The journey that COVID-19 will take us on

[husaberg]

Some interesting results when you search for "Frontiers Media credible"

Sent from my SM-S906E using Tapatalk

Those with long memories will remember how Katman used to use similar sources

[TheDemonLord]

Some interesting results when you search for "Frontiers Media credible"

Sent from my SM-S906E using Tapatalk

Sure, it's not Nature or The Lancet - however, it's a Meta-analysis of other studies - mostly being a load of stats - I had a quick look and most of the stats procedures look to be credible.

However, there are some interesting things that we can look at:

Firstly, the results are very similar to research done on Mask wearing after the Spanish flu.
Secondly, most of the negative results from pro-longed mask wearing aren't that bad (Acne, skin irritations, higher CO2 in the blood etc.) - this lines up with what we know about pro-longed mask wearing in other areas (e.g. Gas Masks/respirators). Although the implication that 'Long Covid' may have been due to wearing masks saturated with pathogens is hilarious.
Thirdly, and this is perhaps key, is that unlike those other areas - the claimed benefit of wearing a mask does not stack up in the public setting.

[TheDemonLord]

Those with long memories will remember how Katman used to use similar sources

Those with such long memories will also remember how I was proven correct about Government Stats.

[sugilite:Me]

Slipping us a mickey in the form of an extremely long report with 2 obvious flaws at first glance, then going on a victory parade of one - you do realise that party poppers are single use right? Think of the planet man

[TheDemonLord]

Slipping us a mickey in the form of an extremely long report with 2 obvious flaws at first glance, then going on a victory parade of one - you do realise that party poppers are single use right? Think of the planet man

The two flaws as you put it, aren't really flaws at all.

I mean - the first one - let's take it serious for the moment:

Imagine a pure hypothetical - where you have a deeply unpopular public policy that is enforced on the basis of, oh I dunno, 'Following the Science'.

That Science better be as close to 100% robust as possible.

Now, let's expand our purely hypothetical scenario - that in multiple instances, what was proported to be 'following the science' could be more accurately described as 'Following the Science that allows a grab of power' and 'Vilifying any science that runs contrary to our power grab' - again - purely off the top of my head.

What do you think that does to public trust in Science as an institution? What do you think that does for Scientists who might be trying to do contentious or unpopular study?

It's entirely reasonable for reputable scientists to be angry on behalf of their profession at how 'Following the Science' was used and abused during Covid. Does that mean the scientist doesn't have an Axe to grind - of course not. Scientists often do research on topics they are passionate about.

I mean - if we are going to say that if someone has an ulterior motive for doing research we get to dismiss it - then allow me to pull out the big book of Climate Alarmism.

The second one - low uptake - that doesn't invalidate the statistical analysis. I would expect that some people are loading up the same models to run their own analysis.

Ironically - looking at the 'controversies' listed against the paper, one of them listed was a paper that said Covid came from a lab. Now - refresh my memory, wasn't that something that was declared heretical for a time, before being rolled back to plausible.

[R650R]

I’d love to see an accurate independent survey of how many people are still Voluntarily; wearing masks around others, following strict hand sanitising protocol, getting tested if they have sniffles, scanning their location, avoiding unnecessary travel both locally and inter-regional or international.

Because casual observation says it’s about near zero. This is despite ample media coverage still showing plenty of cases and some people stilly dying with or due to covid.

So what direction that tell us???? Majority’s of populations is NOT scared of catching the virus or worried about granny catching it of them or the random community members with vulnerable immune system disorders.
And so the only reason the bulk of population complied was due to mass psychosis and virtue signalling triggered by govt run propoganda campaigns. So I hope all the people who got a hardon telling others how to live their lives are still “staying the f$&8 inside/home”

Also let’s not forget a certain part of the community claimed it was damn near genocide for them due to poor access/info/delivery of vaccines and testing. Again casual observation shows no disproportionate drop in their population numbers.

Plus one TDL I want refund too

[husaberg]

still showing plenty of cases and some people stilly dying with or due to covid.

