All Covid-19 measures are permanent, don't be a boiling frog!

King Mob

pearcider wrote: »

I’ve answered a lot of questions actually.

No, you constantly dodge and ignore questions you can't address.

pearcider wrote: »

Here’s a study for you. Enjoy being made a fool of.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33400268/

And again, you lie about what the study says.

While small benefits cannot be excluded, we do not find significant benefits on case growth of more restrictive NPIs. Similar reductions in case growth may be achievable with less-restrictive interventions.

No where in that study does it say lock downs don't work.

You understand that simply linking to the study doesn't make you automatically correct... right?

pearcider

King Mob wrote: »

Yes. And no where in that conclusion does it say "Lockdowns don't work."

No need to throw out baseless insults.
No need to lie.

Yet you do anyway...

Hey here’s another study for you.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33718322/

Enjoy.

pearcider

King Mob wrote: »

No, you constantly dodge and ignore questions you can't address.


And again, you lie about what the study says.


No where in that study does it say lock downs don't work.

You understand that simply linking to the study doesn't make you automatically correct... right?

You’re gas. It literally says that no significant benefits can be discerned. You read that and think they support your position now? You’re even more deluded than I thought.

King Mob

pearcider wrote: »

Hey here’s another study for you.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33718322/

Enjoy.

Yea, you're just googling these out of desperation and just throwing them out as you find them.

You are ignoring my previous posts because again, you've been caught out on complete lies.

And shock of shocks, the article doesn't agree with you here either.

King Mob

pearcider wrote: »

You’re gas. It literally says that no significant benefits can be discerned.

Yes. And you claimed that it said that lockdowns aren't able to prevent the spread of the virus.

That's not that the study says.

PintOfView

pearcider wrote: »

They did not have a lockdown all bars restaurants and businesses remained open. They just had to close earlier.

Yes, I guess you're right about that, the Japanese government seems to have just asked people to reduce social contact by 70-80%, and bars and restaurants were asked to close at 8pm, and they paid some bars and clubs to close completely.

I haven't found a good explanation for how they managed to keep cases and deaths to such a low level.

Why do you think their cases and deaths were so low?

King Mob

pearcider wrote: »

Hey here’s another study for you.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33718322/

Enjoy.

Lol, reading though this and found this quote:

Some Suggestions: What Can We Do?
...

Build Back Better
...
. Climate experts have estimated that “the additional investment needed to shift low-carbon energy investment onto a Paris-compatible pathway thus amounts to about US$300 billion per year globally over the coming 5 years… 12% [of total pledged stimulus to date] when considered over the entire 2020-2024 period… (page 299)” (267). Moreover, “subtracting divestments from high-carbon fossil fuels… indicates that the overall increase in net annual investments to achieve an ambitious low-carbon transformation in the energy sector are notably small… 1% [of the total announced stimulus to date] over the 2020-2024 period (page 299)” (267). A green recovery may be a driver of employment, spur innovation and diffusion of technologies, reduce stranded assets, and result in a more sustainable and resilient society (117, 267).

I guess this study is part of the conspiracy now?

PintOfView

pearcider wrote: »

Anyone who compliments China in this is just a gombeen to me.

But if you read my comment about China, I wasn't setting out to compliment them, I was using them as an example in a particular context, so you're simply wrong about that.

Ted_YNWA

pearcider wrote: »

Conclusion: This suggests that the costs of continuing severe restrictions are so great relative to likely benefits in lives saved that a rapid easing in restrictions is now warranted.

Most obtuse poster on boards. You’re a joke.

pearcider wrote: »

I’ve answered a lot of questions actually. Here’s a study for you. Enjoy being made a fool of.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33400268/

pearcider wrote: »

Anyone who compliments China in this is just a gombeen to me.

pearcider wrote: »

You’re gas. It literally says that no significant benefits can be discerned. You read that and think they support your position now? You’re even more deluded than I thought.

MOD

Any more insults, direct or implied, and your access will be removed.

pearcider

King Mob wrote: »

Lol, reading though this and found this quote:


I guess this study is part of the conspiracy now?

Pity you missed the relevant part.

Considering this information, a cost-benefit analysis of the response to COVID-19 finds that lockdowns are far more harmful to public health (at least 5-10 times so in terms of wellbeing years) than COVID-19 can be.

And you accuse me of being selective?

pearcider

Ted_YNWA wrote: »

MOD

Any more insults, direct or implied, and your access will be removed.

I’ve been warned off I’m happy to bow out. Funny how all the insults that I’ve had to endure are ignored but we all know which side big tech is on. YouTube et al have derided and sidelined any commentary even from academics that dared question the lockdown narrative.

That particular fact should strike fear into you all. The party of Davos and the global elite typified by the politicians we have in control now are not benevolent actors.

But from that study again from Stanford.
Lockdowns do...

“Far more harm”
REPEAT
“Far more harm”

than the virus itself.

Good evening to you all.

