3G in Restaurants?

3,518 posts in this topic

Pappnase, I'm getting another jab for sure. In the meantime, I can't even blame the waitstaff, the information out there is extremely misleading and they're being told to look for the number 3. If they don't see it, well, tough luck

 

4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah I agree mate, it's not their fault, they just have to read the papers and get their info from their managers like everyone else.

Similarly I don't think it's your fault either and I hope it didn't sound like that.

It really is a tricky situation we all find ourselves in, and the less stressful we can make it for each other the better.

 

5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The top editorial staff of the BMJ join the ranks of anti-vaxx terrorists, promoting vaccine hesitancy by suggesting that more data from vaccine and other treatment trials must be made available for independent scrutiny.

 

Covid-19 vaccines and treatments: we must have raw data, now

 

Why can't they just have trust in the fact that these treatments are safe and affective?

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Eric7 said:

Why can't they just have trust in the fact that these treatments are safe and affective?

Ha ha.  I saw that.  The vax/ terrorist expert @yourkeau will have something to say about that.  You must not question 'The Science' 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Jonny said:

Ha ha.  I saw that.  The vax/ terrorist expert @yourkeau will have something to say about that.  You must not question 'The Science' 

 

 

Oh, they'll be dismissed as idiots, for sure.

 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes.  The BMJ don't know what they're talking about.  I guess they're conspiracy theorists according to the clowns on here. 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sure there'll be a hilarious meme about anti-vaxxxxers.


Oh, there's one now, just a couple of posts ago.
Absolutely brilliant.

I await with bated breath why "no, we don't need no independent scrutiny... duh".

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Compulsory vaccination may be on its way, so all this blabbercocking is moot:

 

"Abgeordnete mit Vorstoß für Impfpflicht"

 

Quote

Eine Gruppe Bundestagsabgeordneter wirbt bei den Parlamentskollegen für eine allgemeine Impfpflicht ab 18. Ein konkreter Gesetzentwurf soll in der kommenden Woche fraktionsübergreifend erarbeitet werden.

 

Quote

MPs with push for compulsory vaccination

A group of members of the Bundestag is campaigning for a general obligation to vaccinate from the age of 18 among their colleagues in parliament. A specific draft law is to be drawn up across parliamentary groups in the coming week.

https://www.tagesschau.de/inland/befuerworter-impfplicht-101.html

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Jonny said:

Ha ha.  I saw that.  The vax/ terrorist expert @yourkeau will have something to say about that.  You must not question 'The Science' 

This is once again where your lower level of intelligence shines through.When they say you they mean "you" and people like you because you basically have not got a clue what you´re talking about.You can question it but expect to be laughed at when you link your "sources" (that most times you apparently don´t even read yourself).You know as much about vaccines at me which is basically fuck all.

Of course science should always be questioned but by people who actually understand it,that´s what peer reviewing is (not available on FB etc sadly for you).

So yes scientists,Doctors etc should always be questioning it that's how advances are made and mistakes are found out.

2 hours ago, Eric7 said:

The top editorial staff of the BMJ join the ranks of anti-vaxx terrorists, promoting vaccine hesitancy by suggesting that more data from vaccine and other treatment trials must be made available for independent scrutiny.

I don´t see them promoting vaccine hesitancy, they´re calling for openness and trust.

If they´re promoting vaccine hesitancy then surely they would have been all over that Pfizer report that you seemed to believe showed how dangerous the vaccine was as that was out in public?

 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

About our plague rats' latest ball of moldy cheese:

Quote

Peter Doshi is an Associate Professor of Pharmaceutical Health Policy Research at the University of Maryland School of Pharmacy. He earned an A.B. in anthropology from Brown University, an A.M. in East Asian Studies from Harvard University and Ph.D. in history, anthropology, and science, technology and society from MIT, and his research involves critical assessment of the pharmaceutical industry and FDA procedures, including arguing for greater transparency and data sharing. He is an outspoken critic of Influenza vaccines, and has written numerous commentaries throughout the COVID-19 pandemic critical of the vaccine study designs and results, and their emergency use authorization by the FDA.

 

An educated hack can still be a hack. He has no scientific background.

4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Keleth said:

Of course science should always be questioned but by people who actually understand it,that´s what peer reviewing is (not available on FB etc sadly for you).

So yes scientists,Doctors etc should always be questioning it that's how advances are made and mistakes are found out.

 

 

This is what they are saying, their main point - release the data so it can be peer reviewed. This hasn't happened, no matter how that has been spun.

 

12 minutes ago, Keleth said:

I don´t see them promoting vaccine hesitancy, they´re calling for openness and trust.

If they´re promoting vaccine hesitancy then surely they would have been all over that Pfizer report that you seemed to believe showed how dangerous the vaccine was as that was out in public?

 

Sorry, I was facetiously using yourkeau's words to describe anyone who doesn't blindly believe "The Word of Pfizer".
I also don't think they are terrorists, funnily enough.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, El Jeffo said:

About our plague rats' latest ball of moldy cheese:

 

An educated hack can still be a hack. He has no scientific background.

