Lewes Forum thread

Go on, tell 'em what you think


Lewes Forum New message

Green waste, re: EudraVigilance

2
 
On Sun 8 Aug at 12:47pm Tom Pain wrote:
It's hard not to notice you continuing with your habit of accusing others of doing exactly as you do. Are you aware of it yourself? It gets rather irksome having to ignore your halo burnishing all the time, how many times are you going to repeat your mantra that you're vaxing to protect others over and over again? Maybe you believe it but frankly I don't. There, aren't I horrid. Your remark about the herb is inadvertantly rather amusing, I was riding that train before you were born and, also inadvertently, thus share some responsibility for your delusions in that direction. Back in the sixties it was considered a key to a more enlightened future, but obviously it failed. The thing is- it becomes an end in itself just like any habit, good or bad. It also restricts your capacity for critical thinking and concentration on things with no immediate gratification. I'm sure you have a smart answer for all this and I really don't think you will pay any attention to it whatsoever, in my twenties I wouldn't have either. One thing I find very odd about the whole thing is that, back in the day, it seemed that psychedelics opened one's mind to the hidden machinations of the establishment at least to my self and other "heads" as stoners were known. We were considered to be very progressive, left wing and bohemian and I fear, considered ourselves as such. Now we are labelled right wing conspiracy theorists! Wow man, how times change, a bit like the climate. There's another thing, the environmental movement was growing then and , in spite of your vigorous denial, global cooling WAS considered the way global warming is now. Of course it's all cyclical but when you're inside the bubble you don't look outside. It was all political rhetoric then as it is now to control our perceptions but I'd better not kick too many sacred cows at one time.
 
 
On Thu 12 Aug at 11:50am Tom Pain wrote:
History repeating - I just saw a ten year old channel 4 news clip about the swine flu fiasco. EU to investigate undue influence of pharmaceutical industry on the WHO! Millions wasted on unnecessary vaccines due to false predictions and WHO changing the definition of "pandemic". That must have been another whitewash eh?
16
 
On Thu 12 Aug at 10:08pm Green Sleeves wrote:
Everything you have said above is debunkable, attention seeking and a bit desperate. Quite boring, at this stage.

Still not ready to get your covid jab yet? I'm starting to lose patience with the unvaccinated getting needlessly hospitalised and clogging up the system. Especially towards the ones who you'd struggle to find a conspiracy theory they haven't followed.
10
 
On Fri 13 Aug at 12:54pm Nevillman wrote:
You would have thought that people who choose to ignore the medical advice by not having the vaccine would prefer to be treated by one of the people on the internet whose advice they seem to prefer.
 
 
On Fri 13 Aug at 2:15pm Tom Pain wrote:
I would Nev! Had I been told, say 20 years ago, that I would be guilt tripped into taking part in a trial of an experimental gene therapy medication for a Corona virus that is dangerous only for people who are already I'll, I would not have believed it. However it's reassuring to see you still exist, stolid and cantankerous as ever. I wish I could say the same of your colleague the green one with his malicious, saccharine speciousness. It's a shame he's running out of patience, people so full of self righteous indignation become positively dangerous in febrile situations such as promise to come in such politicised times. Talk about desperation, his ingenuous use of the thoroughly debunked Lancet article is a very good example but I wouldn't like to trespass beyond the limits of his low boredom threshold. I see the climate crisis is in the news again, ramping up the fear factor with their computer modelling using the Ferguson method. No matter how ludicrously inaccurate, it always comes up with something terrifying which is very useful to the fascists in charge to keep us compliant.
5
 
On Fri 13 Aug at 2:59pm Green Sleeves wrote:
The trial was already willingly undertaken, i believe at least 100,000 volunteers. It was deemed safe, and that is why less people are now dying from coronavirus, apart from within the unvaccinated group. 30% of the entire world population has had at least one vaccine, and they're dying less of COVID, and aren't now evolving into genetic mutant zombies. My skin hasn't turned green, nor am I having the urge to chomp on human flesh. I am glad I've been vaccinated twice. Didn't feel remotely guilt tripped into it. I guess I don't value my DNA as much as you do, Tom.
1
 