PintOfView

pearcider wrote: »

Good evening to you all.

No hard feelings, have a nice evening ...

pearcider

PintOfView wrote: »

No hard feelings, have a nice evening ...

No worries at all. I know your heart is in the right place .

I’ll leave just this article here. The central planners have us in their grip now. Covid has allowed them to accelerate all their plans and if you think we are going back to normal you are sadly mistaken. We won’t be getting out of their nefarious “plans” for all of us short of the total collapse of the economic system we live under.

https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2021-03-24/when-will-covid-end-we-must-start-planning-for-a-permanent-pandemic

robinph

pearcider wrote: »

No worries at all. I know your heart is in the right place

I’ll leave just this article here. The central planners have us in their grip now. Covid has allowed them to accelerate all their plans and if you think we are going back to normal you are sadly mistaken. We won’t be getting out of their nefarious “plans” for all of us short of the total collapse of the economic system we live under.

https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2021-03-24/when-will-covid-end-we-must-start-planning-for-a-permanent-pandemic

Who is the central planner in this theory? What are they trying to gain by killing off the population of the world with viruses?

Nothing in that article supports your conspiracy theory claims.

Notmything

pearcider wrote: »

Pity you missed the relevant part.

Considering this information, a cost-benefit analysis of the response to COVID-19 finds that lockdowns are far more harmful to public health (at least 5-10 times so in terms of wellbeing years) than COVID-19 can be.

And you accuse me of being selective?

It doesn't argue that a lockdown is ineffective against the spread of covid tho, it looks at the overall impact a lockdown has on overall health.

pearcider

Notmything wrote: »

It doesn't argue that a lockdown is ineffective against the spread of covid tho, it looks at the overall impact a lockdown has on overall health.

http://ssbhalla.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/Lockdowns-Closures-vs.-COVID19-Covid-Wins-Nov-4.pdf

Okay so you admit that lockdowns do 10-15 times more harm than good now you can pretend to refute this one. They looked at 160 countries and found successful lockdown only happened in 8. In other words a pathetic performance. Furthermore they find less stringent lockdowns have better outcomes. Plenty more evidence where that came from when you’ve picked holes in that one. Happy reading.

Dohnjoe

pearcider wrote: »

Okay so you admit that lockdowns do 10-15 times more harm than good now you can pretend to refute this one. They looked at 160 countries and found successful lockdown only happened in 8. In other words a pathetic performance. Furthermore they find less stringent lockdowns have better outcomes. Plenty more evidence where that came from when you’ve picked holes in that one. Happy reading.

For the forth or fifth time, according to you how does Covid 19 spread?

pearcider

robinph wrote: »

Who is the central planner in this theory? What are they trying to gain by killing off the population of the world with viruses?

Nothing in that article supports your conspiracy theory claims.

The article does support the view that the changes will be permanent. And Bloomberg is second only to the Economist as a mouthpiece of the elite.

They are not trying to kill us off. I never suggest that...No need to do that since birth rates have already collapsed. But that’s another story.

They are trying to control our minds and not question their authority. They want to achieve total control of the narrative.

“It would not be impossible to prove with sufficient repetition and a psychological understanding of the people concerned that a square is in fact a circle. They are mere words, and words can be molded until they clothe ideas and disguise.”

Dohnjoe

Makes baseless claims
Dumps links which don't support claims
Engages in denial
Presents opinion as fact
Evades questions
Insults posters and calls them shills
Plays the victim card

Not making a very strong case here

pearcider

Dohnjoe wrote: »

For the forth or fifth time, according to you how does Covid 19 spread?

Do you want to refute this one now? I notice you didn’t pick holes in the last one.

https://pandata.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/Exploring-inter-country-variation.pdf

pearcider

Dohnjoe wrote: »

Makes baseless claims
Dumps links which don't support claims
Engages in denial
Presents opinion as fact
Evades questions
Insults posters and calls them shills
Plays the victim card

Not making a very strong case here

Here’s another one. I’m still waiting on you to refute them.

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3665588

LessOutragePlz

According to this doctor the MRNA vaccines could potentially permanently alter your DNA.

https://sciencewithdrdoug.com/2021/02/15/breaking-study-sheds-more-light-on-whether-an-rna-vaccine-can-permanently-alter-dna/

pearcider

Dohnjoe wrote: »

Makes baseless claims
Dumps links which don't support claims
Engages in denial
Presents opinion as fact
Evades questions
Insults posters and calls them shills
Plays the victim card

Not making a very strong case here

Accuses me of holding an opinion that lockdowns are ineffective with no evidence.
Picks holes in the first study I post.
Ignores the further five studies I post.
Insults me constantly by calling me a liar and a raving lunatic. Denigrate me because you don’t like my opinion. Your standard method of dealing with people in here.
Claims there is “no debate” when in fact there is a very vigorous one. Your arrogance is something to behold.
Accuses me of “dumping links” when I do provide evidence of the ineffectiveness of lockdowns.

