Crazy shi*t people say about Covid and vaccines

[zafferana]

Tradesman comes to my house once a year and I've got to know him moderately well over the years as we always chat about holidays and our kids and stuff like that. Yesterday though I told him we're going away at half term and he told me the following:

*he knows a bloke who works for AstraZeneca who told him that he'd never get the vaccine and that he shouldn't either and that anyone who did was mad;

*he also knows someone who can get him an NHS vaccine pass for £500 and if he gets desperate enough for a holiday that's what he's going to do;

*he thinks it's very suspicious that the govt were encouraging everyone to get vaccinated and wonders why they did that;

*that he had a bad flu in December and was in bed for 10 days with it, but he didn't lose his taste and smell and never had a cough, so it definitely wasn't Covid, but he didn't test, because it was flu and he's had flu before, so he knows what it feels like and that's definitely what it was;

*that he's hoping that next year all the restrictions around the un-vaccinated will be lifted as he's pinning his hopes on finally being able to go skiing again in 2023.

This is a guy who LOVES to go skiing with his mates, who told me about a miserable UK glamping holiday he and his family had in the pouring rain last summer and how shit it was, yet he's prepared to keep doing that rather than get vaccinated. I wished him good luck. He asked me not to tell him about any holidays I'm going on 🤣🤣🤣

I have a friend who wont get boosted because she had AZ the first time round and the boosters are pfizer. She does not want to mix medicines in her body as she thinks it is risky. But she gets a flu jab, and has botox every few months. Plus she does cocaine recreationally when her DCs are with their dad. There is no point arguing so I just don't.

Questioning is not the problem, imo. Problem is that those people who say "questioning science" already made up their mind, and refuse to accept the answer that doesn't suit them.

@Iflyaway

the fans were flamed by a recent discovery of a new more virulent, highly transmissble strain of HIV in Europe.

Link please.

I read BBC and The Guardian every day. Seen nothing about it. (Different for gonorhea (sp?) though). I used to work for an aids organisation so like to be up on the news.

@Iflyaway it was reported in the daily fail and other publications, you can read about it here www.livescience.com/new-severe-hiv-variant-netherlands

Also see this article saying the strain has been around for 30 years and how there can be no link between the 2. fullfact.org/health/covid-vaccines-hiv-netherlands/

Oh thanks @HIVpos. Hugs.

I will read the links. How strange that it's Netherlands. I live there! Maybe I was travelling and away from news etc.

9 days ago.Indeed, I was travelling and away from the news. :-)

Your point regarding arguments against the mainstream is interesting as it highlights a difference in attitude and approach that this pandemic seems to have sparked within the scientific community. With other areas there seems to be room for alternative viewpoints and evidence to be put forward without the aggressive/fearful/scornful responses that any alternative view of Covid seems to provoke. Why do you think this is?

As I said in my previous post - this is not something that I have seen or experienced.

The vast majority of the world's scientists converge around similar viewpoints regarding coronavirus management and vaccination, with discrepancies around minor points. This is because we now have a wealth of evidence that backs up these viewpoints.

I am not sure what you mean by there being no room for "alternative evidence" though - if a piece of research is conducted well and interpreted realistically, then it is counted as high quality evidence and considered in terms of evidence based decision making.

The fact is that we have replicated evidence from many different sources demonstrating the significant impact of coronavirus on mortality/long term complications and the safety and effectiveness of vaccination. This is why most people are in general agreement, and why we are at a point where outliers (Malone, McCullough etc) are not taken seriously.

If a scientists/group of researchers have an alternative viewpoint, it is taken seriously, if it is evidence based. The people who are being derided and deplatformed are those who are making claims not based in any kind of reality.

@Iflyaway

the fans were flamed by a recent discovery of a new more virulent, highly transmissble strain of HIV in Europe.

Link please.

I read BBC and The Guardian every day. Seen nothing about it. (Different for gonorhea (sp?) though). I used to work for an aids organisation so like to be up on the news.

I'm pretty sure it was picked by the BBC/guardian etc, but here are the original links & research paper

www.nature.com/articles/d41586-022-00317-x

www.ox.ac.uk/news/2022-02-04-new-highly-virulent-and-damaging-hiv-variant-discovered-netherlands

www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.abk1688

I am not sure what you mean by there being no room for "alternative evidence" though - if a piece of research is conducted well and interpreted realistically, then it is counted as high quality evidence and considered in terms of evidence based decision making.

Exactly right. What even is an 'alternative fact'? The answer to that is a falsehood.

