Influenza cases

[the other bob wilson]

Re: Influenza cases

No as I’ve said repeatedly, I have not held another account for years prior to this one but if it gives you comfort thinking I have , crack on .

I am not going to change my opinion and it’s clear to me that it’s reasonable to ask questions. I think it’s laughable that agenda pushers like you who are retired with little to lose if we are locked down question business people with families like myself regarding policies that clearly has a more negative impact than a positive one on society.

I think that you had another posting name on here because you have talked in the past about what was on this board three years ago. However, let's accept you're right and you have only ever posted under your current name, it strikes me as odd that' given your strong feelings about lockdowns, you did not make your opinion clear at the time if you're saying you did have access to the board. Could it be that you did not feel the same about lockdowns then?

I find all of these current day claims about the lockdowns in 2020 in particular a bit of a waste of time. I do not remember too big a backlash against lockdowns when they were first imposed maybe because the world was a much different place then than it is now in terms of what we know about Covid and how we could treat it.

If I do have an "agenda" when it comes to lockdowns, it's that they were a necessary evil through 2020 and into early 2021, but not since then and I certainly wouldn't support a Covid related one now.

I see in the perpetual money v people debate which politics boils down to in its simplest terms, you're on the side of money. I'm not and never have been , my views have nothing to do with my age

[Dorcus]

Re: Influenza cases

I'd rather lose a business than one single life.

[TWGL1]

Re: Influenza cases

I think that you had another posting name on here because you have talked in the past about what was on this board three years ago. However, let's accept you're right and you have only ever posted under your current name, it strikes me as odd that' given your strong feelings about lockdowns, you did not make your opinion clear at the time if you're saying you did have access to the board. Could it be that you did not feel the same about lockdowns then?

I find all of these current day claims about the lockdowns in 2020 in particular a bit of a waste of time. I do not remember too big a backlash against lockdowns when they were first imposed maybe because the world was a much different place then than it is now in terms of what we know about Covid and how we could treat it.

If I do have an "agenda" when it comes to lockdowns, it's that they were a necessary evil through 2020 and into early 2021, but not since then and I certainly wouldn't support a Covid related one now.

I see in the perpetual money v people debate which politics boils down to in its simplest terms, you're on the side of money. I'm not and never have been , my views have nothing to do with my age

I’m not motivated by money I’m motivated by a balanced approach. As a father, I was also concerned about my sons personal development.

I don’t expect a guy who’s retired to have the same view as me but at the same time you have to understand that the lockdown approach just kicked the can down the road. It’s clear that the lockdown approach has done more harm than good both fiscally and in terms of long term health and that was obvious at the time. Prove me wrong.

The multi user debate has been done and done , but even if I did have another user name ( I didn’t ) so what ?
It’s clear many people have been driven off the board with the relentless narrative ( pro mainstream)or felt compelled to start afresh under other user name , and that’s more a reflection of you and other “big hitters” isn’t it?

[TWGL1]

Re: Influenza cases

I'd rather lose a business than one single life.

Very noble of you.

[lardy]

Re: Influenza cases

I’m not motivated by money I’m motivated by a balanced approach. As a father, I was also concerned about my sons personal development.

I don’t expect a guy who’s retired to have the same view as me but at the same time you have to understand that the lockdown approach just kicked the can down the road. It’s clear that the lockdown approach has done more harm than good both fiscally and in terms of long term health and that was obvious at the time. Prove me wrong.

The multi user debate has been done and done , but even if I did have another user name ( I didn’t ) so what ?
It’s clear many people have been driven off the board with the relentless narrative ( pro mainstream)or felt compelled to start afresh under other user name , and that’s more a reflection of you and other “big hitters” isn’t it?

You've already said in another thread that you used to post on here using a different name. Do try and keep your story straight.

[TWGL1]

Re: Influenza cases

You've already said in another thread that you used to post on here using a different name. Do try and keep your story straight.

I posted years ago , do try to keep up.

Even if I did for argument sake so what ?

[Dorcus]

Re: Influenza cases

Very noble of you.

Thanks, I'm chuffed

[the other bob wilson]

Re: Influenza cases

I’m not motivated by money I’m motivated by a balanced approach. As a father, I was also concerned about my sons personal development.

I don’t expect a guy who’s retired to have the same view as me but at the same time you have to understand that the lockdown approach just kicked the can down the road. It’s clear that the lockdown approach has done more harm than good both fiscally and in terms of long term health and that was obvious at the time. Prove me wrong.

