Do you trust and follow the science?

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
a reply to: Asmodeus3

So, no relevant qualifications, then?

Personally, I don't have any medical or science qualifications.

But I did spend many years practicing in the field of Clinical Negligence.

So I know my way around medical evidence which was based upon medical reports from medical experts.

With Clinical Neg claims (I was for claimants) the key focus, once actual negligence is established, is Causation.

So I do know a bit about that, and it's for the likes of you to establish.

I don't usually advertise my academic and professional degrees. But they are in relevant fields.

I am sure you will have plenty of business in the coming years.

We only know the short term effects of these products and it's not good news. Myocarditis, Pericarditis, heart failure, auto-immune conditions, thrombosis with thrombocytopenia, and many other. Including death directly caused by them.

So my challenge is still valid. Anyone who knows the medium and long term effects as well as the benefit to risk ratio in all age groups can comment.

a reply to: Asmodeus3

Doubt it.

I'm not in private practice anymore.

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
a reply to: Asmodeus3

Doubt it.

I'm not in private practice anymore.

That's up to you.
Doubt is good though.

However keep the last paragraph

'So my challenge is still valid. Anyone who knows the medium and long term effects as well as the benefit to risk ratio in all age groups can comment.'

There would be no answer for years to come and you can't travel forward in time and then come back.

a reply to: Asmodeus3

Yes, it was up to me.

I've changed jobs so don't do that stuff anymore.

Of course no one knows the long term effects just yet.

We're not in the long or even medium term yet.

Why ask?

a reply to: Asmodeus3

How about knowing the long term effects of actual COVID?

There's that, too.

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
a reply to: Asmodeus3

Yes, it was up to me.

I've changed jobs so don't do that stuff anymore.

Of course no one knows the long term effects just yet.

We're not in the long or even medium term yet.

Why ask?

I am asking because there are those who claim vaccines are safe and effective. These claims can't be made if you don't have the required information and vaccines cannot be rolled out to the general population if you don't know the short, medium, and long term effects as well as the benefit to risk ratio in all age groups.

Precisely! You have answered the question. Emergency authorisation doesn't establish safety and effectiveness. It's just what it is: Emergency authorisation. So if some scientists or those reporters from the MSM claim that vaccines are safe and effective you need to be very skeptical.

So the question remains the same: Do you trust and follow the science Sir?

a reply to: Asmodeus3

Depends which science.

Science is not fixed, it changes. And developes.

Trust thyself.
Know thyself.
Accept thyself.

Man, know thyself.

Govern thyself.

Be your own master.

Accept no claims of ownership over you.

Be willing to fight for your freedom, and your fellow mans.

No, I do not trust anything from the crowd/hive/culture. I vehemently oppose it.

The hive mind is one of the most evil monstrosities the earth has ever seen. As Terrence McKenna said, culture is NOT your friend.

a reply to: livinglight108

Oh. I quite like yoghurt?

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
a reply to: Asmodeus3

"I forgot from our conversations, what degrees do you have in science and/or medicine?"

Yet you asked another poster that?

Yes, I see the difference.

It's called hypocrisy and double standards.

Not at all. It isn't. As the other member seems to have information that we don't have in relation to the medium and long term effects of the vaccines and the benefit to risk ratio in all age groups.

To know about them you either have to go forward in time and then come back via a time machine or more realistically to have some information that we don't have if these products have been tested for a longer period of time than we know and their safety and effectiveness has been established.

By the way I am asking everyone about this, not only the member above. There was someone else earlier who argued the vaccines were safe and effective.

You seem to enjoy asking members about their personal information who disagree with you, but are unwilling to supply your own information, I wonder why that is???
Also please post where I claim I have information other than whats already freely avalible? You can't and won't because I didn't, but we do know the long term effects covid is having/has had on some people.

originally posted by: Kurokage

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
a reply to: Asmodeus3

"I forgot from our conversations, what degrees do you have in science and/or medicine?"

Yet you asked another poster that?

Yes, I see the difference.

It's called hypocrisy and double standards.

Not at all. It isn't. As the other member seems to have information that we don't have in relation to the medium and long term effects of the vaccines and the benefit to risk ratio in all age groups.

To know about them you either have to go forward in time and then come back via a time machine or more realistically to have some information that we don't have if these products have been tested for a longer period of time than we know and their safety and effectiveness has been established.

By the way I am asking everyone about this, not only the member above. There was someone else earlier who argued the vaccines were safe and effective.

You seem to enjoy asking members about their personal information who disagree with you, but are unwilling to supply your own information, I wonder why that is???
Also please post where I claim I have information other than whats already freely avalible? You can't and won't because I didn't, but we do know the long term effects covid is having/has had on some people.

Here we discuss about whether we trust the science and especially in relation to the claims made about the vaccines.

Do you know the medium & long term effects? The benefit to risk rato in all age groups? You seem to be confident about the safety and effectiveness of the vaccines and you seem to have some access to information that we don't have.

If you are using the available information then there is no way you will establish safety and effectiveness based on emergency authorisations and the amount of time the vaccines have been in circulation.

I don't advertise what I have done in the past.
However everyone can see and judge.

So what are your degrees in the subject? I remember you said you have no experience or relevant qualifications but I ask you again to verify it. But you seem to have a lot of faith in 'science' which is the main problem for a lot of ordinary people who have some sort of blind faith in institutions.

a reply to: Asmodeus3

"So what are your degrees in the subject? I remember you said you have no experience or relevant qualifications but I ask you again to verify it. But you seem to have a lot of faith in 'science"

Good grief!

