Coronavirus

[Guest]

9 minutes ago, Albert said:

To be fair, most seem very critical of the government in the UK right now. The advice that people are listening to is the advice coming form the health experts, and that is being driven by a desire to get out of this dire situation. 

So who is leading this response?

Is it the Government or the health experts?

Or is it the health experts when anything goes right and the Government when things go wrong?

There can't be much drive to get out of this if we are still listening to the same health experts that have been in place since March.

[AndyinLiverpool]

22 hours ago, 86 Schmokes & a Pancake said:

Not really sure when this fear of vaccines became so prevalent? I'd imagine most of those who are concerned would have had any number of vaccinations before they were old enough to choose for themselves and presumably also as adults when travelling to regions like Africa or the Far East? 

Entirely reasonable to be mildly concerned but it seems very clear that while the clinical trials have been conducted very swiftly, this has not been as a consequence of reduced checks and measures. Timelines compressed does not equate to corners cut. I'm also unsure how Pfize are meant to be dogmatic about transmission queries at this point in time. In any case, I'll happily stand in line as and when the powers that be need me to. Least I can then see 'the olds' with a clear conscience, which is immensely preferable to the alternative.

But in the old days nobody was trying to inject us with alien DNA or tracking devices.

[Comrade 86]

1 minute ago, AndyinLiverpool said:

But in the old days nobody was trying to inject us with alien DNA or tracking devices.

Not even the Russians? Must have been poo back then.

[Guest]

2 hours ago, Albert said:

Are you saying that you support the idea of disinformation? 

No, not at all.

Just dubious over who gets to decide what is disinformation. 

It pretty much tends to be one side that keeps getting deplatformed under the headline of disinformation. 

 

[Albert]

9 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

No, not at all.

Just dubious over who gets to decide what is disinformation. 

It pretty much tends to be one side that keeps getting deplatformed under the headline of disinformation. 

 

Well yes, the side that has no evidentiary support for their position. Reality has a bias for... well, reality. 

[GboroRam]

1 minute ago, Albert said:

Well yes, the side that has no evidentiary support for their position. Reality has a bias for... well, reality. 

Truth is subjective. It's like living in nineteen eighty four. Got any razorblades? 

[Guest]

7 minutes ago, Albert said:

Well yes, the side that has no evidentiary support for their position. Reality has a bias for... well, reality. 

On this basis, I assume you would have no problem with many of your posts regarding the safety of the vaccine being taken down?

[Albert]

19 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

On this basis, I assume you would have no problem with many of your posts regarding the safety of the vaccine being taken down?

If the evidence suggests that the data posted is incorrect, then sure. The whole point is, however, that the data supports vaccines being one of the safety medicines on the planet. As noted, you're more likely to be injured or killed from the food you eat each year, than the vaccines you received, and by many orders of magnitude. The ol' comment about the drive to the doctor being more dangerous than the vaccine itself is also true. 

[Angry Ram]

5 hours ago, Albert said:

To be fair, most seem very critical of the government in the UK right now. The advice that people are listening to is the advice coming form the health experts, and that is being driven by a desire to get out of this dire situation. 

Source? 

 

[Albert]

12 minutes ago, Angry Ram said:

 

You said there were 9000 false positives, that says 10, with a rate of 1 in 373. 

[Angry Ram]

21 minutes ago, Albert said:

You said there were 9000 false positives, that says 10, with a rate of 1 in 373. 

I will dig out the article in the morning. Had a quick look on my Twitter feed and could not see it again. 

[Albert]

5 minutes ago, Angry Ram said:

I will dig out the article in the morning. Had a quick look on my Twitter feed and could not see it again. 

Why claim it with that post just now then? The source you posted clearly didn't say it, why post it claiming it was proof of what you said?

[WhiteHorseRam]

11 hours ago, Albert said:

Source? 

HP Brown for choice - am thinking of trying that James Martin stewed golden sultanas and HP mash-up over Christmas

4 hours ago, Albert said:

Why claim it with that post just now then? The source you posted clearly didn't say it, why post it claiming it was proof of what you said?

To be fair, @Angry Ram said he would try and find his reference.

If we have to do citations/footnotes on this thread now, it getting as nutty as squirrel poop.*

 

 

 

1. Squirrel Poop - English slang (18th Cent.). Wild excrement containing much of the diet of the aforementioned small woodland mammal. 'Do take care, Miss Imogen, the Reverend's plum pudding owes much to squirrel poop.' Austin, Jane: Sense and Sensibility (London , 1811).

[alexxxxx]

Suggestions being made that UK nationals won't be allowed to visit EU countries for non-essential reasons due to coronavirus (and brexit) after 31st December. 

[Albert]

34 minutes ago, WhiteHorseRam said:

HP Brown for choice - am thinking of trying that James Martin stewed golden sultanas and HP mash-up over Christmas

To be fair, @Angry Ram said he would try and find his reference.

If we have to do citations/footnotes on this thread now, it getting as nutty as squirrel poop.*

 

 

 

1. Squirrel Poop - English slang (18th Cent.). Wild excrement containing much of the diet of the aforementioned small woodland mammal. 'Do take care, Miss Imogen, the Reverend's plum pudding owes much to squirrel poop.' Austin, Jane: Sense and Sensibility (London , 1811).

Well, when they're saying something like that you'd want some kind of reference on it. If not, we may as well just make up any ol' nonsense. 

[WhiteHorseRam]

2 minutes ago, Albert said:

we may as well just make up any ol' nonsense. 

This is a football forum - that's our job ?

This thread has really become an exercise in the ability to find any facts online that fit your views.

It's fun though.

I have often admired your Aussie stick to your guns grit and powers of multi-quoting.

[Stive Pesley]

5 hours ago, Angry Ram said:

I will dig out the article in the morning. Had a quick look on my Twitter feed and could not see it again. 

I also saw it on Twitter - the form is posted in annoying low resolution (on purpose?) so I guess most people will misinterpret the SHOCK HORROR tone of the tweet text. What it actually shows is that 9376 tests gave 10 positives - which all came up as negative on a second test. So it's an actual false positive rate of about 0.1 percent.

But then I guess if she'd said 99.9% of PCR tests were accurate that wouldn't have got the covidiots twitching quite so much in the nether regions

 

 

[Albert]

10 minutes ago, Stive Pesley said:

I also saw it on Twitter - the form is posted in annoying low resolution (on purpose?) so I guess most people will misinterpret the SHOCK HORROR tone of the tweet text. What it actually shows is that 9376 tests gave 10 positives - which all came up as negative on a second test. So it's an actual false positive rate of about 0.1 percent.

But then I guess if she'd said 99.9% of PCR tests were accurate that wouldn't have got the covidiots twitching quite so much in the nether regions

 

 

Oh my word, it's being posted by an osteopath. Good to see that pseudoscience is alive and well in the US. 

[Eddie]

11 hours ago, GboroRam said:

Truth is subjective. It's like living in nineteen eighty four. Got any razorblades? 

"At any given moment there was some necessary article which the Party shops were unable to supply. Sometimes it was buttons, sometimes it was darning wool, sometimes it was shoelaces; at present it was razor blades. You could only get hold of them, if at all, by scrounging more or less furtively on the 'free' market." - George Orwell, 1984

 

[Eddie]

1 hour ago, WhiteHorseRam said:

1. Squirrel Poop - English slang (18th Cent.). Wild excrement containing much of the diet of the aforementioned small woodland mammal. 'Do take care, Miss Imogen, the Reverend's plum pudding owes much to squirrel poop.' Austin, Jane: Sense and Sensibility (London , 1811).

Is that when Mars first developed Topic?