SARS cov2 and Covid 19

Home Forums Discussion Forum SARS cov2 and Covid 19

  • This topic has 1,202 replies, 1 voice, and was last updated 4 months ago by Dave.
Viewing 40 posts - 1,081 through 1,120 (of 1,203 total)
  • Author
  • #64650

    Of course we know they are CTT it is so obvious. Those who are now active here appear to be in a parallel universe and are not in touch with reality. But our trying to reason with them is giving them the opportunity to disseminate arguments that they get from OffGuardian and other conspiracy websites. Some of them disappear, like Duck and nothinguptop.
    I am also aware that many of those conspiracy theorists overlap with climate change deniers, hiv deniers and antivaxxers but really don’t think this belongs here.


    Oh and distinctly also Trump followers.
    How can you argue with delusions?


    There are always a range of interests behind official narratives and so things won’t always go according to plan, as interests conflict, within the global alliance to suppress the populist revolt against the ruling oligarchy under the guise of fighting a novel virus.

    In the US those behind the coup against democracy are a powerful class who control the money, MSM, social media platforms and senior politicians across the aisle. So they control the commanding heights of the economy, but not the people below who they now intend to criminalise as insurrectionists, the new communism, following a huge peaceful protest against election fraud.

    Trump said our side’s too nice, or more accurately the deep state is sick and vicious and prepared to say black is white and double-speak on a 24/7 repeat loop, as if it were true! For many years that involved ignoring Americans and bombing people overseas, but now I fear the target will be the majority of Americans, as how do you return to normal after such a blatant steal?


    The “blatant steal” as Deluded Dave mentions above is the new Big Lie of our time. Just tell a lie, make it really, really big, and keep repeating it. There were MILLIONS of votes stolen! The dead voted! Ballot boxes were stuffed! What – evidence? We don’t need no stinking evidence!

    SA – I tend to agree with Clark, that these tin-foilers ought to be called out and their characteristics noted. They follow a fairly predictable trend, and rarely have only a single delusion – as Dave shows above. Climate change denial, anti-vaxxer, pandemic denial, and now “deep state” nonsense thrown in with election denial.

    Come to think of it, we have a number of Big Lies going around. None require evidence, and all can be extended just a bit further if any of the points are challenged, to make the lie a little bit bigger, and the conspiracy even more all-encompassing.

    • This reply was modified 4 months ago by degmod.

    SA – January 10, 2021 at 22:39
    “Please for the sake of sanity can we try to discuss realities and try to move away from converting this conversation to another discussion about conspiracy theories.”

    SA – January 11, 2021 at 07:58
    “Of course we know they are CTT it is so obvious. Those who three now active here appear to be in a parallel universe and are not in touch with reality. But our trying to reason with them is giving them the opportunity to disseminate arguments that they get from OffGuardian and other conspiracy websites..
    I am also aware that many of those conspiracy theorists overlap with climate change deniers, hiv deniers and antivaxxers but really don’t think this belongs here.”

    Ha ha. You can’t stop talking about conspiracy theories! Even though the phrase is gobbledygook, you need it to dismiss opinions which challenge your own. Deep down, you know that there is something seriously wrong with the covid narrative you embrace, but your cognitive dissonance is resolved with those two words. Below the threshold of your consciousness, a little voice is whispering “Just call them ‘nutters’ and you can ignore those uncomfortable questions.”

    Why is the phrase gobbledygook? Because you (plural) don’t know what it means! Elsewhere on this site there is an entire thread where you tie yourselves in knots trying not to define a conspiracy theorist as “Someone who believes different conspiracies to me.” Yet despite this you’ve used it hundreds of times on this thread alone. You use the term as though it empowers your arguments but to a neutral observer, it signals the opposite.

    Of course, you won’t accept any of this, such is the nature of cognitive dissonance. However luckily for you there is any easy way to prove me wrong: define “conspiracy theorist” in a way that doesn’t include yourself 🙂


    ET “The various vaccines effects in the real world have yet to be proved/proven. If they do confer some degree of immunity, and/or reduce transmission and/or reduce the risk of severe disease they will speed a return to normal.”

    You don’t seem to see vaccines as crucial in getting us back to normal. At best they may speed things up. You have previously expressed misgivings about the testing process. By what calculation do you consider vaccines worth the risk?


