It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

No vaccinations for the under 50s!!!!!

page: 6
16
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 4 2022 @ 02:05 PM
link   
a reply to: thethinkingman




Why did people all wear a mask, really???


Because the virus was found to be airbourne



posted on Oct, 4 2022 @ 02:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: Kurokage
a reply to: Asmodeus3

It was authorised for emergency use by MHRA and initially given to the most at Vulnerable.


Yes I know. But emergency authorisations are very different from establishing vaccine safety. That's why you shouldn't give them to young and healthy populations, as to avoid the harm.

And as per Dr Malhotra's paper

"In the non-elderly population the “number needed to treat” to prevent a single death runs into the thousands. Re-analysis of randomised controlled trials using the messenger ribonucleic acid (mRNA) technology suggests a greater risk of serious adverse events from the vaccines than being hospitalised from COVID-19"
edit on 4-10-2022 by Asmodeus3 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 4 2022 @ 02:11 PM
link   

originally posted by: thethinkingman
Well if people all follow the same rules more or less, they're quite predictable. If 99+% of people have no clue about most things, they only predictably behave in a certain number of ways.

Its a top down thing, people do as they're told. Thats why you followed "rules". Then when you follow them....it makes to seem like everyone "wanted" to do that. Did you ask all of them??? clearly the vast majority just didnt wanna rock the boat and just breeze through with no issues.

The doctors have people above them. Scientists have people above them. If you have the entire media practically mind programming everyone to think you're a bastard if you do anything otherwise, its quite easy to "cancel" people for whatever you want. Its quite easy to threaten peoples likelihoods and they'll shut up. It happens every single day in peoples work and they just put up with whatever cause they need the job.

You know how you refer to other people all the time????? You and thousands of others are infact peddling a few peoples ideas......... Its not that hard to get people to do it, you literally watch it happen.

Why did people all wear a mask, really??? cause they #ing got told to and threatened if they didnt and didnt wanna be the odd one out. Hence why nobody is wearing them now and instantly stopped as soon as they were "allowed".

Its completely pathetic. Spineless morons. Gullible fools. And the problem is people hate being fooled, they dont like feeling stupid....and if so many of them are, they'll just ignore it, they'll just pretend it didnt happen that way. Duhhhhhhh. But keep being in denial.

Billions of people took an injection they literally didnt even know what it did, for most of them their thoughts were "vaccine good, science good, vaccine save people, death bad". ive talked to # loads of people about it, less than 1% even know the basics about any vaccine nevermind this one, or anything else. You can lead people anywhere you want with all this bull# and they have no idea its bull# until someone in "authority" says so.

99% of people took the vaccine literally based on faith, not on their knowledge. They had no clue and STILL dont.


If only we could all be as smart, special , super duper informed and undoubtedly well hung as you.

I hope you can find it in your heart to have some pity on us poor fools who believe the overwhelming majority of medical professionals scientists, statisticians, and published data.


(post by thethinkingman removed for political trolling and baiting)

posted on Oct, 4 2022 @ 02:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: ScepticScot
a reply to: Asmodeus3

The vaccines weren't even available when that was written.

No decision had been made.



If you know about the process of establishing vaccine safety you would know it takes years.
It's precisely because we knew nothing about them they couldn't be rolled out in the young and healthy populations. One can argue they shouldnt have been rolled out at all.


And of course there was no special circumstances in 2020...
edit on 4-10-2022 by ScepticScot because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 4 2022 @ 02:13 PM
link   
a reply to: Asmodeus3



If you know about the process of establishing vaccine safety you would know it takes years.
It's precisely because we knew nothing about them they couldn't be rolled out in the young and healthy populations. One can argue they shouldnt have been rolled out at all.


Thats just your assumption.
It was authorised for emergency use by MHRA and initially given to the most at risk. But by your argument, we gave the jab to the people who'd be killed the easiest by a faulty drug? I don't remeber hundreds of thousands of the elderly and sick dropping dead from the jab?
If the jab was thought to be dangerous and was a risk, then you'd give it to the people able to fight off any ill effects, the young and more healthy.



posted on Oct, 4 2022 @ 02:14 PM
link   
a reply to: thethinkingman

The virus is in water droplets when people express them when they cough, genius.

Still not mastered the reply button, then?



posted on Oct, 4 2022 @ 02:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: Kurokage
a reply to: Asmodeus3

It was authorised for emergency use by MHRA and initially given to the most at Vulnerable.


