Jo_the_boat
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 784
- Type of diabetes
- Type 2
- Treatment type
- Diet only
Yes Max, it does.Just the other side of the coin. Guess it just depends on who people choose to believe.
https://www.sciencemediacentre.org/...lockdown-policies-and-for-focused-protection/
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...r-signed-fake-experts-dr-johnny-bananas-covid
https://www.sootoday.com/around-ont...ral-herd-immunity-dangerous-and-naive-2853367
I am not trying to frighten, bludgeon or mislead anybody.
I'm not a militant, nor a monster raving loony. I'm just trying to make my own mind up.
I wonder if the three links above are quite as 'pro-establishment' when they see, for example, these things that I came across this morning without really looking hard. For sure there is enough accurate (and inaccurate!) stuff on both sides to both confuse and question.
1. Pfizer 3 days ago: "Our vaccine is 90% effective." Moderna yesterday: "Our vaccine is 94.5% effective." Pfizer this morning: "Just kidding... we meant 95% effective."
2. From Zoe Harcombe (trusted by me and many others. Althought that doesn't mean she should be believed ad hoc. "Just looked at the 90% Pfizer announcement another way... 43,538 people, 94 cases. Assuming participants split 50/50 vaccine/placebo, then 99.61% of the placebo group didn't get Covid-19 and 99.96% of the vaccine group didn't get Covid-19."
3. A response here in the BMJ. I've seen similar figures elsewhere.
4. The Danish study proving masks are all but useless. Confirming others' beliefs.
5. Headline in the Daily Mail this morning. Yes, you say, The Fail. This is not unlike many of their senationalised, doom-laden offerings, however, this one is anti 'main-stream'. One bit that stands out to me is the critical care bed situation. I have friends / family who are unwell and I just hope they, like many others, are not being sidelined on a false premis.
I say again. There is enough 'white noise' for us to legitimately ask questions.