Allan

6 hours ago, waysider said:

You're still missing the point, Allan.

1.) Children with the virus are vectors. They spread the disease to others who can suffer severe disease and death. Remember Typhoid Mary? She unknowingly infected 53 people. Three of them died. She, herself, was asymptomatic.

 

2.) Children can appear to be unaffected, only to develop MIS-C weeks later. If left untreated, it can be life threatening. No one wants to knowingly subject their kids to that possibility.

 

3.) The risks you can face from getting the disease are greater than the risks from the vaccine. Pericarditis is a good example. Your chance of developing pericarditis from the disease, itself, is several times higher than from the vaccine.

 

All the vaccine does is teach the body's immune system what the virus looks like so when it sees it, it can launch an immune response. Your immune system does the heavy lifting, not the vaccine. You are correct when you say we don't know how long your immune system will fight off infection. Not enough time has passed to really know yet.

 

Immunity is multifaceted. When your body senses a foreign substance (virus), it begins to produce antibodies. Our bodies encounter foreign invaders all the time so they are constantly producing some form or other of antibodies. They are too numerous for your body to retain on a long term basis. That's why efficacy wanes. There is good news, though. Once your immune system knows what a particular virus looks like, it starts producing special cells (T-Cells and B-Cells) that are specifically tasked with sensing the presence of invaders and subsequently making a new batch of antibodies.  People who were infected with SARS-1 in 2003 have long since lost any antibodies they developed. Recent tests, however, have revealed they still have at least some T and B cells, 18 years after the fact. SARS-1 is similar to the current SARS-2 that is causing Covid. With that in mind, it's reasonable to assume that some T and B cells for SARS-2 may last for years, as well. We don't know that for a fact, though, because not enough time has passed. In the meantime we can use the vaccine to tell the body to make  T and B cells and keep the arsenal full just in case .

Unless you realise vaccinated people ALSO shed virus, you've missed the point, so that excuse for vaccinating kids is moot.

On 11/7/2021 at 4:30 PM, Bolshevik said:

 

Are you saying getting the vaccine is equivalent or analogous to joining a cult?  

 

Awhile ago you were bragging about your God-given immunity abilities.  As predestination was involved.

 

I'm thinking (not saying) that the hysteria and rhetoric around it and the 'group think' is resoundingly close to cultism.

On 11/7/2021 at 5:22 PM, Twinky said:

Interesting??

Allan, you are pushing your PoV and pushing aside others' PoV.  If you want people to understand your PoV, please express yourself in your own words as to why you have a different view. 

As I perceive your reasoning, your "God-given immune system" is sufficient to protect you.  (And, therefore, it presumably protects you from passing anything at all onto all those you come into contact with.)  I am wondering if you have ever had a common cold (virus), sore throat (various causes), infection of any kind, fever, gyppy tummy, rubella, shingles (you're still a bit young for that), or any other thing wrong with you - or any of the people around you.  

If you cut yourself, do you wash the injury with soap and water?  Put a plaster on it?  Or just leave it to your immune system to deal with the open wound?

Do you wash your hands before food preparation?  Especially cold foods - salads?  Or does, say, E.coli take one look at you and flee in terror, because of your immune system?  (Somehow, I don't think so!)

It seems to me that the corollary of "I have a great immune system and therefore I won't get this disease badly" (you said you've already had it twice) is, for anyone who gets seriously ill (including your own loved ones): "You don't have a great immune system, and therefore you ..."  - what? don't believe God? - which comes perilously close to victim-blaming.  (LCM style: pointing finger, screaming at top of voice: "XYZ stepped out of God's hedge of protection!!!") 

There are plenty of scientists, worldwide, who think something more than a God-given immune system is required.  Some of those scientists are probably Christians, too. 

And some of those who have died are Christians.  Please don't blame them for having fallible human bodies.  Heck, your own brother-in-law died of covid complications.

 

So.  In your own words, why do you have a different view from the body of international scientists, clinicians, hospital workers, statisticians and suchlike?  What can you say to convince me that these people are all wrong? 

What can you say to convince my friend Rebecca, a nurse in ICU, a devout Christian, that what she sees with her own eyes - isn't true?

