Antivax movement imploding in Oz.

Measles, “a normal, minor childhood disease” is now making a comeback thanks to idiot antivaxxers not having their children vaccinated. This includes children dying from measles—how sick is that? I put it down to idiots wanting excitement in their life even at the expense of their childrens lives.

The “rationale” these antivaxxers give is that the vaccinations cause autism and they quote a physician who had his licence to practice medicine revoked. ummm Wakefield if I remember correctly?

Seems the age for some vaxxes is also the age autism shows up.
Wakefield is banging elle mcpherson. The cunt
 

Lols

Active member
because of people like you who whinged when he did enforce it
Don’t make me come up there to tell you this…:stop but I NEVER whinged about the mask …nor about the social distancing in supermarkets …nor about the hand sanitizing …. I’m doing it voluntarily… my choice.
And both hubby and I instinctively knew when it was announced just on winter’s doorstep when flu is rife… no masks mandates at airports…. Hubby shakes his head and says “not a good idea” and yes… we wore them at airport recently and on plane.
But look at McClown in WA how harsh he was and now… totally opposite… much to the horror of those in WA that voted for him. They seem unhappy with it.
What’s with the inconsistency from WA and Vic premiers? Vote time closing in?
Oh and re: the part about protecting the elderly… something Despot Dan sorely lacked as many in elderly homes died. Highest elderly deaths from covid compared to all other states.
 

johnsmith

Administrator
Staff member
Don’t make me come up there to tell you this…:stop but I NEVER whinged about the mask …nor about the social distancing in supermarkets …nor about the hand sanitizing …. I’m doing it voluntarily… my choice.
sorry, with so much whinging it's hard to keep track off sometimes:jumping
 

Shellandshilo1956

Active member
So viruses are now tiny fleas, jumping from body to body??

Is that how you see it, Shell? Where did I write anything like that?

You would know, hopefully, that viral particles can be transmitted in the droplets from your sneezes and coughs from people infected with it and if you inhale those droplets you too can become infected.

They also can linger on any surface for some time before degrading. If touch said surfaces you can introduce them into your body with your your hands or fingers coming into contact with your eyes, nose , ears or mouth.
I was being metaphorical you idiot! I was responding to your stupid "breakthrough cases". Which you avoided explaining!

I am quite aware of the actual pathways in which this virus spreads to another person. But, you must first HAVE THE VIRUS IN YOU, and your IMMUNE SYSTEM MUST RESPOND TO IT, to express these symptoms. No immune response, no sneezing, no coughing, no runny eyes and nose, and no spreading of the virus(bar viral shedding). Since the skin cells have ACE2 receptors, the virus CAN attach and infect the skin cells. But the skin is very layered. So viral infection of the skin, would incur a systemic response(not an immune response). Therefore, you would need to touch your face, nose, eyes, or another person's to develop the disease(Covid-19), or to provoke a full immune response.

Masks don't work because they don't provide a perfect fit(one size fits all). Therefore, you breathe through all of the openings(sides and tops). Even the smallest aerosol droplets can contain thousands of millions of this virus. So, it is extremely unlikely that you would avoid breathing in a few of these viruses. Hence why the largest group of professionals infected, are the healthcare professionals. And, they would have the best protection available, right? Also, your eyes provide another pathway for the virus to enter your body. So, not sure what your trying to say here.

Shell wrote:

If vaccinations stop the virus, so that it doesn't jump to my body, then WHY are fully vaccinated people still being infected and reinfected??

I've already answered this elsewhere and here. The vaccines protect you. Vaccinated people are less likely to get seriously ill or die from the virus. I referenced the NSW Health data in the other thread. I have already told you in this one that from that data the majority of hospitalisations come from the unvaccinated. And of the vaccinated that are in hospital those who have four shots represent a tiniest proportion. There are other real world studies.

You can look here:

You've explained nothing to me! All you've done is refer me to your selective sights, and tell me that they will answer all my questions. Since I can't question your sites, and you don't have a clue, I'm stuck with listening to all your insults and bluffs. You should have at least enough understanding of your own articles, TO BE ABLE TO DEFEND THEM!

Again, the problem with relying on statistics, is that the results can be interpreted in many ways. Using only the results as the premise, does not mean that the premise is true. It only means that the statistical facts are true. They do not explain the WHY OR THE HOW! No parameters were explained. No variables, exceptions, sample sizes, or contradictory results were included or mentioned. I can statistically prove that there have consistently been more female births than male births. Can I then conclude that the male population is in danger of dying out? Sure, I could! But is this true? There is a difference in what is statistically true, and what is actually true. This is how politicians spread their half-truths and disinformation(I.e., Black Americans commit 50% of all murders).

