By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
Novak Djokovic has revealed he is against mandatory vaccination and it could put his tennis career in jeopardy if he is prevented from travelling due to not agreeing to take a future Covid-19 vaccine.
It's a shame the press have to leap in with the immature 'anti-vaxxer' remarks instead of engaging in sensible debate, after all this raises an important debate around civil liberties. If the likes of Bill Gates get their way, nobody will be able to work, travel or do pretty much anything else unless they are up to date with all vaccines and eventually have a microchip or some kind of biometric id to prove it.
To my mind maintaining sovereignty of your own body and what goes into it is a fundamental human right, as are the right to work and travel. If we allow the state to mandate medical interventions in order for us to be active in society then we are going down a potentially very dark road in my view.
I am all for making a vaccine available asap for people who feel they need it but I would strongly oppose it being mandatory, after all if the vaccine works then why should anybody who takes it need to fear somebody that doesn't?
I realise Covid-19 has changed the the landscape considerably but I hope most would agree with maintaining the basic right to medical choice and health freedom. What do the good people of TWTD think?
You appear to have changed your position from "injecting documented poisons into your children is not a good idea" to it being a debate about civil liberties, so that is to be commended, but it's not like smoking in your own home, not being vaccinated affects adversely other people doesn't it?
AMBASSADORS BETWEEN WORLDS: Intergalactic Gateway to a New Earth, is a collection of amazing and profound conversations with enlightened extraterrestrials. Topics include the nature of God, evolution of the soul, finding your purpose, living your passion, cleaning up the environment, and developing new energy resources.
Wow!
Here's one review:
Miller is painstakingly consciousness about the accuracy of the transcripts of her interactions with the various beings she communicates with from the Inter-galactic Alliance of Light.
Her book is a fascinating exploration of the mind-set, priorities and central values of the Alliance's humanoid and alien civilizations living in the fifth or other dimensions.
It's a little too wonkie for my style, likely because the gravitas of the subject is so high for Miller.
But, this book will be, I predict, historically significant, although few can understand that now.
As awareness of humanity's inter-dimensional allies of light and those opposing entities of the negative or dark becomes more widescreen, this book will be looked to by humanity for answers they seek, which is why the book is chalk full of basic questions humans would ask aliens if they had the chance -- questions about time, space, science, religion, politics, society, economics, government, Earth's history.
Can't wait to read it!
And yes I have bought a book that I was unsure if I'd like based off of Amazon reviews. And other products for that matter. I'm not sure what that has to do with anything.
Also Blayblock didn't write the book, he wrote the foreword. Unless all they were doing was reviewing the foreword, it has very little relevance.
You had me at Intergalactic Gateway...
You are the obsolete SRN4 to my Fairey Rotodyne....
Novak Djokovic against mandatory vaccination on 19:56 - Apr 20 by midastouch
That would be the same thread where I also commended you as being a valuable and well-respected poster. A view I still hold regardless of any of the above.
You understand my point though?
If I was to insist to you that Jupiter was about to collide with Saturn and that would start a gravitational game of cosmic snooker which would end with the Earth being thrown out of the solar system to another one where giant leeches waited to eat us and then pointed to you to Amazon reviews for a book which said this was going to happen you'd rightly say that is in no way acceptable evidence for my view.
There are levels of evidence and Amazon reviews are somewhere just below the neighbours cat.
SB
SB - (not Simon Batford)
3
Novak Djokovic against mandatory vaccination on 21:14 - Apr 20 with 825 views
I don't know, I go to have some dinner and all hell breaks loose! Some good debate although It seems that the original point of the thread, one of civil liberties and the right to medical freedom, has been somewhat lost along the way.
But anyway, I'm not going to get involved in exchanging studies with people because it is ultimately futile and we can all find one to support our point of view if we want to, of course we also need to look at who is funding the studies and whether or not they have come to a pre-determined conclusion.
