Current Affairs Coronavirus Thread - Serious stuff !!!

[dholliday]

How is it disinformation?

You're leading (via the Twitter post) with the statement that 87% of deaths are unvaxxed, without calling attention to the fact that South Africa only has a 26% vaccination rate.

You're attempting to artificially steer a narrative in a certain direction by omitting key context.

It's this kind of inflated panic (see also SAGE) that has gotten us into this mess in the first place.

Yes I agree with you, informed consent is something I value highly, therefore I’ve no beef what so ever with someone who chooses not to be vaccinated. Everyone has the right to make what others consider an unwise decision.

The rest of your post was high quality, and it would take me quite a bit of time to go over it and have a back-and-forth (which I might still do), but just wanted to say this bit above I feel is the more urgent important bit to highlight.

Wait a minute - we are sending people to camps in Australia? What camps are these as they certainly don't make the news over here?

hahaha well that tells you something, doesn't it?

They literally say

They literally say:

That's insane.

i know!

No it’s not. It’s 27% less time infectiousness. Very much statistically significant.

It's not, as I've already said this is easily cancelled out by real-world situations like how the vaccinated have more social freedoms and less testing...ergo, merely two less days infectiousness becomes statistically insignificant.

When you study statistics, you have to consider real-world situations. How does the real-world impact the stats?

Because if you don't do that, you end up adhering to the LIES, DAMNED LIES AND STATISTICS maxim.

You can make numbers do anything, if you decide to leave out vital context.

As someone who works in data and statistics, you’re just wrong here.

hahaha...the old appeal-to-authority.

No mate...that doesn't fly anymore. If it did, Neil Ferguson (among many others) wouldn't still be given mainstream access to spread his doom-laden overhyped and plainly wrong projections to the public. The Doomer-in-chief, Karl Lauterbach, is technically an 'expert' too, he's just got the Health Ministry in Germany.

Considering how often wrong these 'experts' have been these last 2 years, it's no wonder more and more folk are thinking for themselves.

But you instead focussed on this wording instead of the fact that the paragraph in question was pointing out that the unvaxxed are 4 times as likely to end up in hospital as the vaxxed. This is interesting.

This is something I've said myself multiple times.

You're not making the point you're think you're making.

cherry picking data to make a point about there being no difference in transmission between vaxxed and unvaxxed

You are cherry-picking, as I've demonstrated. I'm factoring in the real-world, which is what a statistician with no narrative to push should do.

This type of cherry picking data, while ignoring other data is purely to advance your particular narrative.

Oh right...projection and appeal-to-authority.

Any more fallacies in your armoury?

Underplaying the effectiveness of the vaccines

Where have I underplayed it? Quote the specific part of any of my posts where I do that.

Maybe you're interpreting underplayed where I'm merely reporting on its effectiveness?

That is interesting...

and spewing that type of stuff across the internet could easily convince the vaccine hesitant not to get a vaccine, which would put them at greater risk of hospitalisation.

Again, I've said myself multiple times the vaccines offer a short-term protection, by a factor of around four.

I haven't even gone into the dozens of potential hazards of taking the vaccine...I've offered to list them, but no takers.

Maybe I should. Anyone hesitant should feel he or she can make an informed decision. In my post immediately after this one I'll share some interesting links for starters.

The very definition of ‘putting people at risk and doing harm’.

I could just as easily argue you are ‘putting people at risk and doing harm’ by pushing the vaccines as the only way forward.

You might be ok with taking 6 jabs within a year, that's your decision. But be wary of pushing this to hesitant folk. It's a big decision to make, with as-yet unknown long-term consequences.

You could make all your points about social attitudes towards the unvaxxed without bringing in doubt about the effectiveness of the vaccine itself. I’d probably agree with a lot of your points about the dangers of negative views towards the unvaxxed. But you go further, which points to your underlying narrative.

You can disagree with me on the vaccine, at the same time this shouldn't affect your opinion on how the unvaxxed are getting blamed for everything.

Two people can vehemently disagree on some stuff, and profoundly agree on others. Debate used to be like this, until Brexit/Trump broke it.

Where in the article does it mention 4-6 weeks before protection reduces?

Şahin has mentioned it in articles where he's explaining why we need new vaccines.

Or how would you explain this?