    Node, no. My claim is that “theory” means a framework for thought like “theory of gravity” or “theory of music”; that “conspiracy theory” is a specific example of such a framework; that it has recognisable features; and that its adherents use recognisable techniques, eg. “what they aren’t telling you” in which “they” is never defined, and definition is never even attempted. I also propose that specific hypotheses of conspiracy theory necessitate ever-expanding conspiracies, eg. entire fields of science.

    I have attempted to discuss this with you for years, but your response is simply to ignore me. You recently resorted to sock puppetry and got yourself banned rather than confront this. My personal experience as a moderator of this site was that conspiracy theorists frequently resorted to sock puppetry, and on that matter I have a question for you:

    Node, have you posted to this thread as “Duck”?


    But I agree with SA; this is off-topic here. It should be discussed at the thread I started for that purpose but, Node, it should be discussed honestly, with genuine engagement, rather than by cheating, by which I mean ignoring points that embarrass you and resorting to sock puppetry.


    The above posts appear to be veering off topic and this forum is now about conspiracies. Could you please look at this?


    If Node wishes to discuss the topics within SARS cov2 and Covid 19 specifically then I will engage, but he/she has their own agenda, I will refrain from answering.
    As to Dave he has now veered towards talking only about his hero Trump which is completely off topic and of no interest here.


    The mods are keeping an eye on all forum threads.

    Contributors are advised to post any further comments about the concept of conspiracy theory on the relevant thread entitled “What is Conspiracy Theory?” or under a new topic created for the purpose.


    “The various vaccines effects in the real world have yet to be proved/proven.”

    I said this because it is unequivically true as admitted by the companies developing them. I also think Peter Doshi has made some good points and is worth reading. I guess Node, when I said that I was thinking more about the protective effects. I think the safety data THUS FAR is not worrying but because not enough time has elapsed they cannot know long term safety data. In general vaccines have a proven safety record and are generally considered to be amongst the most safe medical interventions. I think they can use that history to a certain extent to add weight (though not conclusively) to an argument that these new vaccines will likely be safe too. That said, this is a new vaccne modality, there are always possibilities of unforseen side effects with any new medication/treatment and strict surveillance needs to be maintained.

    “You don’t seem to see vaccines as crucial in getting us back to normal.”

    The history of such disease pandemics is that eventually an equilibrium is reached and they end, often but not always, having killed huge numbers of people. In my opinion the most useful comparison is the 1918 flu pandemic. It continued for 3 years and it was the second year that saw huge numbers of young people dying. We don’t have the same kinds of data from 1918 as we do now, they didn’t have the availability of medical care as we do now but with a much smaller world population and much less ability to travel it still killed millions. It was a flu virus, H1N1. You know, it was a “bad flu.”

    Whilst I think there was a possibility of eradicating the current Sars-Cov-2 virus in the beginning, if world governments had acted properly, I think that ship has sailed and is in deep ocean water by now. It’s not that I don’t think such measures could work just that I don’t think it is now possible to get agreement across world governments to implement them properly. Therefore I think given it is in every country that it is going to remain endemic.

    “At best they (the vaccines) may speed things up”

    If vaccination converts serious disease to “stay at home, drink plenty of hot drinks, take two paracetamol” disease then just that will make a huge difference to its impact. It will lessen the need for lockdowns, reduce the numbers requiring hospitalisation and so on. (Yet to be proven though)
    If vaccination does confer immunity, even if short lived it will act as a circuit breaker and similarly if it reduces transmissivity/transmissability. (what’s the correct term?) That blood samples from vaccinated people are showing antibody reactivity to antigen challenge is a good sign though again always with the caveat that in vitro doesn’t always translate to real world (in vivo) situations. Thus I think vaccines have a good chance to speed the return to normality.

    ” By what calculation do you consider vaccines worth the risk?”

    We had a short introduction to Sars-Cov-2 in early 2020. It was inadequately handled with insufficiently robust measures introduced too late and not just in the UK. Inevitably it came back again (it never really went away) with infections rising, hospital admissions rising. Again, the obvious threat was inadequately handled with half assed measures leading to the current situation with the addition of new variants. We are now in a worse situation then we were back in April 2020. Not just with disease matrics but people are fed up and restless, worried about their futures. It’s not a good mix. I fear history is repeating itself and we are inviting a similar course to 1918 albeit mitigated somewhat by modern medical care. This is happening world wide. Thus, having made a bollocks of it up to now with the situation being irretrievable (in practice though not in theory) with a potential for things to get hugely worse and continue for another 2 years cycling through lockdowns/partial lockdowns, on balance I think vaccinations are worth the risk.