Yes I know. But semergency authorisations are very different from establishing vaccine safety. That's why you shouldn't give them to young and healthy populations, as to avoid the harm.

And as per Dr Malhotra's paper

"In the non-elderly population the “number needed to treat” to prevent a single death runs into the thousands. Re-analysis of randomised controlled trials using the messenger ribonucleic acid (mRNA) technology suggests a greater risk of serious adverse events from the vaccines than being hospitalised from COVID-19"


Remind me again in this the paper that was published in a journal he is on the board of and has only published 4 things since 2019?

Including his 2 and 1 by another board member.



posted on Oct, 4 2022 @ 02:16 PM
link   
a reply to: thethinkingman

thats the uneducated for you.

It's contained in mositure/condensate that can breathed in and out. Thats why mask are worn in theatre.
edit on 4-10-2022 by Kurokage because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 4 2022 @ 02:20 PM
link   
The reason they wanted to vax everyone over the age of 50 is because that's where all the money is tied up. They wanted that freed up as quickly as possible and the best way to do that is to kill us en masse.

Someone figured out all of the people with all of the money ain't that damn dumb. So they made the poke _mandatory_ for everyone.

How many people do you think that vax is going to kill? I can tell you. "They don't care."



posted on Oct, 4 2022 @ 02:22 PM
link   
a reply to: Deplorable

We are not being killed "en masse".

It's not like 28 Days Later here, ya know?



posted on Oct, 4 2022 @ 02:22 PM
link   
Ok ....these guys think light can pass through the mask...but not their mouth vapours ...or viruses....through a piece of cloth not designed to stop anything....which is what 99% of people wore or wear.

if the virus was about the size of a 10 pence piece.....you would be around 120 to 200 miles tall. Thats the difference in size.

These people just read the most basic stuff with literally zero understanding of any in's and outs and just think it works that way. Completely stupid. Obviously.
edit on 4-10-2022 by thethinkingman because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 4 2022 @ 02:23 PM
link   

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: ScepticScot
a reply to: Asmodeus3

The vaccines weren't even available when that was written.

No decision had been made.



If you know about the process of establishing vaccine safety you would know it takes years.
It's precisely because we knew nothing about them they couldn't be rolled out in the young and healthy populations. One can argue they shouldnt have been rolled out at all.


And of course there was no special circumstances in 2020...


Special circumstances is different to vaccine safety. That is precisely why Ms Bingham sad we won't vaccinate anyone below the age of 50 as we don't want to cause freak harm
edit on 4-10-2022 by Asmodeus3 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 4 2022 @ 02:24 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Oct, 4 2022 @ 02:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
a reply to: Deplorable

We are not being killed "en masse".

It's not like 28 Days Later here, ya know?



If older with money was the target you would have been snuffed out long ago.




posted on Oct, 4 2022 @ 02:25 PM
link   
a reply to: Asmodeus3

Didn't get the point about your article being before vaccinations even started?



posted on Oct, 4 2022 @ 02:25 PM
link   
a reply to: Asmodeus3

Ignoring what else was said and when it was said.



posted on Oct, 4 2022 @ 02:26 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Oct, 4 2022 @ 02:27 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Oct, 4 2022 @ 02:27 PM
link   

originally posted by: Kurokage
a reply to: Asmodeus3



If you know about the process of establishing vaccine safety you would know it takes years.
It's precisely because we knew nothing about them they couldn't be rolled out in the young and healthy populations. One can argue they shouldnt have been rolled out at all.


Thats just your assumption.
It was authorised for emergency use by MHRA and initially given to the most at risk. But by your argument, we gave the jab to the people who'd be killed the easiest by a faulty drug? I don't remeber hundreds of thousands of the elderly and sick dropping dead from the jab?
If the jab was thought to be dangerous and was a risk, then you'd give it to the people able to fight off any ill effects, the young and more healthy.


You misunderstood what emergency use means. Nowhere it implies the vaccine is safe.

You don't seem to understand the meaning of 'safety' in this context.

It is precisely why Ms Bingham said, reflecting the advise by scientists, only a few weeks before the start of the vaccination program, that we won't vaccinate anyone below the age of 50 as we don't want to cause freak harm.

Vaccine safety takes years to establish.



new topics

top topics



 
16
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join