I hope this helps.

[chickenstrip]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J0ZY3VWYKzQ
____________________
Chickenystripgeezer's Biking Life (Latest update 19/10/18) Belgium, France, Italy, Austria tour 2016 Picos de Europa, Pyrenees and French Alps tour 2017 Scotland Trip 1, now with BONUS FEATURE edit, 5/10/19, on page 2 Scotland Trip 2 Luxembourg, Black Forest, Switzerland, Vosges Trip 2017
THERE'S MILLIONS OF CHICKENSTRIPS OUT THERE!

[GettinBetter]

I wasn't going to watch this but, in order to remain open minded I did.

I didn't learn anything from it as I live alone, and have spent many hours days weeks (without family obligations getting in the way) digging into details about the whole issue from day one.

In summary it was a mere snippet of everything that has gone on over the last two years, and whilst much info is missing, it does paint a picture of the contradictary/erroneous messages coming from 'The Experts'.

[Kawasaki Jimbo]

Keep on looking for reasons to justify anti-vaxx as anything other than ignorance, arrogance and cod-rebellion. At least he didn’t try going down the ‘Great Reset’ path.

[chickenstrip]

[Bhud]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Information_behavior

What your man is saying is, given this broad collection of examples (an aggregation of data) of unreliable, contradictory or incorrect things people have been told, a specific conclusion has been drawn about a particular thing by some people (i.e. that the vaccines are not trustworthy). This is poor reasoning, on their part.

To give an example: let's say Drug X is developed, that cures all types of cancer. This drug is tested on many different people. When the results of these people are compared with the sample control group, most of those given the drug seem to recover from their illness. Most recover, but not all. It's statistically significant when compared with a placebo. Some of those who had cancer still die, but because you're using an evidence-based approach in your study of the drug, on average you find there is a strong statistical correlation between recovery from cancer and the administration of Drug X.

Drug X is then administered to cancer patients. Some cancer patients have a heart attack and die. Drug X is studied and found to exacerbate heart attack risks, and is not advisable for people with pre-existing heart conditions. What's more, it's found that one or two of the cancer patients trial group who died in the original testing phase for Drug X had a pre-existing heart condition. Why was this not uncovered at the time? Because the aggregation of data method used in an evidence-based medicine approach causes a loss in particularity when you get your results.

What your man is saying is that vaccine hesitancy is caused by first cherry-picking from a list of things that actually happened, and then compounding this error by using a flawed method (aggregation and averaging of all kinds of selected political hypocrisies, even including American elections and heavy media bias) and applying it to a particular property (i.e. the matter of a vaccine for coronavirus). If we were to apply this mistaken logic to our fictional Drug X, then those same people would be saying that all cancer treatments should be avoided in case they cause heart attacks. Net effect: more people die of cancer.

[Kawasaki Jimbo]

[chickenstrip]

[Kawasaki Jimbo]

Rated funny.

[chickenstrip]

[arry]

[doggone]

The changing narrative around vaccines is hardly encouraging.
In a few years time a major growth industry will be claiming damages caused by vaccine especially where it was practically forced by employers or state.

https://worldaffairs.blog/2021/12/17/why-i-havent-gotten-the-covid-vaccine-yet-an-evidence-based-discussion/

[UncleFester]

My issue with all of this is that it ignores all the things that previous vaccines have done. Please tell me how you correlate the disappearance of smallpox / diphtheria with vaccine use.

Get one / don't get one but it's not a conspiracy and if you choose not to get one and then you get infected ( and become seriously ill - which is the important bit) then that's your own fault. There's still a difference between those who say "i've accepted the risks but i don't want the vaccine" and those who say that all vaccines are bad and it's a all a conspiracy. Yes some people have made a mint out of this, that's life. It has knack all to do with conspiracy and all to do with greedy chunts.

Just because you spent lockdown on your own reading internet bunkum and then convincing yourself that it's fact doesn't make it into real facts.

