Mandatory Vaccinations And Medical Exemptions

[Lavender Bushranger]

View attachment 1270501

That looks like Herald-Sun font.

Always gotta look beyond the headline with the Herald-Sun. And then once you've done that, verify everything you've just read.

 

[theyellowsash]

I was referring to Australia.

If we're taking a worldwide approach it would have to be some form of illness damaging say 1% or more of the global population.

I.e not Covid...

no offence, but ill take the opinion of what constitutes a pandemic from the people who know what theyre talking about (ie WHO and other such organisations) than from someone like yourself whose medical knowledge consists of what they can find on the internet.

and for the record, in 1 year covid killed about 575k people in america (with their mixed bag of heavy restrictions to not even wearing masks, depending on which state you were in). The next highest transmittable disease is influenza and pneumonia combined, which kills just under 50k a year without any restrictions. if thats not good enough for you to be a pandemic, then nothing will be.

 

[imadodgyumpire]

Because spread isn’t a black and white grow/shrink. There are rates of growth, and rates of decay.
Given the delta variant has a R0 around 5, and the Reff of the outbreak in Melbourne has been below 2 the entire time, the lockdown has absolutely slowed the spread of the virus. It failed to bring cases back down unfortunately. But it has absolutely saved our hospitals from being overrun while we got vaccinated.

Unsubstantiated claim taken as fact.

 

[Drought Break]

That looks like Herald-Sun font.

Always gotta look beyond the headline with the Herald-Sun. And then once you've done that, verify everything you've just read.

it was, the other one i posted with the $21,000 fines was from the Guardian (we know which way they swing). Which media outlets do we pick and chose?. I prefer to read articles from multiple sources. Do a search on Victoria covid change legislation and there are plenty of articles there from various outlets with the same information.

 

[HTT]

Unsubstantiated claim taken as fact.

Source: the rest of the world

 

[imadodgyumpire]

Unsubstantiated source.

 

[Lavender Bushranger]

it was, the other one i posted with the $21,000 fines was from the Guardian (we know which way they swing). Which media outlets do we pick and chose?. I prefer to read articles from multiple sources. Do a search on Victoria covid change legislation and there are plenty of articles there from various outlets with the same information.

Doesn't matter really - the media are turds regardless. But Herald-Sun headlines are as far from 'news' as you could possibly find.

 

[HTT]

Unsubstantiated source.

The modelling the roadmap is based on emphasises the risk of hospitalisations exceeding 2500 (https://burnet.edu.au/news/1517_modelling_the_victorian_roadmap) - this seems a reasonable assumption for remaining capacity in Victoria's hospitals once other causes of hospitalisations are considered. Victoria's hospitals contained 14,950 beds in 2019-20 (https://www.statista.com/statistics/979295/australia-number-of-public-hospital-beds-by-state/). If you have better data on this feel free to dispute me, but that figure certainly passes the sniff test.

Victoria's number of hospitalisations in this wave peaked at 851 on October 18 (https://covidlive.com.au/report/daily-hospitalised/vic). This occurred from a peak case rate (7 day average) of around 2000 (https://covidlive.com.au/report/daily-cases/vic).

So with a case rate of 6000/day it stands to reason (somewhat crudely) that hospitalisations would exceed the 2500 limit. How possible is a 6000 limit without lockdown?
Well, when unrestrained, cases can double every 3 days (https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rstb.2020.0264)
That means 1 case per day will be 2 three days later, 4 three days after that and so on. At that rate of growth it takes 13 generations (39 days) to reach 8192 cases per day.
Yet the peak of this outbreak was 78 days after the index cases were discovered - at about 2000 per day.

In the first 39 days of the outbreak, we had less than 50% of the population fully vaccinated (https://chrisbillington.net/aus_vaccinations.html#state). What put downward pressure on cases and stopped hospitals being overwhelmed?

 

[imadodgyumpire]

When I read "modelling", I thought "Yep, speculative."

 

[Drought Break]

Doesn't matter really - the media are turds regardless. But Herald-Sun headlines are as far from 'news' as you could possibly find.

Yeh true. That’s why anything coming from Dan and his army of media advisors needs to be taken with a grain of salt also Those pathetic daily press conferences with pre approved questions from the so called journalists a case in point.

 

[Lavender Bushranger]

Yeh true. That’s why anything coming from Dan and his army of media advisors needs to be taken with a grain of salt also Those pathetic daily press conferences with pre approved questions from the so called journalists a case in point.

I stopped watching them months ago.