1/Your 'perceiving' of my reasoning is incorrect actually. I don't believe I said "my God-given immune system is sufficient to protect me" My POV is that I'll 'run with what I've got' and not put made up suff into my body...at this stage anyways. 2/ I also did not 'infer' as is your 'assumption' that my God-given immune system would not stop me passing on the virus (neither does the covid jab btw)
3/ I am also not 'pushing my POV', you guys are, I'm not pushing anything except my thoughts/beliefs on what I am doing. Have I told ANYONE to NOT get the jab ? vs you and others telling me I should ! 

1 hour ago, Twinky said:

Us and them, Allan?  I simply do not understand why people refuse to do something that's pretty safe, costs nothing, and helps many.  Most of those refusing have quite silly arguments, which do not stand up to close scrutiny or logical reasoning.  I have heard caution, uncertainty, and can understand those people.  I have also outright lies spouted as if they were absolute truth; those people I can't understand at all.

 

Is that a serious comment, or tongue in cheek?  If serious, I really challenge you on this particular experimental technology, when you refuse other technology that is now proven to reduce risks.

 

CNN gives some decent news.  It tries to be somewhat balanced, but of course it has an edge.  One could choose Fox (Faux) News, which has known double standards - for example, it spouts  stuff against vaccination, but most of the news staff have in fact been vaccinated.  There are other really weird US news sources.  No thanks, to them.

I don't know where Stuff's balance is, but it seems okay to me.  It's a gathering of news from all around NZ.

BBC has a legal requirement to produce fair and balanced commentary on subjects, unlike US news outlets.  But much the same stuff will be found on competitors ITV and Channel 4.

Twinky said "  I simply do not understand why people refuse to do something that's pretty safe, costs nothing, and helps many.  Most of those refusing have quite silly arguments, which do not stand up to close scrutiny or logical reasoning.  I have heard caution, uncertainty, and can understand those people.  I have also outright lies spouted as if they were absolute truth; those people I can't understand at all."

Your response is interesting. Perhaps it's the self and same reason whilst in twi we couldn't understand by people did not want the 'greatness of God's Word'- interested on your take on WHY we thought that and was it a valid mindset at the time ?
Those vehemently FOR covid vaccination, masks, mandates, isolation vs those AGAINST same...which one displays 'cultish' behavior ? According to John Juedes it's the former.

6 hours ago, Twinky said:

The UK has indeed approved a covid-19 pill just this week.  And yes, at this stage IT IS EXPERIMENTAL.  But it is expected to help in the recovery of people who already have the early signs of the illness - whether vaxed or not.  It is not instead of the vaccine; it's not a preventive; it's to help those who have already got the illness.

Molnupiravir: First pill to treat Covid gets approval in UK - BBC News

As it's in its early stages and is still somewhat experimental, can we expect vax naysayers to refuse this new treatment?  Because it's so new, hasn't been around long enough to be tested, etc?  Just because it's not injected direct into the body doesn't mean that it won't have effects on the body (indeed, having effects is the very purpose!) or that it can't hurt the body.  (Anti-Polio drugs, for example, aren't injected now; but taken orally but are just as effective.)

If the non-vaxed with the illness are offered this pill, it would be very hypocritical of them to accept it based, on the very arguments that they've used to avoid being jabbed.

You appear to have very much developed the 'us' and 'them' mindset Twinks !! Why, may I ask, is that ? Is that perhaps because those who are against either the 'jab' or the 'mandate' to get it are opposed to your beliefs ? This is division, divisive tactics and many on here have escaped that type of attitude in a previous cult. Perhaps not 'everything' has been let go of ?The citizens are being divided into two camps...gee, almost like it was planned.

6 hours ago, waysider said:

Fascinating. An opinion piece critiquing peer review.

Having children does not change whether something is true or not. It may, however, change how you perceive that truth. In other words, it may change your opinion . 

 

Yes, Einstein had a controversial opinion. It was based on lots of hard work, calculation and data.

So was that professor of virology...the guy with children :)

6 hours ago, waysider said:

This is great news if everything plays out. There are still parts of the world that don't have access to the vaccine for various reasons, such as logistical difficulties and lack of funds. This could be a real life saver if all goes to plan. In the meantime, our best tool available is the vaccine. We need to be getting as many people vaccinated as possible so there will be no need to treat the disease after it's already taken hold.

Great news alright ! Able to skip the vaccine and just have the pill if the bodies defences get overwhelmed.

30 minutes ago, Modgellan said:

There is a big difference between opinion pieces and either peer reviewed papers, empirical studies, or review articles…

Everyone has an opinion. The other types have much more legitimate research backing them. 