Anybody that thinks the financial might of the pharmaceutical industry does not have a huge influence here is living in cloud cuckoo land. I also acknowledge certain anti-vaccine groups are guilty of the same.
What I will say is that there is undoubtedly a LARGE amount of peer reviewed science out that that raises many questions about the safety of vaccines, anybody that says there isn't is either lying or only looking for what they want to find.
I will just leave you with this short video which details the proven death of a child as a direct result of a vaccine.
You see anti-vaxxers are not all selfish, ignorant loons that should be treated with contempt, more often than not they are normal people who DID vaccinate their children and paid a high price for that decision. If vaccines are as 'safe and effective' as we are told then ask yourself why there is an anti-vaccine movement in the first place, and it is not a new thing either, it has been around for as long as people have been harmed by them.
Ask yourself also, if you were to walk in this woman's shoes, would you maybe see things a little differently. There are many other parents like her as well, but not everybody has the presence of mind at the height of grief to connect the dots and pursue the authorities for answers, not to mention the cost involved in appointing a specialist lawyer.
So for those of you that are advocating mandatory vaccines for all regardless, you should know that certain individuals are more susceptible to suffering a reaction or even death such as children who have MTHFR gene mutation. So do you think ALL children should have C19 vaccine even though children are generally not at risk and knowing that they will not be tested for MTHFR before the vaccine? Not quite so black & white after all is it.
Novak Djokovic against mandatory vaccination on 18:41 - Apr 20 by StokieBlue
Isn't this an inherently selfish position though?
You feel it's risky but want people to make the choice. Most people have it so thus take what you deem is an unacceptable risk from which you get to benefit from herd immunity.
If it's as risky as you claim you should be calling for outright bans for all people.
SB
You seem to have a habit of late for not answering questions put to you but then asking further questions for which you expect answers. Debate needs to be a two way thing.
Actually, I seem to recall you doing to same with CIL rather a lot in the past as well. Speaking of which, where is she these days? did you finally succeed in getting her banned?
-1
Novak Djokovic against mandatory vaccination on 21:25 - Apr 20 with 819 views
Novak Djokovic against mandatory vaccination on 21:21 - Apr 20 by Harry_Palmer
I don't know, I go to have some dinner and all hell breaks loose! Some good debate although It seems that the original point of the thread, one of civil liberties and the right to medical freedom, has been somewhat lost along the way.
But anyway, I'm not going to get involved in exchanging studies with people because it is ultimately futile and we can all find one to support our point of view if we want to, of course we also need to look at who is funding the studies and whether or not they have come to a pre-determined conclusion.
Anybody that thinks the financial might of the pharmaceutical industry does not have a huge influence here is living in cloud cuckoo land. I also acknowledge certain anti-vaccine groups are guilty of the same.
What I will say is that there is undoubtedly a LARGE amount of peer reviewed science out that that raises many questions about the safety of vaccines, anybody that says there isn't is either lying or only looking for what they want to find.
I will just leave you with this short video which details the proven death of a child as a direct result of a vaccine.
You see anti-vaxxers are not all selfish, ignorant loons that should be treated with contempt, more often than not they are normal people who DID vaccinate their children and paid a high price for that decision. If vaccines are as 'safe and effective' as we are told then ask yourself why there is an anti-vaccine movement in the first place, and it is not a new thing either, it has been around for as long as people have been harmed by them.
Ask yourself also, if you were to walk in this woman's shoes, would you maybe see things a little differently. There are many other parents like her as well, but not everybody has the presence of mind at the height of grief to connect the dots and pursue the authorities for answers, not to mention the cost involved in appointing a specialist lawyer.
So for those of you that are advocating mandatory vaccines for all regardless, you should know that certain individuals are more susceptible to suffering a reaction or even death such as children who have MTHFR gene mutation. So do you think ALL children should have C19 vaccine even though children are generally not at risk and knowing that they will not be tested for MTHFR before the vaccine? Not quite so black & white after all is it.
Show us the peer reviewed science.
