Ag no man. Keep it going.
This is now evolved into a one stop site.
I don't need to contact my GP or log onto any news sites'.
Pimps...Simps...Scammers...Rate verifications...
You name it...we can find it. All the info is right here!!!!!!

BTW...can someone bump up the finance thread.
Need to check and verify some investment information.
Thanks

On 2022-02-17 12:28:26 Exotica No.1 said:
On 2022-02-16 10:04:06 AP45 said: It's on the internet so it has to be true right...

wrong.....

I think you may have missed the sarcasm in his remark.

There is nothing wrong with a debate but there is everything wrong with it when it decays into name-calling when others do not buy into your beliefs or getting defensive when challenged.

On 2022-02-16 08:10:46 josephjoestar said:
..."This is SPARTA!"...the messenger
dies...

Yep...King Leo Naaied This...is on the warpath....LOL

On 2022-02-17 17:45:23 eziguy said:
On 2022-02-17 12:28:26 Exotica No.1 said: On 2022-02-16 10:04:06 AP45 said: It's on the internet so it has to be true right...

wrong.....

I think you may have missed the sarcasm in his remark.

There is nothing wrong with a debate but there is everything wrong with it when it decays into name-calling when others do not buy into your beliefs or getting defensive when challenged.

That moment when the sarcasm so fine and on point people just think you stupid...

On 2022-02-17 20:36:26 BikerBrian said:
On 2022-02-17 17:45:23 eziguy said: On 2022-02-17 12:28:26 Exotica No.1 said: On 2022-02-16 10:04:06 AP45 said: It's on the internet so it has to be true right...

wrong.....

I think you may have missed the sarcasm in his remark.

There is nothing wrong with a debate but there is everything wrong with it when it decays into name-calling when others do not buy into your beliefs or getting defensive when challenged.

That moment when the sarcasm so fine and on point people just think you stupid...

that moment when 2dudes.....blah blah......without asking why.....(1word)....

Talking of AIDS, wasn't it some random dude in Africa who got bitten by a monkey on the butt and then went to town and gave it to a prostitute who passed it on to a local banker who then passed it to his wife and three girl friends ? And then, 75 million people in Africa became infected ....
Then along came that bat/pangolin in Wuhan ......

Isn't this the guy that was looking for "organic" girls? Hahaha

On 2022-02-17 11:51:12 anon2342 said:
Thanks for sharing Loux, a few interesting data sources in there to take a look at.

On 2022-02-16 09:31:28 JP82 said: It just gets stupider and stupider...

www.skepticalraptor.com/skepticalraptorblog.php/covid-vaccine-does-not-cause-aids-debunking-another-anti-vaxxer-myth/

Loux's article is better referenced than this one.

Loux's article reference the data on www.gov.uk/.

The article you linked was a lot of sarcasm, no sources and didn't focus on the point of the article. I don't think anyone thinks there is HIV in the vaccines. So your debunking article had nothing in it. It was also written before Loux's article and didn't actually reference any specific points so it's hard to even be sure who or what it was addressed to.


On 2022-02-16 12:38:44 WillGrey said: If this was really the case we should be seeing a truck load more deaths by now especially in the countries which have the highest vaccination rates and very high infection rates. Yet we see lower hospitalisation and fewer deaths from covid19. Either the data is spurious or the intepretation and conclusions drawn are highly questionable. I am with the latter.

Here is Israel's data.

www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/israel/

They have an all time high in deaths with a milder form of the virus in circulation. They are also still having massive infections.

Here is south afrtica's data .... with a very low vaccination rate. You'll see low infection and death rates (proportionally to other waves).

www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/south-africa/


This could be due to the age of the population, or various factors, but there is enough data to be asking questions .....

Why is this important? Because we need to get to real data, we don't really know what is going on.

But don't take my word for it. Here is the British medical journal.

www.bmj.com/content/376/bmj.o102

We have no idea what is going on. We don't know how stats are being counted. It's not clear who peer reviewed the trials or what was supplied, and pfizer is in court fighting to seal the records for the next 75 years. Most people don't know that, and don't seem to be concerned about it when they hear. Ethical there is no good argument for them sealing the data, good guy big pharma.

You really should be asking a few questions.

Here is the real kicker.

www.bmj.com/content/376/bmj.o95

Facebook is marking the BMJ as fake news and suppressing their posts. That should also raise a flag if you in any way shape or form believe in the scientific process.

I don't really care what people do with their bodies, I'm just interested in the data and numbers.

I'm struggling to tell if you are being serious or are just sea-lioning.

Loux's article: The vaccine causes aids
My Link: Nope, aids is only caused by HIV.
You: That link didn't focus on the point of the article

Wait..., what? What is it that you think the point of the article is? (hint the headline of an article is usually a bit of a giveaway. In this case "INVESTIGATION: The Covid-19 Vaccines cause AIDS; here's all the evidence." should tell you what the article is about).

Yes my link was written before, but Loux's link is just rehashing an earlier article that contains the same bullshit.