On Fri 13 Aug at 9:02pm Tom Pain wrote:
Oho, greenie, I look forward to you debunking what you over enthusiastically presumed on Thursday. It would probably be best to pretend it never happened as usual but on the off chance that you have pretensions to credibility and not just a desire to dismiss any thing I say, you could just try. A bit of evidence on your side would enliven our spats no end.
5
 
On Sat 14 Aug at 1:11pm Green Sleeves wrote:
I've already dismissed and gone through debunking your claims about 1970s "global cooling" theories being given just as much weight as climate change is today. We have had these arguments before in older threads, so whats the point if you didn't listen the first time? If you can provide a shred of evidence that global cooling was scientific general consensus and not just conjecture in the 1970s, then congratulations, i'll grant you a rare argument "win". To directly compare today and the 1970s is deeply disingenuous though, but that is how conspiracies generally gain any traction.

I think the efficacy of the vaccine (i take it that was the other point you're still trying to maintain) speaks for itself in the 100k plus human trials already conducted, and the 30.1% of the world population who've had at least one jab already. It is reducing death, illness and spread - and it doesn't appear to be changing anyones DNA. Perhaps we can revisit this topic in 5 years time when all us vaccinated sheeple have mysterious growths from our chest, and additional toes.

What else would you like me to fact-check you on?
 
 
On Sat 14 Aug at 11:22pm Tom Pain wrote:
I was referring to my second post- history repeating, which I didn't make clear, it must be admitted. About the global cooling- climate-phobia was a minority sport then, limited to climatologists, the sensationalist press and it's following. We hadn't been subjected to the propaganda of the UN through it's Club of Rome and a host of well foundation funded NGOs, not forgetting the Rio earth summit. The demonisation of CO2 hadn't begun. The idea of a scientific consensus was considered the province of bigotry and as unenlightened as Galileo's opposition. Science is never settled whilst freedom of thought is allowed. Not belonging to any special interest or political persuasion, I can look wherever I chose and one can find newspaper reports about weather events in the last century and before that on the internet. The recent high temperatures were exceeded in the twentieth century and our wildfires pale into insignificance in comparison. Recent reports of the summer melt of glaciers although correct and alarming cease to be so if one finds out that a far greater volume of water was deposited as snow in the winter. The crime of the century is omission not falsehood and is immune from prosecution but not moral observation. I have the same distaste as you for ranting troofers but I don't share your distain for those who distrust the media narrative.
6
 
On Mon 16 Aug at 9:55am Nevillman wrote:
Quite an interesting programme on radio 4 this morning about why people continue to deny things like the existence of global warming and the efficacy of vaccines in the face of insurmountable evidence. Tom would appear to be a classic example. There really is no point in arguing apart from alleviating boredom. I was disappointed to return to the forum to see that even more of the reasonable posters have had enough. The programme was at 9.30 and will be on sounds. Give it a listen Tom.
 
 
On Mon 16 Aug at 11:55am Tom Pain wrote:
A few figures from Aug 5- the US and India that you won't find on the BBC-
US pop.331 million,50%vaxed, daily 127k cases 574deaths.
Delhi pop 31 mil.15% vaxed,daily cases 61, deaths2.
Uttar Pradesh pop 240 mil,5%vaxed,daily cases26, deaths3.
The Indian statistics are from areas using IVERMECTIN. Is that going to affect your boredom Nev?
7
 
On Mon 16 Aug at 12:18pm Nevillman wrote:
Very interesting. Classic denier behaviour. Pick a few random 'facts' that appear to support your predetermined argument and ignore the many substantiated facts that support the view you oppose.
Nothing you say affects my level of boredom Tom. My level of boredom affects my response to you.
 