Odd You earlier claimed covid was a hoax and the deaths were a near impossibilities.
you claimed it was cured by all sorts of other stuff as well only these were all proven to be false
its really surprising you actually still comment on here given how spectacularly wrong you were on so many occasions.

Your odds of dying from Covid in NZ is about the same as winning Powerball....
People dream of winning powerball, actively visit known powerball superspreader hot zones twice a week in hope of winning...

Meanwhile about 6 times as many people die in drink drive car crashes.
We even have mass random surveillance testing for that too, typically about 1.5-2% are ‘ infected’ with the influence of alcohol.....
Would we tolerate say a 24hr lockdown every time you bought a beer at bar?
Or after your night at the bar you don’t leave through the front door, a govt agent escorts you to a ‘quarantine ‘ facility which you can’t leave for 24 hrs.
Just imagine that, we would ABSOLUTELY save 150 lives a year
The govt will NEVER do that so why all this crap with the virus where the potential victim has a 93% chance of not even needing hospital treatment...

The media are tripping over themselves trying to solve the mystery of why Africans aren't dying from covid as badly as the west.
Africans routinely take a cheap safe anti malaria drug invented in n 1960's called hydroxychloroquine....
Scooby Doo would solve that puzzle faster

Well well well, our journey into communist hell continues.

There has only been 1650 alleged cases (out of 700,000 tests!!!!) of the virus, but what has spread faster has been submission to communist control.
Nearly 2 million have downloaded the Covid app so you can be sent to a govt “ health” camp to catch the virus if you didnt already have it.

But yay 3 million kiwis have said no to turning their phone into govt spy device.

Tommorow is D-day, public transport will be the barometer of how many of us have rolled belly up to mask wearing.
Hopefully most will say screw this shit and drive their cars to work.

You don’t have to wear a mask if it affects your physical or mental health and you do NOT need to present documents to prove this.

Out and about it’s refreshing to see nearly No one scanning the qr code thingy.

It’s quite clear now as the mountain of contradictions grow that it’s not about stopping the “virus”..


Masks are for destroying social interaction and communication with strangers. You know those moments in life when some shitbag is bashing his missus and enough of you make visual contact to know you’ve got each other back and intervene.
But with masks there will never be any Flight 93 “lets roll” moments of bravery, you’ll never know if your fellow citizen is a Karen or Stasi as you reluctantly board the blacked out train carriage...
A cop will never see your friendly smile, never know you like them and not let you off that minor stop sign indescretion...

There’s two ways this pans out... the virus magically mostly disappears and we return to some form of normal rampant consumerism after being tattooed/implanted with bill gates digital ID2020 social/vaccine passport
Certificate
Of
Vaccination
I
D

Covid

Or this virus turns out to be as nasty as they say it is. Then we have at least three years living under full blown communism to control spread til it naturally mutates itself out of existence as all virus strains do. This will be a major worldwide depression and everyone will be off to workcamps in exchange for food as all western economies will be crippled by the early welfare dolled out to “keep the economy going”

One thing Is for sure either way, given the chance of a crisis govt will pass new laws and taxes to “save us”.... next election will be very interesting

The Covid tracer app stops the spread of the virus just as effectively as mandatory carrying of drivers licence stops unlicensed drivers from driving cars.

It’s kinda pointless though really, Jacinda has just demonstrated how willing the govt is to plunge the country into draconian lockdowns again for a few cases...
Now if EVERYONE in the current outbreak had scanned the SAME amount of people would be infected, the virus doesn’t care if your Bluetooth is on or not.
The resulting lockdown would prob be worse as with two deg of separation in modern society it would prob show even more people at risk of infection spreading...

But I guess we’ll all find that out soon enough when they decree it mandatory to scan everywhere

[SaferRides]

I don't want to start a debate by posting this link, but some of you might find it of interest. The link will only work until 10 June.

It's a long interview!

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/...smid=url-share

Sent from my SM-S906E using Tapatalk

[pete376403]

I don't want to start a debate by posting this link, but some of you might find it of interest. The link will only work until 10 June.

It's a long interview!

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/...smid=url-share

Sent from my SM-S906E using Tapatalk

Good read, thank you.