Depends on who is doing the peer reviewing....The Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine says it is overly flawed and the Lancet says for the most part it's a joke...read it for yourself...

Peer review: a flawed process at the heart of science and journals (nih.gov)

3 hours ago, Rocky said:

Do you grasp the concept of "cherry picking?"

YOUR professional's opinion is diametrically opposed to the overwhelming majority of experts in the specific field in question...

So was Einstein :)

4 hours ago, waysider said:

Allan, do you understand what an opinion piece is? I'm beginning to wonder.

Yes, it's an ...opinion piece, often based on observation of reports, publications, first hand experience etc...the question for me is "would I be prepared to consider the opinion of an EXPERT in the VERY FIELD we are dicussing ? My answer would be YES (and especially as this medical expert does indeed have...children) I really wonder how many 'experts' in the field of virus immunology actually have children !

14 hours ago, waysider said:

That's just crazy.

Q. How do patients with serious Covid die? 

A. The infection advances to pneumonia and they drown in their own fluid.

 

You might as well say they didn't die from Covid, they just died from drowning.

 

edit: "...this is really just an opinion piece where the author is poking fun at the NIH while trying to make a point about the risks of Covid."

So it's poking fun at this NIH report.

 

Talk about up being down and down being up.

you appear to frequently use the phrase 'just an opinion piece'....when (as I said earlier post) it does not fit YOUR opinion, YOUR narrative....and you know MORE than these professionals and journalists ? shame on YOU !!

22 hours ago, waysider said:

This is an opinion piece. Professor Curtis produces no hard data whatsoever to support his opinion. Reread the article. It even presents data that refutes his position.

 

I don't understand why "not dying" has suddenly become the gold standard for safety. Plenty of other things can happen besides dying, such as organ damage, long lasting symptoms, and transmission to others who may have their lives put in jeopardy by exposure to this disease, as well as opportunities for the virus to mutate to forms that may be more transmissible and/or dangerous. It even says that "Dozens of scientists and children's doctors disagree with Professor Curtis and say vaccinating children is urgent.".

 

Additionally, journalists typically do not write their own headlines. That's an editor's job. Headlines are a marketing tool, designed to entice the reader to further investigate. Sometimes the headline is a valid representation of what the journalist is saying and sometimes it is not. It's a real problem in our information saturated culture. People tend to read the headline and skip the article. That's never a safe approach. Editors can intentionally manipulate a headline to persuade the reader to reach a false conclusion.

 

The jury is not "out" on this, as Professor Curtis would have us believe.. The vaccine is safe and effective for kids. Lots and lots of data supports that stance. The sooner we all get on board, the sooner we can return to at least some level of normalcy.

 

 

aaahhh...an opinion piece...by a more than qualified expert in THE field....but doesn't fit YOUR opinion, YOUR narrative...o.k. good one lol

22 hours ago, waysider said:

This is an opinion piece. Professor Curtis produces no hard data whatsoever to support his opinion. Reread the article. It even presents data that refutes his position.

 

I don't understand why "not dying" has suddenly become the gold standard for safety. Plenty of other things can happen besides dying, such as organ damage, long lasting symptoms, and transmission to others who may have their lives put in jeopardy by exposure to this disease, as well as opportunities for the virus to mutate to forms that may be more transmissible and/or dangerous. It even says that "Dozens of scientists and children's doctors disagree with Professor Curtis and say vaccinating children is urgent.".

 

Additionally, journalists typically do not write their own headlines. That's an editor's job. Headlines are a marketing tool, designed to entice the reader to further investigate. Sometimes the headline is a valid representation of what the journalist is saying and sometimes it is not. It's a real problem in our information saturated culture. People tend to read the headline and skip the article. That's never a safe approach. Editors can intentionally manipulate a headline to persuade the reader to reach a false conclusion.

 

The jury is not "out" on this, as Professor Curtis would have us believe.. The vaccine is safe and effective for kids. Lots and lots of data supports that stance. The sooner we all get on board, the sooner we can return to at least some level of normalcy.

 

 

"the sooner we all get on board we can......" perhaps it IS true, many pro covid vaxxers really motivated more by $$...back to work and other 'selfish' motivations ??

4 hours ago, Twinky said:

You mean, like scientists working their God-given mental abilities devising effective vaccines?

some...and others maybe influenced by other ...shall we say...'entities'....