You’re a joke.

Timberrrrrrrr

LessOutragePlz wrote: »

According to this doctor the MRNA vaccines could potentially permanently alter your DNA.

https://sciencewithdrdoug.com/2021/02/15/breaking-study-sheds-more-light-on-whether-an-rna-vaccine-can-permanently-alter-dna/

Dr Doug, yeah that has me convinced:pac:

LessOutragePlz

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

Dr Doug, yeah that has me convinced:pac:

Did you even bother reading any of it?......

He's used studies done by scientists from Harvard and MIT.

He clearly knows his stuff so he's not just some crackpot doctor with a blog.

Feel free to point out the flaws in his logic or you can continue to belittle a doctor because you don't believe him and you're too lazy to even read what he's posted.

"can RNA from the coronavirus use existing cellular pathways to integrate permanently into our DNA? From that perspective, their paper is rock-solid. Also, please take note that these are respected scientists from MIT and Harvard.

Quoting from their paper:

“In support of this hypothesis, we found chimeric transcripts consisting of viral fused to cellular sequences in published data sets of SARS-CoV-2 infected cultured cells and primary cells of patients, consistent with the transcription of viral sequences integrated into the genome. To experimentally corroborate the possibility of viral retro-integration, we describe evidence that SARS-CoV-2 RNAs can be reverse transcribed in human cells by reverse transcriptase (RT) from LINE-1 elements or by HIV-1 RT, and that these DNA sequences can be integrated into the cell genome and subsequently be transcribed. Human endogenous LINE-1 expression was induced upon SARS-CoV-2 infection or by cytokine exposure in cultured cells, suggesting a molecular mechanism for SARS-CoV-2 retro-integration in patients. This novel feature of SARS-CoV-2 infection may explain why patients can continue to produce viral RNA after recovery and suggests a new aspect of RNA virus replication.” "

Timberrrrrrrr

LessOutragePlz wrote: »

Did you even bother reading any of it?......

He's used studies done by scientists from Harvard and MIT.

He clearly knows his stuff so he's not just some crackpot doctor with a blog.

Feel free to point out the flaws in his logic or you can continue to belittle a doctor because you don't believe him and you're too lazy to even read what he's posted.

"can RNA from the coronavirus use existing cellular pathways to integrate permanently into our DNA? From that perspective, their paper is rock-solid. Also, please take note that these are respected scientists from MIT and Harvard.

Quoting from their paper:

“In support of this hypothesis, we found chimeric transcripts consisting of viral fused to cellular sequences in published data sets of SARS-CoV-2 infected cultured cells and primary cells of patients, consistent with the transcription of viral sequences integrated into the genome. To experimentally corroborate the possibility of viral retro-integration, we describe evidence that SARS-CoV-2 RNAs can be reverse transcribed in human cells by reverse transcriptase (RT) from LINE-1 elements or by HIV-1 RT, and that these DNA sequences can be integrated into the cell genome and subsequently be transcribed. Human endogenous LINE-1 expression was induced upon SARS-CoV-2 infection or by cytokine exposure in cultured cells, suggesting a molecular mechanism for SARS-CoV-2 retro-integration in patients. This novel feature of SARS-CoV-2 infection may explain why patients can continue to produce viral RNA after recovery and suggests a new aspect of RNA virus replication.” "

He is, he really is.

LessOutragePlz

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

He is, he really is.

You say this because........................................

Timberrrrrrrr

LessOutragePlz wrote: »

You say this because........................................

He is

King Mob

pearcider wrote: »

Pity you missed the relevant part.

Considering this information, a cost-benefit analysis of the response to COVID-19 finds that lockdowns are far more harmful to public health (at least 5-10 times so in terms of wellbeing years) than COVID-19 can be.

And you accuse me of being selective?

Yes, you are being selective. You've argued that lockdowns do not slow or stop the spread of the virus.
None of the studies you've posted actually say that
You're now trying to shift the goalposts because you aren't able to find any studies that support your claim.

Remember also that you have claimed that covid isn't real and is just the flu in disguise.
None of your studies agree with this claim and would be completely invalid if your claim was true. You are selectively ignoring this.

You also claimed that the big shadowy cabal behind the conspiracy are suppressing any scientists or studies that disagree with their supposed narrative.
Yet you are also claiming there are tons of studies that do this and all the data released contradicts the "official narrative".
Again you've selectively ignored this contradiction.

And that's all not to mention the dozens of points and questions you've selectively ignored previously.
Particularly the ones where I showed you were lying about some of the studies you posted.

King Mob

LessOutragePlz wrote: »

According to this doctor the MRNA vaccines could potentially permanently alter your DNA.

https://sciencewithdrdoug.com/2021/02/15/breaking-study-sheds-more-light-on-whether-an-rna-vaccine-can-permanently-alter-dna/

According to the vast majority of other scientists, no it can't.

Why should we believe one doctor over the others?