| + Visit Cardiff FC for Latest News, Transfer Gossip, Fixtures and Match Results |
People are using a 2 year old article as reasoning to not take the booster?Originally Posted by TWGL1
It’s not my pet subject , however , it justifies why a significant amount of the UK population (about 20m) have perhaps had second thoughts on their next booster. It also suggests certain people ( usually anonymous) who think it’s great to call people in this category anti - vax , are twats.
Moreso if it’s well know.
"those people who anonymously call people anti vaxxers are twats" says TWGL1, anonymously.It’s not my pet subject , however , it justifies why a significant amount of the UK population (about 20m) have perhaps had second thoughts on their next booster. It also suggests certain people ( usually anonymous) who think it’s great to call people in this category anti - vax , are twats.
Moreso if it’s well know.
Not your finest hour this thread
I could have said something else , and chose a better phrase
Not only that, he clearly doesn’t want to reveal what his posting name was when Covid first hit this country.
I'm just interested why you're so obsessively interested in just this one subject? There are other things going on in the world you know.It’s not my pet subject , however , it justifies why a significant amount of the UK population (about 20m) have perhaps had second thoughts on their next booster. It also suggests certain people ( usually anonymous) who think it’s great to call people in this category anti - vax , are twats.
Moreso if it’s well know.
All of these things were out there in the public domain before people had the first vaccines, as shown by your link which was months before them. I don't know how this would put them off their second booster. The publicly known facts are still exactly the same.It’s not my pet subject , however , it justifies why a significant amount of the UK population (about 20m) have perhaps had second thoughts on their next booster. It also suggests certain people ( usually anonymous) who think it’s great to call people in this category anti - vax , are twats.
Moreso if it’s well know.
You just have a booster to bring your protection back up.
The link didn't make any sense, and your argument doesn't either. I'm really confused by it!
Im not that interested in it per se , however I’m interested in how the masses just fell into line without question and still do with other topics which are the “current thing”
I know I’m in a minority on this platform, but most of my close friends and family are like me and question most things we are fed via the media as a matter of course.
Time will tell on this particular subject I suppose.
Is safe and effective still a thing?
What about long covid stats broken down by status? Now those would be interesting should they ever publish them.
If the original post is anything to go by they've all just heard about man landing on the moon and are questioning whether it really happened
I don’t think having booster after booster is effective especially when most of the healthy population have antibodies.( I’m excluding the obese and people with underlying health issues)
They haven't offered the majority of the country a booster though have they?
The boosters use a different technology and they are self amplifying, so are they really boosters in the sense that they work the same way as the old boosters did, or are they something entirely different?
I've checked his IP and traced it back to a member called ilovewuhan69
I’m not sure but they are offering the over 50’s aren’t they ?
That being said they should have not have coerced people with the original take up when most healthy people would have been fine apart from flu like symptoms.
I wonder how many young healthy people left the care profession because of their decision to not take up the original offer of inoculation when it was well known ( as per my 2020 link ) it didn’t prevent transmission ?
No wonder there is a care shortage.
We seem to have picked up a few of late, like ninja, some 800 posts since he became a bluebird in July….
Your obsession with this is tiresome ,as I’ve said before , I used to post on here years ago , and started posting again when this account was opened. Is that the best you can do ?
Why are you so concerned, does it matter to you that much. Just accept people have different opinions to you.
To be fair to you you are probably the only user name I can recall from years ago, so how many others have changed user names, hundreds by the look of it.
Yeah over 50's because that demographic will be most at risk.
Wales NHS staff didn't have to get vaccinated. They still don't as far as I'm aware. I think the general feeling was that most would have the common sense to do it anyway. So unless you mean specifically England i'm still a bit stumped.
Anyway, I get that you're dubious of vaccines and that's fair enough, but please, jump onto Twitter and get some deranged websites to back it all up (you won't need to look far), because this thread is one of the most oddest i've read
The article was from the Daily MailYeah over 50's because that demographic will be most at risk.
Wales NHS staff didn't have to get vaccinated. They still don't as far as I'm aware. I think the general feeling was that most would have the common sense to do it anyway. So unless you mean specifically England i'm still a bit stumped.
Anyway, I get that you're dubious of vaccines and that's fair enough, but please, jump onto Twitter and get some deranged websites to back it all up (you won't need to look far), because this thread is one of the most oddest i've read
Yes it’s out of date but it’s correct isn’t it ?
Well, you're already in derranged media territoryThe article was from the Daily Mail
Yes it’s out of date but it’s correct isn’t it ?
It's as correct now, as it was correct before the first vaccines. Nothing's changed. It's not news. And I've no idea why it would or should put off anyone having a booster, who wasn't put off having a vaccine in the first place
He could be dubious about gene therapy treatments with no long-term safety data, while still being in favour of traditional vaccines? You seem desperate to paint him into a corner with all of these labels you are trying to stick on himAnyway, I get that you're dubious of vaccines and that's fair enough, but please, jump onto Twitter and get some deranged websites to back it all up (you won't need to look far), because this thread is one of the most oddest i've read
See if it was just conspiritorial stuff like that I'd have just left it straight away and moved onHe could be dubious about gene therapy treatments with no long-term safety data, while still being in favour of traditional vaccines? You seem desperate to paint him into a corner with all of these labels you are trying to stick on him
Quite
It’s hardly an obsession, but you’ve referred to what you said on here two and a half years ago and it seems odd that you don’t want anyone to see what you were saying for themselves.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
