| Bloody vaccines....who need 'em! 09:50 - Feb 22 with 3094 views | homer_123 |
'The work led by Public Health Scotland found by the fourth week after the first dose hospitalisations were reduced by 85% and 94% for the Pfizer and AstraZeneca jabs respectively.'
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-56153600 |  |
| |  |
| Bloody vaccines....who need 'em! on 17:52 - Feb 22 with 402 views | Darth_Koont |
| Bloody vaccines....who need 'em! on 16:55 - Feb 22 by BanksterDebtSlave |
Maybe healthy debate leads to more mutually beneficial options C and D! |
Sure, I wouldn’t disagree but that doesn’t take into account reality – in both situations.
In the case of Covid we have no time to wait and explore C and D because vaccination is clearly the best available answer. Options C and D may come from the more long-range research that we need to do after we’ve contained the spread and the worst health effects. For example, my sister the doctor is going to be heavily involved in the upcoming human challenger study – and through studies like this we’ll see a lot more about how to combat the disease as well as the effects of long covid etc. But I’ll be amazed if studies and research like this say that we shouldn’t have pushed through a vaccination programme right now. So C and D are academic – and will be explored by the scientists and a similar scientific, objective approach that gave us the vaccination anyway.
But the Brexit example really shows the flaw in the reasoning. So it was a choice between staying in the EU or leaving however picking at the EU and it’s flaws while really not addressing the reality of our own government or any reasonable economic projections ensured it remained a completely binary discussion. A third and better option like Remain and Reform had no chance. In fact, it became so polarised that we even ended up with a hard Brexit that barely anyone was asking for before or during the referendum.
That’s what false equivalence and false objectivity gets you. A bad choice to start with, and an increased risk of still picking the worst one of the two. |  |
| |
| Bloody vaccines....who need 'em! on 18:12 - Feb 22 with 378 views | m14_blue |
| Bloody vaccines....who need 'em! on 17:07 - Feb 22 by Darth_Koont |
Haha. Starmer certainly isn’t the vaccine. He’s a milder variant of the disease.
I want a vaccine and the end to unnecessary suffering. And there’s still time before 2024 or Scotland büggers off for good. |
Well played.
Not quite the checkmate I thought it was.... |  | | |
| Bloody vaccines....who need 'em! on 18:46 - Feb 22 with 358 views | jaykay |
| Bloody vaccines....who need 'em! on 12:27 - Feb 22 by PhantomsBelievers |
There is the small matter that an awful lot of us have been in various tiers or locked down for a signficant part of the study period, so results are bound to look 'spectacular' against such a backdrop.
I'm not saying the experimental vaccine(s) haven't had an effect, but if the majority are indoors the fourth week after the first dose, then hospitalisations are bound to be reduced.
I doubt the reduction will be solely attributable to the experimental vaccine(s). [Post edited 22 Feb 2021 12:28]
|
my sister wishes their was a vaccine for polio in 1955 even if it were experimental . which the covid vaccine isn't |  |
| forensic experts say footers and spruces fingerprints were not found at the scene after the weekends rows |
| |
| Bloody vaccines....who need 'em! on 19:13 - Feb 22 with 351 views | BanksterDebtSlave |
| Bloody vaccines....who need 'em! on 17:04 - Feb 22 by J2BLUE |
Nothing wrong with questioning but you picked a side early and have been desperate to justify it ever since. |
Point out where I picked a side if you could....maybe GB's archivist will help you out! |  |
| |
| Bloody vaccines....who need 'em! on 19:18 - Feb 22 with 340 views | BanksterDebtSlave |
| Bloody vaccines....who need 'em! on 17:18 - Feb 22 by The_Flashing_Smile |
You want to answer this Banksy? |
I am not sure what your point is!
It read like you were agreeing with me, you weigh up the pros and cons and make your choice. | |
| |
| Bloody vaccines....who need 'em! on 19:34 - Feb 22 with 303 views | The_Flashing_Smile |
| Bloody vaccines....who need 'em! on 19:18 - Feb 22 by BanksterDebtSlave |
I am not sure what your point is!
It read like you were agreeing with me, you weigh up the pros and cons and make your choice. |
Not sure I can make my point any clearer and I'm baffled as to how you think I'm agreeing with you.
Let's take the final bit - what do you want us to do with your pessimistic view? I presume (perhaps unfairly) that you're not saying we should eschew the vaccines? So what do you want us to do? If the answer is "be wary", in what way? You either take the vaccine or you don't.
Your point is the one I think people aren't sure what it is. |  |
| Trust the process. Trust Phil. |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
