Compulsory Vaccination?

[top4718]

Interesting to see the Tories (who most on here think are looking after their wellbeing) laughing at the Covid rules at a party last Xmas (there's a clip of Rees-Mogg cracking "jokes") this shows the absolute contempt that these people hold the compliant mob in, they're actually laughing at them.

 

173 people at a fully vaxxed only Xmas Party in Spain, 68 since tested positive. Most of the positive were ICU nurses.

 

Great idea these vaccine passports 🤣

[Carbuncle]

3 minutes ago, top4718 said:

Surgical masks have always been to prevent respiratory droplets not microscopic viral particles ...

Viral particles travel in respiratory droplets. It's basic, ... really, really basic. You can't blow/ exhale the individual viral particles off the moist surface of the respiratory tract. Think about how sticky insects find water surfaces and then extrapolate.

[Dromedary]

10 minutes ago, Carbuncle said:

Could you give some examples of outright fraud in drug testing by drug companies?

Depends on how you define fraud as this is as near as you can get and happened during another predicted pandemic.

 

  https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4375804/

 

The Conclusion

 

"A cocktail of pandemic panic, publicity propaganda, and scientific misconduct turned a new medicine with only modest efficacy into a blockbuster."

[Carbuncle]

7 minutes ago, trastrick said:

15 minutes ago, Carbuncle said:

Could you give some examples of outright fraud in drug testing by drug companies?

Well. Nicotine is a drug, and we all know the story of tobacco companies that sold it as safe.

 

But as usual, you miss the thrust of the discussion.

You made an assertion I found interesting. I am disappointed to find you are not able to back it up with examples.

2 minutes ago, Dromedary said:

Depends on how you define fraud as this is as near as you can get and happened during another predicted pandemic.

 

  https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4375804/

 

The Conclusion

 

"A cocktail of pandemic panic, publicity propaganda, and scientific misconduct turned a new medicine with only modest efficacy into a blockbuster."

Does the paper assert fraud during the clinical trials by Roche?

[Dromedary]

8 minutes ago, Carbuncle said:

Viral particles travel in respiratory droplets. It's basic, ... really, really basic. You can't blow/ exhale the individual viral particles off the moist surface of the respiratory tract. Think about how sticky insects find water surfaces and then extrapolate.

Corona viral particles are so tiny that the only way you can actually stop them is to have the correct PPE mask on and that is why surgeons wear the ones they do. Cloth face masks made at home are basically useless against them. And, if they get the least bit wet from breathing then they could also be classed a dangerous viral spreader.

Edited December 7, 2021 by Dromedary

[Carbuncle]

1 minute ago, Dromedary said:

Corona viral particles are so tiny that the only way you can actually stop them is to have the correct PPE mask on and that is why surgeons wear the ones they do. Cloth face masks made at home are basically useless against them. 

The size of coronavirus particles is not relevant because they do not fly singly and would not infect you if they did.

[Dromedary]

Just now, Carbuncle said:

The size of coronavirus particles is not relevant because they do not fly singly and would not infect you if they did.

But that is not how the science behind mask wearing works, and yes size is important in this case. You may help reduce the viral load but you will not stop it and that is the weak link.

[onewheeldave]

3 hours ago, Carbuncle said:

More ridiculousness. As usual you want to tell me what I think/ mean. Why should I apologise for the (extreme) interpretation you put on the term 'covid sceptic'? It's not even rude why are you pretending to take offence?

 

Now what about you? Why are you spreading misinformation?

Covid sceptic would mean 'one who is sceptical of the existence of covid' which clearly does not apply to the poster in question as they know covid exists.

 

If your definition of 'covid sceptic' differs, could you perhaps tell us what you mean by 'covid sceptic'?

3 hours ago, hackey lad said:

As I said before , something suspicious about a poster , that only posts on one subject 

Is there- why?

[Longcol]

1 minute ago, Dromedary said:

But that is not how the science behind mask wearing works, and yes size is important in this case. You may help reduce the viral load but you will not stop it and that is the weak link.

So reducing the viral load by wearing a mask is better than not reducing the viral load by not wearing a mask?

[Carbuncle]

2 minutes ago, Dromedary said:

5 minutes ago, Carbuncle said:

The size of coronavirus particles is not relevant because they do not fly singly and would not infect you if they did.

But that is not how the science behind mask wearing works, and yes size is important in this case. You may help reduce the viral load but you will not stop it and that is the weak link.

I wasn't making a statement about mask wearing I was making a statement about how viral particles travel. Because viral particles travel in respiratory droplets the relevant size is that of the respiratory droplet.