Buy all your VW California Accessories at the Club Shop Visit Shop

Covid19 Passport.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Who get their data from Pfizer. With no long term safety studies. No known effect on fertility. No data on whether if prevents asymptomatic transmission after vaccination. No data about how long the ‘immunity’ lasts. The payout for long term disability or death payed by the taxpayer not Pfizer is £125k. How much is a life worth? The risk of death to people under 80 yrs is no different to flu. Again it’s all about choice. Not enforcement.
As with every other vaccine ever produced. To get that data the trials would last at least 50 yrs and how many would die in the meantime. Complete and utter rubbish.
Try and compare like with like and if you can’t do that then stop peddling YouTube and Twitter mis-information.
 
Who get their data from Pfizer. With no long term safety studies. No known effect on fertility. No data on whether if prevents asymptomatic transmission after vaccination. No data about how long the ‘immunity’ lasts. The payout for long term disability or death payed by the taxpayer not Pfizer is £125k. How much is a life worth? The risk of death to people under 80 yrs is no different to flu. Again it’s all about choice. Not enforcement.

Actually .... No. You are wrong.

They get their data from the open availability of thousands of tests done on thousands of volunteers and review that data through a panel of peer experts independent of the study.

As with the open label study that I am currently a volunteer on the medical examinations that I undergo frequently to assess my current bio-markers against "prior" bio-markers are independently evaluated and data forwarded to my GP or a selected medical examiner independent of either the study sponsor, the drug developer or the body conducting the study on behalf of both.
 
Last edited:
There appears to be many knowledgeable people on this forum. So can someone explain why there is huge difference in number of Covid cases reported via the media versus the number of Covid cases on the Public Health England website? The notification of infectious diseases (NOIDS) page states that the number of cases for Covid in England and Wales for week 49 (to 6/12) is only 76. As it is a statutory requirement for registered medical practitioners to supply this data why is the number broadcast daily far higher? Link below, scroll to page 14 for Covid data.
 

Attachments

  • NOIDS-weekly-report-week49-2020.pdf
    162.2 KB · Views: 4
I might have had interest in the Pfizer court case if it had anything to do with efficacy of a drug or trials etc, it wasn’t anything to do with that. It was a marketing case.

As for having the vaccine being a matter of choice not enforcement that’s tru.
But don’t forget if organisers ofsporting events, music events etc choose to exclude people who have not chosen to have the vaccination, that is also there choice not enforcement.
So if you don’t have the vaccine fine, but don’t whinge when you get turned away from the cinema or refused a seat on an airline, don’t forget it’s choice not enforcement.
 
There appears to be many knowledgeable people on this forum. So can someone explain why there is huge difference in number of Covid cases reported via the media versus the number of Covid cases on the Public Health England website? The notification of infectious diseases (NOIDS) page states that the number of cases for Covid in England and Wales for week 49 (to 6/12) is only 76. As it is a statutory requirement for registered medical practitioners to supply this data why is the number broadcast daily far higher? Link below, scroll to page 14 for Covid data.
Deep State conspiracy. But no cases at all in Bucks apparently, I'm off down the pub then.
 
There appears to be many knowledgeable people on this forum. So can someone explain why there is huge difference in number of Covid cases reported via the media versus the number of Covid cases on the Public Health England website? The notification of infectious diseases (NOIDS) page states that the number of cases for Covid in England and Wales for week 49 (to 6/12) is only 76. As it is a statutory requirement for registered medical practitioners to supply this data why is the number broadcast daily far higher? Link below, scroll to page 14 for Covid data.
Those are cases diagnosed by a GP in a Practice setting. Unlike the other cases diagnosed via Test & Trace.
 
Those are cases diagnosed by a GP in a Practice setting. Unlike the other cases diagnosed via Test & Trace.
OK thanks. I would have thought all data would be pulled together, so that a numpty like me wouldn't have to ask questions. Surely the test and trace positives, if are actually cases, should be reported on the NOIDS site as a statutory requirement? Maybe the PCR test is giving too many false positives so they cannot be confident they are actually infected with Covid.
 
OK thanks. I would have thought all data would be pulled together, so that a numpty like me wouldn't have to ask questions. Surely the test and trace positives, if are actually cases, should be reported on the NOIDS site as a statutory requirement? Maybe the PCR test is giving too many false positives so they cannot be confident they are actually infected with Covid.
Other way round I’m afraid. These are GP notified cases/ diagnosis that are presumed, not necessarily confirmed, from community GP consultations only.
Diagnosis will then be confirmed in Hospital Diagnostic or PHE laboratories, or in the case of COVID 19 via either the Hospital Service, for patients admitted to Hospital directly by a GP, or the Test & Trace system if the patient does not require Hospital Admission.

 
The point about a notifiable diseases system is to detect new clusters and outbreaks of disease in its early stages and so act as an early warning system. Not much point to that with a disease once it's reached pandemic stage and is in general circulation in the population - eg covid 19.
 
