Jump to content

COVID-19 Outbreak


adamsapple

Recommended Posts

14 minutes ago, Oldest Goat said:

I'm very forthright, humble, self-depricating, sincere and my reward is you trying to put words in my mouth and then audaciously doubling down on your imaginings saying I'm a conspiracy theorist with a warped unhinged mind incapable of considering facts rationally. Just fyi terrible bedside manner for if you ever do talk to someone like that.

This is very simple and I have stated the following a few times:

1. There are very few examples of pharma companies lying to regulatory bodies re: the safety or efficacy of drugs.

2. There are no scientific evidence suggesting mRNA vaccines are dangerous.

3. mRNA vaccines have ow been administered to millions of people, and except for a few ultrarare side effects that couldn't reasonably have been expected to have been identified in clinical trials involving just a few thousands of people, they behave exactly as expected.

People who continue to disregard the above in favor of something someone on YT said, is indeed a conspiracy theorist.

1 minute ago, Oldest Goat said:

Go back and re-read what's been said, ideally with reading comprehension skills and try to figure out why I can't be bothered continuing this discussion. You win I do not care.

No, I am of course not going to be bothered to re-read your posts in this thread. If you believe you are mistaken then the onus is on you to go ahead and clear up that misunderstanding by pointing out where I have been wrong.

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, SoulMonster said:

This is very simple and I have stated the following a few times:

1. There are very few examples of pharma companies lying to regulatory bodies re: the safety or efficacy of drugs.

2. There are no scientific evidence suggesting mRNA vaccines are dangerous.

3. mRNA vaccines have ow been administered to millions of people, and except for a few ultrarare side effects that couldn't reasonably have been expected to have been identified in clinical trials involving just a few thousands of people, they behave exactly as expected.

People who continue to disregard the above in favor of something someone on YT said, is indeed a conspiracy theorist.

I understand. I'm not doing what you're doing.

I still love ya mate but don't fucking talk to me about this again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Oldest Goat said:

I understand. I'm not doing what you're doing.

I still love ya mate but don't fucking talk to me about this again.

I dig you too but that's not going to stop me from replying to your posts about Covid-19 vaccines possibly being dangerous :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, SoulMonster said:

I dig you too but that's not going to stop me from replying to your posts about Covid-19 vaccines possibly being dangerous :)

Probably not going to attempt enquiring anything else about this topic as that's clearly futile and unwanted.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/9/2021 at 8:11 AM, SoulMonster said:

It becomes a case of he-said-she-said. On one hand you have this guy on YouTube and on the other hand you have the scientific community, peer—reviewed trial data, and the fact that millions by now have received the vaccines. 

Are these guys anything like tRump's Frontline doctors? The Demon semen lady that he wanted to lead the Covid response? She's an MD but nobody I'd ever wanna see. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Subtle Signs said:

Are these guys anything like tRump's Frontline doctors? The Demon semen lady that he wanted to lead the Covid response? She's an MD but nobody I'd ever wanna see. 

Somewhat similar. In addition to claiming that the mRNA vaccines are dangerous, the guy in the video is one of the main promoters of the "lab leak" theory and that Ivermectin is an efficient medicine against Covid-19 (there are so many YT videos where he claims Ivermectin works that YT has demonetized him).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, SoulMonster said:

Why do you insist they have legal immunity? I have never, ever heard of such a thing that a pharmaceutical company would make agreements with countries where they would be granted immunity from legal repercussions if it turns out something is wrong with the drugs. Can you show any examples of this having happened before? Or even better, can you present any evidence that countries have accepted such terms in their agreements with pharmaceutical companies regarding Covid-19 vaccines?

And again, no one would be suing USA for something a pharmaceutical company does. 

Manufacturers demanded, and got, indemnity from governments for this so-called vaccine.  This alone should cause anyone to stop and think before blindly accepting the propaganda.  Just one example for you, plenty more if you do the research. 

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/health/coronavirus-pfizer-vaccine-legal-indemnity-safety-ministers-b1765124.html
 

  • Like 1
  • GNFNR 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, cyllan said:

Manufacturers demanded, and got, indemnity from governments for this so-called vaccine.  This alone should cause anyone to stop and think before blindly accepting the propaganda.  Just one example for you, plenty more if you do the research. 

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/health/coronavirus-pfizer-vaccine-legal-indemnity-safety-ministers-b1765124.html
 

Thank you.

The indemnity granted is not an immunity from legal repercussions, as discussed. The indemnity some vaccine companies have received in agreements with some countries, would grant the companies protection against civil lawsuits as a result of side effects, and the country instead would be liable to cover any losses from people suffering side effects. It basically shifts the burden of losses from the party of the company onto the party of the country (the two parties in the vaccine agreements). These indemnity clauses will typically offer no protection from criminal lawsuits (like if the companies have falsified results resulting in deaths). 