Israeli PM announces fourth Covid jab for over-60s to tackle Omicron

Booster will also be available to medical teams and immunodeficient people four months after third dose

www.theguardian.com

Europe debates 4th coronavirus vaccine as German minister backs double booster

‘Personally, I would expect a fourth vaccination,’ says Health Minister Karl Lauterbach.

www.politico.eu

UK ‘considering fourth Covid vaccine dose’

Decision has not yet been made but could see vulnerable and older people jabbed for fourth time

www.independent.co.uk

Nope. Sorry. Again, this is madness.

They have had temporary places set up to quarantine people returning from other countries, much in the same way we have used hotels.

not true

Howard Springs: Australia police arrest quarantine escapees

The trio had fled a remote camp near Darwin by scaling a fence in the middle of the night.

www.bbc.com

Choice quote: "Officials did not state whether the escapees were returning travellers or locals in quarantine." which implies locals can also be imprisoned there.

Also: https://www.charitytoday.co.uk/huma...ked-in-covid-camps-and-threatened-with-fines/

This lady tested "negative" and still was forced into the camp...look at this madness:




Now consider the hateful aggressive language used against the unvaccinated...then consider how many more steps we need until those using that sort of language would support the unvaxxed being put into camps like these: 'for their protection, and for the protection of others'.

It's a reasonable Thought Experiment.


That far-right extremist Russell Brand is also wondering the same thing:




Is all this not official enough for ya? How about:

Mandatory supervised quarantine and fees

How much you will have to pay for quarantine costs.

coronavirus.nt.gov.au

Choice quote: "You will be required to undertake 14 days mandatory supervised quarantine if you are a repatriated Australian, an unvaccinated returning Territory resident or you have been directed to quarantine by the Chief Health Officer."

...the bolded bit could mean anything. At the whim, as it where.

Basically he know he is wrong, but is reluctant to admit it.

If that's what makes you sleep at night...

 

[roydo]

Sometimes a short bullet point post is really good and powerful. Just a thought.

 

[dholliday]

Here's a few things to think about, numbered for ease of reference:

1)
Typical case example of a 40-year old:
Jab 1: 1st vaccine dose Summer 2021.
Jab 2: 2nd dose few weeks later
Jab 3: Booster around Winter 2021/22.
Jab 4: Omicron-formular 1st dose Spring 2022.
Jab 5: 2nd dose few weeks later.
Jab 6: Omicron Booster Summer 2022 (the recommended time between double-jabs and boosters is now 3 months).

@everyone, are you all willing to take 6 jabs within 12 months? Should young children too?


2)
Why did Javid say this?




Why did Dorries say this?




Why are they pushing the vaccine by using extremely curated hand-picked stats? Shouldn't the vaccine (and the virus) speak for itself?


3)
Why do 'fact-checkers' say stuff like this:

No, vaccinated people are not ‘just as infectious’ as unvaccinated people if they get COVID

A vaccinated person is less likely to get COVID, is less contagious, and is contagious for a shorter time.

theconversation.com

When the science (which we apparently adhere to) says otherwise?

Transmission potential of vaccinated and unvaccinated persons infected with the SARS-CoV-2 Delta variant in a federal prison, July—August 2021

Background The extent to which vaccinated persons who become infected with SARS-CoV-2 contribute to transmission is unclear. During a SARS-CoV-2 Delta variant outbreak among incarcerated persons with high vaccination rates in a federal prison, we assessed markers of viral shedding in vaccinated...

www.medrxiv.org

Viral Loads Similar Between Vaccinated and Unvaccinated People

A new study from the University of California, Davis, Genome Center, UC San Francisco and the Chan Zuckerberg Biohub shows no significant difference in viral load between vaccinated and unvaccinated people who tested positive for the delta variant of SARS-CoV-2. It also found no significant...

www.ucdavis.edu

Choice quotes:
"No significant differences were detected in duration of RT-PCR positivity among fully vaccinated participants versus those not fully vaccinated"
"no significant difference in viral load between vaccinated and unvaccinated people who tested positive for the delta variant of SARS-CoV-2. "

Even @Amw79 admits he could only find cherry-picked bits from studies which say the vaccinated are only two more days less infectious than the unvaxxed. Considering they have more social freedoms and test less, this hardly appears significant.


So why the big narrative push that the unvaccinated are more dangerous? In previous posts I've also pointed out that even during this peak the unvaxxed haven't gone above using 3% of total NHS beds.

So why the big narrative push that the unvaccinated are preventing other patients from getting beds?


