to each other. Once someone goes outside their groupthink they just attribute the characteristics of the worst possible strawman to them and anything they say that runs contrary to that is a lie or misrepresentation.

Happens in a lot of other stuff too, examples:
"I don't like X news source" = "Oh its because you must like Y news source you Y news watcher!"
"I didn't like this movie/tv show/book because it had a poor storyline" = "Oh its because the main character is X demographic which you secretly hate!"

 

[Lagooner]

View attachment 1278068

I mean you're never gonna get a direct comparison, but I'd say so.

So a once in a century global pandemic is roughly comparable to another once in a century global pandemic? Cheers for that. Very relevant to the outrageously erroneous false equivalences drawn between Corona and the flu ITT.

 

[edgie]

...

So when you use comments that only really apply to those in point 8 and apply them to everybody in points 1-7 (I'm not saying you do this, but I've certainly seen it happen), ...

You can not say it if you want but I I'll say it, yes, that's exactly what onegreatcovid and a host of others are putting across. That's exactly what they are doing with intent.

 

[edgie]

...
"I didn't like this movie/tv show/book because it had a poor storyline" = "Oh its because the main character is X demographic which you secretly hate!"

That reminds me I need to catch up on the recent batch of Last Jedi is shit youtubes.

 

[OneGreatClub]

Anti vaxer is a term that used to have a clear meaning: People who were against vaccinations and would fight to refuse them and stop others from using them.

Its currently a term used to describe a whole range of beliefs:
1. People who would prefer to wait for more empirical data before committing to a vaccine
2. People who take vaccines, but don't want to take one of the current crop of covid vaccines
3. People who are willing to take some covid vaccines (eg protein subunit), but not others (eg viral vector)
4. People who are pro-vaccines, but are also pro-medical choice
5. People who are pro-vaccines and pro-vaccine mandates in some industries, but not in others
6. People who have taken the vaccine, but are against booster shots
7. People who are accepting of current covid vaccines and current government policy, but are also willing to point out the issues with the current crop of covid vaccines
8. People who believe vaccines cause autism and the new covid vaccines have 5G chips in them so Bill Gates and the satanists can spy on us all

So when you use comments that only really apply to those in point 8 and apply them to everybody in points 1-7 (I'm not saying you do this, but I've certainly seen it happen), its a massive oversimplification. All it does is divide people further and prevent meaningful conversation because to them you are now a "woke snowflake" attacking them, and they are now a crazy anti vaxer.

You do make a good point, I was thinking the same as I posted so I perhaps was a bit hasty.

I understand the hesitant, I was a bit hesitant with the AZ at first but when I really looked at the statistics I decided to go ahead. I trust mainstream science or talking to scientists I know, research scientists etc. and reading, listening qnd I want to do my part to decrease the spread. I accept some have concerns. Delta is on another level though and tampering at the edges or letting it rip is not something I could agree with.

I need to find a term for anti vaxers who disrupt society, are violent in their cause, abuse health care workers, spread disinformation, call covid a fraud or a flu. Those ones.

 

[OneGreatClub]

You can not say it if you want but I I'll say it, yes, that's exactly what onegreatcovid and a host of others are putting across. That's exactly what they are doing with intent.

Awww now who’s the snowflake?
At least I always have tried to put arguments and links as to why I feel the way I do and I usually read the oppo links and arguments too, which is more than they do in return.