The vaccine thread



Yep, just been warned about challenging illegal IP knowledge, so you have a green flag mate...away you go :D

What are you wittering about now? You must surely realise that when new posters appear with the same crack as recently banned posters, that it’s most likely it’s the banned poster, under a new name.

Why does this bother you so? Why are you shitting on about IP addresses and whatever else?
 
In 1900 life expectancy in U.K. at birth was around 50 years, today it is over 80 down purely to improvement in healthcare of which medicine and vaccines are a big part

The fact we keep having a debate about the safety of modern day medicine is an absurdity of the highest order, try living without them and the chances are your life will be a dam lot shorter than if you embrace them
 
In 1900 life expectancy in U.K. at birth was around 50 years, today it is over 80 down purely to improvement in healthcare of which medicine and vaccines are a big part

The fact we keep having a debate about the safety of modern day medicine is an absurdity of the highest order, try living without them and the chances are your life will be a dam lot shorter than if you embrace them

The ‘real pandemic’ is the insecurity and paranoia on the right wing of politics. Fuck knows where that has come from.
 
This needs its own thread but one JAMA paper does not unequivocal proof make
agree 100% , but doesn't also mean its wrong either, and its not just one doctor or one study is it, there's been a growing concern for years, but I only have a passing interest as I am interested in diet on the human body and came across a few tit bits.

Just look at keys 7 countries study, with some clever bullying and funding it became gospel for the best part of 40 years, good research side-lined showing he was wrong and low and behold we see now he pretty much lied by omission and now its accepted his heart health theory was wrong and flawed as the science behind it was poor. But some of the worlds healthy eating guide lines are still based on his flawed research.

I mean there's a growing trend to go back to John Yudkin work that was showing it was sugars that was to cause the problems, not the fats.

Good science is open to challenge, if stains work so well, it will stand the test of time, if not it wont. I mean we cant over look its one of the world’s most profitable drugs , that wont influence anything will it, I mean there hasn't be a host of issues where big pharma has decided to keep using a drug or treatment when there's been a problem.

There's always an element of trust and even if some people in big pharma are willing to but profit above health, Doctors i feel only have your best interests at heart in the main, more so in the UK imo, as dont have the same make money pressures that the USA deals with.

But your right we are way off topic,

so back on topic:-
The data we have today is the vaccine is the best option to be safe against covid and its by the sheer fact of the mass trial world wide a very very safe intervention and everyone should get jabbed.
 
after this im never taking another vax again , thinking of wrapping in the statins as well , can i trust them , can i trust the tests , the data , im not sure anymore
Get yourself to an old cemetery. One that was in use in Victorian times. You'll see lots of graves with young kids in. Vaccination is the reason we don't have cemeteries full of children anymore. We've pretty much eradicated the childhood diseases which took many of our youngsters routinely in the past.
Do you really want to return to a society that has cemeteries full of young kids?
 
Get yourself to an old cemetery. One that was in use in Victorian times. You'll see lots of graves with young kids in. Vaccination is the reason we don't have cemeteries full of children anymore. We've pretty much eradicated the childhood diseases which took many of our youngsters routinely in the past.
Do you really want to return to a society that has cemeteries full of young kids?
Have you tried Specsavers? Parm did not say everyone should stop being vaccinated...just him like, and that alone would not lead to loads of kids in cemetary's.

When you reply to me, try not to infer that I wan't kids up chimneys ok :D
 
I'm not saying the vaccine doesn't work, I'm just sensing that the downsides have been seriously under-reported..


This is very worth a read from the University of Alabama at Birmingham, especially the second half..

I've got mixed feelings, I know it's been rushed but still feel that the benefits outweigh the costs, ie more info/choice is my opinion - which should always be the main priority in the free world.
edit: and incidentally I was sick as a dog for nearly 4 days from my 2nd Astrazenica jab - I asked mycousin (who is high up in the NHS) if they were giving you small doses of the disease and she said no, I'm honestly not so certain though.
How have the downsides been under-reported? They're reported right there.
 
Have you tried Specsavers? Parm did not say everyone should stop being vaccinated...just him like, and that alone would not lead to loads of kids in cemetary's.