Still, I don't like it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, SoulMonster said:

Thank you.

The indemnity granted is not an immunity from legal repercussions, as discussed. The indemnity some vaccine companies have received in agreements with some countries, would grant the companies protection against civil lawsuits as a result of side effects, and the country instead would be liable to cover any losses from people suffering side effects. It basically shifts the burden of losses from the party of the company onto the party of the country (the two parties in the vaccine agreements). These indemnity clauses will typically offer no protection from criminal lawsuits (like if the companies have falsified results resulting in deaths). 

Still, I don't like it. 

Optimism is not necessarily positivity it's a toxic head-in-the-sand outlook. You seem to dismiss, downplay and glaze over concerns that don't fit your conclusions(and create strawmen like I'm a fucking idiot who is against all medication/science.) You do this overtly and with pedantic use of language. It comes across as condescending and poorly thought-out which is annoying because either you are right yet you're needlessly compelling me to at least doubt your argument or you're wrong and missing the bigger picture.

 

The bottomline is indemnity granted to the vaccine companies in whichever countries they supply to is legal immunity perhaps not in theory but in practice. In reality. Because:

A) Good luck with suing the government lol particularly governments such as the USA or UK. That would be a gargantuan uphill battle so unlikely to succeed that the possibility of taking this route is in no way a reassurance. Especially since the less populations to succeed in suing their governments the more the unliklihood is compounded. Also, even if this was successful the countries aka the taxpayers would be punished both financially and by the duration of time it would take. The companies would have no responsibility and go unpunished, which is my point.

B) Assuming filing criminal lawsuits against the companies is even possible, again, good luck with that lol. Putting aside how the planets would have to align for this action to not just succeed but succeed on a global scale - there's still no accountability and principles.

 

These cunts aren't running a charity they're absolutely raking it in. They should be legally responsible. Let's say they're making wonderful products with zero risks; they should still be legally responsible for their products.

In conclusion, I'm crazy and unintelligent lmao.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Oldest Goat said:

The bottomline is indemnity granted to the vaccine companies in whichever countries they supply to is legal immunity perhaps not in theory but in practice. In reality. Because:

A) Good luck with suing the government lol particularly governments such as the USA or UK. That would be a gargantuan uphill battle so unlikely to succeed that the possibility of taking this route is in no way a reassurance. Especially since the less populations to succeed in suing their governments the more the unliklihood is compounded. Also, even if this was successful the countries aka the taxpayers would be punished both financially and by the duration of time it would take. The companies would have no responsibility and go unpunished, which is my point.

B) Assuming filing criminal lawsuits against the companies is even possible, again, good luck with that lol. Putting aside how the planets would have to align for this action to not just succeed but succeed on a global scale - there's still no accountability and principles.

These cunts aren't running a charity they're absolutely raking it in. They should be legally responsible. Let's say they're making wonderful products with zero risks; they should still be legally responsible for their products.

Oh, as I ended my last email, I don't like these indemnity clauses, either, for much the same reasons you state. 

But I don't agree the pharmaceutical corporations have legal immunity here. As far as "normal" side effects go -- those that the pharma companies couldn't have been expected to know about and are really rare and often patient-specific thus affecting very few -- vaccine companies have always enjoyed protection against litigation and individual countries have set up various compensation systems to benefit people who suffer from unexpected side effects. This is old news. The indemnity clauses is a continuation of this.

In the context of pharma not being trustworthy and bad, like you wrote about, then we are talking about something different: pharma deliberately not disclosing data during the approval process, or even falsifying results, to favorably affect the process towards being granted market approval. The result of this is the approval of a drug that shouldn't have been approved, because it either doesn't work as expected or has more severe side effects than disclosed, and it happened as the result of criminal activity. Surely this is why the opioid crises was mentioned earlier in this thread where Purdue Pharma did just this and has admitted as much. Such criminal activity is not covered by indemnity clauses nor the various compensation schemes. So in that sense, they are not immune from prosecution.

Whether it is easy to sue a pharma company and succeed, as you wrote about, is a different topic, really, and has more to do with other things (transnational law, the sizes of the companies involved, expenses of litigation, etc) than the indemnity clauses.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, SoulMonster said:

Oh, as I ended my last email, I don't like these indemnity clauses, either, for much the same reasons you state. 

