COVID-19 (Coronavirus) discussion

They remind me that unless a mask is worn properly and disposed of and replaced correctly when required, then they may aswell just wrap an old tshirt around their face and wear that for weeks.

I happy for people choosing to wear masks or being cautious. Just like I'm happy for the majority who've chosen to move on from the phase in their life and just carry on as usual.

This is fine and I think we agree, however there are some who just aggressively rail against any learning/reminder (and I am not saying that is you) and they are the frothers I am talking about. If it really is over for them why are they so keen to froth on about it? I say this with people on ignore so I am probably missing some more serious “shut it down it’s over” type talk.

As I said a while ago, why would a 7900XT owner go into an RX4090 thread just to say stop talking about NVidia? Other than just to froth? It’s not for altruistic reasons.

Full disclosure, I’m team green at the moment!
 
So why care about how they are warn by others?

Sorry folks I give up.

We are still allowed to think it's ridiculous if someone is wearing an old mask under their nose.

If I went to war armed with nothing more than a colander on my head and a toilet brush in my hand I'd like to think someone would tell me I'm doing it all wrong :p
 
We are still allowed to think it's ridiculous if someone is wearing an old mask under their nose.

If I went to war armed with nothing more than a colander on my head and a toilet brush in my hand I'd like to think someone would tell me I'm doing it all wrong :p

Hardly equivalent is it….I know badly fitted surgical masks are not going to do anything compared to a well fitted FFP3. It’s hardly going to war though is it…and if it was you’d be wearing a helmet yourself wouldn’t you? :D

Anyway, my main point is there are some who say those who still maintain caution are mentally ill, whilst just doing this is “trauma” on their part (the anti maskers) if you ask me. I won’t use that phrase as a slur like it seems ok for them to.


I’d like to understand the “risks” these self appointed “hard men” take day to day. Like catching a standing room only commuter train.

For full disclosure I still have a stash of 200 or so FFP3s and if the world has a cold, flu or covid i’ll still wear one if I feel like it because I have to commute on a packed train. Saying that not donned one for a year or so now.
 
Last edited:
I found this explanation by an Australian senate on what Pfizer didn't tell us about the vaccine interesting. I also didn't realise this vaccine used such new technologies.

If you had an auto immune condition and your medication stopped working so had to change or you developed an auto immune condition then this video contains a sort of explanation. Watch from 7m 20 https://youtu.be/5jDS4vayXK0?si=1O0ekLc0fNlPMGCC
 
Let me rephrase the question, you said we can't put everything on Trump, l'm asking: who has blamed Trump for everything?
Trump and Musk had no influence on UK government policy with covid. But you've mentioned their names, so one can assume you think they had more influence.
 
I found this explanation by an Australian senate on what Pfizer didn't tell us about the vaccine interesting. I also didn't realise this vaccine used such new technologies.

If you had an auto immune condition and your medication stopped working so had to change or you developed an auto immune condition then this video contains a sort of explanation. Watch from 7m 20 https://youtu.be/5jDS4vayXK0?si=1O0ekLc0fNlPMGCC
Heres a medical video on how the mrna vaccine works that came on top of my YouTube search. Not worth watching but the answer I was looking for was in the pinned message they provided. https://youtu.be/oMXGGmBfkf8?si=w0vmCXZt-PjMQ-rv

Q1: How long the mRNA from vaccine will stay in human body? A: mRNA is very unstable, it is easily degraded by enzymes in our cells (RNAses). Average half-life of mRNA in human is around 10 hours. mRNA from vaccine is expected to stay no longer than a day.

Q2: How long the antigen (translated from mRNA vaccine) is expected to stay in our body? A: Several days. Once the immune system is activated, it will see the cells that carry the antigen as damaged and destroy them.

Q3: So from A to Q2, our immune system destroys our own cells, is that bad? A: No. This is the natural way the body detects foreign antigens, just like when an infection occurs – infected cells display pieces of the virus to alert the immune system and get killed. The difference is that you can control the dose with the vaccine, unlike a natural infection. And the vaccine does not multiply. The number of our own cells that will be killed with the vaccine dose is negligible. The effect is also limited to the cells around the injection site.

The medics ain't being honest with us. That Australian senate already references something that says the nano particle travels through the body into all the organs because its too small and something about Pfizer tested its spread with a firefly molecule so they could trace the movement in the lab rat but then stopped the study.

These compounds not staying at the injection site seems to be a critical issue of why many peoples immune systems start attacking their own healthy cells.
 
Last edited:
Heres a medical video on how the mrna vaccine works that came on top of my YouTube search. Not worth watching but the answer I was looking for was in the pinned message they provided. https://youtu.be/oMXGGmBfkf8?si=w0vmCXZt-PjMQ-rv



The medics ain't being honest with us. That Australian senate already references something that says the nano particle travels through the body into all the organs because its too small and something about Pfizer tested its spread with a firefly molecule so they could trace the movement in the lab rat but then stopped the study.

These compounds not staying at the injection site seems to be a critical issue of why many peoples immune systems start attacking their own healthy cells.
But if it saves one life?
 
I found this explanation by an Australian senate on what Pfizer didn't tell us about the vaccine interesting. I also didn't realise this vaccine used such new technologies.

If you had an auto immune condition and your medication stopped working so had to change or you developed an auto immune condition then this video contains a sort of explanation. Watch from 7m 20 https://youtu.be/5jDS4vayXK0?si=1O0ekLc0fNlPMGCC

It was made very clear that the technology in use was "new", when they started working on them (or rather this was the first time it had been used in humans on a large scale), but "new" is highly subjective. I'm not sure how you missed all the news about the fact that pretty much every pharmaceutical company, medical research lab and university R&D department that did anything with drugs were throwing resources at both developing a vaccine and finding any possible existing drug that could have helped. IIRC at one point pretty much every supercomputer and computing cluster that could be turned over to it was, a use of resources for one project that we, as a race have rarely if ever seen before.
IIRC the research behind MRNA went from a handful of small teams that were not really sharing their full information because it was a potentially massive thing in vaccines, to pretty much every company in the world turning over vast amounts of their resources to do it, and sharing the information widely.