 
On Mon 16 Aug at 2:29pm Tom Pain wrote:
What if they're true Nev? Will you deny it with great predetermination?
5
 
On Mon 16 Aug at 3:11pm Green Sleeves wrote:
Why has the obsession from the far right been about anti-vax, but happy to push other pharmaceutical drugs such as ivermectin and Hydroxychloroquine. Is ivermectin cheaper than all covid19 vaccines available? Is it more effective? Ok TP, i won't label you are far-right, but you must surely understand why we should be so incredulous about something that Donald Trump, Rudy Giuliani and numerous other despots and covid-deniers have been heavily promoting. All of this seems so 2020 and debunked already but lets give you a few more minutes of attention. Given Trump had some financial investment in the french pharma company that provided the Hydroxychloroquine, and his history of outright lies and falsehoods, can you blame people for gravitating more towards the "establishment" that has far larger and more conclusive studies and significant data?

What has been clear is the efficacy of the vaccine roll outs, in so far that the majority of hospitalised patients and deaths with covid are those who haven't been vaccinated. The studies on ivermectin and HC have simply not shown the kind of success the vaccines have, and these have side-effects as well, and pushed by big-pharma that you routinely cast shade on.

Its like you are against some bunch of pharma-crooks, but happy to side with another bunch of pharma-crooks. All over what? Some inconclusive and limited studies, as well as comparing apples and oranges over the current impact of the delta variant in two hugely different countries at different stages of a covid wave.....that to me sounds like you want the vaccine to fail and some totally other random drugs to succeed. I would have no problem in ivermectin or HC, and would want nothing more for health care systems to have all the drugs available to treat and prevent covid, but if you are so cautious over the vaccine, why are you not more so about these two powerful drugs with more serious side-effects? I thought you said covid19 was nothing more than seasonal flu anyway....why the concern for treatment with powerful anti-malaria drugs? It seems you can't really make up your mind, but anything that is against the general consensus you'll be all over.
6
 
On Mon 16 Aug at 4:10pm Nevillman wrote:
Tom. If sufficient medical and science experts whose opinion I trusted were to announce that the vaccination was ineffective or that climate change was not happening then I would be very happy to change my opinion. I have severe doubts whether you are capable of changing your mind in the light of evidence from anyone but the odd nutjob who happens to post something in support of you pre determined position.
 
 
On Mon 16 Aug at 10:38pm Tom Pain wrote:
I haven't got a predetermined position! No that's not correct, as far as vaccines go, if I was bitten by a rabid dog I would be round the doctors for a jab before greenie could say "antivaxer". On the climate front there's thousands of scientists who don't go along with the current narrative but you're just not interested to find out. I've pointed out the contradictions between historic newspaper reports and the obviously tampered current data but it doesn't bother you. Greenie, ivermectin is dirt cheap, so's hcq, there's no big money there, so that argument is dead in the water. Why do you need studies in the face of clear evidence from India? There are other provinces not using ivermectin where the figures are as bad as the US... conclusion? ....more tests? Why is the WHO against it? How many guesses do you need? Have you got shares in Pfizer ?
6
 
On Mon 16 Aug at 10:57pm Green Sleeves wrote:
Cheap it may be, but this is peoples health we're talking about, and even in the limited studies where ivermectin shows promise, it doesn't stack up particularly well against the vaccines in terms of reduction of symptoms (and not all the vaccines are expensive). Its still advised in India to have vaccines, even if some physicians are finding promise in also using ivermectin alongside it.

You have to bear in mind that these vaccines have been trialed and used by hundreds of thousands, and now millions of people, and the results are 90%+ in efficacy. The limited and non-peer reviewed studies for ivermectin on covid is around 60% and we don't know how long that would offer protection, so it still makes perfect sense to have the vaccine as the first line of defence.

I guess if you're not that scared of catching COVID, then taking another drug which is cheaper but less reliable might be for you, i wish you well in your experiment. I'm happier being double jabbed personally, the data is just more compelling and much more robust.
4
 
On Mon 16 Aug at 11:45pm IDM wrote:
If you'll allow an interloper ... TP - 14 Aug 23-22
"Science is never settled where freedom of thought is allowed". Well, I suppose that a mathematician with free thought might believe that 2 + 2 = 5; but I would claim that things were settled against them.
 