And stop using the poisinong the well fallacy by juxtaposing tangential comments about big pharma with evidence.
The presence of those seeking the truth is infinitely to be preferred to the presence of those who think they've found it.
(Sir Terry Pratchett)
Novak Djokovic against mandatory vaccination on 21:22 - Apr 20 by Harry_Palmer
You seem to have a habit of late for not answering questions put to you but then asking further questions for which you expect answers. Debate needs to be a two way thing.
Actually, I seem to recall you doing to same with CIL rather a lot in the past as well. Speaking of which, where is she these days? did you finally succeed in getting her banned?
You’ve not answered his question and instead asked him further questions.
Just saying.
-1
Novak Djokovic against mandatory vaccination on 21:39 - Apr 20 with 798 views
Novak Djokovic against mandatory vaccination on 21:22 - Apr 20 by Harry_Palmer
You seem to have a habit of late for not answering questions put to you but then asking further questions for which you expect answers. Debate needs to be a two way thing.
Actually, I seem to recall you doing to same with CIL rather a lot in the past as well. Speaking of which, where is she these days? did you finally succeed in getting her banned?
There is no question in that post past the rhetorical one at the top. It's an observation about your position, one which is reasonable in my opinion.
Which question have I missed? I can't see one so please post it again.
Wasn't the MTHFR study very small, discredited and based on the smallpox vaccine? It was also the one that linked to autism. I believe most experts didn't think that results from that study could be extrapolated to the measles vaccine let alone a non-existed C19 vaccine of which you have literally no information. Given this why are you even bringing it up as reasoning against a C19 vaccine?
It looks like muddying the waters.
Everyone seems to love remembering things differently around here at the moment. The person who never wanted to actually answer questions was CIL. It was constant deflection and belittling. You don't see that because she generally agreed with you but I think you're in the minority with your view.
SB
SB - (not Simon Batford)
1
Novak Djokovic against mandatory vaccination on 06:20 - Apr 21 with 702 views
Novak Djokovic against mandatory vaccination on 06:20 - Apr 21 by Harry_Palmer
Yes I know, it wasn't an accident.
Do you want to specify which question I didn't answer so I can answer it?
Then perhaps answer my question about why you are equating a non-existent vaccine with a study that is two vaccines removed and clearly not applicable?
SB
SB - (not Simon Batford)
0
Novak Djokovic against mandatory vaccination on 07:38 - Apr 21 with 663 views
Novak Djokovic against mandatory vaccination on 07:03 - Apr 21 by StokieBlue
Do you want to specify which question I didn't answer so I can answer it?
Then perhaps answer my question about why you are equating a non-existent vaccine with a study that is two vaccines removed and clearly not applicable?
SB
Morning Stokie. I asked you...
Would you be in favour of the State removing the right for an individual to drive their own car if we had driverless cars which guaranteed no RTA's?
And although not a question I also note you had nothing to say about the fact that certain safety steps are being skipped in the race to produce a c-19 vaccine and the fact that stanch pro-vaccine experts such as Paul Offit and Peter Hotez have raised concerns about this. If they are concerned about this then I think we all should be.
In answer to your question. I am not equating a non-existent vaccine to a study. I have not referred to a study, I have highlighted a case in America where it was determined by the autopsy that a child with unknown MTHFR gene mutation died as a direct result of receiving multiple vaccines as per the CDC schedule.
Based on the fact that the parent needed to hire an independent lawyer and arrange a secondary autopsy to uncover the true cause of death, it is not unreasonable to assume that this is not a one off. It is also not unreasonable to assume that as all vaccines that have ever been made carry the potential risk of harm, that any C-19 vaccine will be the same, particularly as they are skipping some of the usual safety steps.
Unless the C19 vaccine is going to have a completely different make up to any vaccine that has gone before it, I think it is valid to question what effect it might have on children that might be more susceptible to harm.