The answer is obvious: to garner mass support for mass vaccinations.

But is that the right way forward?


4)
WHO says vaccine booster programs will prolong Covid crisis: ‘No country can boost its way out of the pandemic’

Oh dear...maybe it isn't.


5)

My Twitter conversation with the chairman of the Sage Covid modelling committee

The latest Sage papers have been published, envisaging anything from 200 to 6,000 deaths a day from Omicron depending on how many more restrictions we’ll get — up to and very much including another lockdown. Earlier today I had an unexpected chance to ask questions of Graham Medley, the chair of...

www.spectator.co.uk

Choice quote:
"if it's quite plausible that Omicron is mild and doesn't threaten the NHS, what would be the point of including that as a 'scenario'? He seemed to suggest that he has been given a very limited brief, and asked to churn out worse-case scenarios without being asked to comment on how plausible they are."

What does this mean? SAGE's doom-laden predictions are famously over-inflated. Why is the UK government (and most governments of the world), in cahoots with mainstream media, promoting panic & worst-case scenarios? In effect: promoting lockdowns...and thus: promoting mass vaccinations.

Why?


6)
I haven't yet verified this yet, it's a tweet from a Telegraph journo, she's also written it for them but it's behind a paywall...if true, what does this tell us about infection rates out in the wild?

My cheering Christmas message? It’s time for humanity to prevail over scientists

We are jabbed up to the gills as a nation, but many of us have regretfully curtailed our festive plans thanks to the misery guts on Sage

www.telegraph.co.uk

7)
This study seems to suggest the full-length spike-based MRNA-vaccines may adversely affect the body's long-term natural immune response:

SARS–CoV–2 Spike Impairs DNA Damage Repair and Inhibits V(D)J Recombination In Vitro

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS–CoV–2) has led to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID–19) pandemic, severely affecting public health and the global economy. Adaptive immunity plays a crucial role in fighting against SARS–CoV–2 infection and directly influences the clinical...

www.mdpi.com

Choice quote: "Mechanistically, we found that the spike protein localizes in the nucleus and inhibits DNA damage repair by impeding key DNA repair protein BRCA1 and 53BP1 recruitment to the damage site. Our findings reveal a potential molecular mechanism by which the spike protein might impede adaptive immunity and underscore the potential side effects of full-length spike-based vaccines....Our findings imply a potential side effect of the full–length spike–based vaccine. This work will improve the understanding of COVID–19 pathogenesis and provide new strategies for designing more efficient and safer vaccines. "


8)
if the vaccines work, then why are hugely-vaccinated nations like Portugal, Israel, South Korea etc still having problems, and pushing yet more rules & boosters?

There's only two answers to this:
a) the vaccines work but only for a short time, hence the need for regular boosters.
b) the vaccines don't work very well, but they must be pushed anyway.

Neither answer really supports the demonisation and mandatory vaccination of the unvaxxed.


9)
What's going on with all these footballers & sportlers clasping their chests being unable to play, even dying? 2020 wasn't like this:



Why can't we talk about it?

 

[dholliday]

10)
Eighteen reasons for being vaccine-hesitant (check out the ones about Pfizer et al being dodgy):

https://www.citizensjournal.us/18-reasons-i-wont-be-getting-a-covid-vaccine/

11)
Why has there been so much debate-shutdown when folk want to discuss alternatives to the vaccine? I've been threatened with a ban on here myself just for linking serious discussion on Ivermectin. Joe Rogan, famously, was the victim of a misinformation campaign from CNN (where they falsely labelled the drug he used as "horse dewormer") while he quickly recovered from Covid by taking (among other things) Ivermectin.

There's at least enough substance out there to warrant a debate without getting shut down...shutting down without allowing debate only increases vaccine-sceptisism:

(PDF) Ivermectin prophylaxis used for COVID-19 reduces COVID-19 infection and mortality rates: A 220,517-subject, populational-level retrospective citywide.

PDF | Background: Ivermectin has demonstrated different mechanisms of actions that could potentially protect from both COVID-19 infection and... | Find, read and cite all the research you need on ResearchGate

www.researchgate.net

Conclusion: Prophylactic use of ivermectin showed significantly reduced COVID-19 infection rate, mortality rate and chance of dying from COVID-19 on a calculated population-level analysis, which controlled for all relevant confounding variables.