 
On Wed 18 Aug at 5:15pm Tom Pain wrote:
How long has this vaccine been trialed? Nearly a year? How long are they usually trialed for? A bit longer than that. Is all this talk about vaccine passports just a conspiracy theory? I've never had a health passport in my life. Suddenly they're all the rage just about the flu and you think that's just fine. Yes dreamer, they said the same to Galileo.
2
 
On Wed 18 Aug at 5:15pm Tom Pain wrote:
I'm sure dreamer could make 2+2=9. Let's allow Galileo the final say on consensus science. Bearing in mind the billions in fines paid by Pfizer for corruption, I think it wise to rely on real life results from India. Greenie is involved in an experiment with only emergency licensing if government statements are heeded. If , more likely when, they get Covid passports going what next, income tax was a temporary measure once you know.
5
 
On Fri 20 Aug at 3:29pm Nevillman wrote:
I'm a bit bored Tom so I thought I'd try to unpick your last 2 posts in an attempt to keep some discussion going. You don't think that the covid vaccine has been trialled for long enough. I'm sure everyone would prefer it to have been trialled for longer but circumstances dictate and most people accept the risk of a less trialled vaccine as one they are prepared to take. You have expressed your disagreement with this many times. Do you have anything to add? You've lost me about health passports. Thank you for telling me they are all the rage but I've never heard of them. Seems like a reasonable idea given there is an infection illness around. If you have an argument against them please elucidate.
Galileo was very clever and we all know how science works by gradual development and occasional radical change of ideas. What point are you making? If you think you've found someone in the internet who is the equal of Galileo, Newton and Einstein then I'm afraid I have my doubts but who are they? I can't find anything about the results in India that back up your claims. No idea what point you are making at the end. Sounds like you having a go at green but I'm not sure.
Do you ever wonder why you are often the last person to post on a particular thread or why they often degenerate after your post. You may think it is because you are like your namesake and happy to adopt unpopular views that conflict with established views and upset people. It really isn't Tom. I used to go into your shop and know you are decent, intelligent and articulate. I'm afraid your posts on here close down discussion and I think drive people away from the forum. That is only my opinion and others may disagree.
I hope I've accurately summarised your last posts Tom. Please tell me where I have got them wrong and in your next post please try to make your points a little clearer as that makes further discussion so much easier.
4
 
On Fri 20 Aug at 5:55pm Green Sleeves wrote:
What did his shop sell? All the snake oil he has accumulated over the years and needs to shift?
 
 
On Fri 20 Aug at 11:35pm Tom Pain wrote:
Health passports- vaccine passports, mooted to to be necessary to attend populous functions by November. Galileo- in answer to IDM, referring to the unscientific premise that science is ever settled especially in a very short time. Indian results show ivermectin to be more efficacious at reducing cases and deaths- it's in the numbers. Last point- governments never give up controls or taxes willingly and will introduce them as a temporary measure with no intention of ending them. Haven't you noticed they lie? I'm afraid I've never had a shop but thanks for the compliment. I just say what I think, with no intention of upsetting anyone. Certainly I get indignant and more than a touch brusque with some commenters who equivocate and make serpentine remarks like, umm, the one before this post, mentioning no names but..... who wouldn't?
5
 
On Sat 21 Aug at 10:55am Green Sleeves wrote:
You are a contrarian, nothing more, nothing less. There has been a proliferation of your kind of "thinkers" with the advent of social media. I don't mean that in an unkind way, its just that humanity now has a lot easier access to credible resources as well as garbage BS.

