Yet Another Cycling Forum
General Category => The Knowledge => Health & Fitness => Topic started by: Canardly on 26 March, 2023, 11:02:48 pm
-
Well you need to watch this and be patient. What does this tell us about the way things are done around here and elsewhere? I am not one of those conspiratorial types and have had all the jabs but this does raise some rather huge questions. See some news articles regarding the damaging of immune system passim. These guys are not uninformed idiots. Of particular concern are the redactions.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pYkN7Gdpl8w (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pYkN7Gdpl8w)
-
And Professor Clancy? (There was a now deleted comment denigrating John Campbell).
-
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Campbell_(YouTuber)
One of his videos features Neil Oliver. This should be all you need to know.
Clancy was another hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin promoter (like the Trumpian antivaxxers).
-
And Professor Clancy? (There was a now deleted comment denegrating John Campbell).
Yes, that was mine. Decided I just couldn't be arsed. So I'll just give you a wiki link instead:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Campbell_(YouTuber)
Still, nearly 2/3 billion YouTube views. That's a nice little supplement to the pension.
-
Campbell has made a large amount of money peddling misinformation. He's about as credible as a Boris assurance that all the Covid rules and guidance were followed...
-
OIC.
-
He's actually a nurse. He did a pHD in nurse training. His blunders when trying to interpret data are the stuff of legend now.
-
The Ph.D is more or less in YouTubing. He's a doctor, but not in any sense a physician. To be fair to him, he does say in his "About.." text what his doctorate was for, but I don't know how many people will bother to read it.
-
I could happily offer Campbell a bottle of the Trumpian cure. Trouble is, my conscience would make me stop him consuming it.
With freedom of speech comes consequences but without freedom of speech comes despair.
-
I think Campbell has already done the pro Ivermectin thing.
-
I was thinking more along the lines of Cillit Bang ...
-
As an aside, Campbell's NMC registration expires on 31 July this year and I understand that there are several formal complaints that have been submitted about his circulation of misinformation. I wonder if he'll renew his registration?
-
He's a choob star now so no need I guess.
-
Why can't these people express their fascinating discoveries in fewer than 30 minutes of YouTube?
-
Why can't these people express their fascinating discoveries in fewer than 30 minutes of YouTube?
Because then they wouldn't be paid for six ad breaks for stuff I probably wouldn't buy, and certainly won't now. I am afraid I called the Duracell bunny a c*nt last week, out loud. Energizer ftw.
-
The Ph.D is more or less in YouTubing. He's a doctor, but not in any sense a physician. To be fair to him, he does say in his "About.." text what his doctorate was for, but I don't know how many people will bother to read it.
I see his Youtube channel is called "Dr. John Campbell". If someone is using the title "Dr" outside an academic context when they are not a medical doctor then they are deliberately trying to mislead people.
People with doctorates (and who are not a medical doctor) generally don't use the "doctor" title, nor say they're a doctor, in general life precisely because people will think they are a medical doctor.
-
The Ph.D is more or less in YouTubing. He's a doctor, but not in any sense a physician. To be fair to him, he does say in his "About.." text what his doctorate was for, but I don't know how many people will bother to read it.
I see his Youtube channel is called "Dr. John Campbell". If someone is using the title "Dr" outside an academic context when they are not a medical doctor then they are deliberately trying to mislead people.
People with doctorates (and who are not a medical doctor) generally don't use the "doctor" title, nor say they're a doctor, in general life precisely because people will think they are a medical doctor.
This is BS, by the way.
-
Yeah, it's the other way round: It's medical doctors who don't use the title in general life because people will know they're a medical doctor and might show them their rashes and expect them to deliver babies and stuff. People with PhD's generally don't care, unless they're being righteously feminist about their qualifications, deliberately avoiding gendered titles, or in the bullshit business (management consultancy, pop psychology, antivax grifting, etc.).
-
I think context matters a lot. I know a lot of women with PhDs who 'Dr it up' cos they're sick of sexist nonsense from menz and mansplaining and are making a point that they have achieved usually a PhD at great hard work etc (and often in the face of sexism + whatever else (racism/disablism etc) in academia).
But even the ones who are medical doctors are very clear about their role, remit and what their social media is for.
-
This is BS, by the way.
Medical doctors spend 6 years busting their guts to acquire the title Dr then the next 10 years trying to get rid of it.
-
The Ph.D is more or less in YouTubing. He's a doctor, but not in any sense a physician. To be fair to him, he does say in his "About.." text what his doctorate was for, but I don't know how many people will bother to read it.
I see his Youtube channel is called "Dr. John Campbell". If someone is using the title "Dr" outside an academic context when they are not a medical doctor then they are deliberately trying to mislead people.
People with doctorates (and who are not a medical doctor) generally don't use the "doctor" title, nor say they're a doctor, in general life precisely because people will think they are a medical doctor.
This is BS, by the way.
Reminds me of the CEO of a computer company I worked for: he used his title everywhere but I don't think expertise in theology sells that many computers.
-
Does anyone use titles at work? It died out circa 1992 in our place.
-
Our place is rammed with PhD's (physicists) but their titles are only used when presenting at conferneces etc. In contrast, back in the late '70's, one of my dad's acquaintances (a senior civil servant) had his name followed by "OBE" on his credit cards.
-
one of my dad's acquaintances (a senior civil servant) had his name followed by "OBE" on his credit cards.
Obnoxious Bell End?
-
Piers Morgan should have CBE on his card.
-
Does anyone use titles at work? It died out circa 1992 in our place.
Mine was in Germany, where if you're a prof with 2 phuds you're Herr/Frau Professor Doktor Doktor.
-
This is BS, by the way.
Medical doctors spend 6 years busting their guts to acquire the title Dr then the next 10 years trying to get rid of it.
In the UK, medical doctors spend a number of years (varying depending on degree and route) busting their guts to acquire the title 'registered medical practitioner, doctor of medicine, general practitioner, surgeon, physician, licentiate in medicine and surgery, bachelor of medicine or apothecary*'.
* I kid you not, 'apothecary' is a protected title in the UK.
-
Does anyone use titles at work? It died out circa 1992 in our place.
Mine was in Germany, where if you're a prof with 2 phuds you're Herr/Frau Professor Doktor Doktor.
I remember my German A-level teacher telling the class that anyone in Germany with a university degree is allowed to use the title Doctor. Is that right? I've been carrying this factoid around with me for over 30 years but have never had it verified.
-
Does anyone use titles at work? It died out circa 1992 in our place.
Mine was in Germany, where if you're a prof with 2 phuds you're Herr/Frau Professor Doktor Doktor.
I remember my German A-level teacher telling the class that anyone in Germany with a university degree is allowed to use the title Doctor. Is that right? I've been carrying this factoid around with me for over 30 years but have never had it verified.
That sounds like bollocks, and certainly none of my German colleagues have done it! Though there’s an Engineer title that I have seen used. (I think a bit like chartered engineer over here.)
-
That sounds like bollocks...
I always thought it sounded a bit sus - I suspect my teacher was extrapolating from one pretentious German person he knows.
-
In Italy anyone with a University degree can be called Dottore (Doctor)
Thanks to Inspector Montalbano for that info.
-
This is BS, by the way.
Medical doctors spend 6 years busting their guts to acquire the title Dr then the next 10 years trying to get rid of it.
In the UK, medical doctors spend a number of years (varying depending on degree and route) busting their guts to acquire the title 'registered medical practitioner, doctor of medicine, general practitioner, surgeon, physician, licentiate in medicine and surgery, bachelor of medicine or apothecary*'.
* I kid you not, 'apothecary' is a protected title in the UK.
LMSSA (Licensiate in Medicine & Surgery of the Society of Apothecaries) is/was a qualification you could get to become medically qualified if you flunked university. I don't know if it still runs.
-
Actually only surgeons spend the years after graduation training to return to Mr, Ms. This is so we can let the anaesthetists and other doctors answer the emergency call on the plane whilst we recline in business class.
-
Does anyone use titles at work? It died out circa 1992 in our place.
Mine was in Germany, where if you're a prof with 2 phuds you're Herr/Frau Professor Doktor Doktor.
I remember my German A-level teacher telling the class that anyone in Germany with a university degree is allowed to use the title Doctor. Is that right? I've been carrying this factoid around with me for over 30 years but have never had it verified.
Nope, not at all - they are very picky about it. If I had a phd from the UK in my field I would not have been allowed to be called Dr in Germany as my subject was not recognised. Not even sure I am allowed to use my MA title (which I don’t anyway).
-
In Italy anyone with a University degree can be called Dottore (Doctor)
Thanks to Inspector Montalbano for that info.
I didn't know fictional characters could have that kind of influence.
-
Setting aside the credibility of these presenters for the moment, are we saying, with absolutely certainty, that that there are no side effects of any significance related to Covid Vaccines?
-
Setting aside the credibility of these presenters for the moment, are we saying, with absolutely certainty, that that there are no side effects of any significance related to Covid Vaccines?
No, we're not. There were well-publicised blood clots affecting some AZ patients, for example. But you were still at greater risk of dying from Covid. Also, it was optional for almost everyone. Our government sucks, but I don't think they could have handled the vaccine rollout differently.
-
I will be open and say that I held personal doubts about the speed of the vaccine development. As part of my LL.B (Hons) studies Thalidomide came up. I also went to school with two peers who were victims as babies born to mothers who were prescribed the drug. Their physical abnormalities were plain to see.
However and perhaps because of the really crazy, illogical, irrational and over zealous anti vaccine protagonists, and the fact that the only person to suffer from consequences would be me, I decided to trust the scientists.
The government politicians were (still are) as batshit crazy as the anti-vaxxers so in general I ignore their "advice" on all matters.
-
Thalidomide was a two problem issue: off-label use and manufacturing issues. Not really testing, it shouldn’t ever have been prescribed for morning sickness, and it shouldn’t have been manufactured as a racemate.
Every vaccine (every drug) will have side-effects. The Covid vaccines are amongst the most tested drugs in the world. Even if you doubt the initial trials, the aftermarket testing has been extreme to the order of billions. If there was even a tiny issue, the numbers affected would be in the millions. Very visible. This hasn’t happened. These vaccines have been proven to be extraordinarily safe.
-
RZ, PB, Ian, thanks for your replies. I was reading the responses differently, but maybe I had the wrong angle.
I don’t regard myself as an anti-vaxxer, but I will admit to having doubts and un-answered questions for a number of reasons.
That the vaccines were presented as perfectly safe, while at the same the Government indemnified the Manufacturers from legal action seemed, to me at least, contradictory.
For my wife and myself the vaccine was not optional. Well it was, but if you chose not to have it you were out of a job, a role we both trained hard for and have worked in for our entire adult lives. I understood the rational for Vaccination being made mandatory for HCP’s but it was something that didn’t sit comfortably with me. I also felt the possible risks associated with the vaccine were being downplayed, or kept low key, which I can understand if you want to maximize uptake, but that conflicts with my understanding of informed consent.
Shortly after my 2nd shot I had a mild flare up of my arthritis, did the Vaccine trigger that? I don’t know & anyway it settled down quickly.
My wife wasn’t so lucky, her Meniere’s, which had been in remission for several years, came back with a vengeance. She was on and off severely ill and debilitated for about four months before it settled down again. A close work colleague also developed tinnitus, also an audio-vestibular disorder and with links to Meniere’s, which caused enough distress and sleeplessness to make her feel close to suicidal at one point. Again were these linked to the Vaccine, or purely co-incidental? We’ll probably never know, but others have reported similar experiences. My wife chose not to have the 3rd booster and her employer accepted that decision.
My understanding of the fast role out process was that reporting the occurrence of possible reactions and side effects would be used to help gain understanding of any risks and problems. All 3 of used the BNF Yellow Card system, but that’s not something many people know about. A question I would ask is how many people experienced these sorts of possible reactions following vaccination and either regarded them as unrelated or if they did think they were triggered by the vaccine had no means of reporting the fact?
The big question; if the three of us could turn back the clock, knowing what we know now, would we still have the vaccine?
Me – I still have unanswered questions and reservations, but on balance I would consider the wider benefits to society and I would be vaccinated.
My colleague with Tinnitus. It’s a condition she’s likely to have for life, although I believe you get used to coping with it. She strongly suspects the vaccine played a part in the onset of her Tinnitus, but with elderly at risk parents she says she would make the same decision again and have the vaccine.
My wife – Acute attacks of Meniere’s over several months, with no idea if it would settle down, was horrendous for her. She’s very clear that she would rather have taken her chances with Covid. We know others may not agree with that stance, but we would both argue she has the right to make that choice.
Of course I have many other family members, friends and colleagues who as far as we are aware have suffered no adverse effects from being vaccinated, and for whom currently being alive, healthy and able to go about their normal lives may be partly or wholly atribuable to the vaccines fast development and rapid mass roll out programme.
Sorry, that’s a long post & maybe I am an anti-vaxxer, but ones who’s been vaccinated?
-
It’s understandably hard to be objective when you’re the one who has suffered the consequences of the side effects of a vaccine, but epidemiologists measure the risks at a population level, not an individual level, and on that basis the evidence is overwhelmingly in favour of the vaccines.
-
With no disrespect to Phil, AFAIK we have no way of telling whether the vaccine caused the health issues he mentions. He talks about pre-existing conditions re-occuring in himself and wife, and an acquaintance. Things like this happened before the COVID vaccine.
-
With no disrespect to Phil, AFAIK we have no way of telling whether the vaccine caused the health issues he mentions. He talks about pre-existing conditions re-occuring in himself and wife, and an acquaintance. Things like this happened before the COVID vaccine.
I think this is very true. We have to remember that the times were very abnormal and stressful so that may well have been part of the flare. I had one colleague off work for 9 months after her vaccine with severe autonomic dysfunction which severely incapacitated her.
However all the government and non-government data suggests that the vaccines caused significantly fewer side effects than Covid would have done. the reduction being multiple orders of magnitude. So yes the vaccine was beneficial but also each person with a side effect is a personal nightmare and on balance of probability they would not have got a covid side effect. Vaccine side effects are a real example of altruism.
-
Some of the best (most complete) data on vaccines safety is available from NZ, albeit relating to relatively small numbers.
NZ has one of the world's most comprehensive pharmacovigilance systems, combined with a (generally) vaccine accepting population (for historical reasons), healthcare staff and public who are very much used to reporting issues* and a 'no fault' compensation structure. It's often used as one of the systems where human based trials/roll outs are undertaken.
Pfizer BioNTech/Comirnaty was the main vaccine used in NZ.
The adverse events following immunisation (AEFI) data is publicly available. https://www.medsafe.govt.nz/COVID-19/vaccine-report-overview.asp
*the public can also submit reports and follow up reports directly.
-
That correlation effect is the wave that Wakeman et al. surfed with MMR, children are often diagnosed with autism after receiving the MMR vaccine. It's intuitive to link the two events, but MMR is given around the time (or before) developmental autism is likely (or can be) diagnosed. In the unvaccinated, the same rates of autism are found.
It's understandable to link events, so if you have had a covid jab, any kind of illness that occurs in the period afterwards is naturally suspect. Of course, those illnesses may have happened regardless. I had a flu jab some years ago and came down with dreadful flu symptoms a day later. Maybe it was a reaction to the vaccine, maybe it was bad luck I'd been infected with flu a few days before the jab. I won't ever know. No matter how rational I may claim to be, I skipped the jab the following two years, and only recently started again (and no bad reactions, which suggests it was nothing more than a bad luck coincidence).
Every drug has side-effects. Even aspirin kills a significant number of people every year. So yes, some people will have adverse reactions to the covid vaccines. Vast amounts of data suggest they are generally minor. It's a balance, getting covid, even minor, will have far worse outcomes than vaccines (not to mention in the vast majority of cases, the worse adverse effect from the vaccine is a temporarily sore arm). That said, anyone taking the vaccine should have been advised of the risks, informed consent must be informed. I certainly felt I was advised reasonably for each of my shots. I don't believe anything can be 'perfectly safe.'
It's worth noting that putative adverse effects are very visible because there's a reporting bias, amplified by the internet and social media. Another thing to note is that you're being 'vaccinated' all the time – every interaction your immune has is, effectively vaccination. It's possible, of course, that the adjuvants and other additives have their own side-effect, though they have been well tested and such, should be minimal.
The covid vaccines easily saved millions of lives and brought the pandemic to an expedited conclusion.
-
That correlation effect is the wave that Wakeman et al. surfed with MMR, ....
Wakefield. I should remember - the twat was in my class at senior school.
-
Good spot, typing too fast. No offence intended to geriatric progrockers.
-
That correlation effect is the wave that Wakeman et al. surfed with MMR, ....
Wakefield. I should remember - the twat was in my class at senior school.
Elle Macpherson was briefly charmed :facepalm:
-
That correlation effect is the wave that Wakeman et al. surfed with MMR, children are often diagnosed with autism after receiving the MMR vaccine. It's intuitive to link the two events, but MMR is given around the time (or before) developmental autism is likely (or can be) diagnosed. In the unvaccinated, the same rates of autism are found.
It's understandable to link events, so if you have had a covid jab, any kind of illness that occurs in the period afterwards is naturally suspect. Of course, those illnesses may have happened regardless. I had a flu jab some years ago and came down with dreadful flu symptoms a day later. Maybe it was a reaction to the vaccine, maybe it was bad luck I'd been infected with flu a few days before the jab. I won't ever know. No matter how rational I may claim to be, I skipped the jab the following two years, and only recently started again (and no bad reactions, which suggests it was nothing more than a bad luck coincidence).
Every drug has side-effects. Even aspirin kills a significant number of people every year. So yes, some people will have adverse reactions to the covid vaccines. Vast amounts of data suggest they are generally minor. It's a balance, getting covid, even minor, will have far worse outcomes than vaccines (not to mention in the vast majority of cases, the worse adverse effect from the vaccine is a temporarily sore arm). That said, anyone taking the vaccine should have been advised of the risks, informed consent must be informed. I certainly felt I was advised reasonably for each of my shots. I don't believe anything can be 'perfectly safe.'
It's worth noting that putative adverse effects are very visible because there's a reporting bias, amplified by the internet and social media. Another thing to note is that you're being 'vaccinated' all the time – every interaction your immune has is, effectively vaccination. It's possible, of course, that the adjuvants and other additives have their own side-effect, though they have been well tested and such, should be minimal.
The covid vaccines easily saved millions of lives and brought the pandemic to an expedited conclusion.
This is a good summation. There is little to no Internet chatter about the emerging evidence of the increased risk of various adverse clinical diagnoses following Covid infection but these appear to be both real and life limiting for some.
At the extreme end, an anti-vax colleague suffered from a ‘chest infection’ in Oct 21 and hasn’t yet returned to work. Other more ‘normal’ infections appear to lead to increased risk of diagnosis with type 2 diabetes, various heart and lung issues and stroke over time.
Not saying Covid is special - actually, I think we dodged a bullet in this case - but getting infected to gain immunity isn’t the garden of Eden fantasy the anti-vaxxers suggest.
-
That correlation effect is the wave that Wakeman et al. surfed with MMR, ....
Wakefield. I should remember - the twat was in my class at senior school.
Super-twat at the very least, I'd have thought. Was his supper-twattery in evidence back then?
-
That correlation effect is the wave that Wakeman et al. surfed with MMR, ....
Wakefield. I should remember - the twat was in my class at senior school.
Super-twat at the very least, I'd have thought. Was his supper-twattery in evidence back then?
It pays well
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7556279/amp/Andrew-Wakefield-struck-anti-MMR-science-millionaire-lifestyle.html
-
That correlation effect is the wave that Wakeman et al. surfed with MMR, ....
Wakefield. I should remember - the twat was in my class at senior school.
Super-twat at the very least, I'd have thought. Was his supper-twattery in evidence back then?
It most certainly was! He was an arrogant shit and the only person in the 7 years of that school that I had the proverbial playground punch-up with (mainly neck-holds as I remember). My rugby training came in handy.
Yes, he appears to be doing nicely in the land of the gullible. He couldn't have stayed in the UK - he was rightly struck off.
It was one of the relatively few times that Private Eye backed the wrong horse, much to their subsequent embarrassment.