"Science was wrong".

No. The data changed so the science changed, that's the whole point of it, it evolves. The only thing that hasn't evolved is the conspiracy theorists who are still exhaling the same old rubbish.

When this eventually mutates into something akin to the common cold, all we'll hear from these nutjobs is that Science was wrong and we should have just waited it out. Which flies in the face of all that we've learned over the last 100 years or so of dealing with disease and viruses. Imagine it we'd just waited out Smallpox - or do you think we were lied to about that as well?

That most people who get it now don't get seriously ill doesn't mean the vaccine is dangerous or wrong. To then use those people as evidence against vaccine use is mental gymnastics at its finest.

I get that a carpet fitter might be able to turn their hand to light engine maintenance or maybe the plumber can engage in a little gas pipe work. Or that someone who can't cook can learn to do so. All of these things are reasonable / possible.

But this view that folk are somehow able to to transfer their day job skills to become experts in a field that requires years of training and an accompanying IQ baffles me beyond reason. Maybe we've all just got it wrong, in which case why aren't you working for big Pharma making the next vaccine better or in Government fighting the good fight.

Answers on the back of a postage stamp in felt tip pen please.
____________________
Module 1 and 2 passed - October 2014. Happy owner of a 2017 Z1000SX, ex owner of a YBR125 / CB500 / VFR800.

[doggone]

[Nobby the Bastard]

[Bhud]

The mRNA vaccines are a real breakthrough. These are very exciting times, and it's a bit shocking that anyone might conflate unrelated things as diverse as American election results and our politicians being a bunch of cocks and then apply them to the vaccines.

The potential of this stuff is huge. Not just for epidemic control (there will be other novel viruses after Covid) but for the improvement of humanity as a whole. I hope that one day new tech such as CRISPR is actually seen as a desirable thing to get involved with, as a means to correct heritable issues and to improve quality of life. I want to see optogenetics take off. The potential of this stuff is mind-blowing. Just imagine, you could get humans with fluorescence virally induced in the neurons of specific regions of the brain, and remotely induce behavioural modifications nonintrusively by shining directed light upon those regions. You could eliminate crime, even remove painful memories, or create new ones. People will go after this stuff and even experience flavours of ice cream that don't exist and can't be described. What if these updates, rather than money, became the new way to motivate people and reward them? The end of all social problems and conflicts and issues facing us as a species. And who would have thought this epidemic response would have started it all?

That video is just made to accrue views and money, playing to the lowest common denominator and exploiting anxiety. These Luddite attitudes he's describing are holding us back and we need to do our bit as individuals to knock down a few idols. This is the time of the greatest technological progress in all of human history.

[chickenstrip]

I don't know anything about the science behind vaccines, viruses or any of it. I don't really care. What I care about is the attitudes forming around it all. It doesn't make any sense to me. We'd actually divide society based on those who have had a vaccine, and those who haven't?! Madness! I can see absolutely no sense in that mentality. It will not "save lives", it will not "save the NHS" (which needs much more than a little relief from a few people sick with an ever less potent virus). I suspect most of this is an argument for the sake of an argument, and people trying to say "Look at me, I'm more intelligent than you!" Well, good luck with that intelligence if it causes massive polarisation and hatred. That'll be really worthwhile, won't it?
____________________
Chickenystripgeezer's Biking Life (Latest update 19/10/18) Belgium, France, Italy, Austria tour 2016 Picos de Europa, Pyrenees and French Alps tour 2017 Scotland Trip 1, now with BONUS FEATURE edit, 5/10/19, on page 2 Scotland Trip 2 Luxembourg, Black Forest, Switzerland, Vosges Trip 2017
THERE'S MILLIONS OF CHICKENSTRIPS OUT THERE!