Also "no sources" --
1) I can only assume you didn't read to the end then and missed the "citations" section?
2) Maybe check out the credentials of the link author (www.skepticalraptor.com/skepticalraptorblog.php/vaccine-science-why-i-do-research-better-than-anti-vaxxers/)
3) as a tip going forward, where text in a webpage is blue, that usually indicates a hyperlink which more often than not takes you to related information (including for example this on vaccine safety pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/

Lastly: "Loux's article is better referenced than this one."
Except that it isn't, because the "data" that it cites, isn't actually in the report that it links to, which is an odd thing for you to have missed for someone who claims that they're "just interested in the data and numbers"

(I'm not going to get into the rest of your post because it's not really relevant to the claims I've made -- Its fair enough to ask "what's going on in Israel?" but firstly I'm done doing research for people who are too lazy or stupid to do it themselves but more importantly -- there's a fucking big difference between asking that sort of question and claiming "the vaccine causes AIDS", so maybe you're the one whose missed the point of this thread)

Idiots that write articles like this still walk among us. We really need to somehow rid the earth of people like this. Bloody societal leeches.

On 2022-02-16 07:53:43 Loux said:
Read for yourself and don't shoot the messenger

dailyexpose.uk/2022/02/13/the-covid-19-vaccines-cause-aids/

On 2022-02-18 10:15:13 JP82 said:

I'm struggling to tell if you are being serious or are just sea-lioning.

Had to google that, TIL. Happy to clarify.

On 2022-02-18 10:15:13 JP82 said:

Wait..., what? What is it that you think the point of the article is? (hint the headline of an article is usually a bit of a giveaway. In this case "INVESTIGATION: The Covid-19 Vaccines cause AIDS; here's all the evidence." should tell you what the article is about).

The detail in article suggests that there is potentially a link between vaccination and a suppressive effect on your immune system response. The article you posted and the references are linked to HIV. I agree it's a very misleading and click bait heading. The misleading heading does not change the data. I agree HIV causes AIDS, so i agree with your sources, i just don't agree that the case studies on HIV are relevant when considering the immune response to covid vaccines.

I also acknowledge that causation and correlation are two different things, which is why i did not say anything against the vaccine. If anything i was trying to point out that we need more analysis on the data in order to draw the correct conclusions, however the data is interesting and warrants further investigation.

[QUOTE;3455660;JP82]
Yes my link was written before, but Loux's link is just rehashing an earlier article that contains the same bullshit.
[/QUOTE]

Hopefully i've clarified above why i believe the HIV study is not applicable on this data set.


[QUOTE;3455660;JP82]
Also "no sources" --
1) I can only assume you didn't read to the end then and missed the "citations" section?

[/QUOTE]

Nope, it would be bad to have a knee jerk reaction without understanding the argument made. After looking at the argument and the references i came to the conclusion that the author did not read the detail and focused on the AIDS portion in the heading and provided HIV data and went on to explain the link between HIV and AIDS which i agree with. If the sole focus is on the title and the word AIDS, then i'm happy to drop out of this discussion because it is not productive. It is not addressing the ideas or concerns expressed in the article. It's a strawman argument.

[QUOTE;3455660;JP82]
2) Maybe check out the credentials of the link author (www.skepticalraptor.com/skepticalraptorblog.php/vaccine-science-why-i-do-research-better-than-anti-vaxxers/)
[/QUOTE]

That's an argument from authority. Bias exists in everyone which is why it's good to look at multiple sources.


[QUOTE;3455660;JP82]
3) as a tip going forward, where text in a webpage is blue, that usually indicates a hyperlink which more often than not takes you to related information (including for example this on vaccine safety pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/
[/QUOTE]

Thanks.


[QUOTE;3455660;JP82]
Lastly: "Loux's article is better referenced than this one."
Except that it isn't, because the "data" that it cites, isn't actually in the report that it links to, which is an odd thing for you to have missed for someone who claims that they're "just interested in the data and numbers"
[/QUOTE]

Page 44 of week 7 is the last one i reviewed and shows an interesting trend in new infections increasing in vaccinated individuals. Death appears to be lower in vaccinated individuals, this increases with the age group. (so higher rate of infection but lower death rate). So the older you are, the better the vaccine is. In the younger age groups there seems to be a negligible effect in terms of benefit based on the UK numbers. This seems to be the case for omnicron, so it's a different argument from something like Delta. Notice i use works like "seems" I'm trying to not draw conclusions from the information.

Here is the report: assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1055620/Vaccine_surveillance_report_-_week_7.pdf

Please note the report itself asks you not to draw conclusions.

[QUOTE;3455660;JP82]
(I'm not going to get into the rest of your post because it's not really relevant to the claims I've made -- Its fair enough to ask "what's going on in Israel?" but firstly I'm done doing research for people who are too lazy or stupid to do it themselves but more importantly -- there's a fucking big difference between asking that sort of question and claiming "the vaccine causes AIDS", so maybe you're the one whose missed the point of this thread)
[/QUOTE]

I hope i've clarified the AIDS part, which really is the strawman here.