[TheDemonLord]

I don't want to start a debate by posting this link, but some of you might find it of interest. The link will only work until 10 June.

It's a long interview!

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/...smid=url-share

Sent from my SM-S906E using Tapatalk

An interesting read.

There's a few points in there - such as the Bangladesh study on mask efficacy (triple usage of masks, less than 10% impact on transmission) and when he talks about the Origin, his answers aren't the answers of the Scientist he professes to be, but the answers of the Politician he has become.

Reading the comments was also interesting - either he's a Saint or a Sinner.

Perhaps the most interesting line, however, is when he talks about his proposed actions and the costs to do them - he repeatedly says 'I'm not an Economist' - and in a moment of naked honesty - he admits that as a Public Health official, he can only see the situation in terms of Public Health.

It seems that the biggest reason for the criticism/hatred he gets - is because he was the figurehead that publicly proposed increase non-pharmaceutical interventions (Masks, Lockdowns etc.) on wonky data and completely ignored the impact on people's lives. If you are going to make the case, publicly, for these things to be done, your data had better be 200% sound.

There was a Comment that was critical of him that also referenced this - that in the interview when he talked about how many would die without the Vaccine, he's pulling numbers out of the air - but he's relaying them as if they were facts - and I think this exemplifies the issue: He was putting forward shaky science as gospel truth and using it as the basis to demand massive infringements on individual autonomy and civil liberty.

He does also acknowledge that when they knew it was almost all elderly that were dying, that they didn't get their messaging right.

My personal view here is not charitable - if they had said that clearly - then everyone would have gone 'Sweet, I'm not over 65, No mask and No lockdown for me'.

Ultimately - Fauci decided to self-appoint himself as 'I am the science', using that authority to push highly restrictive policy. When the Science in question is shown to be dubious at best - people are absolutely right to critique him.

Another commenter said it best 'He would have gotten less hate if he had been honest about what he didn't know'

[husaberg]

[mr bucketracer]

Time for your boosters guys

[BMWST?]

An interesting read.

There's a few points in there - such as the Bangladesh study on mask efficacy (triple usage of masks, less than 10% impact on transmission) and when he talks about the Origin, his answers aren't the answers of the Scientist he professes to be, but the answers of the Politician he has become.

Reading the comments was also interesting - either he's a Saint or a Sinner.

Perhaps the most interesting line, however, is when he talks about his proposed actions and the costs to do them - he repeatedly says 'I'm not an Economist' - and in a moment of naked honesty - he admits that as a Public Health official, he can only see the situation in terms of Public Health.

It seems that the biggest reason for the criticism/hatred he gets - is because he was the figurehead that publicly proposed increase non-pharmaceutical interventions (Masks, Lockdowns etc.) on wonky data and completely ignored the impact on people's lives. If you are going to make the case, publicly, for these things to be done, your data had better be 200% sound.

There was a Comment that was critical of him that also referenced this - that in the interview when he talked about how many would die without the Vaccine, he's pulling numbers out of the air - but he's relaying them as if they were facts - and I think this exemplifies the issue: He was putting forward shaky science as gospel truth and using it as the basis to demand massive infringements on individual autonomy and civil liberty.

He does also acknowledge that when they knew it was almost all elderly that were dying, that they didn't get their messaging right.

My personal view here is not charitable - if they had said that clearly - then everyone would have gone 'Sweet, I'm not over 65, No mask and No lockdown for me'.

Ultimately - Fauci decided to self-appoint himself as 'I am the science', using that authority to push highly restrictive policy. When the Science in question is shown to be dubious at best - people are absolutely right to critique him.

Another commenter said it best 'He would have gotten less hate if he had been honest about what he didn't know'

Ironic too in that he was one of the parties that you could say was "responsible" for the virus in the first place

[Kickaha]

Time for your boosters guys

Stick your boosters up your arse, even the vaccine wasn't worth getting

[sugilite:Me]

Stick your boosters up your arse, even the vaccine wasn't worth getting

What - they have covid boosters in suppository form now?
Finally an incentive to get boosted!