    Ginger root and meteorite dust: the Steiner ‘Covid cures’ offered in Germany”?

    That article in the Guardian offers an indication of the power of the Steiner cult in Germany, and how it is having a field day with SARS-CoV2 and Covid-19. [1]

    Steinerites are in positions of power in the “health”, “education”, and agricultural sectors in many European countries, and in a number of royal families too. (Watch out for references to “epochs”, “Alcuin”, etc.) They are also among the main pushers of homoeopathy. If “the prestigious Charité university hospital” (in other words, a hospital) in Berlin is referring Covid-19 patients to a Steiner-cult clinic, that will be because the Steiner cult has already infiltrated the senior echelon at the said hospital.

    Interesting to read that Germany’s highest grossing chemist’s (“drugstore chain” in the US English that the Guardian uses), DM-Drogerie Markt is run by self-professed anthroposophists.

    The general rule is don’t trust any organisation with a Triodos bank account.

    There are probably Steiner-loony references in the World Economic Forum’s pandemic-related “Great Reset” [2], especially given the involvement of Britain’s deranged and mentally subnormal crown prince.


    1) The reference in the article to Steiner schools as “left-leaning” is totally ignorant and mistaken. Indeed the Guardian’s hyperlink for that very assertion goes to an article about the support those schools have received from Michael Gove, who is not known as being leftwing. And it is not simply that Steiner loonies got into “organic farming” in the 1960s. The very term “organic farming” comes from Steinerism – not from the 1960s but from long before then. (Look up “Betteshanger Conference”.) We should keep our antennae out for Steiner-significant framing and spinning of official SARS/Covid propaganda in all countries.

    2) Klaus Schwab (founder of the European Management Forum which became the WEF) got his doctorate at ETH Zurich I see. I wouldn’t be surprised if the Steiner cult has a great deal of power in that institution.


    ”By what calculation do you consider vaccines worth the risk?”

    Here’s one huge difference between vaccines and a spreading virus – vaccines aren’t infectious. If a vaccine turns out to be doing more harm than good, authorities can stop administering it, and/or individuals can avoid being vaccinated with it. The only way to avoid SARS-CoV-2 is to avoid anyone potentially infected by it.


    “Don’t say you are exercising when you are really socialising,” says “health” secretary Matt Hancock.

    There’s no law forbidding socialising while exercising, any more than there’s a law forbidding resting on a bench because your exercise pattern goes Exertion-Rest-Exertion. But who cares about the law any more?

    Want to exercise? Buy a gym membership and the rulers will tell you on your smartphone when the gym is open, and under what conditions you’re allowed to go there, and don’t think the cameras won’t be running. And forget about walking in the countryside. Unless you own it, of course.

    Eleven months into fascism, the rulers really don’t like people socialising off-Apple and off-Google.

    Is waving to somebody allowed, or is it a case of “That’s what enemy saboteurs WOULD claim they were doing”? I don’t ask that lightly. All it would take is a few bombs conveniently to explode, or just to be “found”, or a hostage-taking or crazed stabbing incident, and the “No Socialisation Where We Can’t See You” order will arrive like an arrow out of the blue.


    Leaving considerations of payment aside, would the British army if it called up all its reserves have the logistic capability to supply food to 60 million people imprisoned 24 hours a day in their homes?


    Fascism is a curtain-twitcher’s paradise. Imagine how many calls the police must be receiving (and following up) from Daily Heil readers who say they’ve seen somebody walk in the park for too long, or in the wrong place, or talk to someone, or walk past their window twice in one week.

    That’s all being encouraged by the government.

    There will probably be a special phone number soon – or Facebook page maybe.

    “Seen someone ‘exercise’ in a banned way?
    Call this number in confidence.
    Protect the NHS.”


    Dave, it has been said that there are 10 types of people; those who know binary and those who don’t. But maybe it’s a bit more complicated than that 🙂


    Such indeed is the nature of cognitive dissonance that to explain the rising daily death toll and overwhelmed NHS some have to find a lot of other explanations for why this is happening, anything except that there is a novel coronavirus that causes serious disease. And why do they KNOW that these deaths are not due to Covid-19? Why of course because according to them the virus has not been isolated and in any case the PCR is totally unreliable. Of course all the NHS staff are also part of this deception. They appear daily on TV saying they are now exhausted and reaching capacity for no reason whatsoever, and may be also because suddenly all the NHS professional have collectively lost the ability to make correct diagnosis, mistaking a bad flu season for a non existent viral induction.These same people then claim that we cannot accept their point of view because we suffer from cognitive dissonance.