I have never said that this vaccine doesn't do what it was designed to do. If you took a tiny rock and placed it under your skin, it would evoke an immune response. So yes, forcing muscle cells to produce viral spikes, WOULD evoke an immune response that would attack only that spike. These tiny innate antibodies don't think or discern. If you weren't born with it, they will attack it. This video is the best, and least complicated I could find to illustrate how the NATURAL IMMUNE SYSTEM WORKS! Vaccines play only a minor role in the system's overall function.

https://www.science.org.au/curious/video/immune-system-explained

The problem is, that you keep parroting that this vaccine saves lives, prevent infections, lessen the severity of symptoms, and will prevent transmission. THESE ARE ALL LIES! Vaccinated people are still dying from, becoming reinfected with, having severe symptoms from, and are still spreading this virus. As well as unvaccinated people who are infected! The only rational explanation that explains this, is the condition of the patients immune system. Nothing to do with whether they are vaccinated or not. All vaccines are precautionary AT BEST, therapeutic SOMETIMES, and useless AT WORST(for those dead)!
And, there is nothing on this planet that can stop any virus from infecting you! Sorry, but these are the facts.

WHY are fully vaccinated people still dying?? WHY are fully vaccinated people still developing serious symptoms??

Another pointless question that you keep returning to. Are you trying to claim that vaccinated people aren't doing better than the vaccinated in all those aspects? Real world evidence confirms that they are.

Are you making the absurd proposition that if the vaccine doesn't give you 100% protection then it useless and don't take it?
What does vaccinated people are doing better than unvaccinated people actually mean? To the dying or dead unvaccinated/vaccinated person, this is meaningless! So, simply deflating and demeaning the question doesn't mean that the question is absurd or pointless. It just means that you can't or don't want to answer it. And, answering a question WITH a question, is just deflecting to avoid answering.

We were first told that masks and distancing would slow down this virus. They lied! We were told that isolation and lockdowns would slow down this virus. They lied! We were told that hospitals would be overwhelmed as this virus infected more and more people. They lied! We were told that closing down major industries and small businesses, and the loss of tens of thousands of jobs were necessary to save lives. They lied! We were told that this "quick fix" new type of vaccine, would prevent people from becoming infected, dying, spreading, or becoming seriously ill from this virus. They lied! Now they are telling us that endless vaccines and boosters are necessary to save lives. Sorry, their track record speaks for itself. But it is YOUR choice!
 

Shellandshilo1956

Active member
I don't give a shit about being protected from being infected by this flu virus. That would be impossible!

And you don't give a shit in protecting others you come in contact with. That's clear.

What do you mean by infected, Shell? I think you're using the word rather loosely and ambiguously in an attempt to deceive. So, tell us what infection means to you.

BTW if you didn't give a shit about protection why did you even argue about it before ad nauseum in the other thread?
What do I mean by being infected? I mean a single virus flies into your nose, mouth, or eyes, and attaches itself to one of its preferred cells. And, then begins to duplicate itself. What do you THINK it means for a person becomes infected, dumb-dumb?

What you think is clearly irrelevant! What I was saying is, that I'm NOT afraid of a virus less lethal than the measles. A virus with a mortality rate of less than 0.1%. A virus that only effects a fraction of the total population. So being forced/coerced and shamed into taking endless vaccines and boosters, is just insane to me! And, I argue because of people like you, who keep parroting and peddling half-truths, lies, and disinformation, AD NAUSEUM!

So, Shell, do you give a shit about the government demanding that you use seat belts or obey traffic lights or other laws for the rest of your life? Just asking.
I don't stick a seatbelt or a traffic light into my arm, dumb-dumb! And, I don't wear a seat belt when shopping or walking in the park. Horrible comparison! Or, are you saying, that because we are told to do some things for a rational reason, that this justifies being told to do anything for a rational reason? Read a book!

Thing is , Shell, people take annual flu shots to protect themselves and those around them from coming down with constantly mutationg flu's , which could if not taken result in serious illness or death for many.
So in your convoluted reasoning, because people voluntarily take yearly flu vaccines(whose genome is segmented), that this means that it is okay to take the Covid-19 vaccines(non-segmented genome) indefinitely? Madness! And, you call me irrational?

Do you think flu shots are "shit in the arm"? If so, why are they shit in your arm?

Whilst you're there why are Covid vaccines "shit in your arm"?

Are you going to go the same course arguing ingredients, unknown long term effects, ethics etc again? All of which were refuted in the other thread.
When I say shit, I hope you don't think I literally mean shit. What I mean is "crap" in a figurative sense. These vaccines mimic an infection that forces the immune system to respond. This response produces very robust antigen-specific, low spectrum, extremely high affinity antibodies(which is why it works). They will out compete against all other antibodies to attack this infection. I would prefer keeping MORE of my normal broad spectrum, antigen-nonspecific, and low affinity antibodies. These are the antibodies I want fighting REAL viral infections. Antibodies that are only created when I actually have been infected. But that is me! NOT YOU!

And, I don't know all the ingredients in this virus. Except for the ones the drug companies have listed. I've asked two questions about the function of this vaccine, based on the ingredients listed. No answers so far!

Here you display your self-centredness, Shell. It's not just your body. It's other people's bodies too that you should care about. Stop the virus in you and you stop the virus spreading to someone vulnerable.

What would you think and feel Shell, if you caught the virus and transmitted the virus to your parents, husband or children and they got seriously ill or died as a result, whilst knowing that if you were fully vaccinated that they may have been spared?