 

[mouncey2franklin]

Do you think a randomized controlled double-blinded study into, lets say small cell lung cancer, would meet ethics approval if the methodology was "Cyclophosphamide v placebo"??

You tell me: have these kinds of studies been performed?

 

[mouncey2franklin]

This is turning into me continually chasing information for you

What information have you provided?

 

[mouncey2franklin]

I'm not disputing anything.

So we agree that the hospitals receive more funding for 'covid' cases.

Good.

With this being the case, let's return to your point about the data coming from hospitals rather than the government.

You can now see why some people might not be trusting of this data, yes?

 

[mouncey2franklin]

What’s really bizarre is that this whole discussion is on an AFL forum because if you think the government, scientists, journalists and medical professionals are all lying to society all the time I can’t understand how you could believe the AFL was all above board.

Where did I claim that "the government, scientists, journalists and medical professionals are all lying to society all the time"?

If you need to resort to strawmen arguments, what does that say about your position?

As for the AFL, I do not believe it is all 'above board'.

It is a huge moneymaking pro sports league. As slimy as any other.

 

[Lavender Bushranger]

So we agree that the hospitals receive more funding for 'covid' cases.

Good.

With this being the case, let's return to your point about the data coming from hospitals rather than the government.

You can now see why some people might not be trusting of this data, yes?

I didn't agree or disagree with anything.

And I didn't make a point about data coming from hospitals rather than the government.


I'm curious as to why you choose to blindly trust some sources, yet have strong distrust for others. The AHA is just one example of you doing this amongst many others.

It's somewhat intriguing where this blind trust comes from.

 

[Profop]

Where did I claim that "the government, scientists, journalists and medical professionals are all lying to society all the time"?

If you need to resort to strawmen arguments, what does that say about your position?

As for the AFL, I do not believe it is all 'above board'.

It is a huge moneymaking pro sports league. As slimy as any other.

Bit of a selective quote that one, seems you accidentally left out the first part of my message where I ask good faith what you actually do believe about the government, science and the health system.

It’s pretty easy to sit back, demand people get you double blind studies, allude to worldwide conspiracies and not put up any hypothesis’ or beliefs of your own for similar scrutiny.

Don’t know if you think it makes you seem wise and smarter than everyone else? In reality it makes you look like a hypocrite without a firm handle on your own beliefs.

 

[kingswood71]

You tell me: have these kinds of studies been performed?

Do you think RTC's involving placebo for cancer patients where one arm is not treated would be ethically approved?
You keep asking for them. They did them many years ago. When this was raised, you asked that studies be "within the last 20 years", so effectively wanting to ignore any body of knowledge built up in prior years. Thats not how things work.
So to answer your question and to end this conversation as its going nowhere: Years ago RCT;s involving chemo v placebo were done. They are no longer done as to not treat one group is ethically wrong.
Perhaps look at the World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki Ethical Principles for medical research, specifically Sec 33.
In further answer to you: Does chemo always give better outcomes than no treatment? No. Does chemo always cure cancer? No. Does chemo cure some cancers? Yes.
Cancer treatment is multi-factorial. It is effected by many considerations related to the person and the cancer itself. Its not just about chemo v placebo.

 

[Gruffles]

What information have you provided?

At the start this discussion you said that you believed that the body could fix itself, what has changed since this study that allows the body to do that given it's clear that people couldn't at the time (of the study I posted)? (What has changed in the human body to allow this?)

You had mentioned that you initially thought chemo/radio were the only options but then did some digging and found some things out that made you decide these treatment methods didn't work. Given this is the change in cancer science since the data in the article, wouldn't that indicate that it is working as intended? Can you please show me what you found in your digging?

Also, can you please show me evidence of scientists not actually working on chemical treatment R&D and clinical trials?

 

[Gruffles]

Yes. The participants come in, they are accommodated in what is, effectively, a large hospital ward. My partner is a doctor, so she or the nursing staff administer the doses and ensure that any reactions are observed, documented, and most importantly of all, managed.

Also, mouncey2franklin, did you have any reply to iameviljez's post above? Or is this challenging your stance too much so you'll just stick to one line questions rather than any actual discussion?

Your posting is making something pretty apparent as you seem to be avoiding providing any of your own found research...

If you can't do that, be honest with yourself, your belief comes from faith, not science.

 

[The 747]

These posters are like a virus, similar behaviour and symptoms and as soon as one fool departs a new variant appears.

Plus they pop up everywhere on the board now "did someone say COVID?"

