Tip jar

If you like CaB and wish to support it, you can use PayPal or KoFi. Thank you, and I hope you continue to enjoy the site - Neil.

Buy Me a Coffee at ko-fi.com

Support CaB

Recent

Welcome to Cook'd and Bomb'd. Please login or sign up.

March 28, 2024, 12:05:48 PM

Login with username, password and session length

Vaccines "unneccessary"

Started by steve98, April 30, 2021, 11:23:00 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

idunnosomename

At least he died doing what he loved. Being a gynecologist.

This is the data I was looking for. https://www.ons.gov.uk/aboutus/transparencyandgovernance/freedomofinformationfoi/deathsofthoseunder60fromcovid19only The mortality rate for those without underlying health conditions (and especially the young) is indeed low. Then you factor in the risk of thrombosis presented by gene based vaccines and they do begin to appear unnecessary for the majority of people.

JamesTC

Quote from: Wanking Monk of Kefalonia on May 07, 2021, 01:50:43 PM
This is the data I was looking for.

A very scientific approach. Wait for information you agree with.

Quote from: JamesTC on May 07, 2021, 01:52:38 PM
A very scientific approach. Wait for information you agree with.

I wasn't waiting for it, this information's been out there for a long time, I just took upon myself to Google it. And it's raw data, not an opinion piece so it's not a question of 'agreeing' with anything you fucking bellend.

MojoJojo

You know that seeing 150,00 dead and going "well, they were mostly old or had underlying health conditions" makes you look like a bit of sociopath, right?

No ones ever disputed that the risk to young healthy people is low*. Although there is still the risk that the NHS could be overwhelmed and then every medical problem gets a lot more dangerous.

(*actually looking at the figures you posted, roughly 1% of the deaths are in under 60s with no underlying health conditions, which is I think higher than I was expecting.)

Drygate

Sorry to hijack, but when people say "they were mostly old or had underlying health conditions" what do they mean?

What point are they trying to get across? That only the old or unhealthy should take it seriously? Or that it doesn't matter if we let it rip because the people that die had it coming?

I hear it a lot offline and it sounds like "common sense" but then I think, most of the population are old or unhealthy so it's like saying "it only kills people".

JamesTC

The weak shall perish. Only the strong shall survive in the maskless regime.

Kankurette

Quote from: Drygate on May 07, 2021, 02:57:33 PM
Sorry to hijack, but when people say "they were mostly old or had underlying health conditions" what do they mean?

What point are they trying to get across? That only the old or unhealthy should take it seriously? Or that it doesn't matter if we let it rip because the people that die had it coming?

I hear it a lot offline and it sounds like "common sense" but then I think, most of the population are old or unhealthy so it's like saying "it only kills people".
It means they think old and disabled people are disposable. The Monk acts like he's a humanitarian but thinks people like me are better off dead. We don't matter. We're just taking up precious oxygen.

jobotic

I wonder how many of these cunts that worry so about the mental health of those in lockdown or going through the sheer hell of wearing a mask on a bus are also on forums talking about "useless eaters".

mothman


Poirots BigGarlickyCorpse

Quote from: Drygate on May 07, 2021, 02:57:33 PM
Sorry to hijack, but when people say "they were mostly old or had underlying health conditions" what do they mean?

What point are they trying to get across? That only the old or unhealthy should take it seriously? Or that it doesn't matter if we let it rip because the people that die had it coming?

I hear it a lot offline and it sounds like "common sense" but then I think, most of the population are old or unhealthy so it's like saying "it only kills people".
It can be read two ways - "oh, the people who got it would've died anyway so what are we all locking down for", and an attempt at reassuring/comforting, "the vast majority of people who get it won't die of it, you/your loved one is going to recover and be fine". The thing is that while COVID might only make a youngish healthy person feel a bit miserable for a few weeks, by the time they develop symptoms they'll have infected Granny and the next thing she's in hospital. The people hurping and farting about lockdowns aren't thinking of their own elderly/chronically ill relatives.

flotemysost

Quote from: Drygate on May 07, 2021, 02:57:33 PM
Sorry to hijack, but when people say "they were mostly old or had underlying health conditions" what do they mean?

What point are they trying to get across? That only the old or unhealthy should take it seriously? Or that it doesn't matter if we let it rip because the people that die had it coming?

I hear it a lot offline and it sounds like "common sense" but then I think, most of the population are old or unhealthy so it's like saying "it only kills people".

It was part of the initial official government messaging, which I assume was intended to reassure the public that this was nothing to panic about. Except, of course, to anyone who actually falls into those categories. A mate of mine who has Lupus said at the time it was like a fucking dagger in the coffin hearing that sentence every time she turned on the TV or radio - it felt like essentially the nation was being assured it's OK, because they're not an expendable minority like you are.

I also remember thinking the choice of "underlying" was pretty sinister - I mean, surely the nature of an underlying condition means it's not necessarily obvious until something triggers it. Like COVID, apparently, which they're saying might kill you if you happen to have one of these underlying conditions? Oh great, I feel so much safer now!

(I know really it was most likely just a lazy, insulting catch-all term for invisible disabilities and non-obvious health conditions, but it's a shit and misleading choice of wording all the same.)

And of course all the above does a grave disservice to the scores of people of all ages, children even, who are ill after having had COVID. Just because they conveniently don't ratchet up the death stats doesn't mean they all had a mild case of the sniffles, but obviously it's far easier for these stupid cunts to bleat on and on about how young people don't die of it and completely ignore the actual lives many of those young people are now living.

steveh

There has been a lot of work done on how many years of life people who died of Covid lost and it's a myth that they would not have survived long anyway. The majority would have had another 10-20 years of often good quality life.

Research from last year on years lost is here: https://wellcomeopenresearch.org/articles/5-75.

flotemysost

Thanks for that steveh.

Even if not getting COVID would have only(!) bought some of these people another six months or a year, what sort of heartless cunt thinks that the preferable way out for Granny is to be wheezing her last on a ventilator, getting waterboarded by her own body? In what sort of mindset is that an acceptable argument?! It's really disturbing.

I suppose they'd probably come back and say aahhhh but that wasn't COVID, those were additional complications, they just happened to test positive for COVID at the time (I've seen this argument used online re: Captain Tom). Right, so all those AIDS victims who died of pneumonia are just a red herring then. Burn the condoms sheeple!!!

mothman

Also, when the cunts we're stuck with in charge for the next 15 years privatise the NHS, they'll be comforted to know that there is a significant portion of the population who will just shrug about all those others who'll be denied coverage under the brave new world of privatised health insurance for... underlying conditions!

Kankurette

Quote from: jobotic on May 07, 2021, 11:18:39 PM
I wonder how many of these cunts that worry so about the mental health of those in lockdown or going through the sheer hell of wearing a mask on a bus are also on forums talking about "useless eaters".
I'll give you a hint: they don't care.