If ivermectin was much more safe and effective than the vaccines, they would be using it to treat covid the world over. The evidence is extremely limited and not peer reviewed. This is not to say ivermectin is not worth researching when it comes to covid, but we have vaccines which are proving to be safe and effective. I am not against other treatment or prophylaxis, but the overwhelming data and evidence is already available on vaccines, where as its limited on ivermectin. On the other hand, you have trotted out numerous wild stories about the vaccine during the pandemic - including the whole DNA nonsense. I've never discredited ivermectin in the way you have done with the vaccines.

You seem to have the agenda here, as while you are a contrarian, i am no conformist. If the science behind the vaccines efficacy on covid was more limited and dubious than the science behind ivermectin (on covid), then I'd have more hesitancy on this issue. I'm more than open to being convinced otherwise, but you've left me only with mildy curious studies rather than deep and compelling ones that I would consider sufficient evidence to make an informed choice. I feel the pro-vaccine side of the argument has vastly more data and credibility. Thats what it comes down to, ultimately.
4
 
On Sat 21 Aug at 6:40pm IDM wrote:
I've got a bit of catching up to do.
TP - 13 Aug - 14-15: how do you know that Green Sleeves is male? Are there ex-Forum liaisons beyond our knowledge?
Green Sleeves - 16 Aug - 15-11: a quick piece of statistical support. If the vaccine were completely useless, 80% vaccination would result in 80% of infections being of the vaccinated. That is not happening.
TP - 18 Aug - 17-15 (first): health passports have been around for ages. On
Nevillman - 20 Aug - 15-29: the wall of a surgery you may see a fee list for GP issued passports, because they do not count as health treatment. I recently had to show an NHS vaccination passport (not a normal UK one) to board a plane to Guernsey.

3
 
On Sat 21 Aug at 11:50pm IDM wrote:
TP - 18 Aug - 17-15 (second): I don't understand what you are saying about
20 Aug - 23-35: Galileo. Is it that if only one person uses freedom of speech to reject Galileo's views, then the science is not settled? Faced with two opposing scientific views with a 99%/1% split between adherents, not being a genius myself I would follow the 99%. Nor do I follow the .01% of flat earthers.
Science develops slowly as it is tidied up, refined and ideas pushed a little bit further (hence Newton's shoulders). But it can change overnight with new evidence, especially physical; this is particularly true when a conjecture is transformed into a theorem (or, quite simply, a fact). In this category, I would offer: the Higgs boson; general relativity; Aramaic being used in formal settings (confirmed by the Dead Sea scrolls). Also the development of early hominids being turned on its head by the discovery of cave paintings. Then there are Archimedes style eureka moments. Remember that Wiles did not prove Fermat's last theorem by a slow build-up of reasoning. He suddenly plucked out of the blue the relationship with Liouville numbers.
 
 
On Sat 21 Aug at 11:51pm Tom Pain wrote:
The problem is access to information and even the drugs themselves; and a massive propaganda campaign. In view of this contention, I cite the opinion of the medical authority at the very beginning of the pandemic-lite ( contentious but taking into account the WHO dropping the "causing serious loss of life" in it's description of a pandemic, not without validity), they deemed Covid to be not too serious. That was before the charlatan Ferguson came up with his ludicrous prophecy of doom. He with a record of consistently over estimating the seriousness of every epidemic by factors of thousands, if not millions. Now, for me, that is proof positive that we are in the realm of fiction. I can't take seriously anything the government has done since then. Nobody in their right mind could consider anything he said as anything but lies, unless they were in cahoots, why is a matter of conjecture but to me it's glaringly obvious.
4
 
On Sun 22 Aug at 11:02am Green Sleeves wrote:
The world didn't just drop everything based on the words of Professor Neil Ferguson, who you are treating in a similar way to RW'ers and anti-vaxxers/MAGAs in America have treated Anthony Fauci. If they weren't 100% bang on with their predictions and advice, then they're "enemies of the state".

This pandemic would have occurred even if those two never existed, and probably the same outcome of lockdowns, social distancing, mask mandates and vaccinations would have been the same result and where we would be today.