It's happened Shell. It could happen to you.
WOW! So in your self-serving delusion, I should infect myself with a vaccine, that produces and antigen that I never had, for a disease that I don't have, so in case I am infected, I will not spread the virus and potentially kill someone more vulnerable? I really don't give a shit how you want to spin your hypocritical bullshit. It is my body, and it damn sure is my choice. And, no amount of your hypocritical shaming, and crystal-balling nonsense is going to give you control over my body, and definitely not over how I think!

You are simply told what to do, and you do it. You don't think, you don't question, and you don't disobey! So, if being egocentric and selfish means to think for myself, using my own commonsense and the verifiable facts, then I am. I'm curious, just how many people have you told to stop smoking, quit drinking, or stop eating so much? That their related illnesses are placing an unnecessary drain on the health system? And, will cause emotional stress on their loved ones?

You mean YOUR freedom of choice, Shell, and bugger the rest of us if that's limited for you in any way, eh?

And you got your freedom of choice back through the very vaccines you've spent days decrying.

You never lost your freedom of choice. Well, not entirely. You could choose to take a tested, safe and effective vaccine or not. You could wear a mask or not. Of course, if you chose not to, it was reasonably demanded, in the prevailing circumstances, that you stay the hell away from the rest of us.
Since people were still being infected, simply claiming that vaccines are the reason for the return of our freedoms, makes no sense. We have our freedoms back, because the non-spineless Australians did not drink all the Kool-Aid. And, removed the current government, and replaced it with people who don't think they can physically stop a virus, or keep 26M people 2 meters apart.

There are two types of freedoms. Intrinsic and extrinsic. Our extrinsic freedoms requires no restrictions or barriers. This is our basic freedoms as a human being. The right to decide what goes into your body is just one example of this freedom. Intrinsic freedom is what you're talking about. The herd/bandwagon/hive mentality. Restrictions based of social feedbacks, norms, customs, and for the general good of the society.

Unless you are a total moron, given a choice between jab or job, is not much of a choice. Not wanting to to be asked to leave restaurants, pubs, libraries, unless you have a vaccine passport, is also not a realistic choice. If you choose NOT to be tested in the healthcare system, or in education, you will be fired! No choice there either. If you think that this can be characterized as "reasonably demanded", then you are an ignorant idiot as well.

The government took action, with an unknown worldwide viral pandemic, not seen seen before, to protect the population. It's what governments are there to do and they are expected to exercise that function when needed.

We had no vaccines to start with, we had to wait for them, the hospitals would have been overwhelmed by sick and dying patients, the virus would have exponentially ripped through the whole population. It would have been total chaos and god knows how many lives would have been lost.

WTF did you expect them to do? They acted in accordance with the best medical advice. The restrictions and shutdown had bipartisan support.

Here Shell, even The Guardian agreed with the shutdown:
Just more bullshit. None of these manufactured fears EVER HAPPEND! Except in your mind! And since News Corp Australia titles account for 59% of all daily newspaper sales in Australia, they are more of an extension of Rupert Murdoch's beliefs, than as an unbiased objective news source. Therefore, just another extension of the Government's rhetoric.

I am for saving suffering, lives, and preventions. But NOT AT ANY COST!! There is a limit to how far I will go. My limit is forcing/coercing/shaming me into putting anything into my body without my consent. I would've thought this to be a no brainer!

I don't think your vote or that of your motley bunch of disgruntled antivaxxers could show the government the door. You never had the numbers and you have even less in your ranks now.

Given that the measures had bipartisan support, your dummy spit isn't worth a pinch. But it does show everyone here how self-important and entitled you think you are.
Spin it anyway you want. IT FUCKING WORKED! Or, do you believe, that all these silly and useless restrictions and lockdowns are still in effect? And, as long as this occurred just before and just after the election, the message was received loud and clear, just how far the government can push us. Voting is the only power the people have! What sad little toady sycophants like you believe in, can be learned by watching Good Morning Australia. People like you are a danger because they will attack anyone who dares to challenge your masters. So tell your new masters, if they try to do this again, they will also be shown the door.

So I, and those disgruntled pro-choicers couldn't be more happier with our efforts. Don't worry, you still have your freedom to keep injecting whatever shit your masters tell you to, IN-FUCKING-DEFINITELY!!
 

Shellandshilo1956

Active member
"The overwhelming majority of people infected and dying from this disease are those vaccinated, NOT UNVACCINATED."

I'm surprised at the number of anti-vaxxers who endlessly cite this purported claim.
Of course the number of COVID deaths is greater overall in the vaccinated than in the unvaccinated. That's simply because only around 2% of the population are unvaccinated. It's simple maths which the anti-vaxxers can't comprehend. On a pro rate basis of course it's obviously the unvaccinated who are in hospital, in ICU, and dying.

And around 98% of Australian patients in ICU are unvaccinated.

From Scientific American:
View attachment 1209
Firstly, could you provide the full link? And secondly, lets talk about the math. Lets just assume that all the total death of vaccinated/unvaccinated were directly from the complications of Covid-19.

Since you say that only 2% of the population are the unvaccinated, and 98% of the population are the vaccinated, lets keep the ratio the same(98 : 2). So, lets double this ratio for this example. If we took a population of 196 vaccinated people, and another population of 4 unvaccinated, we would be mathematically correct in representing the correct population distribution, right?