The multi user debate has been done and done , but even if I did have another user name ( I didn’t ) so what ?
It’s clear many people have been driven off the board with the relentless narrative ( pro mainstream)or felt compelled to start afresh under other user name , and that’s more a reflection of you and other “big hitters” isn’t it?

There wasn’t a can to be kicked down the road until Covid came along and became the priority.

That modelling in March 2020 that said there could be half a million Covid deaths in the UK if measures weren’t taken to combat it has been ridiculed by the “independent thinkers”on here, but how can anyone know for sure whether it was accurate or not? If it was, just under 300,000 lives were saved with the imposition of the lockdown being a major factor in that. Even if we accept that it was only half right that still points to well over a 100,000 lives saved.

To hear you lot talk, you’d think, first, that nobody who’s had the vaccine thought there was any risk, but the large majority who did knew that there were chances of problems down the line, yet
thought it was a risk they had to take. Secondly, you lot seem to think that everyone would have continued using the NHS as if nothing was happening if there had not been a lockdown. There are two ludicrous assumptions which follow from that second option that you and others take. The first one being no recognition of the numbers who would have died without the lockdown and, second, that all of those additional excess deaths would be avoided if there hadn’t been a lockdown. Of course they wouldn’t have, I can only guess at the numbers who would have not bothered to have gone to their doctors or keep hospital appointments in the spring of 2020 out of a fear of catching Covid even if there had not been a lockdown, but would assume it would be a very, very significant number.

The truth is that if the sort of excess deaths figures referred to in this recent article continue at the same rate

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2022/10/29/disastrous-legacy-left-lockdown-non-covid-excess-deaths-overtake/

Then it’s going to take a long time to surpass what I believe is a reasonable figure to assume for deaths saved by the early lockdowns in particular.

You say you are motivated by “a balanced approach”, but your contributions on the subject of Covid, lockdowns and vaccines are not balanced in the slightest, they’re completely one sided.

[TWGL1]

Re: Influenza cases

[QUOTE=the other bob wilson;5369342]There wasn’t a can to be kicked down the road until Covid came along and became the priority.

That modelling in March 2020 that said there could be half a million Covid deaths in the UK if measures weren’t taken to combat it has been ridiculed by the “independent thinkers”on here, but how can anyone know for sure whether it was accurate or not? If it was, just under 300,000 lives were saved with the imposition of the lockdown being a major factor in that. Even if we accept that it was only half right that still points to well over a 100,000 lives saved.

To hear you lot talk, you’d think, first, that nobody who’s had the vaccine thought there was any risk, but the large majority who did knew that there were chances of problems down the line, yet
thought it was a risk they had to take. Secondly, you lot seem to think that everyone would have continued using the NHS as if nothing was happening if there had not been a lockdown. There are two ludicrous assumptions which follow from that second option that you and others take. The first one being no recognition of the numbers who would have died without the lockdown and, second, that all of those additional excess deaths would be avoided if there hadn’t been a lockdown. Of course they wouldn’t have, I can only guess at the numbers who would have not bothered to have gone to their doctors or keep hospital appointments in the spring of 2020 out of a fear of catching Covid even if there had not been a lockdown, but would assume it would be a very, very significant number.

The truth is that if the sort of excess deaths figures referred to in this recent article continue at the same rate

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2022/10/29/disastrous-legacy-left-lockdown-non-covid-excess-deaths-overtake/

Then it’s going to take a long time to surpass what I believe is a reasonable figure to assume for deaths saved by the early lockdowns in particular.

You say you are motivated by “a balanced approach”, but your contributions on the subject of Covid, lockdowns and vaccines are not balanced in the slightest, they’re completely one sided.[/

The modelling was wildly inaccurate hence the ridicule of professor lockdown.

How many people actually died of cov-sars2 and not with - similar to any other flu year

CDC have confirmed cov-sars 2 cannot be distinguished with a “test” and many Covid deaths were of a medical opinion only. This would inflate numbers on a huge scale

[the other bob wilson]

Re: Influenza cases

[QUOTE=TWGL1;5369349]

There wasn’t a can to be kicked down the road until Covid came along and became the priority.