1
Novak Djokovic against mandatory vaccination on 08:21 - Apr 21 with 651 views
Novak Djokovic against mandatory vaccination on 07:38 - Apr 21 by Harry_Palmer
Morning Stokie. I asked you...
Would you be in favour of the State removing the right for an individual to drive their own car if we had driverless cars which guaranteed no RTA's?
And although not a question I also note you had nothing to say about the fact that certain safety steps are being skipped in the race to produce a c-19 vaccine and the fact that stanch pro-vaccine experts such as Paul Offit and Peter Hotez have raised concerns about this. If they are concerned about this then I think we all should be.
In answer to your question. I am not equating a non-existent vaccine to a study. I have not referred to a study, I have highlighted a case in America where it was determined by the autopsy that a child with unknown MTHFR gene mutation died as a direct result of receiving multiple vaccines as per the CDC schedule.
Based on the fact that the parent needed to hire an independent lawyer and arrange a secondary autopsy to uncover the true cause of death, it is not unreasonable to assume that this is not a one off. It is also not unreasonable to assume that as all vaccines that have ever been made carry the potential risk of harm, that any C-19 vaccine will be the same, particularly as they are skipping some of the usual safety steps.
Unless the C19 vaccine is going to have a completely different make up to any vaccine that has gone before it, I think it is valid to question what effect it might have on children that might be more susceptible to harm.
Good Morning.
Would you be in favour of the State removing the right for an individual to drive their own car if we had driverless cars which guaranteed no RTA's?"
I have actually previously said I would be in favour of only allowing self-driving cars once the technology is mature. The benefits are numerous:
- If all cars are self-driving they can communicate before any of them reach junctions and coordinate their responses.
- It removes the random element which in this case is a human who may do unpredictable things.
- A mix of self-driving and human driven cars is, in my opinion, more likely to cause accidents as it's harder to code for all the randomness a human driver might do.
- Speed limits will be obeyed by self-driving cars.
- Cars can be automatically rerouted to control pollution levels or traffic.
- No drunk driving
I'd actually be interested to know what you would have against a full-automated car transport paradigm?
All of that however, has nothing to do with vaccines. You started the thread as a freedom of choice argument whereby that would have been valid but it's moved to an argument on the dangers of vaccines.
There is no vaccine yet. How can safety steps have been skipped when there isn't something to test and there haven't been trials. Perhaps best wait to actually have information on this before making it a basis of your argument?
As I have pointed out though, the MTHFR study was on smallpox vaccines and not applicable to measles in the eyes of most experts. Do you have the study where the "direct link" was confirmed? It could be the case but as Badger pointed out, nothing is going to be 100% safe but it is safer by orders or magnitude than getting the disease. You are taking the minority case as a justification to possibly harm the majority.
Furthermore, as you've conceded, we know nothing about any possible C19 vaccine at the moment including ingredients and manufacturer. Given this the whole premise is projecting existing anti-vaccine arguments onto something which doesn't even exist which is clearly not an appropriate way to look at these things.
If I said a plane crashed in the 1950's and thus all future planes must be as dangerous as it was in the 1960's even though they are totally different you'd correctly say that is a fallacious argument. It is however the argument you are making with regards to future vaccines on the basis of historical ones but without the undisputed information that the earlier ones were dangerous.
SB
SB - (not Simon Batford)
0
Novak Djokovic against mandatory vaccination on 08:55 - Apr 21 with 630 views
Novak Djokovic against mandatory vaccination on 08:21 - Apr 21 by StokieBlue
Good Morning.
Would you be in favour of the State removing the right for an individual to drive their own car if we had driverless cars which guaranteed no RTA's?"
I have actually previously said I would be in favour of only allowing self-driving cars once the technology is mature. The benefits are numerous:
- If all cars are self-driving they can communicate before any of them reach junctions and coordinate their responses.
- It removes the random element which in this case is a human who may do unpredictable things.
- A mix of self-driving and human driven cars is, in my opinion, more likely to cause accidents as it's harder to code for all the randomness a human driver might do.
