The COVID humbug thread (2021 edition)

Why, what’s the risk on them?

Get jabbed folks!

Only a tiny proportion of Ireland’s adult population is unvaxxed, but they account for more than half of the ICU cases.

https://www.hpsc.ie/a-z/respiratory/coronavirus/novelcoronavirus/surveillance/vaccinationstatusweeklyreports/Vaccination%20Status%20of%20ICU%20admissions.pdf

Five hundred and eighty-nine persons (aged 15+ years) with confirmed COVID-19 infection were admitted to
ICU between April 1
st and November 13th 2021 and reported to the national Computerised Infectious Disease
Reporting (CIDR) system at HPSC. Of these 589 cases, 369 (63%) were reported as not having received a COVID19 vaccine or were not registered as vaccinated on Ireland’s national COVID-19 immunisation system
(COVAX) and 220 (37%) were reported as having received at least one COVID-19 vaccine prior to ICU
admission.

There are actually some risks associated with those pills.
But as I pointed out there are also serious risks from taking corticosteroids which are also a standard treatment for sick patients.

I’m just amused that folks who railed so hard to get ivermectin, an unproven treatment, don’t seem concerned to find out about the availability of the proven ‘miracle drugs’.

1 Like

There are plenty of people who have the expertise and can tell if Crawford is wrong, don’t need to belittle people.

the claim 150,000 people have died in the United States as a result of COVID-19 vaccines is not accurate and is based on data from VAERS that was not properly interpreted.

The document itself states that it used a “simple analysis” of data from the U.S. Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) – not an in-depth study as the article in question suggests.

https://www.reuters.com/article/factcheck-coronavirus-usa-idUSL1N2R00KP

2 Likes

Regarding author Steven R. Gundry, I see the usual pattern here:

He is best known for his disputed claims that lectins, a type of plant protein found in numerous foods, cause inflammation resulting in many modern diseases. His Plant Paradox diet suggests avoiding all foods containing lectins. Scientists and dieticians have classified Gundry’s claims about lectins as pseudoscience. He sells supplements that he claims protect against or reverse the supposedly damaging effects of lectins. . . .

T. Colin Campbell, a biochemist and advocate for plant-based diets, states that The Plant Paradox contains numerous unsupported claims and denies that it makes a “convincing argument that lectins as a class are hazardous.” Robert H. Eckel, an endocrinologist and past president of the American Heart Association, argues that Gundry’s diet advice contradicts “every dietary recommendation represented by the American Cancer Society, American Heart Association, American Diabetes Association and so on” and that it is not possible to draw any conclusions from Gundry’s own research due to the absence of control patients in his studies. Writing in New Scientist , food writer and chef Anthony Warner notes that Gundry’s theories “are not supported by mainstream nutritional science” and that evidence of the benefits of high-lectin containing diets “is so overwhelming as to render Gundry’s arguments laughable”.

1 Like

I’m not sure how that’s supposed to be a response to my post, but anyway, I already pointed out some of the flaws in the seatbelt analogy.

You can unfasten a seatbelt when you’re ready to exit a vehicle. You can never get unjabbed.

1 Like

But driving is a necessity for many people, and seatbelt use is legally mandated whenever you drive.

If you really want a seatbelt analogy, masks are much closer. They can malfunction. They are imperfect. But they are not invasive, and they are not permanent. And (in most cases) they do not use novel technology with no long term safety data.

1 Like

I don’t! Just pointing out there are some similarities with vaccines, or at least it isn’t entirely a free choice.

That is arbitrary requirement to ask.
What would you see as long term?
1, 10, 50 or 100 years? What’s the point of a vaccine at that point in future if all people already recovered or died?

As pointed out in this thread previously, all long term effects from all developed vaccines have been detected in the first 6 months after injection. And we are past that with covid vaccines and have unprecedented amount of data to support the vaccine is safe and very rarely have adverse side effects.
It is possible that some can die from vaccine, like the child with undetected heart disease did die from myocarditis in Germany. Most kids recover from that rare side effect quickly without issues.

And you also have little choice of getting covid or have no possibility of getting uninfected with covid for that matter.

Effects from vaccines wear off after a while, otherwise we would not need boosters.
The immune response (which often comes with usual side effects like fever, shivering, headache, muscle pain) after a few days and most antibodies after 6-12 months.


Or may be it is a secret plan of an alien invasion all along :alien::

Earth is celebrating the tenth anniversary of the alliance with the Aschen, an advanced race that SG-1 encountered and has defeated the Goa’uld and provided science and technology to improve the quality of life of the Earthlings. Among the improvements, the Aschen have developed a vaccine against aging.

Sam is infertile and soon they learn that 90% of the women on Earth have the same problem, as the result of the Aschen vaccine, as part of a plan to conquer Earth.