 

[Slippery Pete]

The fact of the matter is that the flu is so less infectious that these lockdowns that couldn’t suppress COVID entirely may have wiped out versions of the flu forever.

If you believe that you’d believe in fairies in the bottom of the garden.

 

[FlowersByIrene]

no offence, but ill take the opinion of what constitutes a pandemic from the people who know what theyre talking about (ie WHO and other such organisations) than from someone like yourself whose medical knowledge consists of what they can find on the internet.

and for the record, in 1 year covid killed about 575k people in america (with their mixed bag of heavy restrictions to not even wearing masks, depending on which state you were in). The next highest transmittable disease is influenza and pneumonia combined, which kills just under 50k a year without any restrictions. if thats not good enough for you to be a pandemic, then nothing will be.

Any comparison between the flu and covid is useless because we adopted a process we had never done before re: covid. And that is testing healthy individuals with no symptoms. Do you remember at the very start of the pandemic you HAD to have multiple symptoms of covid to get a test? Then when contact tracing began in full force hundreds of thousands of people got covid tests with zero symptoms.

Accordingly.. the number of cases is astronomically high. But that doesn't mean it's more transmissible than the flu. We just never tested the flu in the same volume. There could be the same amount of flu transmission but we don't know because we don't test healthy people.

And this comes back to the death statistics and their validity. In the UK the death stats for covid is "having died within 28 days of being covid positive". Who is to know what it is elsewhere but it's become abundantly clear that these statistics are not above board. If we tested influenza to the same degree, who is to say the numbers wouldn't be the same or similar from the flu.

This is the crux of the issue and why I will never support covid measures of any form - we put the cart before the horse. The whole world came together and ASSUMED based on flawed modelling and information out of China and the WHO (neither of which should be trusted) that this was an extraordinary illness. Since then we have treated it as such and accordingly have created a self fulfilling prophecy that it IS and extraordinary illness.

 

[Slippery Pete]

Any comparison between the flu and covid is useless because we adopted a process we had never done before re: covid. And that is testing healthy individuals with no symptoms. Do you remember at the very start of the pandemic you HAD to have multiple symptoms of covid to get a test? Then when contact tracing began in full force hundreds of thousands of people got covid tests with zero symptoms.

Accordingly.. the number of cases is astronomically high. But that doesn't mean it's more transmissible than the flu. We just never tested the flu in the same volume. There could be the same amount of flu transmission but we don't know because we don't test healthy people.

And this comes back to the death statistics and their validity. In the UK the death stats for covid is "having died within 28 days of being covid positive". Who is to know what it is elsewhere but it's become abundantly clear that these statistics are not above board. If we tested influenza to the same degree, who is to say the numbers wouldn't be the same or similar from the flu.

This is the crux of the issue and why I will never support covid measures of any form - we put the cart before the horse. The whole world came together and ASSUMED based on flawed modelling and information out of China and the WHO (neither of which should be trusted) that this was an extraordinary illness. Since then we have treated it as such and accordingly have created a self fulfilling prophecy that it IS and extraordinary illness.

It’s obvious to anyone with a quarter of a brain that flu deaths (and a host of other deaths) were rebranded as COVID deaths.

But you don’t even need a quarter of a brain… it’s not in any way a secret, authorities have admitted it.

 

[The 747]

Any comparison between the flu and covid is useless because we adopted a process we had never done before re: covid. And that is testing healthy individuals with no symptoms. Do you remember at the very start of the pandemic you HAD to have multiple symptoms of covid to get a test? Then when contact tracing began in full force hundreds of thousands of people got covid tests with zero symptoms.

Accordingly.. the number of cases is astronomically high. But that doesn't mean it's more transmissible than the flu. We just never tested the flu in the same volume. There could be the same amount of flu transmission but we don't know because we don't test healthy people.

And this comes back to the death statistics and their validity. In the UK the death stats for covid is "having died within 28 days of being covid positive". Who is to know what it is elsewhere but it's become abundantly clear that these statistics are not above board. If we tested influenza to the same degree, who is to say the numbers wouldn't be the same or similar from the flu.

This is the crux of the issue and why I will never support covid measures of any form - we put the cart before the horse. The whole world came together and ASSUMED based on flawed modelling and information out of China and the WHO (neither of which should be trusted) that this was an extraordinary illness. Since then we have treated it as such and accordingly have created a self fulfilling prophecy that it IS and extraordinary illness.

Kingwood71 has explained you how it works in Australia, but you continue to post your UK stats and cast doubt for your own purposes.