shade

👍🏼 It definitely wasn't homophobia, possibly it was insensitivity to the subject though, but I think I know what it was now judging by what posts were deleted.

There in lies the problem, not even an indication what the offending post was. How can I be expected to rehabilitate if I don't know what my offence was, of course we all think we're being reasonable and rational otherwise we wouldn't post what we do. I can say everything I said I tried to back up with sources, and never once resorted to ad hominem attacks.

The perplexing thing for me was it went from people saying how nice it was to see people having differences of opinion but remaining civilised to me having blood on my hands for my interpretation of the official data. 😅 Fair to say it escalated quickly.

I wasn't complaining, but I couldn't work out what had happened at first, the reply button had gone but I had no messages or warnings in my profile so I didn't even realise I had been silenced! It was just surprising. I don't even know what it was for, I know mods are busy but a quick 10 word message would help just to let you know what you've done? I guess it was for posting stuff that may cause people to become vaccine hesitant (although anyone who wants it must have had it by now surely lol). In my defence I always cited sources and almost always made sure they came from reputable places like the ONS or medical journals. The torturous part of it is not knowing how long I'm banned for, it's like I'm in Guantanamo Bay here!

To be fair to the others, they don't have to play in lead boots like vestergaard obviously does.

Deb, I'm not going to go in to that again, but I will say that I fail to see how referencing the largest ever and most up to date study on the subject is offensive? I appreciate that it's a sensitive subject though so I will avoid such discussions in the future.

mod bros, they're mods, we're all bros because we're Leicester fans, it's what unites us on this board.

Modbros, give me one more chance in the general chat section please? If you're silencing people, unless it's for something egregiously offensive or illegal they post, they should be given an official warning first surely? I promise I'll self-censor and will actively try not to post anything offensive, misinformational or lacking in context. I'm a twelve year, impeccably behaved FT veteran, do the needful?

we're finally back boys.

Valid criticisms. Whats your opinion on highly credentialed physician like Pierre Kory who's worked on covid ICUs since the start and published this paper on Ivermectin, using it? I just don't see what he has to gain by vehemently backing it, going so far as to speak to the senate about it. He was one of the first peopke who suggested steroids as a treatment for it when it was counter indicated. Basically his meta analsysis is of 18 shit studies, all with positive outcomes on a drug that's out of patent? It's a weird agenda to push? https://journals.lww.com/americantherapeutics/fulltext/2021/06000/review_of_the_emerging_evidence_demonstrating_the.4.aspx

Published today, peer-reviewed, large PSM study from Brazil finds, "regular use of ivermectin as a prophylactic agent was associated with significantly reduced COVID-19 infection, hospitalization, and mortality rates." https://www.cureus.com/articles/82162-ivermectin-prophylaxis-used-for-covid-19-a-citywide-prospective-observational-study-of-223128-subjects-using-propensity-score-matching

Got a new job hosting this... (joke)

I'll only leak small details, another one, anybody caught letting their dog defecate in a public space and not picking it up gets ONE warning (just one) before the dog is removed and they are no longer allowed to own animals.

A vaccine passport isn't radical enough for me to be honest. I would rather see a microchip we can implant in to people, linked to their phone and connected to a digital ID. You start off with a points total (let's say 100) and points are removed for breaches of the authority's recommendations. For example, for every % your body fat is over 12% as a male, you lose one point, for every unit of alcohol over 14 you drink within a 7 day window, you lose a point per unit, or for every 1000 steps less than 10,000 you take a day you lose one point, if you don't take a mandated vaccine you lose 5 points. This is averaged out every 30 days, and you are assigned to a band 100-90, 89-80 and so on. For every band below the top one, you lose certain rights (you can't buy junk food, you can't travel on public transport etc). The world will be a MUCH better place, vote me in to power and I will get this implemented.

Interesting to see them trying to "deplatform" Joe Rogan.

yes but you're forgetting that it aligns perfectly with my viewpoint that obesity is the real driver of this, therefore I will follow whatever the renegade maverick says. 😂

maybe, but can we get a bit more serious for a minute, I know it's the daily mail but this is the most terrifying thing I've read in 2 long, hard years... https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10397797/Man-claims-lost-1-5-inches-length-penis-Covid-vascular-damage.html

He claims it's born out of frustration to be fair.

https://orwell2024.substack.com/p/age-adjusted-all-cause-mortality?r=zp558&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web His conclusions. The driving motivation in doing science is being surprised and to find the unexpected and having views challenged by the data. In order to do that, one needs an open mind and the willingness to adapt conclusions based on new insight and not to do it the other way around (pushing a narrative). La grande surprise, the main surprise was France. But also Switzerland. Expectation / hypothesis to find a negative correlation with lockdowns was challenged by data which told us a different story and surprised us with a much stronger apparent underlying cause: obesity. 2021: Neither a positive nor negative impact of the vaccine can be seen. At least it’s not of any relevant dominance on a yearly base level. Other causes dominate. Probably lockdown, or random seasonality as also lockdown hardliners like France and Spain are doing ok for now. Detailed time window analysis by age may find 2nd order some effects. Maybe we will see the male heart (post dose 2) problems for the 18-30 years cohort (in a time window analysis). And we should see some benefit in 70+. That are the 2 trails. In the 30-70 year cohort it likely impossible to see anything. Sweden is outperforming in 2021 (even all it’s neighbours), despite the Sweden denial in MSM. They could have done better in elderly care settings to flatten the sharp peak in 2020. But nobody else managed that either. What is interesting is that at least in the wealthy countries, the expected lockdown harm doesn’t show up in all-cause mortality. Rich countries like Norway, Switzerland and France can obviously afford such (to my view counterproductive) measures. I still expect, that it’s devastating in poor countries like India and Africa. 2020: The age adjusted mortality demonstrates the overreaction in the Covid-19 crises. The observed excess mortality in Austria and Netherlands, is dominated by mortality in the elderly age bins. Those are 95 % vaccinated like in Sweden, Spain and France. The vaccine doesn’t reduce or increase all cause mortality. It isn’t the underlying root cause. QR passports and the one dimensional panic driven C19 health focus has to stop.

I read an unbelievably detailed piece by a data scientist that expected to find that lockdowns decreased covid deaths, he didn't find that, but did find an unbelievably strong correlation between obesity and number of deaths.

wait until he finds out delta omicron is an anagram of media control!

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10397737/Ministers-used-propagandistic-tactics-scare-public-complying-Covid-rules.html

I'm assuming there's no monetary incentives in the UK like there is in the US for hospitals to declare them covid deaths?

I admired his "debunking the BBC's debunk of ivermectin" video particularly.

I made an observation underneath the graph that the correlation doesn't seem strong (although the data is poor and there are so many confounding variables) but you would hope it would look more like this... Thanks for the professional input, it would be interesting if you have time for your expert opinion in to whether the second paper does debunk the first one? Worryingly the first paper is claiming that the deaths <14 days of the vaccine (obviously classed as unvaccinated) suggests that the vaccine caused it, they posit that the fact that the spike in non-covid all cause mortality amongst 40-49 year olds happens as the vaccine rollout began in that agegroup, that it's evidence that the vaccine was causing it?