Lets just ignore if they were randomly sampled or not? Now lets say that in the vaccinated group of infected, 20 people died of Covid-19 complications. And, 2 people died of the the same complications in the unvaccinated group. Does this conclusion mean that only 10% of the vaccinated people died, and 50% of the unvaccinated people died? YES! But does this mean that 5 times more unvaccinated people are dying than vaccinated people? NO! Why?

First we were told that it was the unvaccinated who were skewing the death curve. Now, even after the population has reached 98% vaccinated, we are still using the unvaccinated as an excuse for why vaccinated people are still dying of this virus. My claim long ago was, that even if we reach a 100% vaccinated population, that this would only mean that only vaccinated people would be dying from this virus. This is exactly what we are seeing.

Look at the hospital's daily death totals in any State you choose. You will see that the overwhelming deaths with/from Covid-19 are vaccinated people. This is the obvious, and expected trend that we would expect to see in a 98% vaccinated population. Because it will always be the condition of our immune system, that will determines whether we survive or die from Covid-19. Not a vaccine.
 

ausGeoff

New member
As a newbie here, I have to ask why Shell wastes so much of their
time posting page after page of misinformation, anti-vax bias,
misrepresentation of scientifically established facts, conspiracy
theories, falsehoods, and even blatant lies.

That the anti-vaxxers are facing a lost cause is obvious now, with
a mere 2.2% of the eligible population totally unvaccinated.



And these 2.2% are the future COVID deaths waiting to happen. Sad really, and so unnecessary. I can only hope that Shell is not asymptomatic, and happily spreading
the virus wherever they go in public!

I'd like to know were Shell a parent, would they have their children vaccinated against
diphtheria, chickenpox, pneumococcal, rubella, poliomyelitis, rotavirus or hepatitis etc? None of these is compulsory in Australia, but it would be an errant parent who refused to have their children vaccinated against a slew of deadly diseases.

In fact, researchers from the University of Western Australia and the University of Sydney found that 85% of parents are in favour of a mandatory vaccination policy, with
only 9% disagreeing. [RACGP, 3 July 2019]
 

Shellandshilo1956

Active member
As a newbie here, I have to ask why Shell wastes so much of their
time posting page after page of misinformation, anti-vax bias,
misrepresentation of scientifically established facts, conspiracy
theories, falsehoods, and even blatant lies.

That the anti-vaxxers are facing a lost cause is obvious now, with
a mere 2.2% of the eligible population totally unvaccinated.



And these 2.2% are the future COVID deaths waiting to happen. Sad really, and so unnecessary. I can only hope that Shell is not asymptomatic, and happily spreading
the virus wherever they go in public!

I'd like to know were Shell a parent, would they have their children vaccinated against
diphtheria, chickenpox, pneumococcal, rubella, poliomyelitis, rotavirus or hepatitis etc? None of these is compulsory in Australia, but it would be an errant parent who refused to have their children vaccinated against a slew of deadly diseases.

In fact, researchers from the University of Western Australia and the University of Sydney found that 85% of parents are in favour of a mandatory vaccination policy, with
only 9% disagreeing. [RACGP, 3 July 2019]
I'm sorry. Other than a whole lot of editorializing, I have no idea what any of this has to do with anything I've said. I don't disagree with any of the data. I'm sure that they are all correct. Did you address the sampling size, or the false conclusions I was illustrating? How about the daily number of death at hospitals?

Whether I am symptomatic or not is irrelevant. Other than just your opinion, what verifiable evidence, even suggest that unvaccinated people are deaths just waiting to happen? It think, in reality, we all would fit in that category. What is sad, is that you would even think this way.

I am NOT an antivaxxer, and my children and I have all been immunized. Totally different type of vaccine back then. I'm also one of those who was not allowed to say my last goodbyes to my mother.
 

ausGeoff

New member
Firstly, could you provide the full link?
No problem: Average weekly COVID death rates in March 2022: Scientific American

And secondly, lets talk about the math.
The actual (or any maths) is unnecessary Shell. It's the statistics that
tell the story, and statistics don't lie.

EG: From a data set of 644 individuals, 383 unvaccinated people died,
whilst 261 vaccinated people died. But, the sample population ratio
is 3.3, so 383 x 3.3 is the equivalent number of the unvaccinated people
who died, or 1,264 unvaccinated. In simple terms then, this means
that unvaccinated people are dying at a rate of nearly 5 times that of
the unvaccinated.

Because it will always be the condition of our immune system, that will determines whether we survive or die from Covid-19. Not a vaccine.
Not so. An individual's immune stem does not necessarily determine whether
one dies from COVID or not. People who are immunocompromised routinely
survive a COVID infection, whilst others with a 100% immune system often die.

The COVID vaccines simply reduce one's chance of ending up in ICU or dying;
they do not prevent the death of some infected individuals.
 

SethBullock

Captain Bullock
Staff member
As a newbie here, I have to ask why Shell wastes so much of their
time posting page after page of misinformation, anti-vax bias,
misrepresentation of scientifically established facts, conspiracy
theories, falsehoods, and even blatant lies.
It's just a topic he is invested in. I think most of us have a political or social topic that is really important to us. I have a couple like that.