Fergusons worst-case estimate of 500k dead in Britain doesn't even seem outlandish anymore. We have lost over 150k, and his prediction was based on taking absolutely no measures and over a 2 year period. So either he was just partially right with significant deaths, OR all the lockdown and pandemic measures we took helped. I would say it was a bit of both. Britain eventually took steps to reduce the spread of the virus, and I believe less people are dead as a result. However, "eventually" being the operative word. We could have probably saved a lot more had we gone into lockdown sooner, as well as stopped pussyfooting around about face masks and just taken life seriously for a change.
 
 
On Sun 22 Aug at 8:26pm Tom Pain wrote:
My last post got lost in the post
 
 
On Mon 23 Aug at 9:52am Tom Pain wrote:
Any chance of my reply to greeny being reinstated?
3
 
On Mon 23 Aug at 2:02pm Green Sleeves wrote:
If its another hit piece on Ferguson, then save it. Ive heard it all before. 150k people have died in this country of covid in 18 months. Its a pandemic. Its a good thing that we have a mostly vaccinated adult population now. Its keeping the deaths low during another wave and is mainly only killing off folks that find themselves nodding away to Piers Corbyn and David Icke. And Karens.
 
 
On Mon 23 Aug at 3:29pm Tom Pain wrote:
Piers Corbyn, Icke, Karens? RWers? Anti vaxers, magas ! Desperately up to your tricks eh, are you getting a bit worried, is the brainwash wearing so thin that you have to pile all those associations on me? Shame on you, relying on such underhand methods. I did try to reply before but censorship is now the rule rather than the exception in the dictatorship of communitarian "democracy". Cameron's Big Society is on a roll. Do we still have a parliament, let alone an opposition?
2
 
On Mon 23 Aug at 4:20pm Green Sleeves wrote:
Ugh, oh gawd...
1
 
On Tue 24 Aug at 11:49pm IDM wrote:
Through gritted teeth, I admit TP has statistical support:
Country Full vaccination % Cases/million/day
Australia 24 35
Russia 24 133
Brazil 26 62
USA 51 222
France 55 79
Germany 58 66
UK 61 470
Spain 67 170
It is not smooth, but there is a genuine link between a rise in vaccination rates and cases. So vaccines cause cases? Er, no.
Countries that were affected heavily and quickly (Europe and the USA) had a strong motive to develop vaccines and get them to the population. They have high vaccination rates, but are wrestling with the legacy of the original breakout. Countries catching up in infections now (Africa, South America, Australia) have only just started to move towards a high vaccination rate. In time, the high vaccination countries will see their infection rates come down.
1
 
On Wed 25 Aug at 9:45pm Tom Pain wrote:
These are all "cases" anyway. That is people testing positive for a Corona or flu virus with a test that can't distinguish the difference and run with enough cycles can find anything you want; that's according to its inventor who should know. They may have evidence of a, or the, virus in question but it doesn't mean they have the disease it can cause. Billions of people have traces of millions of viruses in them, as virologist very well know; why it's suddenly terrifying is something you'd have to ask the WHO. When the economy of the world is totally wrecked by this insane panic you'll own nothing, as Klaus Schwab says and you'll be happy, ho, ho, ho. Returning to the reason you give for all these "cases"- it is possible, but so many other causes are equally possible too, have you considered them?
2
 
On Fri 27 Aug at 6:52pm Woman in Whitecoat wrote:
Tom Pain, you are a deluded nutcase. I hope you don't have any underlying conditions, because when you get Covid (and you will), I don't think the NHS need another antivaxer taking up an ICU bed :
1
 
On Fri 27 Aug at 7:21pm Green Sleeves wrote:
i think we could do with another 2 more threads of this....


This thread has reached its limit now
Why not start another one


 

Lewes Cross 67:132
Lewes Cross

Funnily enough I haven't spoken to the fossil fuel industry, or they to me. Your personal remarks about my sanity are becoming as... more
QUOTE OF THE MOMENT
I like All the wide open spaces on the downs
Jojo