And clearly the freedom to infect who you like. It is your decision but like most decisions in life it comes with consequences, if you don't like the consequences don't make that decision . If people stopped blaming the Government and came to realise that their selfish attitude by not following the rules is why why are still having to live with this. I Certainly do not agree with the regime in China but at least their ability to make people obey the rules is why they got a handle on it faster than the Western World.
I’m afraid the the “Following the rules” must apply to EVERYONE and not The governments “Chosen”....Any faith was ruined by just that chosen one very early on. I would say probably the majority were following the rules but that incident has become a benchmark in NOT following the rules.
 
I might have had interest in the Pfizer court case if it had anything to do with efficacy of a drug or trials etc, it wasn’t anything to do with that. It was a marketing case.

As for having the vaccine being a matter of choice not enforcement that’s tru.
But don’t forget if organisers ofsporting events, music events etc choose to exclude people who have not chosen to have the vaccination, that is also there choice not enforcement.
So if you don’t have the vaccine fine, but don’t whinge when you get turned away from the cinema or refused a seat on an airline, don’t forget it’s choice not enforcement.
First rule of medicine : do no harm. No guarantees of that with the vaccine.


As with every other vaccine ever produced. To get that data the trials would last at least 50 yrs and how many would die in the meantime. Complete and utter rubbish.
Try and compare like with like and if you can’t do that then stop peddling YouTube and Twitter mis-information.
It’s not YouTube and Twitter misinformation. Educate yourself, it’s Scientific opinion.
 
Actually .... No. You are wrong.

They get their data from the open availability of thousands of tests done on thousands of volunteers and review that data through a panel of peer experts independent of the study.

As with the open label study that I am currently a volunteer on the medical examinations that I undergo frequently to assess my current bio-markers against "prior" bio-markers are independently evaluated and data forwarded to my GP or a selected medical examiner independent of either the study sponsor, the drug developer or the body conducting the study on behalf of both.


Actually .... No. You are wrong.

They get their data from the open availability of thousands of tests done on thousands of volunteers and review that data through a panel of peer experts independent of the study.

As with the open label study that I am currently a volunteer on the medical examinations that I undergo frequently to assess my current bio-markers against "prior" bio-markers are independently evaluated and data forwarded to my GP or a selected medical examiner independent of either the study sponsor, the drug developer or the body conducting the study on behalf of both.
 
Oh dear, I hope this is not a conspiracy theory from the World Doctors Alliance. More questions to ask our own trusted medical experts.
‘Doctors with Conspiracy theories’ - their goal being? They must be the doctors who said smoking causes cancer or Thalidamide causes birth defects as opposed to our Government backed Health Advisors who said it was nonsense for decades??
 



I would like to see this openly available data- do you have a link?
 
What you won’t see in the press or on the BBC but can be vefified via Public Health England.

This data is on NHS England Covid Statistics section on their website. Another question for the experts. Did those that died with no known underlying health condition have a post-mortem to evaluate if there was underlying health condition?
 
er...

I think you may have gleaned the wrong impression .....
 
This data is on NHS England Covid Statistics section on their website. Another question for the experts. Did those that died with no known underlying health condition have a post-mortem to evaluate if there was underlying health condition?
I doubt it
 
I might have had interest in the Pfizer court case if it had anything to do with efficacy of a drug or trials etc, it wasn’t anything to do with that. It was a marketing case.

As for having the vaccine being a matter of choice not enforcement that’s tru.
But don’t forget if organisers ofsporting events, music events etc choose to exclude people who have not chosen to have the vaccination, that is also there choice not enforcement.
So if you don’t have the vaccine fine, but don’t whinge when you get turned away from the cinema or refused a seat on an airline, don’t forget it’s choice not enforcement.
Catalogue of deception, fraud, illegal trials, poor safety. Again we all have a choice but for me it’s like asking Jimmy Saville to babysit
 
Catalogue of deception, fraud, illegal trials, poor safety. Again we all have a choice but for me it’s like asking Jimmy Saville to babysit
And on your point about whinging- if one chooses to have an untested vaccine and has a bad reaction then the same applies.
 

I’d appreciate it greatly if you did not regurgitate this sort of link on our BB.
I presume you have fact checked this “Organisation” prior to posting.
I have and I’m not impressed.

It is no better than spreading gossip and can cause great harm.

If you don’t wish to take a vaccine then don’t.



Mike
 
I’d appreciate it greatly if you did not regurgitate this sort of link on our BB.
I presume you have fact checked this “Organisation” prior to posting.
I have and I’m not impressed.

It is no better than spreading gossip and can cause great harm.

If you don’t wish to take a vaccine then don’t.



Mike
Looking through the articles (sorry, gossip) on that site, many from the BMJ, they appear to be no more or less harmful than the stuff we are bombarded daily by the government and MSM. Just an alternative source of information.

The article you refer to has a list of 'key facts' that are available in the MSM, though the constant noise that the Pfizer-Biontech vaccine is 'safe' and 'no corners cut' drowns out other facts and concerns. No vaccine can be deemed safe, especially a brand new mRNA vaccine with little track record or data. Each person has to way up the risks between having it or not.

Shutting down debate just adds fuel to conspiracy theories. Believe nothing, question everything.
:cheers
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top