Shell can spend as much time as he wants arguing his position. He is not forcing anyone here to "waste their time". What you choose to read on the site is up to you.

Seth
 

ausGeoff

New member
...I am NOT an antivaxxer, and my children and I have all been immunized. Totally different type of vaccine back then. I'm also one of those who was not allowed to say my last goodbyes to my mother.
Firstly Shell, I'm sorry to hear about your mum, and I know how distressing
it is to miss that last goodbye—I was in the same position with my parents.

I also appreciate that despite your strong objections to COVID vaccinating
and your apparent misunderstanding of the death rates of vaxxed v. unvaxxed
people that you've had your children vaccinated. :)
 

Shellandshilo1956

Active member
It's just a topic he is invested in. I think most of us have a political or social topic that is really important to us. I have a couple like that.

Shell can spend as much time as he wants arguing his position. He is not forcing anyone here to "waste their time". What you choose to read on the site is up to you.

Seth
No Seth. I am no longer invested. We won out freedoms and rights back through peaceful marches, protests, and at the polls. True democracy in action.

It's all just fun now!
 

Linus

Member
The page turns and Shell returns to the same, to repeat her anti-covid vaxxer( Is that better?) views anew. Are you hoping that people will forget your debunked views as the page turns?

Shell wrote:

I was being metaphorical you idiot!

Do look up "metaphorical" and compare and contrast with" rhetorical". Rhetorical was the appropriate word here.

Shell wrote:

I was responding to your stupid "breakthrough cases". Which you avoided explaining!


I explained it, you didn't read it or avoided reading it or are just lying. And I explained it again. Scroll up.

Shell wrote:

I am quite aware of the actual pathways in which this virus spreads to another person. But, you must first HAVE THE VIRUS IN YOU, and your IMMUNE SYSTEM MUST RESPOND TO IT, to express these symptoms. No immune response, no sneezing, no coughing, no runny eyes and nose, and no spreading of the virus(bar viral shedding).

This is half true. As it turns out ".....infected people without symptoms were shown to be contagious in a window of time lasting anywhere from three to 12 days, with eight days being the average. So without any apparent symptoms, these virus carriers could continue shedding and spreading SARS-CoV-2 for about a week...



Shell wrote:

Since the skin cells have ACE2 receptors, the virus CAN attach and infect the skin cells. But the skin is very layered.So viral infection of the skin, would incur a systemic response(not an immune response). Therefore, you would need to touch your face, nose, eyes, or another person's to develop the disease(Covid-19), or to provoke a full immune response.


Shell does like to sound important. After all, she's been straining to tell us through pages of verbiage that she knows better than the relevant experts and authorities.

The skin cells do not get directly infected by its contact with covid outside of the body, as far as I am aware. Would you like to provide a reference on that or are you just making things up?

And if Covid doesn't directly infect skin by contact with Covid outside the body, then you're making it up as you go along when you refer to systemic response v immune response in relation to this.

Can you define Systemic response and Immune system response for us? Do provide references.

Can you distinguish between the two for us?

Once you have Covid , however, it can cause skin problems like rashes indirectly:

"Some of the COVID-19 rashes are not caused by the virus itself, but by the body's immune response to the virus.

For instance, research suggests some may be caused by over-activation of a part of the immune system known as the "complement" response. This leads to the blood vessel damage seen in the chilblain-type symptoms"


It seems from the quote, Shell, that as far as the skin goes , its all immune response or direct viral action( of the virus already within the body)


Shell writes:

"Masks don't work because they don't provide a perfect fit(one size fits all). Therefore, you breathe through all of the openings(sides and tops). Even the smallest aerosol droplets can contain thousands of millions of this virus. So, it is extremely unlikely that you would avoid breathing in a few of these viruses. Hence why the largest group of professionals infected, are the healthcare professionals. And, they would have the best protection available, right? Also, your eyes provide another pathway for the virus to enter your body. So, not sure what your trying to say here."

Masks don't work at all, Shell? They don't any afford any protection at all, Shell?

If they do provide some protection then you're talking shit, right?

"Dr. John Swartzberg, a clinical professor emeritus in infectious diseases and vaccinology at Berkeley Public Health, told the San Francisco Chronicle that the risk of transmission with BA.5 was "greater inside or outside."

"If I was crowded together with other people where I couldn't keep my distance, or if somebody near me was talking loudly or singing, I would just carry a mask with me and put it on if I feel uncomfortable," he said.

"Dr. Maimuna Majumder, a computational epidemiologist specializing in emerging epidemics at Boston Children's Hospital told Insider that she wears a mask in particuarly crowded outdoor settings, such as an open-air concert where people are cramped together. Majumder said she highly recommends that others do the same.

"It's important to remember that while the outdoors is considerably safer than many indoors spaces, the closer together people are in an outdoor space (and the more people there are), the more air people share with each other," Majumder said.

"It's important to remember that while the outdoors is considerably safer than many indoors spaces, the closer together people are in an outdoor space (and the more people there are), the more air people share with each other," Majumder said."


And here:

"How well do masks and respirators work?