Yet more hypocrisy and double standards?!!!!!

What are yours?

As you seem to keep demanding this of others?

a reply to: Oldcarpy2

Scientific development is dependent on who provides the funding for research and how much profit can be generated. Academia was hijacked by corporatocracy long ago. It’s only regarded as good science when it lines the pockets of those peddling it.

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
a reply to: Asmodeus3

"So what are your degrees in the subject? I remember you said you have no experience or relevant qualifications but I ask you again to verify it. But you seem to have a lot of faith in 'science"

Good grief!

Yet more hypocrisy and double standards?!!!!!

What are yours?

As you seem to keep demanding this of others?

Durrrrr bitchute!!

a reply to: v1rtu0s0

I wasn't replying to you, but thanks for your mature and well thought out post.

Are you well?

originally posted by: Grenade
a reply to: Oldcarpy2

Scientific development is dependent on who provides the funding for research and how much profit can be generated. Academia was hijacked by corporatocracy long ago. It’s only regarded as good science when it lines the pockets of those peddling it.

Well said!

Science & academia have also been hijacked by political activism and ideologies apart from corporatism.

Trusting this form of 'science' is the same as trusting sheep 🐑 with a few hungry wolves.

Someone must be really naive or even stupid to trust and follow THE 'science'. Most people have no idea what they care dealing with. If they were told to get 'vaccinated' every 3 months they would have done it.

originally posted by: PerfectAnomoly

originally posted by: NoCorruptionAllowed
a reply to: Ksihkehe

I also think it isn't following science for someone to say their a scientist, but they never tested these vaccines in a lab to verify their safety, instead they believed they would be okay based on other's words, or just jumped on the peer pressure band wagon to avoid all the backlash and ridicule and loss of employment.

I suppose it could be said that everyone who took these Covid vaccines are themselves all scientists because they participated in a very large experiment. Not a very safe experiment though since many already did not survive, or have serious medical issues afterwards.

You are badly misinfromed my friend.... these vaccines went through exactly the same trial process as every other commercially avialable drug... The difference being that some of the processes that are ususally carried out in series were carried out in parralell.... This is why they were approved quicker than conventional medicine. Ony of my family members was involved in the clinical trials..

I would advise you read up about it and stop spreading patent lies..

PA

You are the one lying here not I. Clinical trials last a lot longer than what was done for the Covid jabs, but they weren't done. If they had actually done that and finished them, there would have been no need to keep them experimental use only. They were RUSHED through.

And because they were rushed, is the very reason people are now seeing so many DRASTIC side effects. You and family participated? That's really nice, but this is the only reason you are now "flag waving". All the propaganda made it all sound so proper and above ground, but you have been deceived, and were not following any true science or medicine protocol, only specially "revised for Covid" ones.

Many true and respected experts all over the planet are now exposing the deceit of all of it.

originally posted by: Grenade
a reply to: Oldcarpy2

Scientific development is dependent on who provides the funding for research and how much profit can be generated. Academia was hijacked by corporatocracy long ago. It’s only regarded as good science when it lines the pockets of those peddling it.

From your perspective, that is true.

However, other perspectives exist. I am not arguing against any particular thing you stated. However, it is unlikely, in my opinion, that every scientist, is abused in this way. There are people who want to cure disease, people who are trying to engender progress for the sake of the human condition, and not their own pockets. Their science has the potential of being very good. Frankly, I have to say that the reason many care is to reinforce that spirit and hope that it can break free of those who see only exploitation in their endeavors, those who will only support that which creates excess revenue they can cull for their own.

And I would also enjoy exploring the possibility that it wasn't the corporate culture that invaded academia, but the reverse. Academia has been "under the radar" as a culprit in the decay of our societal calm, but that time is coming to an end (I believe.)

But then, we would have to also agree that the corporate culture's nature only amplified the defect of their behavior.

I agree with you - you have identified aspect of the problem which I will not dispute. Keep an open mind.

originally posted by: Asmodeus3
Someone must be really naive or even stupid to trust and follow THE 'science'. Most people have no idea what they care dealing with. If they were told to get 'vaccinated' every 3 months they would have done it.

Not really. But I understand that current events betray hopeful naivete and invoke cynicism in its place.

Trusting the science is logical.

Most people have been conditioned (another topic entirely) to accept that knowledge comes from whatever the media says and shows. Not "the media (MSM, traditional, or what have you) - but instead ANY media. We all do it. In a world where no one lies, and has no reason to, we could get along with that approach without many of the problems we face today.

The problem is certain people speak for science - and these people mostly serve someone - not science. How can we change such a culture? Even then, the science must be communicated to have universal value... who executes the distribution of information? Generally speaking, it's what we refer to as "the media" - and these people mostly serve someone - not science. Add to that the detractors whose primary function is to deceive in the name of chaos... there are those folks too.

It all adds up to a bad scenario for people who would expect to be told everything without provisos, caveats, or other extraneous crap that isn't about science.

That is what we're talking about here right? Do we trust science?

a reply to: Maxmars


No, trusting science is not logical, it` s utterly stubid to blindly believe/trust science and may put person to grave if person trust the science. science is often not science but dogma and just lies .

Where have you been last few years ? dont you observe the lies that science has tell to people ?