Moar:



Per peer-reviewed evidence: the most effective alternative to the vaccines appears to be monoclonal antibodies (Regeneron etc): this is a specialist expensive treatment which can be tricky to get hold of in a pinch. If the cheap, widely-available, Nobel-prize winning and patent-free human-medicine Ivermectin isn't useful at all, then so be it. But folk aren't gonna be convinced by shutting down debate before it even gets going.

Shouldn't we be at least curious?


12)
What's going on here then? Basically, Bayern & Hamburg have faked the numbers to make it look like there are vastly more unvaxxed in hospitals....why? Well, to promote the vaccines, of course:

Geimpfte und Ungeimpfte: Falsche Covid-Zahlen – Amtspräsident in Bayern wird versetzt - WELT

In Bayern und Hamburg wurden Infektionszahlen von Geimpften und Ungeimpften grob falsch ausgewiesen. Der Präsident des Bayerischen Landesamtes für Gesundheit bekommt nun einen neuen Job. In Hamburg beteuert der Bürgermeister derweil seinen Willen zur Aufklärung.

www.welt.de

13)
The Austrian Mandatory Vaccination, and the German one currently being planned...is a sinister direction considering all the information we've gathered these last 12 months. Olaf Scholz put fear into millions of Germans when he said in his first address as Kanzler: "There will no no red lines in our push to get everyone vaccinated". Scholz, as well as others, promised before the election there would be no mandatory vaccination. Now he is openly supporting it. Those refusing will be fined into bankruptcy, or jailed.

Imagine back in the Spring of 2020 we'd get to this stage...anyone suggesting such would've been labelled a conspiracy theorist.


14)
Do we really want to regularly jab small kids with MRNA-vaccines? Considering their hospitalisation rates (for the non-vulnerable), and small viral load (per relative volume)...do we really need to do this?


15)
isn't it noteworthy how no one really talks about where the virus came from? It's almost certain it came from the Wuhan lab, and Rand Paul among others have unearthed how Fauci helped funded related research there. Lack of evidence or fear of China?





...and finally...just a thought:






TL/DR bit: there are other valid ways of looking at this pandemic outside of what the mainstream media & politicians are telling us. But if not enough of us do this, then we're fated to have the next 12 months much like the previous 12: regular jabs, regularly-changing rules, culture broken, childhoods broken...and demonisation of the unvaxxed (remember many of you - the double-jabbed - will soon count as unvaxxed too).

 

[dholliday]

Sometimes a short bullet point post is really good and powerful. Just a thought.

This is the most significant crisis of our generation. It needs thoughtful analysis and detail. Short soundbites have been more of a problem than a solution in attempts to understand what is going on.

 

[Amw79]

You're leading (via the Twitter post) with the statement that 87% of deaths are unvaxxed, without calling attention to the fact that South Africa only has a 26% vaccination rate.

You're attempting to artificially steer a narrative in a certain direction by omitting key context.

It's this kind of inflated panic (see also SAGE) that has gotten us into this mess in the first place.


The rest of your post was high quality, and it would take me quite a bit of time to go over it and have a back-and-forth (which I might still do), but just wanted to say this bit above I feel is the more urgent important bit to highlight.



hahaha well that tells you something, doesn't it?



They literally say:

View attachment 149291



i know!



It's not, as I've already said this is easily cancelled out by real-world situations like how the vaccinated have more social freedoms and less testing...ergo, merely two less days infectiousness becomes statistically insignificant.

When you study statistics, you have to consider real-world situations. How does the real-world impact the stats?

Because if you don't do that, you end up adhering to the LIES, DAMNED LIES AND STATISTICS maxim.

You can make numbers do anything, if you decide to leave out vital context.




hahaha...the old appeal-to-authority.

No mate...that doesn't fly anymore. If it did, Neil Ferguson (among many others) wouldn't still be given mainstream access to spread his doom-laden overhyped and plainly wrong projections to the public. The Doomer-in-chief, Karl Lauterbach, is technically an 'expert' too, he's just got the Health Ministry in Germany.

Considering how often wrong these 'experts' have been these last 2 years, it's no wonder more and more folk are thinking for themselves.



This is something I've said myself multiple times.

You're not making the point you're think you're making.



You are cherry-picking, as I've demonstrated. I'm factoring in the real-world, which is what a statistician with no narrative to push should do.



Oh right...projection and appeal-to-authority.

