Andrew Bridgen MP

[serrac]

2 hours ago, Gordon R said:

serrac - Is cut and paste your only skill? I would have hoped that your school would be teaching you to think for yourself.

You asked for facts, I gave you facts which prove your original assertion wrong.
The format is irrelevant - they are still facts.

[Gordon R]

serrac- what you posted proves nothing. 

[timps]

49 minutes ago, Gordon R said:

serrac- what you posted proves nothing. 

Agree with you totally Gordon.

The OneAmerica is often miss quoted, the CDC explains that excess deaths are associated with COVID-19 directly or indirectly. The rise in fatalities is largely associated with COVID-19, either directly from the disease or from other causes such as health care shortages, overburdened health care systems or complications from catching COVID 19 to people with ongoing health issues who die many months later.

The OneAmerica CEO did NOT state these are not being filed as Covid deaths but people commenting on his statement have.

It might even be true that they are not filed as COVID deaths but as someone once said there are Lies, damned lies, and statistics. The figures are correct but the inference and interpretation are not.

I could use official UK government figures to write a paper with pretty graphs that prove the figures mean wearing seatbelts causes more fatalities. It’s a rubbish and false conclusion but the figures prove it if you don’t give them context.

Out of all fatalities on uk roads 23% were not wearing seatbelts and 77% were wearing  seatbelts (official figures).

The bare bones figures cannot be argued, however the inference that you are less likely to be killed not wearing a seatbelt than wearing a seatbelt can be.

Out of all my family or friends we only had one unexpected death, a blood clot, someone tried to link that to the vaccine until his widow pointed out he was unvaccinated. That same someone still wouldn’t accept it though.

I’m in no way stating there are no deaths related to the vaccine alone, just there isn’t as yet the smoking gun proof of mass deaths due to the vaccine alone as some would have you believe.

 

 

[Gordon R]

Timps - I cannot disagree. The stark choice is whether Bridgen is a man with high morals, who raised the issue with some very dubious information, or an idiot. I chose the latter and so did his colleagues on both sides of the House.

[Rewulf]

40 minutes ago, Gordon R said:

Timps - I cannot disagree. The stark choice is whether Bridgen is a man with high morals, who raised the issue with some very dubious information, or an idiot. I chose the latter and so did his colleagues on both sides of the House.

That's an interesting one.

Whether he's right ,wrong , or an idiot , the fact is he raised the issue because he thought it was the right thing to do, at the probable expense of his parliamentary career and reputation.

A rarity in that den of thieves and hypocrites. 

[Gordon R]

Or an attention seeker.

[Walker570]

Bridgen is not an attention seeker. He is one of the most diligent MPs we have in the House and has the guts to stand up and say what many of the public believe.  He is hated by the Globalist elites which says it all.

[oowee]

4 minutes ago, Walker570 said:

Bridgen is not an attention seeker  He is hated by the Globalist elites which says it all.

Who are they? 

[johnphilip]

11 minutes ago, Walker570 said:

Bridgen is not an attention seeker. He is one of the most diligent MPs we have in the House and has the guts to stand up and say what many of the public believe.  He is hated by the Globalist elites which says it all.

An interesting video follow up interview  by Andrew Bridgen . And gives his view .

 

[12gauge82]

9 minutes ago, oowee said:

Who are they? 

Another problem, many hide in the shadows while bribing corrupt eu commissioners. 

[JohnfromUK]

A high court judge's professional view on Bridgen;

In April 2022 High Court Judge Brian Rawlings ruled against Bridgen, stating that he "lied under oath and behaved in an abusive, arrogant and aggressive manner", was "an unreliable and combative witness who tried to conceal his own misconduct", and "gave evasive and argumentative answers and tangential speeches that avoided answering the questions".

[oowee]

18 minutes ago, 12gauge82 said:

Another problem, many hide in the shadows while bribing corrupt eu commissioners. 

🤣 who Bridgen?

17 minutes ago, JohnfromUK said:

A high court judge's professional view on Bridgen;

In April 2022 High Court Judge Brian Rawlings ruled against Bridgen, stating that he "lied under oath and behaved in an abusive, arrogant and aggressive manner", was "an unreliable and combative witness who tried to conceal his own misconduct", and "gave evasive and argumentative answers and tangential speeches that avoided answering the questions".

👍

[12gauge82]

17 minutes ago, oowee said:

🤣 who Bridgen?

👍

Really legit organisation the EU! 

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/dec/13/eu-vice-president-eva-kaili-faces-stripped-role-amid-qatar-corruption-scandal

[serrac]

On 14/01/2023 at 15:28, timps said:

The OneAmerica CEO did NOT state these are not being filed as Covid deaths but people commenting on his statement have.

I think you'd have to have a pre-existing agenda to interpret Davison's actual words in any other way:

"What the data is showing to us is that the deaths that are being reported as COVID deaths greatly understate the actual death losses among working-age people from the pandemic. It may not all be COVID on their death certificate, but deaths are up just huge, huge numbers.”

The figures are correct but the inference and interpretation are not.
And your evidence for this is?
 