But I don't agree the pharmaceutical corporations have legal immunity here. As far as "normal" side effects go -- those that the pharma companies couldn't have been expected to know about and are really rare and often patient-specific thus affecting very few -- vaccine companies have always enjoyed protection against litigation and individual countries have set up various compensation systems to benefit people who suffer from unexpected side effects. This is old news. The indemnity clauses is a continuation of this.

In the context of pharma not being trustworthy and bad, like you wrote about, then we are talking about something different: pharma deliberately not disclosing data during the approval process, or even falsifying results, to favorably affect the process towards being granted market approval. The result of this is the approval of a drug that shouldn't have been approved, because it either doesn't work as expected or has more severe side effects than disclosed, and it happened as the result of criminal activity. Surely this is why the opioid crises was mentioned earlier in this thread where Purdue Pharma did just this and has admitted as much. Such criminal activity is not covered by indemnity clauses nor the various compensation schemes. So in that sense, they are not immune from prosecution.

Whether it is easy to sue a pharma company and succeed, as you wrote about, is a different topic, really, and has more to do with other things (transnational law, the sizes of the companies involved, expenses of litigation, etc) than the indemnity clauses.

So it seems basically we're in agreement and you're grasping the very sound point I'm making...maybe there's hope for redemption of my warped mind afterall...unless this means you're insane too?

Here's where we disagree; You see the example of J&J being forced to finally payout a paltry sum for the irreversible damage they've greedily inflicted as not only justice and accountability but an example that justice and accountability is the precedent and I find that outlandish and an insult to my intelligence and values. The punishment should've been far more severe and they should no longer be in business.

And yes I'm aware that an aspect of legal immunity for vaccine developers is old news. It was shit then and now it's worse.

So that's point one of why I'm suspicious of the situation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Oldest Goat said:

So it seems basically we're in agreement and you're grasping the very sound point I'm making...maybe there's hope for redemption of my warped mind afterall...unless this means you're insane too?

Here's where we disagree; You see the example of J&J being forced to finally payout a paltry sum for the irreversible damage they've greedily inflicted as not only justice and accountability but an example that justice and accountability is the precedent and I find that outlandish and an insult to my intelligence and values. The punishment should've been far more severe and they should no longer be in business.

I haven't said anything about J&J in this discussion and what I think of any outcomes of legal actions against that company. So maybe not claim I have?

As for where we disagree: I disagree with your irrational belief that the mRNA vaccines could be dangerous, as claimed in that YT video of yours, despite fact being that there is no scientific evidence to support this, despite the fact that the drug approval process is usually very stringent with few examples of it being corrupted, and despite the fact that the vaccines have now been administered to millions of people with very few unexpected adverse effects.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, SoulMonster said:

I haven't said anything about J&J in this discussion and what I think of any outcomes of legal actions against that company. So maybe not claim I have?

As for where we disagree: I disagree with your irrational belief that the mRNA vaccines could be dangerous, as claimed in that YT video of yours, despite fact being that there is no scientific evidence to support this, despite the fact that the drug approval process is usually very stringent with few examples of it being corrupted, and despite the fact that the vaccines have now been administered to millions of people with very few unexpected adverse effects.

The reason I mention J&J is they're one of the covid vaccine companies. You keep bringing up Purdue(who was punished but not enough, like J&J).

 

Regarding mRNA, let's say there really are no risks with the process. Your rigid and aggressive approach erodes the chances of confidence being inspired. It will definitely cement conspiracy theorist types and Trump supporters etc just fyi.

My attitude: "Hey, I don't know what the fuck this is. No idea. But it's new and experimental. I understand there's been testing but it was made quite quickly and the cunts peddling it aren't the most trustworthy bunch. They're trying to blackmail and coerce everyone instead of simply having clear, open, convincing communication. The situation seems more about politics and control than healthcare. Even if I do get vaccinated I can still get sick and even die and also infect others. Maybe it at least strengthens the recipient but there's all these increasingly bad strains of the virus maybe that's because half a dozen different vaccines plus combinations of vaccines are being rushed out simultaneously with the virus."

Your attitude: "Oh just shut the fuck up you're paranoid and insane. Shut the fuck up and put it in your body without question or you'll be ostracized. There is no need for doubt as all is already known to be good. This is the way."

 

I'm a scientific layman with a few fears and questions. This is a Guns N' Roses forum I'm not barging into an ER for fuck sake. I'll probably end up get getting the Pfizer vaccine out of social pressure and needing to function in daily life. I guess I'll also have to get the 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th etc jabs too. We are probably never going back to how things were this is post 9/11 2.0 we are entering a new level of Orwellian hell. Then again when has big corporations, governments, bureaucrats and intelligence agencies ever steered us wrong eh?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Oldest Goat said:

Regarding mRNA, let's say there really are no risks with the process. Your rigid and aggressive approach erodes the chances of confidence being inspired. It will definitely cement conspiracy theorist types and Trump supporters etc just fyi.