Any more fallacies in your armoury?



Where have I underplayed it? Quote the specific part of any of my posts where I do that.

Maybe you're interpreting underplayed where I'm merely reporting on its effectiveness?

That is interesting...



Again, I've said myself multiple times the vaccines offer a short-term protection, by a factor of around four.

I haven't even gone into the dozens of potential hazards of taking the vaccine...I've offered to list them, but no takers.

Maybe I should. Anyone hesitant should feel he or she can make an informed decision. In my post immediately after this one I'll share some interesting links for starters.




I could just as easily argue you are ‘putting people at risk and doing harm’ by pushing the vaccines as the only way forward.

You might be ok with taking 6 jabs within a year, that's your decision. But be wary of pushing this to hesitant folk. It's a big decision to make, with as-yet unknown long-term consequences.



You can disagree with me on the vaccine, at the same time this shouldn't affect your opinion on how the unvaxxed are getting blamed for everything.

Two people can vehemently disagree on some stuff, and profoundly agree on others. Debate used to be like this, until Brexit/Trump broke it.



Şahin has mentioned it in articles where he's explaining why we need new vaccines.

Or how would you explain this?

Israeli PM announces fourth Covid jab for over-60s to tackle Omicron

Booster will also be available to medical teams and immunodeficient people four months after third dose

www.theguardian.com

Europe debates 4th coronavirus vaccine as German minister backs double booster

‘Personally, I would expect a fourth vaccination,’ says Health Minister Karl Lauterbach.

www.politico.eu

UK ‘considering fourth Covid vaccine dose’

Decision has not yet been made but could see vulnerable and older people jabbed for fourth time

www.independent.co.uk

not true

Howard Springs: Australia police arrest quarantine escapees

The trio had fled a remote camp near Darwin by scaling a fence in the middle of the night.

www.bbc.com

Choice quote: "Officials did not state whether the escapees were returning travellers or locals in quarantine." which implies locals can also be imprisoned there.

Also: https://www.charitytoday.co.uk/huma...ked-in-covid-camps-and-threatened-with-fines/

This lady tested "negative" and still was forced into the camp...look at this madness:




Now consider the hateful aggressive language used against the unvaccinated...then consider how many more steps we need until those using that sort of language would support the unvaxxed being put into camps like these: 'for their protection, and for the protection of others'.

It's a reasonable Thought Experiment.


That far-right extremist Russell Brand is also wondering the same thing:




Is all this not official enough for ya? How about:

Mandatory supervised quarantine and fees

How much you will have to pay for quarantine costs.

coronavirus.nt.gov.au

Choice quote: "You will be required to undertake 14 days mandatory supervised quarantine if you are a repatriated Australian, an unvaccinated returning Territory resident or you have been directed to quarantine by the Chief Health Officer."

...the bolded bit could mean anything. At the whim, as it where.




If that's what makes you sleep at night...

More doubling down. Your mind’s made up. Will leave it there.

Just saw your follow up post which tagged me with a misrepresentation at best, and a lie at worst, so on ignore you go.

 

[roydo]

Holy Moly.

 

[roydo]

This is the most significant crisis of our generation. It needs thoughtful analysis and detail. Short soundbites have been more of a problem than a solution in attempts to understand what is going on.

I didnt even read your posts, such of the state of them. So, bullet point, what, er, point are you making?

 

[tsubaki]

“The Covid modellers at Imperial College have begun to back down. About time too. Over the past few weeks, they have made extreme claims about the omicron variant that cannot be fully justified by fundamental science, let alone by clinical observation.

Academic etiquette restrains direct criticism, but immunologists say privately that Professor Neil Ferguson and his team breached a cardinal rule by inferring rates of hospitalisation, severe disease, and death from waning antibodies, and by extrapolating from infections that break through the first line of vaccine defence.

The rest are entitled to question whether they can legitimately do this. And we may certainly question whether they should be putting out terrifying claims of up to 5,000 deaths a day based on antibody counts.

“It is bad science and I think they’re being irresponsible. They have a duty to reflect the true risks but this is just headline grabbing,” said Dr Clive Dix, former chairman of the UK Vaccine Task Force.”

I’ve been saying this about Ferguson all along, the man is a egotistical panic maker…..

shouldn't you support him then?

 

[mill]

It needs thoughtful analysis and detail.

ahahahshahshshshshdhsgsgsgshahshahhhhaaajaas

Brilliant.