I could use official UK government figures to write a paper with pretty graphs
The charts I posted from John Hopkins are merely raw-data plots of excess deaths against time - there is little scope to manipulate what they tell us.  The only addition was the graphic showing the advent of the vaccine program which establishes the temporal relationship between the vaccine and the excess deaths.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4589117/
"Temporality is perhaps the only criterion which epidemiologists universally agree is essential to causal inference. Consider that Rothman and Greenland, despite finding a lack of utility or practicality in any of the other criteria, referred to temporality as “inarguable” [25]. Hill explained that for an exposure-disease relationship to be causal, exposure must precede the onset of disease. Thus, epidemiologic study designs which ensure a temporal progression between the two measures are more persuasive in causal inference. "

I’m in no way stating there are no deaths related to the vaccine alone, just there isn’t as yet the smoking gun proof of mass deaths due to the vaccine alone as some would have you believe.

I believe the John Hopkins charts in themselves are very close to that standard of proof.  If you don't agree, what standard of proof would satisfy you?

 

 

[serrac]

On 14/01/2023 at 14:35, Gordon R said:

serrac- what you posted proves nothing. 

If we hold the Covid vaccine to the same standard, there is no *proof* that:

The vaccines reduce transmission of Covid
The vaccines reduce the severity if symptoms
Anyone who was vaccinated and survived Covid would have died if they weren't vaccinated
Anyone who was unvaccinated and died of covid would have survived if they were vaccinated
etc etc

Since there is no proof the vaccines provide any benefit, yet by your own admission they do cause a certain amount of adverse events, do you not think the sensible thing would be to pause the vaccine program until the actual benefits and risks are rigorously assessed?

 

[oowee]

1 hour ago, serrac said:

If we hold the Covid vaccine to the same standard, there is no *proof* that:

The vaccines reduce transmission of Covid
The vaccines reduce the severity if symptoms
Anyone who was vaccinated and survived Covid would have died if they weren't vaccinated
Anyone who was unvaccinated and died of covid would have survived if they were vaccinated
etc etc

Since there is no proof the vaccines provide any benefit, yet by your own admission they do cause a certain amount of adverse events, do you not think the sensible thing would be to pause the vaccine program until the actual benefits and risks are rigorously assessed?

 

This is not correct. The CDC have ample evidence that the vaccinnes are effective. They have been rogorously tested on the population. 

[12gauge82]

1 hour ago, oowee said:

This is not correct. The CDC have ample evidence that the vaccinnes are effective. They have been rogorously tested on the population. 

The vaccines have been tested on the population you say? 🤔

[Gordon R]

oowee - some are in denial. 🙂

[oowee]

22 minutes ago, 12gauge82 said:

The vaccines have been tested on the population you say? 🤔

 

Just now, Gordon R said:

oowee - some are in denial. 🙂

🤣 we all have a part to play in that 😁

[12gauge82]

13 minutes ago, oowee said:

 

🤣 we all have a part to play in that 😁

😂😉

[timps]

4 hours ago, serrac said:

I believe the John Hopkins charts in themselves are very close to that standard of proof.  If you don't agree, what standard of proof would satisfy you?

The John Hopkins charts make no mention of deaths due to the vaccine or even how many of those dead people are actually vaccinated, nor do the team at John Hopkins make that inference.

The first graphic you posted for Thailand claims that mass vaccination started on 24th of February 2021 when the graph is nice and flat, unfortunately mass Vaccination started on June 7th 2021 when the death rate was already increasing, and is the start of a third wave and nothing to do with mass vaccine roll out.

https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/thailand-starts-long-awaited-covid-19-vaccination-drive-2021-06-07/

“BANGKOK, June 7 (Reuters) - Thailand kicked off a long-awaited mass vaccination campaign on Monday as the country battles its third and worst wave of the coronavirus epidemic.”

There are plenty of other sources should you not like Reuters conformation of date. Add to that the graphic also fails to address the causes of the two other previous spikes in deaths before mass vaccination started.

https://coronavirus.jhu.edu/region/thailand

When you look at ALL the data on the Thailand chart there is no proof at all that vaccines are the cause, as vaccines cannot cause a mass spike in deaths before they are administered in a mass roll out.

Just like my seatbelt analogy, 73% of fatalities were wearing seatbelts but I neglected to mention the other figure, 93% of drivers wear seatbelts, it alters the interpretation. Failing to mention the previous 2 spikes and the third one well underway before mass vaccination starts alters the inference of the chart considerably.

As to the other charts I haven’t bothered to look as when the first one is so easily proven as false and unreliable, I am not going to waste time on the others.

As I said, the John Hopkins figures are correct just the inference and interpretation is so far wide of the mark its laughable. 
 

[Gordon R]

timps - I appreciate your proper response, but worry that it will fall on deaf ears. People just cut and paste, without bothering to check whether what they are posting is accurate, relevant or in the proper context.

[oowee]

39 minutes ago, Gordon R said:

timps - I appreciate your proper response, but worry that it will fall on deaf ears. People just cut and paste, without bothering to check whether what they are posting is accurate, relevant or in the proper context.

[serrac]

19 hours ago, timps said:

unfortunately mass Vaccination started on June 7th 2021 when the death rate was already increasing,

 

According to Wikipedia vaccination rollout started in Thailand on 28th Feb 2021

[henry d]

11 minutes ago, serrac said:

According to Wikipedia vaccination rollout started in Thailand on 28th Feb 2021

Wiki eh?

How about Reuters?