"To assess COVID risk and masks, we have to rely on studies in which we are unable to control exactly what people's exposure to the virus is. This is because we can't deliberately put people in risky settings. But that means the results are less clear-cut than if we could control the duration and concentration of disease around each subject.


One meta-analysis (pooled results from multiple studies) of the performance of surgical masks versus respirators in healthcare workers found respirators tended to provide better protection than surgical masks, but the difference was not statistically significant. However, staff were more likely to wear respirators when they were working in high-risk areas with greater exposure to COVID, so the results were biased against respirators.


A recent community study compared the effectiveness of masks or respirators with no masks. People who had received a positive COVID PCR result were matched by age, gender and locality, with people who had a negative result. They were surveyed about their mask or respirator use in indoor public settings two weeks before the test.


Those who always wore any type of mask or respirator in indoor public spaces were 56% less likely to test positive than those that never wore one. There was an 83% reduction in the odds of getting a positive test in those who wore a respirator, compared with a 66% reduction in those wearing surgical masks. Those wearing a cloth mask had lower odds of having a positive PCR test result than those wearing no mask, but the difference was not statistically significant."




So, Shell, masks are worthwhile and you're talking shit. More lies and misinformation from you.

Shell writes:


You've explained nothing to me!

I'm not surprised. You don't read, avoid reading, can't read or can't understand. Take your pick.

Shell writes:

All you've done is refer me to your selective sights, and tell me that they will answer all my questions.

That's "sites" not "sights".

Since I can't question your sites, and you don't have a clue, I'm stuck with listening to all your insults and bluffs.You should have at least enough understanding of your own articles, TO BE ABLE TO DEFEND THEM!

The references I gave you throughout this argument over two threads say what they mean and mean what they say. Anyone reading them, well, apart from you, can understand them. I did explain in my own words where appropriate, I did quote understandable excerpts and gave you the reference to these excerpts if you wanted to look at the source more closely, and, of course, for practicality I left it for you to look at data because it would have been impracticable to dump it here.

Defend my references? WTF are you saying? References are there to support what I say or assert. I don't need to defend them. It's up to you to attack a reference if you think there's something wrong with it and offer something better.

This is what I wrote to which you attacked with the above:

"I've already answered this elsewhere and here. The vaccines protect you. Vaccinated people are less likely to get seriously ill or die from the virus. I referenced the NSW Health data in the other thread. I have already told you in this one that from that data the majority of hospitalisations come from the unvaccinated. And of the vaccinated that are in hospital those who have four shots represent a tiniest proportion. There are other real world studies."

Now scroll up for the reference. No, wait, I'll provide it again:


I explained what I was looking at and referenced it so you or anyone else could check.

Shell writes:

Again, the problem with relying on statistics, is that the results can be interpreted in many ways. Using only the results as the premise, does not mean that the premise is true. It only means that the statistical facts are true. They do not explain the WHY OR THE HOW! No parameters were explained. No variables, exceptions, sample sizes, or contradictory results were included or mentioned. I can statistically prove that there have consistently been more female births than male births. Can I then conclude that the male population is in danger of dying out? Sure, I could! But is this true? There is a difference in what is statistically true, and what is actually true. This is how politicians spread their half-truths and disinformation(I.e., Black Americans commit 50% of all murders).


Pure bullshit.

If you're going to attack any statistics or data I provided in relation to this argument we're having, then provide an alternative interpretation or statistics and we can argue on something concrete, forget your nebulous waffle.


Shell writes:

I have never said that this vaccine doesn't do what it was designed to do. If you took a tiny rock and placed it under your skin, it would evoke an immune response. So yes, forcing muscle cells to produce viral spikes, WOULD evoke an immune response that would attack only that spike. These tiny innate antibodies don't think or discern. If you weren't born with it, they will attack it. This video is the best, and least complicated I could find to illustrate how the NATURAL IMMUNE SYSTEM WORKS! Vaccines play only a minor role in the system's overall function.

https://www.science.org.au/curious/video/immune-system-explained

.
Showing us a video about how the immune system works does speak to the value or efficacy of vaccines, especially the one we've been fighting over, namely, mRNA vaccines.

What you said obfuscates and attempts to misleadingly trivialise what vaccine mediated antibodies do when they, as you say, "only attack the spike". The fact that the vaccine mediated antiboides attack the viral spikes means that the virus is impeded in targeting, attaching and infecting the body's cells!!!! Moreover , it was found in research that the spikes in themselves cause harm.

Anything which attacks these spikes and blunts, degrades or destroys these spikes will help, no?

And this is why the vaccines have been efficacious in reducing illness and death. as indicated ,for example, by the cumulative hospital data already provided, again, above and in this post.


Shell writes:

The problem is, that you keep parroting that this vaccine saves lives, prevent infections, lessen the severity of symptoms, and will prevent transmission. THESE ARE ALL LIES!

No ,Shell, I've spelt it out and you're the one who comes up short. I've discussed the mechanism and given you real world data.


Shell writes:

Vaccinated people are still dying from, becoming reinfected with, having severe symptoms from, and are still spreading this virus.As well as unvaccinated people who are infected!