When you reply to me, try not to infer that I wan't kids up chimneys ok :D
He consistently sends out an anti vaccine message. Others on social media are doing the same. This undermines the beneficial health message and vaccine uptake falls. The only people who lose out are kids who then go on to pick up avoidable diseases potentially with disastrous consequences. You may think it's a joke with your smilies but those of us who work in healthcare don't.

 
He consistently sends out an anti vaccine message. Others on social media are doing the same. This undermines the beneficial health message and vaccine uptake falls. The only people who lose out are kids who then go on to pick up avoidable diseases potentially with disastrous consequences. You may think it's a joke with your smilies but those of us who work in healthcare don't.

I appreciate your response, but this is about the present post not the past, and that's what I called you out for. The truth of the here and now is always of greater importance.

Thanks for your civility 👍
 
What’s your point? Throwing up an article and making no comment is pointless.

What are you trying to say?
Post #4509 - my point is that I'm essentially in agreement with @parm and Dr Steve James from the article/video clip..

So you are literally saying nothing then. Just cryptic anti-vax shite. Doubtless you’re another alter-ego of another banned anti-vaxxer
Oh I'm far from an anti-vaxer in fact I've had 3 vaccines personally, and see my reply above ^^^^
That’s a frankly terrible article. It bases its assertions at least party on the statement

“In the UK, the majority of deaths have been in the vaccinated”

This is a sentence easily misunderstood by people who either

a) do not know enough about the subject matter to comment

or

b) are trying to skew the data to support their views

The vast majority of adults, at the time of writing of that article, were vaccinated.

This includes those most at risk of dying, who even after vaccination, still had higher risk than most, just lower risk than they had without a vaccine.

So it’s not unusual for most people who died to be vaccinated, because almost everyone was vaccinated, especially the elderly.

This doesn’t mean the vaccine doesn’t work. It just means there’s numerically far more people!

-

And another thing, why give a fuck about a Bloomberg article lamenting poor data quality in the US when we have exceptional data quality in our hospitals and have tracked data on vaccinations and hospital outcomes?

Most people with a low post count or who have a new account are current or former posters using a new account. They often post covid or vaccine sceptical content. I hope you are not one such person
It's simply an opinion piece marra - also the UK stats from Worldometer (used & trusted by the UK Govt) are the most similar to those in the US than any other European nation bar France:

they are still in their trial periods , only were allowed onto0 the market because we were in a pandemic , i had 2 pfizer but will never have another , i dont know what i was thinking and i will regret it till the day i die
Fair enough marra, I'm over 50 and was sick as a dog when I had my second dose of AstraZenica but as I'm slightly clinically vulnerable I'd take it again.
How have the downsides been under-reported? They're reported right there.
Aye it is but you have to search and it has been rushed somewhat, if you remember the EU banned Astrazenica for a while..


 
Last edited:
This needs its own thread but one JAMA paper does not unequivocal proof make

agree 100% , but doesn't also mean its wrong either, and its not just one doctor or one study is it, there's been a growing concern for years, but I only have a passing interest as I am interested in diet on the human body and came across a few tit bits.

Just look at keys 7 countries study, with some clever bullying and funding it became gospel for the best part of 40 years, good research side-lined showing he was wrong and low and behold we see now he pretty much lied by omission and now its accepted his heart health theory was wrong and flawed as the science behind it was poor. But some of the worlds healthy eating guide lines are still based on his flawed research.

I mean there's a growing trend to go back to John Yudkin work that was showing it was sugars that was to cause the problems, not the fats.

Good science is open to challenge, if stains work so well, it will stand the test of time, if not it wont. I mean we cant over look its one of the world’s most profitable drugs , that wont influence anything will it, I mean there hasn't be a host of issues where big pharma has decided to keep using a drug or treatment when there's been a problem.

There's always an element of trust and even if some people in big pharma are willing to but profit above health, Doctors i feel only have your best interests at heart in the main, more so in the UK imo, as dont have the same make money pressures that the USA deals with.

But your right we are way off topic,

so back on topic:-
The data we have today is the vaccine is the best option to be safe against covid and its by the sheer fact of the mass trial world wide a very very safe intervention and everyone should get jabbed.