That modelling in March 2020 that said there could be half a million Covid deaths in the UK if measures weren’t taken to combat it has been ridiculed by the “independent thinkers”on here, but how can anyone know for sure whether it was accurate or not? If it was, just under 300,000 lives were saved with the imposition of the lockdown being a major factor in that. Even if we accept that it was only half right that still points to well over a 100,000 lives saved.

To hear you lot talk, you’d think, first, that nobody who’s had the vaccine thought there was any risk, but the large majority who did knew that there were chances of problems down the line, yet
thought it was a risk they had to take. Secondly, you lot seem to think that everyone would have continued using the NHS as if nothing was happening if there had not been a lockdown. There are two ludicrous assumptions which follow from that second option that you and others take. The first one being no recognition of the numbers who would have died without the lockdown and, second, that all of those additional excess deaths would be avoided if there hadn’t been a lockdown. Of course they wouldn’t have, I can only guess at the numbers who would have not bothered to have gone to their doctors or keep hospital appointments in the spring of 2020 out of a fear of catching Covid even if there had not been a lockdown, but would assume it would be a very, very significant number.

The truth is that if the sort of excess deaths figures referred to in this recent article continue at the same rate

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2022/10/29/disastrous-legacy-left-lockdown-non-covid-excess-deaths-overtake/

Then it’s going to take a long time to surpass what I believe is a reasonable figure to assume for deaths saved by the early lockdowns in particular.

You say you are motivated by “a balanced approach”, but your contributions on the subject of Covid, lockdowns and vaccines are not balanced in the slightest, they’re completely one sided.[/

The modelling was wildly inaccurate hence the ridicule of professor lockdown.

How many people actually died of cov-sars2 and not with - similar to any other flu year

CDC have confirmed cov-sars 2 cannot be distinguished with a “test” and many Covid deaths were of a medical opinion only. This would inflate numbers on a huge scale

It was not wildly inaccurate, it was a worst case scenario figure if measures were not taken - measures were taken, so how can you come to that conclusion?

Your use of the term Professor Lockdown blows your claims to be balanced out of the water.

[TWGL1]

Re: Influenza cases

[QUOTE=the other bob wilson;5369358]

It was not wildly inaccurate, it was a worst case scenario figure if measures were not taken - measures were taken, so how can you come to that conclusion?

Your use of the term Professor Lockdown blows your claims to be balanced out of the water.

So , you’re ignoring the facts then that come from CDC ?

[Wales-Bales]

Re: Influenza cases

There wasn’t a can to be kicked down the road until Covid came along and became the priority.

That modelling in March 2020 that said there could be half a million Covid deaths in the UK if measures weren’t taken to combat it has been ridiculed by the “independent thinkers”on here, but how can anyone know for sure whether it was accurate or not? If it was, just under 300,000 lives were saved with the imposition of the lockdown being a major factor in that. Even if we accept that it was only half right that still points to well over a 100,000 lives saved.

To hear you lot talk, you’d think, first, that nobody who’s had the vaccine thought there was any risk, but the large majority who did knew that there were chances of problems down the line, yet
thought it was a risk they had to take. Secondly, you lot seem to think that everyone would have continued using the NHS as if nothing was happening if there had not been a lockdown. There are two ludicrous assumptions which follow from that second option that you and others take. The first one being no recognition of the numbers who would have died without the lockdown and, second, that all of those additional excess deaths would be avoided if there hadn’t been a lockdown. Of course they wouldn’t have, I can only guess at the numbers who would have not bothered to have gone to their doctors or keep hospital appointments in the spring of 2020 out of a fear of catching Covid even if there had not been a lockdown, but would assume it would be a very, very significant number.

The truth is that if the sort of excess deaths figures referred to in this recent article continue at the same rate

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2022/10/29/disastrous-legacy-left-lockdown-non-covid-excess-deaths-overtake/

Then it’s going to take a long time to surpass what I believe is a reasonable figure to assume for deaths saved by the early lockdowns in particular.

You say you are motivated by “a balanced approach”, but your contributions on the subject of Covid, lockdowns and vaccines are not balanced in the slightest, they’re completely one sided.

So you've been through everything with a fine tooth comb and nothing was amiss, or you didn't bother and just accepted everything at face value?

[the other bob wilson]

Re: Influenza cases

So you've been through everything with a fine tooth comb and nothing was amiss, or you didn't bother and just accepted everything at face value?