 

[dholliday]

I didnt even read your posts, such of the state of them. So, bullet point, what, er, point are you making?

TL/DR bit: there are other valid ways of looking at this pandemic outside of what the mainstream media & politicians are telling us. But if not enough of us do this, then we're fated to have the next 12 months much like the previous 12: regular jabs, regularly-changing rules, culture broken, childhoods broken...and demonisation of the unvaxxed (remember many of you - the double-jabbed - will soon count as unvaxxed too).


My long posts offer a little window in what else is going on, which yous might not be aware of. There is something off, something strange, about the whole thing. I'm trying to make people aware of it.

If I'm way off on all this, then these long posts are just one of many mad ravings of internet weirdos. Feel free to ignore or ban. I hope the posts remain, tho'. There's no fake or dangerous info there, all serious official sources. People should at least have a chance to go through them and make their own mind up.


I'm off again until the new year.

peace x

 

[n01efc]

You're leading (via the Twitter post) with the statement that 87% of deaths are unvaxxed, without calling attention to the fact that South Africa only has a 26% vaccination rate.

You're attempting to artificially steer a narrative in a certain direction by omitting key context.

It's this kind of inflated panic (see also SAGE) that has gotten us into this mess in the first place.


The rest of your post was high quality, and it would take me quite a bit of time to go over it and have a back-and-forth (which I might still do), but just wanted to say this bit above I feel is the more urgent important bit to highlight.



hahaha well that tells you something, doesn't it?



They literally say:

View attachment 149291



i know!



It's not, as I've already said this is easily cancelled out by real-world situations like how the vaccinated have more social freedoms and less testing...ergo, merely two less days infectiousness becomes statistically insignificant.

When you study statistics, you have to consider real-world situations. How does the real-world impact the stats?

Because if you don't do that, you end up adhering to the LIES, DAMNED LIES AND STATISTICS maxim.

You can make numbers do anything, if you decide to leave out vital context.




hahaha...the old appeal-to-authority.

No mate...that doesn't fly anymore. If it did, Neil Ferguson (among many others) wouldn't still be given mainstream access to spread his doom-laden overhyped and plainly wrong projections to the public. The Doomer-in-chief, Karl Lauterbach, is technically an 'expert' too, he's just got the Health Ministry in Germany.

Considering how often wrong these 'experts' have been these last 2 years, it's no wonder more and more folk are thinking for themselves.



This is something I've said myself multiple times.

You're not making the point you're think you're making.



You are cherry-picking, as I've demonstrated. I'm factoring in the real-world, which is what a statistician with no narrative to push should do.



Oh right...projection and appeal-to-authority.

Any more fallacies in your armoury?



Where have I underplayed it? Quote the specific part of any of my posts where I do that.

Maybe you're interpreting underplayed where I'm merely reporting on its effectiveness?

That is interesting...



Again, I've said myself multiple times the vaccines offer a short-term protection, by a factor of around four.

I haven't even gone into the dozens of potential hazards of taking the vaccine...I've offered to list them, but no takers.

Maybe I should. Anyone hesitant should feel Şahin has mentioned it in articles where he's explaining why we need new vaccines.

Or how would you explain this?

Israeli PM announces fourth Covid jab for over-60s to tackle Omicron

Booster will also be available to medical teams and immunodeficient people four months after third dose

www.theguardian.com

Europe debates 4th coronavirus vaccine as German minister backs double booster

‘Personally, I would expect a fourth vaccination,’ says Health Minister Karl Lauterbach.

www.politico.eu

UK ‘considering fourth Covid vaccine dose’

Decision has not yet been made but could see vulnerable and older people jabbed for fourth time

www.independent.co.uk

So to be clear, you initially said the vaccine manufacturers admit its 4-6 weeks after a vaccination before protection reduces.
You quote a story which has no such reference and then start quoting more rubbish, again with. I such claims. I would like one story showing the CEO saying 4-6 weeks please?

I’m all for freedom of speech and debate but not when you mak stuff up.

 

[n01efc]

I didnt even read your posts, such of the state of them. So, bullet point, what, er, point are you making?

Is there not a point when certain people are banned for making up blanket lies and scaremongering?

 

[COYBL25]

Sometimes a short bullet point post is really good and powerful. Just a thought.

Apparently not lol

 

[BlueToff]

‘Boosters waning for some’ lol