 

So says "El Jeffo", basement dweller of Toytown fame*
 

 

 

*He's American, so is always right, obvs.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, RedMidge said:

Watched a few You tubes of Airline tantrums regarding non masks/ verbally abusive passengers.  All seemed to end in removal of offender,  diversion to  nearest airport,  Have things got so much worse, or is Social media fuelling this??

 

I personally know people working for American Airlines in the US.

Yes, it got way, way worse since the mask mandate started and the Covidiots launched their right wing media campaign.

I've been told that in 2020/2021 at just a busy regional airport, the supervisors had to board a plane almost daily before takeoff and inform a rambunctious passenger they would either wear a mask, or be removed from the plane by the police. Physical threats against the supervisors, flight attendants, gate agents were common.


The police was called every week or so for said removal - the passenger then also was on the AA no fly list. Was it worth it?
The other passengers put the mask on when they realized they would be driving home...

 

...things calmed down in the second half of 2021, but trouble is still ongoing. And yes, flights are being diverted because of these idiots almost daily in the US.
There is a reason why no alcohol is served in Economy any more... unfortunately Business/First Class travelers can be idiots, too.


And the Economy/Economy+ travelers compensate by getting drunk *before* boarding.
I personally in September saw a drunk passenger in Texas act up at the gate, grumbling, then yelling and threatening because of the mask mandate and filling out Germany's Digitale Einreiseanmeldung.
That resulted in the airline refusing to transport him, and a seat upgrade for me (I was filling out everybody else's Digitale Einreiseanmeldung after the gate agent called for help).

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Eric7 said:

This is what they are saying, their main point - release the data so it can be peer reviewed. This hasn't happened, no matter how that has been spun.

Do you understand what peer review means, as opposed go public review or review by health authorities?

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, jeba said:

Do you understand what peer review means, as opposed go public review or review by health authorities?

 

I do know what it means and I also know that you know what it means.
 

It would appear that no-one outside of Pfizer or Ventavia has seen the raw data to do an independent review of it:

"Pfizer’s pivotal covid vaccine trial was funded by the company and designed, run, analysed, and authored by Pfizer employees. The company and the contract research organisations that carried out the trial hold all the data. And Pfizer has indicated that it will not begin entertaining requests for trial data until May 2025, 24 months after the primary study completion date, which is listed on ClinicalTrials.gov as 15 May 2023"

From your understanding of peer review, does this meet the description of "peer reviewed"?

 

 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Eric7 said:

 

I do know what it means and I also know that you know what it means.
 

It would appear that no-one outside of Pfizer or Ventavia has seen the raw data to do an independent review of it:

"Pfizer’s pivotal covid vaccine trial was funded by the company and designed, run, analysed, and authored by Pfizer employees. The company and the contract research organisations that carried out the trial hold all the data. And Pfizer has indicated that it will not begin entertaining requests for trial data until May 2025, 24 months after the primary study completion date, which is listed on ClinicalTrials.gov as 15 May 2023"

From your understanding of peer review, does this meet the description of "peer reviewed"?

 

 

Peer review is something done for publication in scientific journals. Pfizer, as any pharmaceutical company which wants permission to market a drug or vaccine,  has to share their data with authorities like the FDA in the US. And that´s what they´ve done. Even before the trials were concluded they were subject to a rolling review (which is unusual), which means the FDA was watching over their shoulder while the trials were still ongoing.

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Jonny said:

Ha ha.  I saw that.  The vax/ terrorist expert @yourkeau will have something to say about that.  You must not question 'The Science' 

 

20 hours ago, Eric7 said:

 

 

Oh, they'll be dismissed as idiots, for sure.

 

 

Could you please point me a link to the full data of efficacy of the horse dewormer you are taking against COVID? 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, jeba said:

Peer review is something done for publication in scientific journals. Pfizer, as any pharmaceutical company which wants permission to market a drug or vaccine,  has to share their data with authorities like the FDA in the US. And that´s what they´ve done. Even before the trials were concluded they were subject to a rolling review (which is unusual), which means the FDA was watching over their shoulder while the trials were still ongoing.

You are talking with people who believe:

1. That this vaccine kills

2. Is not effective

2. Even when it is effective, it does more harm than good. 

 

Everything which contradicts these beliefs is dismissed.

9 billion administered doses = dismissed

independent studies post clinical trials = dismissed

statistics from governments = dismissed

statistics from hospitals = dismissed

 

Their only hope is a 2-year-old study which (as they believe) will prove that the vaccine kills. 

 

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, jeba said:

Peer review is something done for publication in scientific journals. Pfizer, as any pharmaceutical company which wants permission to market a drug or vaccine,  has to share their data with authorities like the FDA in the US. And that´s what they´ve done. Even before the trials were concluded they were subject to a rolling review (which is unusual), which means the FDA was watching over their shoulder while the trials were still ongoing.

 

Firstly, the trials were not concluded - the Pfizer one for example is due to run until mid 2023.

 

Secondly, we are talking about peer review, something that happens for every single scientific discovery before being widely accepted - except in this case of course.
I'm not sure why you would just dismiss the legitimate concerns of the BMJ.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now