If a piece of research is conducted well and interpreted realistically, then it is counted as high quality evidence and considered in terms of evidence based decision making

Once again this is true in theory, but omits the issue of access to research funding. For my taste rather too much is spent chasing corroboration of a predetermined view, rather than on purely objective research - a concern magnified in the cases mentioned because of the amount of money involved

To be clear I'm in no way advocating the silly argument that Covid itself is some kind of conspiracy, just considering some of the nuances involved

@Puzzledandpissedoff

If a piece of research is conducted well and interpreted realistically, then it is counted as high quality evidence and considered in terms of evidence based decision making

Once again this is true in theory, but omits the issue of access to research funding. For my taste rather too much is spent chasing corroboration of a predetermined view, rather than on purely objective research - a concern magnified in the cases mentioned because of the amount of money involved

To be clear I'm in no way advocating the silly argument that Covid itself is some kind of conspiracy, just considering some of the nuances involved

my taste rather too much is spent chasing corroboration of a predetermined view, rather than on purely objective research - a concern magnified in the cases mentioned because of the amount of money involved

Do you have any examples in mind @Puzzledandpissedoff regarding coronavirus?

Obviously there is bad science everywhere, but in my experience of research (epidemiology) this is not the case when you talk about high quality, low research of bias research.

And purely in my personal experience as a scientist, I have seen far more bad science (as you say "chasing a predetermined view") that aims to minimise the impact of coronavirus, exaggerate risks of vaccination or make spurious claims regarding therapeutics like iveremectin, than I have from what are considered "mainstream views".

As I said, views tend to be mainstream in science because there is good quality evidence backing them up.

Not about coronavirus research funding specifically, ollyollyoxenfree; it's still a bit early for much to have come to light, which is why I'm avoiding assumptions
However since sponsorship bias is already a well known issue (viz Tamiflu, statins, etc, etc.) I'd be amazed if it's not been involved here

@Puzzledandpissedoff

Not about coronavirus research funding specifically, ollyollyoxenfree; it's still a bit early for much to have come to light, which is why I'm avoiding assumptions However since sponsorship bias is already a well known issue (viz Tamiflu, statins, etc, etc.) I'd be amazed if it's not been involved here

I'm not sure how it could be seen as a issue here though?

I do not see gaps in high quality research in terms of establishing the impact of coronavirus and vaccine safety, effectiveness and side effects.

Equally, I do not see gaps in high quality research looking at alternatives to vaccination, like novel therapeutics and repositioned drugs.

What specifically do you think is missing that has been caused by funding bias?

What specifically do you think is missing that has been caused by funding bias?

Hard to say right now - as mentioned it's still very early in the process
However one of my main concerns is Pharma's role and the motivations involved. Without wanting to out myself with exact details, this was my field and I'm only too well aware of what can result when colossal amounts of money come into play

That everyone's an anti vaccer.

Erm besides a fairly small group of extreme of grid-ers in this country at least lost people have had all vaccines up to this point. But have a bit of caution around one for reasons which frankly are no ones business, I don't ask about your medical history my vaccine status is my medical hosting ergo my private business between my dr amd me, are automatically labeled an anti vaxer.

In fact non boosted are now the new anti vaxers. Wtf are you gonna do when you can no longer bully or intimidate people or exert your superiority over covid regulations any more.

That the vaccine is 100 percent safe

All substances are Poison. There is no substance without Poison. The only thing that stops anything being a Poison is the dose.

Water can kill u. Oxygen can cause harm.

Is it as safe as it can be..probably. is it totally problem free, reaction free, non fatal in any circumstance and medical injury free ? No. Its not. Rare, or extremely rare , yes. But should you decide someone should take that risk however small for your benefit over their own? No.

Either we have bodily autonomy or we don't. If you are for bodily autonomy then the trade off is some people will make decisions you don't understand or agree with.

@Puzzledandpissedoff

What specifically do you think is missing that has been caused by funding bias?

Hard to say right now - as mentioned it's still very early in the process
However one of my main concerns is Pharma's role and the motivations involved. Without wanting to out myself with exact details, this was my field and I'm only too well aware of what can result when colossal amounts of money come into play

Sure, but the vaccines have been rolled out now.

The data from respective pharmecuetical companies has been scrutinised by regulatory bodies in all countries who have approved it. Beyond that, we now have data globally from independent studies demonstrating effectiveness and safety.

There are numerous independent studies assessing viability of drugs that could be used as coronavirus treatments or preventatives.

There's a wealth of evidence, again, independent of "big pharma" demonstrating why vaccination is necessary.

I'm just failing to understand what problems you are anticipating given that we have good quality evidence that vaccination is necessary and they are safe and effective independent of pharmeutical companies.