Yes, but to a lesser degree than the unvaccinated. Saying that they are dying says nothing against the fact that these vaccines have helped and are helping in mitigating death and reinfection. It was shown that the more shots you had the better the outcome. Refer again to the NSW hospitalisation data.


Shell writes:

The only rational explanation that explains this, is the condition of the patients immune system. Nothing to do with whether they are vaccinated or not.

You, yourself said:

"So yes, forcing muscle cells to produce viral spikes, WOULD evoke an immune response that would attack only that spike."

WTF... that's what vaccines do, evoke an immune response! They train the immune system to mount a response against a live virus by causing a response to attenuated or harmless antigens of viruses, which may include parts thereof or the whole. So when a virus attacks the body, the immune system can eliminate it before it does anything to compromise it.

Shell writes:

All vaccines are precautionary AT BEST, therapeutic SOMETIMES, and useless AT WORST(for those dead)!

And, there is nothing on this planet that can stop any virus from infecting you! Sorry, but these are the facts.


So, Shell, vaccines, you would agree, are "precautionary"or "therapeutic ". Do you know what these mean?

Here look at a dictionary:

Precautonary:

intended to prevent something unpleasant or dangerous from happening:

"Therapeutic"

"relating to the curing of a disease or medical condition"/"having a healing effect; tending to make a person healthier:"

You've strung as all along in trying to message that things that have been shown to help like vaccines,masks, sanitisers, social distancing are useless. That is, you were peddling your worst case scenario and preaching or suggesting at least there's no point in do any of it.

But that isn't true, is it Shell? And Real life experience, studies, experts and data have proved you wrong.

Vaccines may not be bullet proof method but by their use disease( and thereby illness and death) has been prevented or mitigated. Look at the success of vaccines for diseases like measles, polio and smallpox. Extremely successful.

With respect to the mRNA vaccines they have worked as other vaccines ( However, by using the novel means of inducing the muscle cells to create the antigens ). Again, look at the NSW cumulative data on hospitalisations and the distribution between vaccinated and unvaccinated. mRNA vaccines have been working!

However, it has been found that the antibodies wane over time, and that the viral spikes are mutating ( by and large due to unvaccinated people acting as reservoirs of mutations which can undermine vaccine induced immunity), and the older people their immune systems less effective in mounting the required response to the vaccine. So all that has necessitated booster shots. And it may necessitate periodic shots like we have with flu shots.

Just on your point on "nothing can prevent a virus from infecting you", I asked you what you meant by "infection". You haven't told me yet. I think by the way you've been using the term, you just mean that nothing can prevent a virus entering your body. (Well, that's not totally true.) In any case, it's meaningless as an argument or a suggestion against the use of vaccines and other measures. By using them, we have, in fact, prevented or mitigated disease. That's what this turns on not the mere fact that the virus entered into a body.

Through vaccines and other measures we get some protection and some protection is better than no protection. You have agreed by your own words to this with respect to mRNA vaccines. In respect of what I've written on masks, it would be reasonable to agree. Sanitisers, social distancing , hand washing with soap and water aren't in reasonable dispute in what you've written anywhere and certainly not where the experts are concerned.

I think, then, there's no more discussion to be had.
 
Last edited:

Shellandshilo1956

Active member
The actual (or any maths) is unnecessary Shell. It's the statistics that
tell the story, and statistics don't lie.
As I've said and demonstrated before, states can be manipulated(adding multipliers) and misinterpreted. So, Stats can certainly lie and mislead. I can give you many examples of this.

Not so. An individual's immune stem does not necessarily determine whether
one dies from COVID or not. People who are immunocompromised routinely
survive a COVID infection, whilst others with a 100% immune system often die.
Firstly it is not the virus that kills you, it's your own immune system's response. But lets just assume that no one is immunocompromised, or has 4 or 5 other comorbidities, and is generally in good health. Would you think a virus where over 99% of its victims survive, could overwhelm a healthy immune system? Again, this is just my opinion!

The COVID vaccines simply reduce one's chance of ending up in ICU or dying;
they do not prevent the death of some infected individuals
I'd like to say that vaccines give you a 2 day early warning buffer. But if you diabetic, sporting a triple heart bypass, suffering from cancer, and on anti-rejection meds, recovery would be a lot less certain. There are many other factors and variables that can reduce ones chances of becoming seriously ill. Vaccines are just one of them.

Firstly Shell, I'm sorry to hear about your mum, and I know how distressing
it is to miss that last goodbye—I was in the same position with my parents.
Thank you, and my condolences as well.

I also appreciate that despite your strong objections to COVID vaccinating
and your apparent misunderstanding of the death rates of vaxxed v. unvaxxed
people that you've had your children vaccinated.
I've never had any objections to any traditional vaccines. And, have explained why. But this vaccine is NOT a traditional vaccine at all. I also think that the elephant in the room you're ignoring, is that there shouldn't even be a vaxxed vs unveaxxed death rate.☺
 

HBS Guy

Head Honcho 💉💉
Staff member
It's just a topic he is invested in. I think most of us have a political or social topic that is really important to us. I have a couple like that.

Shell can spend as much time as he wants arguing his position. He is not forcing anyone here to "waste their time". What you choose to read on the site is up to you.