    SA – “Of course all the NHS staff are also part of this deception”

    Precisely. And all the statisticians including local record keepers, virologists, epidemiologists, politicians, immunologists, etc. etc. etc., all over the world.

    This is why it fits my description of conspiracy theory. It is not the possibility of some conspiracy that makes it conspiracy theory; powerful people indeed conspire. No, it’s that universal conspiracy is the central central claim, and all the other claims (PCR false positives, misclassification of deaths, payments to US hospitals for ventilation etc.) are seized upon from the tiniest shred of evidence and repeated over and over, ignoring everything to the contrary, to fit around the central claim of unlimited conspiracy.

    And if anyone objects? Well, they must either be evil agents, or have psychological problems such as cognitive dissonance which prevents them seeing past “MSM” brainwashing, unlike the Fearless Warriors Who Can Face The Terrifying Truth. We’re either evil, or cowed by fear, SA. But we mustn’t take the piss out of those who feel so superior, eh, Steph?

    This is why there’s so much overlap between the adherents of the various conspiracy hypotheses. There’s really only one claim, that everything is run and all information is controlled by this grand, unlimited conspiracy. It merely looks like multiple hypotheses – climate change, anti-vax, covid denial, HIV denial, whatever; really, they’re all the same hypothesis – overarching worldwide conspiracy. And that’s why it’s called conspiracy theory; nothing to do with genuine conspiracy, but provides very good cover for it!


    In fact, nothing is any problem except this grand conspiracy, and if everyone would just believe the conspiracy theorists, this grand conspiracy would become impossible, all problems would be revealed to be imaginary and we’d all realise that we had been living in paradise all along. Salvation!


    They’re saying they want to increase social distancing to 3 metres now. That will stop the spread of the “mutant”, apparently.


    Next the bosses will be telling us always to enter our bathrooms with our left feet first, or always to stir our coffee with a knife rather than a spoon.

    Cloth masks don’t stop many virus particles at all. The proportion that get through is 97%, according to some “re$earch” in the Briti$h Medica£ Journa£. Anyone who wears a cloth mask is protecting neither themselves nor anyone else. You might as well wear a “Viruses, Keep Away” sign on your hat. If you want to wear a mask, wear a proper one. (And use 60%+ alcohol to wash your hands too, not some stupid gel that smells like lemons.)

    The rulers couldn’t care less what kind of bacteria or viruses you get. It’s the socialisation they’re against. GIVE THEM AN INCH AND THEY’LL TAKE A YARD. That’s what’s happening.

    They just want you

    1) to become more habituated to obeying orders, and not to e.g. answer a policeman back
    2) to become alienated from your family
    3) to reduce your face-to-face socialising with other people in general
    4) to get less exercise

    Let me tell you something…
    The prescribed distance is 1 metre in Singapore, where there have been 5 deaths “with Covid-19” per 1 million population, unlike in Britain where there have been 1204. In Singapore there is also a S$300 fine for being in public places without a mask. The government has been very strict there, and it’s a densely populated country. But do they make everyone stay 2 metres apart? No.

    It’s 1.5 metres in Australia.

    So far it’s been 2 metres in Britain. The idea of increasing it to 3 metres has absolutely f*** all to do with reducing the famous “R” rate.

    The stories about “woman fined for sitting on park bench” etc. are all part of the propaganda campaign. It’s impossible to know all the exact details of the enemy’s psychological warfare effort. That’s always true in psychological warfare. It’s not like a damned board game. But it seems to me very likely that they are trying to divide the population into two big parts: for or against the draconian measures


    It works like this…

    If they ratchet up the repressive measures too far too fast, they will get too many people too strongly opposed.
    If they don’t ratchet them up much, then
    1) they will feel like “pussies” (must keep the stormtroopers on their toes), and
    2) they will have failed themselves by not getting towards their goal as fast as they could have (no point in “losing money”).

    Please don’t believe they aren’t that cynical. They ARE that cynical.

    Also the practice of on-off on-off, “circuit breaker lockdown”, followed by “OK, everyone go to Ibiza and the pubs”, followed by “Oh dear, too fast a relaxation, better have another lockdown”, etc., it is absolutely CLASSIC Skinnerian conditioning. See “variable reward” and “variable ratio” etc. – concepts that are taught to those who run advertising campaigns and “social media” companies and websites.


    N_ omitted to mention this, from the very link N_ provided:

    “The authors of this article, published in 2015, have written a response to their work in light of the COVID-19 pandemic. We urge our readers to consider the response when reading the article:”


    The questions I would like to an have an answer to from Node and Steph are:
    Do you think there is a crisis in the health service or not?
    If there is a crisis, what do you think it is due to?
    We also know that the economy and people’s psyche and education are being severely disrupted, what do you think the reasons for these are?
    Who do you think is responsible for this mess and why?
    What is your proposed solution?


    ‘The questions I would like to an have an answer to from Node and Steph are:’

    Hahaha! All good questions which I would have been more than willing to spend a great deal of time trying to answer at the outset. I use the past tense because I am no longer willing to invest effort on this thread. The prevailing superciliousness, condescension, wrath and resentment of the primary contributors directed towards absolutely anyone venturing another opinion, misguided or otherwise, renders the thread purely a source of entertainment value to me.


    It is your answer that is supercilious. I seem to recollect that you have had several goes at participating and then finally deciding that this is not for you, even stating that you were a bit embarrassed about saying you will not participate but then changing your mind. Since then your activities have been what I would describe as ‘sniping’ not really conveying any opinion, just criticising others. And of course now you do not wish to participate but just would like a source of entertainment. And here I was thinking that this is a serious life or death matter for many, oh but for Steph it is just a source of entertainment.


    ‘It is your answer that is supercilious’

    It is indeed.


    Police and crime minister Kit Malthouse says people have a “duty” to make sure this lockdown is “the last one”. That’s in the context of the cops promising to crak down harder on people who go outside their houses without a reasonable excuse.

    Read between Malthouse’s words. He is blaming the population, hoi polloi, the townies, proles, plebs, chavs, for the fact that the government ordered the current lockdown! He is saying were it not for the dirty germ-spreading lower orders of society who aren’t so keen on obeying the orders they receive from their betters, there wouldn’t have had to be any lockdowns after the first one.

    Checks Malthouse’s background… some kinda third division private school…founder member of the HMC maybe but still nobody’s ever heard of it, “Liverpool College”…primed him for Newcastle University…


    Being told two contradictory things and expected to believe them both at the same time is getting ramped up like nobody’s business. Time for another read of Orwell’s “1984”…

    “Police will now be quicker to stop people and fine them for being outside of their home, warns Met chief”

    and yet have they fined Boris Johnson yet, who seems to treat London as if it were Oxford or Cambridge, some overweight boozy posh git on his bike…


    Thanks for your polite and considered reply. I wanted to explore how the vaccine narrative has evolved – from society’s saviour to a bit-part player – but it’s very difficult with all the baying from the sidelines. I’m going to take a break for a few days, but I’ll be back.

    [ Mod: Moderation enquiry removed.

    Node, if have queries about moderation, kindly post them in the Blog Support Forum: Site technical issues and feedback. ]


    Derbyshire police withdraw two women’s £200 fines for lockdown walk…………
    This episode ought to make the police think a little more about what it is exactly they are trying to enforce and some other things. The coffee shops are considered essential retail? What exactly is a picnic? Is it not a little over zealous to construe a takeout coffee as a picnic? Why were there so many police at that spot in the first place? Was this the social distancing equivalent of a speed trap? What is the purpose of their enforcement? To define what local means or what a picnic is or to try to prevent and discourage potentially virus spreading events?


    Ah ET. you are the good guy, the rest are just barking dogs. Careful not to get into bad ways.


    Boris Johnson has blamed “demented” Chinese people selling traditional medicine, including for sexual potency, for SARS-CoV2.

    Downing Street propagandists are trying to deflect the story into one about “Carrie” and “the environment”. They won’t see it like that at the Chinese embassy. Who’s Carrie anyway? And anyway it’s not Carrie that he’s been cycling to visit.

    This drug-addled, drunken, overgrown schoolboy of a Tory prime minister, whose schtick aged into ludicrousness some time ago, has f*rted at China and wafted the expelled gas into Chinese faces wearing a look of superiority on his own.

    When he was only the “former mayor of London”, he did much the same at Turkey. Before then, when he was a “journalist”, he channelled the Tory party’s beloved hero Enoch Powell by ranting about black people, whom he called “piccaninnies” with “watermelon smiles”.