One thing this statin debate highlights as well as the vaccine stuff is the difference between population based decisions/research and those made on an individual basis

If you ask a question 'Do statins benefit you if you dont have established heart disease' then the answer over a large sample size may well be no and I certainly dont prescribe routinely

What is important is to sit and talk to an individual and assess all their risks to then have a chat and take into account someones own health beliefs to reach a decision together
 
One thing this statin debate highlights as well as the vaccine stuff is the difference between population based decisions/research and those made on an individual basis

If you ask a question 'Do statins benefit you if you dont have established heart disease' then the answer over a large sample size may well be no and I certainly dont prescribe routinely

What is important is to sit and talk to an individual and assess all their risks to then have a chat and take into account someones own health beliefs to reach a decision together
Spot on and very important, it has to be an individuals decision at the end of the day.

I have doubts on a few things, I dont think these things were done with malice, but I feel newer research is asking some important questions, sometimes stuff becomes dogma and "immune" to be challenged, this is when problems arise, good science wants to be challenged.

I think at times we are quick to reach for the quick fix, pills fit into this too easy, its not the doctors fault, the time a GP gets to spend with a person is a disgrace and no fault of the doctors at all, I would guess not a great deal of time for Doctors to always be up to date with the latest research either, unless a topic they specialize in or an interest, due to time demands.
With a lot of treatments, you dont get to see true outcomes for many many years before you can see how the intervention works or didn't work.

I am firmly starting to believe we need to address many problems before the intervention stage and that our diet is key, but that is another mine field of epic proportions, which I find very interesting, but confusing as hell at times.
We have to end the treating the symptoms thats seems to be the normal and address the underlying causes or nothing with ever change.
 
Spot on and very important, it has to be an individuals decision at the end of the day.

I have doubts on a few things, I dont think these things were done with malice, but I feel newer research is asking some important questions, sometimes stuff becomes dogma and "immune" to be challenged, this is when problems arise, good science wants to be challenged.

I think at times we are quick to reach for the quick fix, pills fit into this too easy, its not the doctors fault, the time a GP gets to spend with a person is a disgrace and no fault of the doctors at all, I would guess not a great deal of time for Doctors to always be up to date with the latest research either, unless a topic they specialize in or an interest, due to time demands.
With a lot of treatments, you dont get to see true outcomes for many many years before you can see how the intervention works or didn't work.

I am firmly starting to believe we need to address many problems before the intervention stage and that our diet is key, but that is another mine field of epic proportions, which I find very interesting, but confusing as hell at times.
We have to end the treating the symptoms thats seems to be the normal and address the underlying causes or nothing with ever change.

The way I normally explain it to flok who just want the tablets is that if I give you a tablet it will only lower your cholesterol. If you lose weight, exercise and change diet then your Cholesterol comes down, your mental health is better, your blood pressure comes down, risk of diabetes is lower etc etc.

Its a total no brainer but the majority of folk wont change even when they get ill. I no longer get upset ot frustrated when people dont listen as I would have died of a brain haemorrhage by now 🤣🤣.

I had a colleague who was trying to get a bloke to stop smoking who had a heart attack and after 5 minutes of 'Yeah, buts' he stopped talking and told him 'I dont care if you stop smoking or not, its not going to change my life but its my job to say you should do this so if you stop or not Im not bothered' 😂
 
The way I normally explain it to flok who just want the tablets is that if I give you a tablet it will only lower your cholesterol. If you lose weight, exercise and change diet then your Cholesterol comes down, your mental health is better, your blood pressure comes down, risk of diabetes is lower etc etc.

Its a total no brainer but the majority of folk wont change even when they get ill. I no longer get upset ot frustrated when people dont listen as I would have died of a brain haemorrhage by now 🤣🤣.

I had a colleague who was trying to get a bloke to stop smoking who had a heart attack and after 5 minutes of 'Yeah, buts' he stopped talking and told him 'I dont care if you stop smoking or not, its not going to change my life but its my job to say you should do this so if you stop or not Im not bothered' 😂
Must be frustrating as hell hehe,

quick question if I may, do statins target VLDL or LDL cholesterol only or does it just reduce the total cholesterol, which could mean a reduction in HDL if its a blanket approach of lowering everything, from my limited understanding its the ratios thats the most important factor and not necessary the total cholesterol count, so a high cholesterol count which was very high in HDL would be heart healthy?
 

Back
Top