Seth
Exactly Seth. I have taken to skipping over the reams of crap Shell posts.
 

Lols

Active member
I’ve been out all day as the sun was shining… went to visit my son down the peninsula as he is still recovering from a leg injury from his motor bike…. So we say we will go to the pub for lunch… in Mornington…. On the way we see a police chopper hovering…. Over the rocky area… and a diver is lowered down… I wanted to stay but the lads wanted to go to lunch… sad news is there was a dead young girl on rocks that was retrieved. That’s all I know for now…

Anyway… back to the Dan comment…I did agree last 2 years with mask mandates and distancing rules… and the hand sanitizers!
But the border locks… the inability to drive further than 5 kms… inability to see your family member in hospital…. Etc was the pits!
I had an op booked in private hospital just as lockdown happened… my hubby was at a loss not able to come see me in hospital… and I was alone in the hospital room… which is okay… except for a ghost night nurse that visited and flickered the light … and whispered her name … I asked the nurse in morning if there are any experiences other patients or nurses had…
She said yes she heard storeys some have had experiences.
Now back again to the Dan comment.
You know something…. I was thinking today as we struggled with traffic on the way there to Mornington and back…I had to think of some positives during lockdowns…. how pleasant it was when there was little traffic in roads, how quiet it was… the air fresher…. how little I spent as no shopping except for online…. and… how greatful I was that we lived on acreage.
But I am empathic for the businesses that struggled and closed down… for instance we passed one burger place in Ferntree Gully that used to thrive before lockdown…. Only to be boarded up and graffitied with grass 5 ft tall.

All that restriction may have slown down the virus spread but it didn’t stop it at all.
And neither is the covid vax stopping it.
My son’s mother in law has worked in the funeral industry for 20 years… she said there has been an overwhelming of bodies they can’t take … no room… more than busy… and many other funeral parlours also. Her work place is considering expanding to accomodate more holding of bodies.
So where are we now? 90% people double/triple vaxxed?
Back to Dan…. he was this attention power mad “I’m locking down Melbourne more than anyone else in the world” trick….
So why not enforce mask mandates at least?
What’s going on in his little head?
I’m asking and referring to this because he has shown either way too harsh one way… then way too lax another way.
Inconsistency and hypocrisy.
Oh and… when I try to tell Queenslanders up there how harsh it was for us in Melbourne… there’s a vague look as they had no idea.
To be told is wasn’t so bad for them like that.

here’s a pic I took today of police chopper and diver being lowered. I wonder if a gal was taking a selfie and fell? I’ve seen those things happen on those ambulance shows.

Just a follow up… there’s no further info about this young girl’s death in Mornington on Thursday. It got very little attention on ch 9 news only. Now I’m wondering if it’s a suicide? The Rocks. Isn’t there a place in Sydney similar where many do suicide off The Rocks? When we did a tour around Sydney, we went to walk to see the view from there… only to have many signs along the way to seek help/support etc
Obviously to try and deter suicidal thoughts.
I just felt so sad.
And Thursday … once the police helicopter retrieved the body… and it flew overhead… I said… there goes the chopper with a body…and thought of all the family and friends sadness that knew/loved her.
 

Linus

Member
I came across some interesting reading the other night. It's called the Anti-Vax Playbook.

You can download it here:


If you take Shell's ramblings on a whole she fits the general pattern of an anti-vaxxer approach:

1. Covid is not dangerous- (Sorry, Shell this is false)

2. Covid vaccine is dangerous/unethical-(Sorry, Shell, this is false)

3. The Medical authorites, experts /statistic/research are not to be trusted.- (Sorry, Shell this is false)

She is full of crap in all 3 areas and a danger to the community. I think videos like this put the lie to her ramblings:




I endorse HBS's approach:


"Exactly Seth. I have taken to skipping over the reams of crap Shell posts."
 
Last edited:

Shellandshilo1956

Active member
Because I understand the weakness of the human condition, I know just how easy its perception of reality can be altered. I try to rely on facts, truisms, and my intuitive logic. Not my biases, feelings, or my beliefs.

I know that there is nothing that man can do to stop any virus from infecting him.
I know that over 95% of anyone infected by this virus have recovered in 2-3 weeks.
I know that the SARS-CoV-2 virus is 34x smaller than the spectrum of white light.
I know that barring viral shedding, there is no other transmission method mechanism for asymptomatic carriers to spread it.
I know that states are required to list any person dying WITH Covid-19, as dying FROM Covid-19. And, to ignore any secondary causes.
I know that a 100% vaccinated nation, only means that those infected, dying, transmitting, and developing serious symptoms, will be only the vaccinated.
I know that only the condition of our immune system, and our overall health, will determine our survivability from this illness. NOT SIMPLY A VACCINE!

There is no way I can just ignore, or rationalize away these truisms. But I do understand how the human condition allows others to. They are called the "illusionary truth", "group conformity" and "obedience to authority". Here are a few examples(experiments) of how easily the human condition can be manipulated to believe anything.


But hey, it is easier to say that I am just repetitious, and that you have addressed the obvious. This is also "cognitive ease". Fortunately hundreds of thousands of us, are NOT so easily manipulated.
 
Top