You say funding bias may have prevented or limited research (not sure specifically what), but I'm not sure what research gaps you are suggesting there are.

the vaccines have been rolled out now

They have indeed, though in the UK only under emergency licence, which in my (admittedly limited) legal understanding absolves the producers from legal responsibility if damage resulted - a factor worth remembering in light of there having been no time for long term assessments of giving jab after jab

You're correct again about the regulatory bodies' scrutiny, a process made easier because the massive funding allowed for a greater speed than would otherwise have been the case. However that same funding doesn't seem to have enabled the publication of what's resulted, hence the ongoing situation with the FDA and Pfizer

Overall, as I've said, a lot of this may have to wait for another day, but past experience leads me to be less than sanguine

@Iflyaway

www.ox.ac.uk/news/2022-02-04-new-highly-virulent-and-damaging-hiv-variant-discovered-netherlands

Well @XenoBitch unfortunately I have known a number of vaccinated people who have recently caught covid and I know of one who was unvaccinated (thought it would damage her eyes oddly enough). Guess which one did go to icu, was put on a ventilator and sadly passed away last week? No underlying conditions at all.
Of course not everyone will, but your chances are much better of staying out if you are vaccinated.

Bloke who interviewed me for a job last year said is messes with DNA and is related to 5G. I didn't ask him to elaborate.

You're correct again about the regulatory bodies' scrutiny, a process made easier because the massive funding allowed for a greater speed than would otherwise have been the case. However that same funding doesn't seem to have enabled the publication of what's resulted, hence the ongoing situation with the FDA and Pfizer

We need to stop looking at questions amd having to prove things as a 100 percent bad thing all the time.

If no one had questioned anything throughout history we'd not have anything.

We used to drill holes in people's heads for mental illness.

We used to blow smoke up arses to cure the plague.

Wasn't there a vaccine that people were so skeptical/scared of that the guy who invented it had to test out on himself

The field of medicine is littered witg things discovered by accident. In fact didn't a mistake in the roll out lead to the discovery tht you cluld wait longer between does than originally thought ?

Originally the vaccine was 2 doses wasn't it? If they themselves had so much faith in it and trusted the science as opposed to continuing regular monitoring the waning the vaccine for 10 weeks requiring a subsequent booster would never have been picked up.

Have there been gazillion bat shit ideas throughout history to present day yes. Does that mean we shouldn't ever have questions and have blind trust in healthcare etc with no questions ever? Absolutely not!

Sometimes people were as far from reality as you could get.

Some times people were right but for the wrong reasons. I mean we still drill holes in heads but to relieve pressure on the brain after trauma, not to cure mental illness.

And occasionally there's a spectacular break through.

And yes there re many many medical scandals where money talks and patient care suffered. Thalomide, vaginal mesh, fir example as have already been mentioned.
Any law suits against many a pharmaceutical company. We cant pretend these don't exist .

And we also have to remember that sometimes it's not even the initial course of action that people are concerned about. It's after.

Getting the vaccine? Never in my life have I been spammed so much . Never. They'd grap you off the street amd sit on hou of they could. With plenty of gleeful bystanders thrilled about it.

Would I be able to get a drs appointment if i gotbsick as a result? Like fuck would I.. my drs don't wanna know at the moment unless you are actually dying.

Drs are very happy to push the coil or implant on you. We've had posters on MN who had to threaten to remove it witg a blade in the drs waiting room to get it taken it though.

The vaccine has been linked to menstrual issues. Bleeding after a menopause can be a sign if cancer. Many women don't want to have it dismissed as a side effect nd refused an appointment.

@FflosFfantastig

It's madness to have a vaccine just so you can go on holiday. I think those people are bonkers.

I very much enjoyed my last holiday, thank you very much. A bad hangover from the first dose and minor headaches from the second were well worth it to be hiking in the Alps.

@Whatwouldscullydo

And we also have to remember that sometimes it's not even the initial course of action that people are concerned about. It's after.

Getting the vaccine? Never in my life have I been spammed so much . Never. They'd grap you off the street amd sit on hou of they could. With plenty of gleeful bystanders thrilled about it.

Would I be able to get a drs appointment if i gotbsick as a result? Like fuck would I.. my drs don't wanna know at the moment unless you are actually dying.

Drs are very happy to push the coil or implant on you. We've had posters on MN who had to threaten to remove it witg a blade in the drs waiting room to get it taken it though.

The vaccine has been linked to menstrual issues. Bleeding after a menopause can be a sign if cancer. Many women don't want to have it dismissed as a side effect nd refused an appointment.

Yes I agee, the amount of pressure has been unreal and very off putting. It's one thing to offer a vaccine and quite another to start introducing mandates / vaccine passports etc. I think the messaging has been off from the start and this has contributed to how distrustful some people are.

Yes you can blame anyone fir being distrustful. The lies that have been told all along. While downing Street have been partying and those in power having affairs and flouting rules , everyone else was a granny killer fir walking the dog twice on their own land incase trespassers touched the gate

Never has there seemingly been a vaccine/medication soooo safe. That alone makes it unbelievable. Especially when paracetamol comes with risks and side effects. And we give that to babies.

I dont know anyone who hasn't got a medical horror story. Myself included. It's not as easy to trust as people may think

The GP in South Africa describing Omincron as 'mild' was crazy and stupid