Donate SIGN UP

Here Is Proof, Proof, That Vaccinations ...

Avatar Image
sunny-dave | 22:42 Mon 05th Jul 2021 | News
67 Answers
...........are useless. If they do the job they're supposed to, why is there such a big increase in positive tests? Admit it; they don't serve any purpose do they?

https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/
Gravatar

Answers

41 to 60 of 67rss feed

First Previous 1 2 3 4 Next Last

Best Answer

No best answer has yet been selected by sunny-dave. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.

For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Rosalind...correct but I said fully vaccinated (2 -doses)....which is a about 30million.....about 50% ofthe population.
the UK population is more than 68 million (maybe nearer 70m). About 20% are under 18, so the total number for vaccination (including some who may not be able to have it) would be about 55 million.
30/55 = 55% fully vaxed
Question Author
For clarity :

I'm not a tin hatter - I'm very much pro-vaccination and also (in appropriate circumstances) believe that masks are a useful extra tool in reducing airborne infections.

My headline was a satirical riff on the absolute ballcocks being spouted in the preceding news thread started by 10Clarion.

[ The stats I later provided about deaths/hospitalisations being dominated by the vaccinated were an attempt to display the lack of ability to process statistics evinced by the tin-hatters on twitter - it is obvious that if most of the population is vaccinated then most deaths will be of the unlucky few for whom the vaccines didn't work - but the great unwashed conspiracy theorists can't understand this and so the nonsense of 'dodgy vaccines' is propounded ]

Phew - I hope my credentials are now exposed.
Correct davebro......almost half the population not fully vaccinated.
Sqad, yes, you make an important point not many people have picked up on. The 100,000 cases a day that Javid talks about may not kill so many people once vaccination is widespsread (which it isn't yet) but it greatly increases the chances of new mutations coming about, which may not respond to the vaccines at all.
Jno......that is my main concern an immune "resistant " highly infectious variant.
// I'm not a tin hatter - I'm very much pro-vaccination//

I can tell hur hur hur

You are a tin hatter who says you are not a tin hatter - yup a few more of them on AB

we have the highest vacca rate in Europe and more cases then the sum of ALL the countries
and who asked that a few days ago ? why me - it was I

the tw answers I can think of is
they are all in school age chldren
or - - and
there are whole communities not stragglers who are refuseniks - and it is running wild there - - BUT if that were the case, then there should be local spikes of deaths ....
Question Author
I do sort of wish I'd reined in my sardonic humour last night ... sigh :+(
Dave. Is there somebody at the door or are you banging your head against the wall again?
You've not picked up on the smiley face at the end of a post to signify wit, dry or otherwise.

It pays to be clear, to be sure.
indeed, when i first read the op i thought dave's account had been hacked . . .

Question Author
Sqad (at 12:45) makes a good point.

I understand that most viral plagues evolve into a form that can be summarised as "mild infection, spreads very quickly" - this is the best result for the virus as it doesn't kill its hosts and can continue to spread.

But ... if we are hit an unusual outlier this time and get "kills quickly, but spreads even quicker", then the result could be catastrophic.

The Petri Dish that is the UK will be watched with interest/concern by the rest of the world ...
// if we are hit an unusual outlier this time and get "kills quickly, but spreads even quicker",//

draws in breath and spits on floor of virus lab - - this is seem in most epidemics - they get more virulent as they progress ( passage froo man makes it more virulent - passage as in collage )
1680 Diary of the Plague year ( plague year 1665, Diary published 1685) Defoe points out that most cases were from the walking well ( carriers or just before sturck down) and later could be spread without fleas but by bloody sputum.
( pneumonic form travelled from man to man not via a rat flea)

whether or not COVID came from bats 25 000 years ago - with that time cycle it may well be less virulent.

and no - the data does NOT show vaccination is useless
it shows the opposite ( xc to some diehard crayzies who have their reps on AB - they know who they are!)
As an aside - would it be truly awful for the world if the human population was reduced by half in the next 50 or so years?
Of course, typically, as soon as I celebrate hospital cases staying low, they show a 34.6% weekly rise in the latest figures, implying something between 5,000 and 8,000 hospital cases for the end of the month. I'm crossing my fingers for a lower figure.
//Avatar Image davebro
As an aside - would it be truly awful for the world if the human population was reduced by half in the next 50 or so years?//

No. It was bound to happen. I'm surprised it didn't happen earlier. Human kind will never win.
Survival of the fittest will always apply.

And I must admit I think Sunny Dave had had a brain transplant initially. ;O)
depends, davebro, which half would you like you and your family to be in?
Piece in Times today -
Australian - the min says the rush to find vaccine is like The Hunger Games. Well the ozzies can certainly tell it like it is

sunny dave - are you the AB category of 'I have made sure that I am vaccinated myself, but you know I dont think it is that safe for others, like the Indians, it may make them infertile' ? Some on AB are (in that category) - they know who they are ....
// And I must admit I think Sunny Dave had had a brain transplant initially. ;O)//

up or down

that is: to be clear: was he the donor or recipient?

41 to 60 of 67rss feed

First Previous 1 2 3 4 Next Last

Do you know the answer?

Here Is Proof, Proof, That Vaccinations ...

Answer Question >>

Related Questions