A quick history of MRNA vaccines, they started research on them back in the 70's (within a decade or so of them finding RNA), they had test vaccines for mice (usually first step towards human trials) back in the 90's, they were working on them continuously but at a very small scale for something like 40 years, they had a Human Rabies test vaccine about a decade ago, and they'd been working on vaccines using it for things like Ebola, Malaria and Aids all that time.
Basically as a technology the basic theory, and even "carrier" was in place 30 years ago, what was "new" was getting it into mass production* and finding the version that would work with covid, the latter of which was also an issue faced by "traditional" vaccines.

The main reason it wasn't in large scale use 10+ years ago is that we didn't need it, so there wasn't the large scale investment to get MRNA vaccines through development to full routine use, although every time there was something like a SARS or Ebola outbreak funding would increase for a while, then it would slow down, as MRNA vaccines can be mass produced much faster, and more consistently than "traditional" ones that can take months, so no great rush to spend money until there was a new disease that threated to break out.

It was "new" as in the first widespread use of the technology, not "new" as in completely new and never before seen or heard of.

Also given how "odd" we know some politicians can be it's not necessarily worth anything more than anyone else's views except he's got a nice impressive title in front of his name, a title that requires the massive intellectual effort of potentially just campaigning for a few months to get 1 more vote than anyone else in the race (I'm cynical, but I've seen far too many politicians, including very senior ones who are scientifically and medically as qualified as a pile of rocks, and many more that I wouldn't trust to be able to find their own backside without a map and guide).
ecently)


*It's one thing to get a sample of a vaccine or medication in a lab, it's another to be able to produce millions of doses a week, and in this the governments basically footing the bill really helped as it meant they didn't have to worry about angry shareholders when they did things like built 3 different production facilities knowing the chances were that at least two of them wouldn't be suitable (but not which ones at that point) without major, expensive changes, and then started to produce the vaccine in bulk as soon as the first human trials said it was likely ok (again something the shareholders normally frown on, as if you run into a problem and have to dump it that's more money down the drain).,
 
Last edited:
Yeah it wasn't the use of mrna per se that I was surprised at, it was the ionised lipid nano particles that it used as a delivery mechanism, felt far too risky because of the spread risk. I didn't really appreciate how it worked until that Australian Senate explained it, and its contradictory too so who to believe? Yes he's a politician so not sure I believe him but sounds plausible.

There are still doctors out there unwilling speak the truth of the chronic inflammation effects because their jobs would be at risk and it goes against the health boards advice.
 
Yeah it wasn't the use of mrna per se that I was surprised at, it was the ionised lipid nano particles that it used as a delivery mechanism, felt far too risky because of the spread risk. I didn't really appreciate how it worked until that Australian Senate explained it, and its contradictory too so who to believe? Yes he's a politician so not sure I believe him but sounds plausible.

There are still doctors out there unwilling speak the truth of the chronic inflammation effects because their jobs would be at risk and it goes against the health boards advice.
Because for years before Covid you were an expert in this field as well rather than just a normal punter like the rest of us and now it is your time to shine. What’s your day job?
Edit: is this where the “brexit is going well” tribe come to get a win now?

Thin gruel
 
Last edited:
Because for years before Covid you were an expert in this field as well rather than just a normal punter like the rest of us and now it is your time to shine. What’s your day job?
Edit: is this where the “brexit is going well” tribe come to get a win now?
There are definitely vaccine side effects:


I know someone who is experiencing them (well, that's what they think is the cause) and their life in the normal sense is essentially over. Unfortunately there are side effects of all medications - in this case the uproar is that we were told that the vaccines were safe.
 
Last edited:
Yeah it wasn't the use of mrna per se that I was surprised at, it was the ionised lipid nano particles that it used as a delivery mechanism, felt far too risky because of the spread risk. I didn't really appreciate how it worked until that Australian Senate explained it, and its contradictory too so who to believe? Yes he's a politician so not sure I believe him but sounds plausible.

There are still doctors out there unwilling speak the truth of the chronic inflammation effects because their jobs would be at risk and it goes against the health boards advice.

The only risk with the delivery system is that people with certain existing conditions can struggle to breakdown the lipids and if you need a treatment intensive enough it can cause a toxic build up for anyone, it was also something which was creating difficulties with using mRNA therapies before the breakthroughs which made the mRNA COVID vaccine possible.

It is actually still a problem with the COVID vaccines in that while pretty much anyone can tolerate a small to moderate number of doses, it doesn't take many before a small number of the population starts to run into a toxicity problem with them, and regular use of the vaccines would quickly start to cause a problem for a not insignificant number of the population - probably one of the reasons they've backed off the vaccination campaigns a lot.

(Like with artificial colours and flavourings, a small subset of the population have hypersensitivity to them).
 
Last edited:
There are definitely vaccine side effects:


I know someone who is experiencing them (well, that's what they think is the cause) and their life in the normal sense is essentially over. Unfortunately there are side effects of all medications - in this case the uproar is that we were told that the vaccines were safe.

I am sorry for your friend, but @pallys is the new medical expert on the block so ask him/her.

That’s if you are ok with “internet” advice of course.
 
Last edited:
I also know someone who has had life changing side effects from antibiotics :( it doesn't necessarily mean there's a big conspiracy.

Well sorry about that also. The internet doctors are in this thread so I am sure they can explain.

It’s either a WEF conspiracy, or 5g, apparently.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom