Jump to content

Vsplat

Donating Member
  • Posts

    1,627
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    56

Vsplat last won the day on October 12

Vsplat had the most liked content!

Reputation

463 Excellent

1 Follower

Recent Profile Visitors

5,451 profile views
  1. I wasn't focused on the patent aspect. The poison part and the absence of any controlled studies distracted me. vs
  2. Meanwhile... As a subscriber to Health Canada’s MedEffectTM e-Notice, you are being informed of the latest Advisory. Reports to poison centres concerning ivermectin as a prevention or treatment for COVID-19 have increased over the summer months Health Canada is reminding Canadians not to use ivermectin to prevent or treat COVID-19. Canadian poison centres have seen an increase in reports concerning ivermectin over the summer. There is no evidence that ivermectin works to prevent or treat COVID-19, and it is not authorized for this use. To date, Health Canada has not received any drug submission or applications for clinical trials for ivermectin for the prevention or treatment of COVID-19.
  3. I am surprised that this is a surprise. The analysis has been out for awhile. All of the alphabet groups were on Ottawa's case and Transport Canada asked for this to be addressed months ago. I think it has nothing to do with Huawei. It affects all 5G equipment. Vs
  4. UD I am not trying to pick and choose, but frankly, I find your response highly selective. The alberta triage plan not implemented yet? So what? The need is being discussed. Look to the US. Look around the world. One almost has to put effort into not seeing health care infrastructure crumbling. The 'great unwashed'. What is wrong with you? That is a corrosive inflammation of what I said. Who would not be offended being framed that way? I find your characterisation of the nurses' situation beyond belief. After the stupidity with the harassment at the health care institutions and just how destructive that was to people who were already beaten down, I thought the press coverage was more thorough than you acknowledge. It wasn't just unions doing the talking. It's not just nurses BTW. You might want to check into the retirement curve of the docs in Ontario, for example. There is a curve that's not flattening. It feels like Kellyanne Conway was contagious. Play with this all you like. At the end of the day, there are real people getting sick, and some of them are getting sick because they are following misinformation. Some of them are getting sick at work, trying to save people who could have avoided being there altogether. Vs
  5. That's an odd question. Alberta provincial triage statements? CTV news? All of the interviews with burnt out health care workers? I believe you can see for yourself the percentage of cases in hospital and ICU that are vaccinated and not. Vs
  6. Hmmm. Hard for me to anticipate what you're going to say I was thinking. Funny how you feel you are OK to attribute things to me but it's not OK for me to point it out. Or better yet, I am somehow required to defend that I wasn't thinking what you thought I was thinking.... To my original point. I really don't think any parent would be consoled hearing that their sick or dying child was statistically insignificant in the eyes of another. That was my entire point. The rest is just a tangent. Vs
  7. We will do better if you stop trying to say what I must be thinking. You haven't guessed right yet and it just leads to a time wasting line of posts. Easy fix. If I didn't say something, don't say that I must have meant it. Vs
  8. What gets me worked up is the appropriation of messaging and re-purposing of partial data. From the web page link you provided. Have a look at the case numbers distribution. And that is not the whole story, either. As much as you prefer to count the dead, they no longer are in the health care system. It is the living who are seriously ill, the bulk of whom are unvaccinated, that are overtaxing the system, burning out health care workers and primary care providers and causing others to die of treatable illness. What also seems to be lost in this discussion is that the unvaccinated population continues to spread illness and foment variants. By the time we have enough pediatric death counts to satisfy whatever yardstick is needed, we will be behind the curve, as we have been, due to the same cycle of denial, all along. Perhaps someone in the F2F group can explain why they feel it is their right to pass on vaccination, but not society's right to then force them to see that decision through when they get (predictably) sick. This business of showing up in the ER and expecting the public dime to pay for a personal choice is BS, IMO. Vs
  9. I'm unable to find that article. Perhaps this one might be of relevance: https://www.cnn.com/2021/09/07/health/us-coronavirus-tuesday/index.html But again, I don't know how much death and suffering is required to meet the unspecified threshold of validity. Vs
  10. Haven't you reversed this a bit? The only place I see any claim about scale is in the Free to Fly quote. I asked how parents of affected children would feel reading that, quite frankly, reference free statement. 'Well established' - but not backed up with anything. The discussion about how many children originated with you. I find the need to quantify childrens' death for the sake of argument macabre. How about simply asking where F2F gets the support for their material? Vs
  11. How many do you need to see? I have no idea where you are going with this. Vs
  12. Not aimed at you FA@AC, but whoever put that clause on the F2F website. I wonder how the parents of children who have died or are in ICU would feel reading that. IMO It's a disgrace. Vs
  13. Hmmm. Maybe time to give decaf a try. Vs
  14. OK. So this is indeed about unreported side effects. There is a process for tracking these and I don't sense any sort of orchestrated conspiracy to silence that system. Human factors being what they are, there is a fallback method. If a specific physician is unaware or unable to respond to a side effect concern, the local public health office will take the call. But it is not perfect. Now, compare that to the approach to tracking side effects from chloroquine or ivermectin use. It just makes me scratch my head to see aversion based on international, widespread data-driven systems that actually identify issues, while embracing chemical options that have floated up on social media powered by ardent belief and strident talk, with limited or absent tracking or follow up of bad outcomes. It seems to me that one of these approaches is far more prone to biased reporting than the other. Anyway, not a discussion that will ever result in universal agreement, just some thoughts. Vs
×
×
  • Create New...