    Tories cheered him to the rafters and made him prime minister after those achievements. But insulting China will probably have different consequences. Unlike Prince Philip, this pillock can be sacked.

    (That’s even if few care to notice that the reported death rate “with Covid” per million population is 400 times bigger in Britain than in China. It’s as if it’s traitorous to imagine that Britain is not well managed, given that public schoolboys were born to rule. Never mind that the data shows that the rulers in Britain couldn’t run a f*cking vicar’s tea party even if they called in a catering company.)

    Will Johnson be replaced by Jeremy Hunt (who made his large fortune trading in China) by Mayday?


    SA, I agree with ET. I know of someone who, during the Spring restrictions, was hounded by a police helicopter for sunbathing on a hilltop half a mile from the nearest other person.

    The ideal situation would be if we were a population sufficiently educated to spontaneously behave appropriately during a pandemic, with authorities trustworthy enough to apply appropriate discretion with the small amount of residual enforcement that would be needed.

    Instead we have “news” media that promotes doubt about the seriousness of our predicament and every defensive measure available to us. Even the BBC gave air time to S Guptra’s highly marginal and now thoroughly disproven perspective that a second wave was impossible. How many lives has that editorial decision cost?


    Steph, yet another appeal to emotion:

    “superciliousness, condescension, wrath and resentment…”

    No, you were just wrong. You were manufacturing doubt to suit your political objectives on a matter where there is none. That’s just how it is with matters of fact. No matter what names you call me I cannot alter that because I am not God.

    As it happens, I also disrespect your opinion that the sick should be left to die without treatment so that young people can socialise, but you are entitled to it. But you have no moral justification to muddy the facts to make your opinion look more humane than the circumstances permit.

    This is not rude etc. but it is blunt. But people are dying from preventable illness, and doctors are having to decide who gets treatment; I have far more sympathy for these than for your offended sensibilities.



    I stand by my assessment that this was crass policing. That they have withdrawn the fines underlines this. Unfortunately it is the kind of thing that feeds into the fascist narrative. There is a reason behind the lockdowns which is to reduce situations in which transmission may potentially occur. Within the rules they have allowed for people to meet up with one other from another household locally to exercise whilst maintaining social distancing. In Ireland they defined local as within 2 km (lockdown 1) in the UK they haven’t defined it. What’s local in say London isn’t the same thing as rurally. That is what these two women did. The coffees were immatterial to any transmission risk.
    What I am saying is that policng decisions should be judged aganst what may cause a transmission risk rather than what constitutes a picnic or local. And the need to be seen to be fair minded. It doesn’t help that Bojo as prime minister of UK was seen to be cycling 7 miles presumably with a security detail (at least I hope the Prime Minister isn’t allowed to cycle London’s streets without a security detail, notwithstanding that it would be greast if he could do so without worry).
    Mixed messages, one of the major problems throughout.


    I am sorry to cause a misunderstanding. Of course I agree that policing needs to be more nuanced, I was just referring to the praised heaped on ET and the disdain on those ‘braying’.


    ‘But you have no moral justification to muddy the facts…’

    How interesting that you should mention morals. Here is a rather interesting little paper, only a pre-print I’m afraid, but quite well put together. You will like it because it fully acknowledges the seriousness of covid, and has lots of damning phrases which you will be able to throw at people like ‘Covid-19 (C19) remains an urgent and visible threat’ and ‘Covid-19 (C19) has been a terrifying global health threat since its detection.’
    Its aim is to demonstrate how the case for restrictions has become moralised. I hope you will find it of interest too. May I take this opportunity of wishing you and your moral high ground many years of happiness together and that you remain blissfully blinded to all else forever.


    No again, Steph. I was entirely explicit. I personally disrespect your opinion that illness should be permitted to spread for the sake of young people’s socialising, but unambiguously stated that you are entitled to it.

    The moral issue I made was about your attempt to muddy the facts of covid-19 mortality, to make your opinion seem more humane than it is; it’s about honesty. Doctors are familiar with this in the field of informed consent for medical procedures.

    If you think it’s right to deceive people so they hold the opinion about restrictions that you prefer, go ahead and say so. If not, get off your moral high horse and apologise for repeatedly insulting people.

Viewing 40 posts - 1,081 through 1,120 (of 1,203 total)
  • The topic ‘SARS cov2 and Covid 19’ is closed to new replies.