Bolshe, when I use the term 'God-given' to me it impies "God has worked in a situation to bring a good, godly result" as in, when the first pilgrims arrived in America and were starving, the American Indians came and helped them by showing what grew, when and where etc...hence the term 'Thanksgiving'....I'm surprised an 'Aussie' knows more about a national holiday than an American !!
Thanksgiving Day | Meaning, History, & Facts | Britannica

And just to keep everything fair minded, transparent, debatable and honest heres another article.

Professor reveals he wouldn't give his children the Covid vaccine yet (msn.com)

3 minutes ago, Bolshevik said:

China is going to suffer a population implosion too.

What are god-given freedoms?

??

59 minutes ago, modcat5 said:

Meanwhile...

https://www.science.org/content/article/why-many-scientists-say-unlikely-sars-cov-2-originated-lab-leak

 

Stop using GSC to spread COVID misinformation.

An extract from your article- But like at least one other signatory, he now has second thoughts about that plea, in part because it heightened political tensions. “I think it probably did more harm than good in terms of actually having relevant information flow out of China,” he says.

shame on you posting a 'political' article !! Then again, where our 'political allegiance' lies I believe, has somewhat of a bearing on what 'angle' we come from and what one is inclined to believe. Which I think is a reason 'politics' is not allowed to be discussed on here :)

28 minutes ago, Raf said:

Have you READ the article you posted?

"the virus EcoHealth Alliance was researching could not have sparked the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, given the sizable genetic differences between the two."

So while the article engages in a lot of "hmmm" speculation, nothing in it even hints that the finding above has been contradicted. 

Meanwhile...

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-01529-3

An actual science journal, not to be confused with Vanity Fair. Rather than hand pick quotes, I'll just post the link and say enjoy.

And stop using GSC to spread misinformation.

22 minutes ago, Bolshevik said:

 

"God-Given immune system" - what does that mean?

With Thanksgiving approaching . . . we are reminded of other pandemics . . . in which one group of peoples "god-given" immune system was pitted against another people's "god-given" immune system.  

A lot of it has to do with the domestication of animals.   Eurasia/Africa had cattle, horses, chickens, pigs, sheep, goats maybe some others all mixing with people and sharing each others boogers.

The Americas had llamas and alpacas and the like.  Maybe Guinea pigs.  Not in North America.

 

Are we referencing "God-given" immune systems as a superior technology and innovation versus someone else's?  Or what?

 

 

No not really, I place it in the category of 'God-given freedom' celebrated by 'THANKSgiving day' :)

Just now, Allan said:

Here it is again...Modcat denies it and Waysider says it's false ??...no point posting articles then is it if only articles posted by WW and modcat are true and everyone elses is 'false' ??

In Major Shift, NIH Admits Funding Risky Virus Research in Wuhan | Vanity Fair

could you explain Modcat WHY you do not believe the covid came from the Wuhan lab ??

2 minutes ago, Allan said:

Okaayyy, so the article I posted WITH the headline "NIH admits funding gain of function research at Wuhan lab"...Modcat does not believe the covid was a result of that gain of function ?? Go figure !! GS forum appears to be a lurking place of, um, how do I get around the 'no political' stance with mods ready to pull the trigger with fingers hovering over the 'delete' button...shall we say a 'lurking place of 'Brandon' admin worshippers' LMFAO

Here it is again...Modcat denies it and Waysider says it's false ??...no point posting articles then is it if only articles posted by WW and modcat are true and everyone elses is 'false' ??

In Major Shift, NIH Admits Funding Risky Virus Research in Wuhan | Vanity Fair

16 hours ago, modcat5 said:

The article Allan cited to prove NIH was funding "risky virus research" at Wuhan SPECIFICALLY SAYS COVID 19 was not a result of that research. When I repeated that, he said my assertion, TAKEN STRAIGHT FROM THE ARTICLE HE POSTED, "beggars belief."

Of course we know my comment is valid and not BS because if it were BS, Allan would have embraced it and spread it halfway around the world by now.

COVID misinformation and distortion is prolonging the pandemic. We will not permit the spread of misinformation on this site. Stop misrepresenting the research. Stop promoting agenda-driven political findings disguised as medical research.

Thank you.

