Offering the vaccine to 18-65 yr olds is an evidenced-based decision. For those younger than 18 there are insufficient peer-reviewed safety studies available, meanwhile they generally fair well if infected with sars-cov2. Those over 65 do not have much in the way of peer-reviewed safety studies and the evidence is suggesting reason for caution. For example, in Norway 33 elderly died after receiving vaccination. One report argued that they had co-morbidities. My contention with that would be the idea they were going to die anyways. What competent authority puts such people at risk, unless it is for the good of the Big Experiment? The vaccine is a big experiment to which we are invited to participate. Trust is vital. The fact is....if it is a novel virus it is therefore a novel vaccine program, and until we are at least 10 years in we will not have the evidence, to begin to know with any certainty, the outcomes. An important note of caution to those who think the vaccination puts an end to masks and protocols of caution....it is not known if, and/or when, the vaccine sheds and renders a recipient "infectious". If it does we might as well have done a proper lockdown at the beginning of this pandemic and created our coved free bubble to which we could have opened to other coved free bubbles until the whole planet had cooperated, and become covid free (?) !
His track record as being untrustworthy is catching him up. I no longer accept his interpretation of medicine. Our whole system of health care needs an overhaul, particularly since many of our illnesses are preventable, including most cancers.
For a government’s to take authority over a person’s sovereign body is a Human Rights issue. The Act was wisely constructed to allow for “reasonable excuse”. Given the true facts behind vaccination and it’s spurious “science” funded by profiteering companies there needs to be caution. Cause and effect in this case are not instant, but there is no doubt that vaccine injury is a real and growing concern.
Twocent says...
Offering the vaccine to 18-65 yr olds is an evidenced-based decision.
For those younger than 18 there are insufficient peer-reviewed safety studies available, meanwhile they generally fair well if infected with sars-cov2.
Those over 65 do not have much in the way of peer-reviewed safety studies and the evidence is suggesting reason for caution. For example, in Norway 33 elderly died after receiving vaccination. One report argued that they had co-morbidities. My contention with that would be the idea they were going to die anyways. What competent authority puts such people at risk, unless it is for the good of the Big Experiment?
The vaccine is a big experiment to which we are invited to participate. Trust is vital.
The fact is....if it is a novel virus it is therefore a novel vaccine program, and until we are at least 10 years in we will not have the evidence, to begin to know with any certainty, the outcomes.
An important note of caution to those who think the vaccination puts an end to masks and protocols of caution....it is not known if, and/or when, the vaccine sheds and renders a recipient "infectious". If it does we might as well have done a proper lockdown at the beginning of this pandemic and created our coved free bubble to which we could have opened to other coved free bubbles until the whole planet had cooperated, and become covid free (?) !
On Twocent
Posted 5 February 2021, 12:01 p.m. Suggest removal
Twocent says...
Things were bad and now he lost he car! He has to walk home from da hospital 😢
On Man rescued after driving off Montagu ramp in 'attempted suicide'
Posted 5 September 2020, 1:47 p.m. Suggest removal
Twocent says...
His track record as being untrustworthy is catching him up. I no longer accept his interpretation of medicine. Our whole system of health care needs an overhaul, particularly since many of our illnesses are preventable, including most cancers.
On Survival rate shock for kids cancers
Posted 25 February 2019, 10:13 a.m. Suggest removal
Twocent says...
For a government’s to take authority over a person’s sovereign body is a Human Rights issue. The Act was wisely constructed to allow for “reasonable excuse”. Given the true facts behind vaccination and it’s spurious “science” funded by profiteering companies there needs to be caution. Cause and effect in this case are not instant, but there is no doubt that vaccine injury is a real and growing concern.
On Vaccination act no longer tough enough, says Sands
Posted 18 February 2019, 5:27 a.m. Suggest removal