[doggone]

[Nobby the Bastard]

I seem to remember someone on here repeatedly posting a picture of a vaccination leaflet that said it was to prevent serious illness etc and not to prevent infection and trying to argue that means the vaccines don't work....
____________________
trevor saxe-coburg-gotha:"Remember this simple rule - scooters are for men who like to feel the breeze on their huge, flapping cunt lips."
Sprint ST 1050

[chickenstrip]

I'm sorry to hear you're being held back Bhud. I hope you can find a way forward for yourself again soon
____________________
Chickenystripgeezer's Biking Life (Latest update 19/10/18) Belgium, France, Italy, Austria tour 2016 Picos de Europa, Pyrenees and French Alps tour 2017 Scotland Trip 1, now with BONUS FEATURE edit, 5/10/19, on page 2 Scotland Trip 2 Luxembourg, Black Forest, Switzerland, Vosges Trip 2017
THERE'S MILLIONS OF CHICKENSTRIPS OUT THERE!

[Islander]

[chickenstrip]

[Islander]

[chickenstrip]

[Islander]

[Bhud]

There's nothing new about restrictions and controls. It's just that the way they're implemented right now is so defunct and obsolete and offers so little benefit to us, that we should avail ourselves of the technology that exists out there. This isn't going to be a painless process, but we will have to walk down that road that leads to the betterment of the human condition. For this to be possible, many of the systems, beliefs and patterns that guided previous generations in the modern, industrial age will have to be scrapped. It's not as if they've been fit for purpose for the past 40 years anyway.

Example: "covid passports are bad". Why are they bad? Because of centralised control, tyranny, the potential for the abuse of data, the sanctity of privacy, George Orwell, etc.

OK, but do we currently enjoy a utopia of freedom of belief, thought and conscience, where our reality is not already under heavy control and restriction? Could there possibly be ancillary uses to which such data and systems as the Covid passport scheme could be put to better use? Why can't we use this system in the future to DNA-sample every newborn, and use that information to build an incredibly comprehensive picture of the way in which the genes work?

Let's start from scratch.

The reality you're defending hasn't existed for some considerable time, but the illusion of it has. There was no freedom - everyone's thought was policed and under heavily restrictive control.

Child is born, and is introduced to other children at the kindergarten. One child has an interesting toy. Another child goes up to it, and grabs it. Child holds on, and starts screaming. Other child bashes it with a wooden block, full-force, in the face. Childminder steps in and says "No! Naughty!" and that's where it all starts. It takes 16 years of carrot-and-stick (mostly stick) after that to create the individual who fits into this "ideal" society. Individuals created and formed by PUNISHMENTS to make this society sort of work. How is that humane?
On top of that, they have to face viruses out in the wild, alone? What's it worth? Why defend it?

You go to the workplace water cooler. You ask your colleague, "did you see the game last night?". Or, if it's a woman, they will ask whether they saw Eastenders or something. Well, of course they did. There were perhaps 2 or 3 choices on TV that night (going back to the 1980s), and 60 million people glued to the TV had to choose between them. Then they work, and all their productivity and all their life-force and energy goes into making Capital, Fidelity, Blackrock, etc. richer. The people who own everything, right? Every product, so much "choice", but is there really, when the same people own everything?

The country is so crowded - so much overpopulation, right? Well, it doesn't look like that from the air. It actually looks idyllic. The land that inspired Arthurian legend - all green and pleasant. Just people are locked into human habitation zones, while all that greenness is very much off-limits and owned by just a few people.

So, all I'm saying is, scrap it - it's crap and we've done all this before. Men get used like farm animals, and eventually it becomes Game of Thrones, except the people on the TV who actually fight great wars somehow look so shiny and good compared with the people in the supermarket or down the high street. We need to embrace these new technologies in order to break this trap, that's all I'm saying.

A destination 40-ish so years into the future in which the human being isn't actually a human being but is something else, and is connected to a universal, prime intelligence. Any step that brings us closer to this is a boon. And that includes novel vaccines, medications, computer systems and networks.