Okaayyy, so the article I posted WITH the headline "NIH admits funding gain of function research at Wuhan lab"...Modcat does not believe the covid was a result of that gain of function ?? Go figure !! GS forum appears to be a lurking place of, um, how do I get around the 'no political' stance with mods ready to pull the trigger with fingers hovering over the 'delete' button...shall we say a 'lurking place of 'Brandon' admin worshippers' LMFAO

6 hours ago, WordWolf said:

Allan:

"WW - 'virtually no-one' 16 or under gets seriously ill or dies from covid is what I said NOT 'absolutely no-one' and what you subsequently posted per link backs that up ! "

WordWolf responds:

It's time to give up when the only way one can win a point is by making up things somebody never said, then making fun of them for saying it.    I ran down why kids aren't dying from Covid in the few cases that DO get it- their death rate is tiny, although ANY deaths are unfortunate.    The point you've been REFUTED on was your claim that your POSTED source said NO kids were " GETTING SERIOUSLY ILL" (your words.)  Reputable sources around the world have acknowledged that a low rate of infection of kids doesn't mean NO kids are seriously ill of Covid-  and that's prompted rushes to vaccinate- to flatten new waves of infection, small though those waves are.  Some kids end up in ICU's around the world over Covid-  because they're getting seriously ill.   I'm glad they're getting treatment and that's keeping their death numbers down.

 

Allan:

"You then went on to post that " the few news readers that gave lip service to covid being a gray area were the first to rush out and get vaxxed."
Joe Rogan is one that didn't that springs to mind so did you mean virtually all or absolutely all of the few ??:)"

 

WordWolf responds:

For the benefit of anyone actually reading my posts, here's what I wrote:

"Personally, I find it interesting that the few TV news personalities in the US who ever claim there's any gray area here were all among the first people to run and get their vaccinations.  Anyone

on TV news as a staffer has gotten at least 2 shots, including anyone who gives lip service to the idea that the vaccinations are useless/harmful/whatever."

Now, Joe Rogan is a comedian and a podcaster. 

The difference between being "on TV news as a staffer" or a "TV news personality in the US" and some podcaster should be OBVIOUS.  However, I'll spell it out for those struggling with English. 

See, in the US, there's television. Some of the television is news programs.  There's a studio, and serious news gets discussed.  People show up in suits and begin reading "Our top story tonight is..." and so on.  To be a "staffer" on TV news is to work on the staff of one or more television news programs.  To be a "TV news personality" is to be a regular person featured ON television news programs.

As for podcasters, anybody could make a podcast from their living room. 

 

Only someone who can't tell the difference between sourced, credible news and podcasts would confuse one for the other- and that says a lot about someone.

Oh, and Joe Rogan previously being a UFC fight commentator" doesn't make him a "TV NEWS personality", either.  That's not "TV NEWS."

Again, I said 'virtually' no-one...keep it honest man !! If you drop a word, add a word...well you know the rest lol

9 hours ago, Twinky said:

Not all "underlying health conditions" are obvious.  Obesity, sure, but other things?  Diabetes, maybe.  Other things?  Perhaps not; the "underlying condition" may only be discovered after the child has begun to suffer the serious illness.

It appears only one child <16 has died in England in the first three months of 2020 - don't know about Scotland, Northern Ireland or Wales.  Child mortality in England during the COVID-19 pandemic | Archives of Disease in Childhood (bmj.com)

That doesn't count serious illness.  I know several kids of that age or younger who have been quite poorly.

 

I think it much better to concentrate on the bigger picture.  Where there are high vaccination uptake rates - the UK, some US states, elsewhere in Europe - deaths and serious illness have gone down markedly.  Where there are low uptake rates, deaths and serious illnesses are rising.

 

Allan, you said you've had covid TWICE.  That should prove to you that having covid DOESN'T confer sufficient immunity.  Glad it's not seriously affected you; maybe a third time will.  (Remind me: what did U*u die of?  Covid complications, was it? And he was a pretty fit chap.) 

You should be thankful that you live in a country that has a high uptake of vaccination (so that should protect you quite a lot from actually getting the illness, though not from the effects if you catch it again) and you have great medical facilities to help anyone who does get it and has serious problems.

And yes, it appears some covid complications may be very long-lasting, with permanent damage caused to some organs.  A life lived, a full life, but not necessarily quite the life the person wanted.  We don't know enough about that yet.

I know two people who have post-polio syndrome.  Retirement age, but not quite as they wished.  One has breathing difficulties, the other has damage to her leg, which looks as though it's been put together with all the joints the wrong way round and she walks with the most peculiar rolling gait.  She knows that's PPS.

He had underlying health issues with his lungs AND had been vaccinated. I had covid twice, first time was like a bad flu, second time round more like hay fever but hey, that could just be me with my haelthy God-given immune system.