- Speed limits will be obeyed by self-driving cars.
- Cars can be automatically rerouted to control pollution levels or traffic.
- No drunk driving
I'd actually be interested to know what you would have against a full-automated car transport paradigm?
All of that however, has nothing to do with vaccines. You started the thread as a freedom of choice argument whereby that would have been valid but it's moved to an argument on the dangers of vaccines.
There is no vaccine yet. How can safety steps have been skipped when there isn't something to test and there haven't been trials. Perhaps best wait to actually have information on this before making it a basis of your argument?
As I have pointed out though, the MTHFR study was on smallpox vaccines and not applicable to measles in the eyes of most experts. Do you have the study where the "direct link" was confirmed? It could be the case but as Badger pointed out, nothing is going to be 100% safe but it is safer by orders or magnitude than getting the disease. You are taking the minority case as a justification to possibly harm the majority.
Furthermore, as you've conceded, we know nothing about any possible C19 vaccine at the moment including ingredients and manufacturer. Given this the whole premise is projecting existing anti-vaccine arguments onto something which doesn't even exist which is clearly not an appropriate way to look at these things.
If I said a plane crashed in the 1950's and thus all future planes must be as dangerous as it was in the 1960's even though they are totally different you'd correctly say that is a fallacious argument. It is however the argument you are making with regards to future vaccines on the basis of historical ones but without the undisputed information that the earlier ones were dangerous.
SB
You are right in regards to the original theme of the thread, it was not me that changed the direction of it but I guess it was an inevitable outcome and I have tried to answer any questions that have come my way as a result.
It is widely acknowledged that producing a vaccine usually takes around 5 years and it has been acknowledged by experts that certain corners will need to be cut in order to get a C19 vaccine within 12-18 months.
Watch the Bill Gates interview with the BBC where he admits this ( not that he is a health expert, despite his claims ), read the comments made by Peter Hotez and Paul Offit.
Professor Sarah Gilbert, a vaccinologist at Oxford University was interviewed by Marr on Sunday and said they were having to fit what would normally be 5 years work into 4 months! I don't see how that is even possible without cutting corners.
The way I am looking at this is entirely appropriate and the questions quite logical.
With regards to automated transport, yes I agree that there are potentially huge benefits around safety but how far do we take society in order to be safe? How many freedoms do we sacrifice to those in power in order to remain safe?
Once you have this automated transport and lose the ability to drive of your own free will, what happens when the Government decides to impose further conditions of travel such as being microchipped and if you refuse you can't use the system? You may be ok with mandatory vaccines but what if the next condition set by Government is something you strongly oppose? If we are not careful we will sleep walk into a future under an authoritarian rule and mass surveillance, just to keep us 'safe' . Orwell will be turning in his grave.
0
Novak Djokovic against mandatory vaccination on 09:10 - Apr 21 with 623 views
Novak Djokovic against mandatory vaccination on 08:55 - Apr 21 by Harry_Palmer
You are right in regards to the original theme of the thread, it was not me that changed the direction of it but I guess it was an inevitable outcome and I have tried to answer any questions that have come my way as a result.
It is widely acknowledged that producing a vaccine usually takes around 5 years and it has been acknowledged by experts that certain corners will need to be cut in order to get a C19 vaccine within 12-18 months.
Watch the Bill Gates interview with the BBC where he admits this ( not that he is a health expert, despite his claims ), read the comments made by Peter Hotez and Paul Offit.
Professor Sarah Gilbert, a vaccinologist at Oxford University was interviewed by Marr on Sunday and said they were having to fit what would normally be 5 years work into 4 months! I don't see how that is even possible without cutting corners.
The way I am looking at this is entirely appropriate and the questions quite logical.
With regards to automated transport, yes I agree that there are potentially huge benefits around safety but how far do we take society in order to be safe? How many freedoms do we sacrifice to those in power in order to remain safe?