1 Like

2 posts were merged into an existing topic: From coronavirus

I’ve read Gundry’s book and I agree that he’s a bit of a nutcase. However, buried in the mumbo-jumbo is a diet that’s well within the adaptive range of our species, and most people will thrive on it much better than the trash that the average American eats. He also has some ideas that do at least fit with the observed facts and are perhaps worthy of research.

The rebuttal you quote is pretty bizarre. Whoever wrote it clearly hasn’t read Gundry’s book. He does not promote a “high-lectin containing diet”. On the contrary, he suggests that most people would do well to avoid such foods. The ‘paradox’ in the book title refers to the fact that most plants contain anti-nutritional factors of one sort or another, but most humans do well with a lot of plants in their diet.

But yes, there is a pattern here:

  • Find someone who is making the establishment look foolish by pointing out that they’re running a massive scam that’s doing more harm than good
  • Set up a strawman argument to attack them with
  • Get that argument into as much of the mainstream media as possible
  • Point and laugh at the people who say “hang on a second, this is a strawman”, with the rebuttal “LOL, conspiracy theorists again, we’re following the science”.
1 Like

Warner promotes the benefits of a “high-lectin containing diet,” not that Gundry does.

The “pattern” I was referring to is whenever I look into many of the articles posted in this thread the experts behind them seem to be outside the mainstream of science. Why concern myself with an expert’s reputation and credentials? How else to confirm the reliability of an authority on a subject and avoid becoming a victim of the expert fallacy?

An argument from authority, also called an appeal to authority , or argumentum ad verecundiam , is a form of argument in which the opinion of an authority on a topic is used as evidence to support an argument. Some consider that it is used in a cogent form if all sides of a discussion agree on the reliability of the authority in the given context, and others consider it to always be a fallacy to cite the views of an authority on the discussed topic as a means of supporting an argument.

I don’t think he will be invited back.

Ah, got it. Didn’t read that bit carefully. Well, Warner’s probably an idiot then. There are plenty of societies which thrive without the benefits of a “high lectin diet”, whatever that even is.

I suspect what’s happened to Gundry is that he’s had several patients who have a genuine allergic response to lectin-containing vegetables (possibly because of the lectins, possibly not). When they eliminate those vegetables their problems go away. What’s irritating about this scenario is the nutritionists who pop out of the woodwork and claim that because their theory can’t explain it, the observed result didn’t happen.

Dietitians, as a group, are all outside the mainstream of science. Some of their assertions are utterly laughable: they’re simply incompatible with either physics or biology. I’ve had plenty of arguments about such things here on forumosa. I once wrote to the British Dietetic Association to correct an assertion on their website that was so egregiously wrong that they actually wrote back to me and said “oh yes, you’re right, we’ll correct it” (and they did, sort of - it was still wrong, but somewhat less wrong). The whole discipline of dietetics, if it even deserves the term, is a pseudoscience. So yes, there are some eccentric characters who occasionally stand up and point out what a complete load of bollocks it all is. But they’re few and far between and they’re inevitably labelled cranks. Some of them are cranks. But they’re often right.

I don’t understand your question. Are you suggesting that one should rely on an expert’s reputation and credentials to make judgement? Isn’t that basically just saying that Appeal to Authority is totally OK as long as you Appeal to the highest Authority (ie., the one who shouts the loudest)?

The way to decide if an expert is talking bollocks is conceptually simple but practically hard. If you want (for example) to determine how much of nutrition “science” is … not science, then you start by learning all about organic chemistry and physics and then work your way through physiology and cell biology. When you’ve done that, you’ll have a pretty good basis for making a judgement, because you’ll know a lot more about the relevant science than the average nutritionist does.

She makes some great points.

1 Like

I remember seeing over the years people call the EU the EUSSR. Poignant now. Some of its nonsensical claims are just that.
And the Romanian MEP is spot on when he said people checking other people’s health status to enter places is insane. It’s totally insane.

People checking other people’s belongings to enter planes is insane. It’s totally insane.

Why do you always come up with some wildly-inaccurate simile instead of just addressing the issue as presented? Did you even bother watching the video or is this another instance where you already know the answer without checking the facts?

In any case people have done experiments showing that the security theater at airports is indeed mostly pointless. I’ve personally put luggage through at least two x-rays with a 20kg bag of white powder inside. It was completely inert and I had the MSDS with me, but nobody even asked what it was.

1 Like

Argh someone who did not watch the video again.
Maybe if you had heard his words you would see the parallels to what happened in Europe previously to what is happening now and their plan on what is coming. But I have to remind myself, there are people who support tyranny even though they themselves think it is not.
War is peace…