Let’s just say that, once again, I don’t see conspiracies left, right and centre like you and a few others do. Instead, I see the biggest crisis for this country, and many others, since the Second World War and those responsible for putting together a response to it making mistakes and misjudgements (that there would be some was inevitable) which are easy to be wise after the event about now.

[Wales-Bales]

Re: Influenza cases

Let’s just say that, once again, I don’t see conspiracies left, right and centre like you and a few others do. Instead, I see the biggest crisis for this country, and many others, since the Second World War and those responsible for putting together a response to it making mistakes and misjudgements (that there would be some was inevitable) which are easy to be wise after the event about now.

Are we done with all the mistakes and misjudgements or are there more to come? How about the side-effects of vaccine passports, programmable digital currency, shrinking agriculture, and further lockdowns, are they planned?

[cyril evans awaydays]

Re: Influenza cases

Are we done with all the mistakes and misjudgements or are there more to come? How about the side-effects of vaccine passports, programmable digital currency, shrinking agriculture, and further lockdowns, are they planned?

Of course we aren't done with mistakes and misjudgements. Here are a few dozen to start!

1) It's a Chinese Plot against its own people;
2 Its a hoax inflamed by the media;
3) It's a bit like Y2K;
4) It's a bit like the common cold or seasonal flu;
5) Let's call it Wuhan Flu;
6) Textbook response by health authorities and the British and US Governments;
7) Only 0.1% (350k Americans) will die so that is no reason to shut down the economy so dramatically;
8) Hydroxychloroquine is a miracle cure that if you were offered the choice of it or a ventilator which one would you go for;
9) It was all the World Health Organisation's fault we should never have listened to their tweets;
10) Most of those poor souls were dying anyway so it's nowhere near as bad as it seems;
11) Any vaccine is one of Bill Gates trojan horse vaccines advocated by a deep state health official, who was once photographed with George Soros, which will probably kill us anyway;
12) Well it's just an extended month's holiday for workers whilst the economy burns;
13) Hydroxochloroquine is the miracle cure because Trump met a Democrat who recovered using it;
14) The WHO were running the show along with the CDC;
15) Those who do not believe Trump's narrative generally or on the WHO specifically are siding with China;
16) It would be very unfortunate if the WHO or China were shown to have been complicit in the spread of the virus that killed tens of thousands of people around the world, including many of the deaths that TOBW was apparently trying to pin directly on Trump;
16) I believed that the WHO were doing a textbook job initially but now I am not so sure. This shows how I flexibly adjust my views which is a talent not all possess;
17) I know what a Plandemic is and the current US investigation into the WHO is already examining the possibility that the virus was leaked from the Wuhan biolab, and that it may have been present in Wuhan earlier than thought;
18) I am sitting on some information that if true will shock a lot of people much worse than anything mentioned on here so far, but I'm not posting it until I can verify it with other sources.
19) I am getting tired of seeing people trying to use this event as a political football, in an attempt to gain moral superiority.
20) All diseases that lead to death are terrible, but I'm just not seeing a once in a hundred years catastrophic event here.
21) If the global economy crashes people will die in the hundreds of millions. Until you can square that circle we are heading towards an unprecedented catastrophe of epic proportions
22) I didn't support them going on forever like some people are calling for, and some countries that did nothing haven't had a once in a hundred years catastrophic situation.
23) Bill Gates reckons it's Pandemic 1, in a series of 1001 pandemics!
24) An intuitive person's position would naturally evolve over time, unless their thoughts were being manipulated by a subset of the media
25) I dunno, but the goings on in Wuhan seem a bit fishy to me, and the way things are heading I wouldn't be surprised to see China being asked to foot the bill, which would run into many trillions of dollars.
26) Supervisor Jim Desmond says San Diego has only had ‘six pure’ coronavirus deaths
27) It's a huge scandal what happened in many care homes around the world and somehow they all managed to follow the same course of action, which begs the question where did the directive come from, or was it coincidental that the same thing occurred in many different countries?
28) China were so successful in controlling the Coronavirus narrative via the WHO and world media, that there were people on here repeating the Chinese Communist Party line.
29) There is a the BBC article minimizing the role that China played in the transmission of the the virus to the UK, by saying their contribution to the pandemic was almost zero percent;
30) The EU acted as incubation zone that allowed the virus to freely multiply, before it's onward transmission into the UK;
31) The Virus is a trojan horse for Tony Blair to introduce a national identity card scheme;
32) The trouble is there will be no normality to return to as the global economy will have been wiped out,