My attitude: "Hey, I don't know what the fuck this is. No idea. But it's new and experimental. I understand there's been testing but it was made quite quickly and the cunts peddling it aren't the most trustworthy bunch. They're trying to blackmail and coerce everyone instead of simply having clear, open, convincing communication. The situation seems more about politics and control than healthcare. Even if I do get vaccinated I can still get sick and even die and also infect others. Maybe it at least strengthens the recipient but there's all these increasingly bad strains of the virus maybe that's because half a dozen different vaccines plus combinations of vaccines are being rushed out simultaneously with the virus."

Your attitude: "Oh just shut the fuck up you're paranoid and insane. Shut the fuck up and put it in your body without question or you'll be ostracized. There is no need for doubt as all is already known to be good. This is the way."

I'm a scientific layman with a few fears and questions. This is a Guns N' Roses forum I'm not barging into an ER for fuck sake. I'll probably end up get getting the Pfizer vaccine out of social pressure and needing to function in daily life. I guess I'll also have to get the 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th etc jabs too. We are probably never going back to how things were this is post 9/11 2.0 we are entering a new level of Orwellian hell. Then again when has big corporations, governments, bureaucrats and intelligence agencies ever steered us wrong eh?

When a drug has passed through the clinical approval process it is not longer "experimental". 

Can you give any examples of the vaccine companies "trying to blackmail and coerce everyone"?

Yes, even if you get vaccinated you can still get sick, infect others, and die. But the chance of that is much smaller. 

No, the reason new virus strains pop up is not because the vaccines approval process have been quick, but because of evolution. In fact, if more people got vaccinated there would be less new strains originating because there would be less viruses in circulation which can evolve into new forms. So vaccination will slow the rate at which new virus strains are evolved.

I have never called you insane or asked you to shut the fuck up.

What has Covid-19 vaccines got to do with Big Brother and Orwellian hell? Oh no, don't tell me you believe that nonsense about the vaccines containing chips that allows the monitoring of citizens, too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, SoulMonster said:

When a drug has passed through the clinical approval process it is not longer "experimental". 

Can you give any examples of the vaccine companies "trying to blackmail and coerce everyone"?

Yes, even if you get vaccinated you can still get sick, infect others, and die. But the chance of that is much smaller. 

No, the reason new virus strains pop up is not because the vaccines approval process have been quick, but because of evolution. In fact, if more people got vaccinated there would be less new strains originating because there would be less viruses in circulation which can evolve into new forms. So vaccination will slow the rate at which new virus strains are evolved.

I have never called you insane or asked you to shut the fuck up.

What has Covid-19 vaccines got to do with Big Brother and Orwellian hell? Oh no, don't tell me you believe that nonsense about the vaccines containing chips that allows the monitoring of citizens, too.

They're not experimental even for the longterm?

I was listing the reasons for my paranoia. I didn't say the vaccine companies are trying to blackmail and coerce what I'm referring to is lockdowns, vaccine passports etc. Presenting basic human rights as a carrot on a stick. I think at this point it's gotten way out of hand with no end in sight and I no longer really care about covid tbh I'd rather NZ partially(so we aren't overwhelmed with people flooding here) open its borders and cease obliterating businesses and bleeding money. Why can't they communicate clearly and just vaccinate the people who are at risk? It's been over a year for fuck sake.

Okay, I'll accept your explanation for the strains. Just to be clear, there's no chance of my fear I stated contributing to the strains?

You called me insane and told me to shut the fuck up using different words.

The vaccines have something to do with Orwellian hellish controls in the form of things like lockdowns and vaccine passports and monitering everyone even more than usual.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Many restrictions have been lifted here a month ago, and since then numbers have been going up like crazy mainly due to the young people who have been partying a lot. Therefore a few are back in place since last week. Only 40% of the population has been fully vaccinated. Good news is that so far the numbers in the hospitals aren't rising because most old people have been vaccinated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Oldest Goat said:

They're not experimental even for the longterm?

I was listing the reasons for my paranoia. I didn't say the vaccine companies are trying to blackmail and coerce what I'm referring to is lockdowns, vaccine passports etc. Presenting basic human rights as a carrot on a stick. I think at this point it's gotten way out of hand with no end in sight and I no longer really care about covid tbh I'd rather NZ partially(so we aren't overwhelmed with people flooding here) open its borders and cease obliterating businesses and bleeding money. Why can't they communicate clearly and just vaccinate the people who are at risk? It's been over a year for fuck sake.