Once you have this automated transport and lose the ability to drive of your own free will, what happens when the Government decides to impose further conditions of travel such as being microchipped and if you refuse you can't use the system? You may be ok with mandatory vaccines but what if the next condition set by Government is something you strongly oppose? If we are not careful we will sleep walk into a future under an authoritarian rule and mass surveillance, just to keep us 'safe' . Orwell will be turning in his grave.
Novak Djokovic against mandatory vaccination on 08:55 - Apr 21 by Harry_Palmer
You are right in regards to the original theme of the thread, it was not me that changed the direction of it but I guess it was an inevitable outcome and I have tried to answer any questions that have come my way as a result.
It is widely acknowledged that producing a vaccine usually takes around 5 years and it has been acknowledged by experts that certain corners will need to be cut in order to get a C19 vaccine within 12-18 months.
Watch the Bill Gates interview with the BBC where he admits this ( not that he is a health expert, despite his claims ), read the comments made by Peter Hotez and Paul Offit.
Professor Sarah Gilbert, a vaccinologist at Oxford University was interviewed by Marr on Sunday and said they were having to fit what would normally be 5 years work into 4 months! I don't see how that is even possible without cutting corners.
The way I am looking at this is entirely appropriate and the questions quite logical.
With regards to automated transport, yes I agree that there are potentially huge benefits around safety but how far do we take society in order to be safe? How many freedoms do we sacrifice to those in power in order to remain safe?
Once you have this automated transport and lose the ability to drive of your own free will, what happens when the Government decides to impose further conditions of travel such as being microchipped and if you refuse you can't use the system? You may be ok with mandatory vaccines but what if the next condition set by Government is something you strongly oppose? If we are not careful we will sleep walk into a future under an authoritarian rule and mass surveillance, just to keep us 'safe' . Orwell will be turning in his grave.
So in summary it's actually the government and what you perceive as big brother that you are against and vaccines, transport etc are just extensions of the fundamental point that you don't trust the government?
"Once you have this automated transport and lose the ability to drive of your own free will"
I am not sure one would be losing their own free will. How would automated transport mean you can't go somewhere you want? If you are allowed to go there then you wouldn't be allowed to go their in your own car either.
The final paragraph is the slippery slope fallacy.
SB
SB - (not Simon Batford)
0
Novak Djokovic against mandatory vaccination on 09:43 - Apr 21 with 613 views
Novak Djokovic against mandatory vaccination on 09:16 - Apr 21 by StokieBlue
So in summary it's actually the government and what you perceive as big brother that you are against and vaccines, transport etc are just extensions of the fundamental point that you don't trust the government?
"Once you have this automated transport and lose the ability to drive of your own free will"
I am not sure one would be losing their own free will. How would automated transport mean you can't go somewhere you want? If you are allowed to go there then you wouldn't be allowed to go their in your own car either.
The final paragraph is the slippery slope fallacy.
SB
I agree the final paragraph is the painting of a future reality that might not transpire but it is actually quite feasible if you look at the factors involved.
As it currently stands ( outside of lockdown conditions ), I can get in my car and drive anywhere I wish to in the UK and nobody can stop me unless I break the law. In an automated system it is quite conceivable that you would have a digital profile and would need some sort of 'pass' to enable access to the vehicle. If you don't have your vaccines or whatever other requirements the Government dictates the 'computer says no'. This is really not as far-fetched as it seems.
0
Novak Djokovic against mandatory vaccination on 09:58 - Apr 21 with 611 views
Novak Djokovic against mandatory vaccination on 17:12 - Apr 20 by BloomBlue
He doesn't need a medical degree, remember everyone is an expert at the moment all he has to do is post on twitter a link to some ransom scientist or professor and that makes him an expert
Well said. There are plenty on this site who see something random by some guy with a few letters after his name who then run with it and are suddenly experts.
-1
Novak Djokovic against mandatory vaccination on 11:13 - Apr 21 with 585 views
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