Okay, I'll accept your explanation for the strains. Just to be clear, there's no chance of my fear I stated contributing to the strains?

You called me insane and told me to shut the fuck up using different words.

The vaccines have something to do with Orwellian hellish controls in the form of things like lockdowns and vaccine passports and monitering everyone even more than usual.

My point is that an "experimental drug" is one that hasn't gone through the approval process, or has failed in the process. It is just how that term is used. If you mean it more in the sense that we can't know what long-term effects a drug has until in many years, then yes, that is the case with Covid-19 vaccines as with any other new drugs that have recently been approved. There is no reason to think there will be any detrimental long-term effects from Covid-19 vaccines than from any other drugs.

I fundamentally disagree with your statement that there is no end in sight. We knew from the onset of the pandemic that this would be a disease that would trouble us from time and likely not subside until we had efficient treatments. Many experts also suggested this would take years. What we are seeing now is exactly what was predicted. And the vaccines are hugely effective, I was just told the Pfizer vaccine presents a >80% protection after three weeks after the first dose. We also see that in countries that have been good at vaccinated, infection rates and morbidities have dropped significantly. The end is very much in sight. But, and there is a big but, the disease will likely not be eradicated and we can expect it to flare up now and then and also possible require that new vaccines are designed. In the more long-term perspective, it will probably end up being similar to a flu, causing some deaths but not something most people will think or worry about.

Why they can't just vaccinate the people that are at risk? Isn't this being done everywhere? In Norway the elderly and the frail were the first to be offered the vaccines. Isn't it like that in New Zealand?

I see no reason to think that the quick approval process has contributed to the development of new strains. The vaccines obviously works very well and we know from evolutionary theory that viruses evolve naturally. 

No, I never called you insane and told you to shut up, with any words. For the record, I don't consider you to be insane and I dont want you to shut up. Okay? I think the fact that I continue to try to engage with you in this discussion is also indicative of that.

Well, naturally pandemics result in temporary lockdowns, vaccine passports and infection tracing. In my opinion that is better than a pandemic that is allowed to rage unchecked. 

Edited by SoulMonster
Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, Oldest Goat said:

The powers that be now have the most control over the general public they've ever had in all of history.

That's properly actionuesque both in its paranoia and its ignorance of history.

 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, SoulMonster said:

That's properly actionuesque both in its paranoia and its ignorance of history.

 

You cheeky cunt. :lol:

If you had it your way we'd all be injected with fish cum for God's sake.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, Oldest Goat said:

You cheeky cunt. :lol:

If you had it your way we'd all be injected with fish cum for God's sake.

confession time: since you've made people here aware that @SoulMonster consumes ridiculously large quantities of fish cum on a regular basis (irl), I had to try it myself. Delicious with a bit of lemon. Highly recommended.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, EvanG said:

Many restrictions have been lifted here a month ago, and since then numbers have been going up like crazy mainly due to the young people who have been partying a lot. Therefore a few are back in place since last week. Only 40% of the population has been fully vaccinated. Good news is that so far the numbers in the hospitals aren't rising because most old people have been vaccinated.

That sounds just like Mexico...I talked to my dad last night (who lives there) and he said there are pockets where COVID is going up. Like at the beach cities of Mazatlan where a lot of young people go and where many are not vaccinated and that they are the ones in the hospital now and not the older folk like him who are vaccinated, still masking up  etc .etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Since it seems things are still changing day by day, I think we're all a little leary and confused on what to believe anymore?

glad I got vaccinated, but now they are talking about booster shots. The pharmacies and doctors seem to disagree on boosters, so here we go again.

We've come so far, but now with the delta variant and more people not getting vaccinated for one reason or another, some states are seeing numbers rising in cases and most of them are people who are not vaccinated. Eventually, it will effect all of us again.

Some countries don't even have a vaccine. We all need to be doing the same thing now to get some kind of hold on this virus.

It hasn't happened as yet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, marlingrl03 said:

That sounds just like Mexico...I talked to my dad last night (who lives there) and he said there are pockets where COVID is going up. Like at the beach cities of Mazatlan where a lot of young people go and where many are not vaccinated and that they are the ones in the hospital now and not the older folk like him who are vaccinated, still masking up  etc .etc.

Yeah, me too still wearing a mask and not going to restaurants or large crowds. Although I will be going to see GNR in September, not sure if I'm doing the right thing, but seeing GNR in concert is one thing I won't miss, but I will be wearing a mask and hope for the best.

But yeah, many states now see a rise in cases due to the delta variant and younger people not getting vaccinated.

And if/when we need a booster shot, will we be notified? too many unanswered questions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...