Thursday, April 15, 2021

Thursday [1 & 2]

2.  Returning to the Feedburner issue

This is not for the completely tech knowledgeable, nor for the semi-knowledgeable, it's for the barely knowledgeable, so please forgive if it talks down.  Lord Somber writes:

Ann Althouse was fussing about this. She didn't sound to pleased either.

https://althouse.blogspot.com/2021/04/followbyemail-widget-feedburner-is.html

She would not be pleased, no blogger would who uses Blogger.  We've seen so much of this going on from Big Tech - complete horsebacksidery and lack of any knowledge of how their stock-in-trade - blogs - even work. That is simply jawdropping.

Anyone in the blogging area knows that there are core offerings such as older post-newer post, navbar, sidebar, links and one of these is the ability for readers to take the "feed" from the site without having to click into the site every time.  

It depends on the blogger.  If he wants to entice readers in, he'll offer a "teaser" excerpt, which appears in one of three places - a] a "Reader" in which the reader himself has physically entered the blog url, b] post subscription button in which you can have that post sent by email to you, c] the facility for any new comment to come to you by email.

As I say, it is a core offering for a blog.  Therefore they wish to remove it, covering all that with sophistry.  Actually, what they're trying on is to gauge resistance, just as with masks, vaxxes etc, even that there is a Covid in the first place.  In short, this is political and unnecessary and the ones most likely to bitterly complain are the right political blogger, who is the target after all.

They claim, ggl, that there is a brand spanking new, bells and whistles version coming, which of course means more ratcheted control over you, the reader and by extension - us the bloggers.  That's where we are.

1.  Steve

a.  A reply (BMJ article) from Dr. K Polyacova, Consultant, London:


Dear Editor

I have had more vaccines in my life than most people and come from a place of significant personal and professional experience in relation to this pandemic, having managed a service during the first 2 waves and all the contingencies that go with that.

Nevertheless, what I am currently struggling with is the failure to report the reality of the morbidity caused by our current vaccination program within the health service and staff population. The levels of sickness after vaccination is unprecedented and staff are getting very sick and some with neurological symptoms which is having a huge impact on the health service function. Even the young and healthy are off for days, some for weeks, and some requiring medical treatment. Whole teams are being taken out as they went to get vaccinated together.

Mandatory vaccination in this instance is stupid, unethical and irresponsible when it comes to protecting our staff and public health. We are in the voluntary phase of vaccination, and encouraging staff to take an unlicensed product that is impacting on their immediate health, and I have direct experience of staff contracting Covid AFTER vaccination and probably transmitting it. In fact, it is clearly stated that these vaccine products do not offer immunity or stop transmission. In which case why are we doing it?

There is no longitudinal safety data (a couple of months of trial data at best) available and these products are only under emergency licensing. What is to say that there are no longitudinal adverse effects that we may face that may put the entire health sector at risk?

Flu is a massive annual killer, it inundates the health system, it kills young people, the old the comorbid, and yet people can chose whether or not they have that vaccine (which had been around for a long time). And you can list a whole number of other examples of vaccines that are not mandatory and yet they protect against diseases of higher consequence.

Coercion and mandating medical treatments on our staff, of members of the public especially when treatments are still in the experimental phase, are firmly in the realms of a totalitarian Nazi dystopia and fall far outside of our ethical values as the guardians of health.

I and my entire family have had COVID. This as well as most of my friends, relatives and colleagues. I have recently lost a relatively young family member with comorbidities to heart failure, resulting from the pneumonia caused by Covid.

Despite this, I would never debase myself and agree, that we should abandon our liberal principles and the international stance on bodily sovereignty, free informed choice and human rights and support unprecedented coercion of professionals, patients and people to have experimental treatments with limited safety data. This and the policies that go with this are more of a danger to our society than anything else we have faced over the last year.

What has happened to “my body my choice?” What has happened to scientific and open debate? If I don’t prescribe an antibiotic to a patient who doesn’t need it as they are healthy, am I anti-antibiotics? Or an antibiotic-denier? Is it not time that people truly thought about what is happening to us and where all of this is taking us?

b.  Over the pond:

MEDICIDE: How American Hospitals and Doctors Methodically Murder Covid Patients

https://stateofthenation.co/?p=60062

Don't conduct experiments on our children - Leigh Dundas Orange County Civil opposition.

c.  Essential reading:

Pure, Unalloyed Evil by Mike Whitney

https://www.unz.com/mwhitney/pure-unalloyed-evil/

7 comments:

  1. Section b. Video not visible stateofthenation link ok.

    ReplyDelete
  2. 1.
    This part is the inner workings of the BMJ website >[Do doctors have to have the covid-19 vaccine?
    BMJ 2021; 372 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n810 (Published 29 March 2021)
    Cite this as: BMJ 2021;372:n810

    All rapid responses
    Rapid responses are electronic comments to the editor. They enable our users to debate issues raised in articles published on bmj.com. ....]
    This is from another doctor querying the censorship of Dr. K Polyacova by the BMJ.
    "Re: Do doctors have to have the covid-19 vaccine?
    Dear Editor,
    I was very saddened to see the removal of the Rapid Response by Dr Polyakova [1].
    The letter was accepted for publication on 2nd April 2021. All responses are checked by BMJ editors before publication. It is therefore perplexing to know why this letter was acceptable prior to being shared on public media, yet 10 days later it was 'being used to spread misinformation'. I did not see any misinformation in the letter. Only a heartfelt description of staff concerned and under pressure.
    The original article [2] barely mentions that the vaccines available currently involve novel technologies under temporary licence, with phase 3 trials not due to be completed until 2023. This is very different from Hepatitis B vaccine which has a long track record of safety. If any health professional comes to harm as a result of a vaccine then this will not only be a tragedy for the staff member concerned, but will risk greatly increasing vaccine hesitancy.
    Has the BMJ changed its editorial policy on censorship?
    Dr Geoffrey Maidment

    [1]https://www.bmj.com/content/372/bmj.n810/rr-14
    [2]Do doctors have to have the covid-19 vaccine? https://www.bmj.com/content/372/bmj.n810 "

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Forgot the link to the page
      https://www.bmj.com/content/372/bmj.n810/rapid-responses

      Delete
  3. And here's the note from the editor on Polyakova's comment removal. https://www.bmj.com/content/372/bmj.n810/rr-14

    ReplyDelete
  4. Another reply to the same question. This time by Dr Teck Khong
    GP - Past President of BMA Leicestershire & Rutland



    Re: Do doctors have to have the covid-19 vaccine?
    Dear Editor,

    When I was offered Covid vaccination by my GP, I asked him which it was he was offering me. He thought they were all the same until I explained that there are 7 technological approaches being employed in the making of the 214 vaccine candidates that were in the pipeline or had reached emergency authorisation in December 2020. This impression of homogeneity has been allowed to be glibly glossed over in the mass immunisation programme.

    Equally, it is disingenuous to give the public the impression that there are no potential long term sequelae, no more than is the dearth of information that makes the ethical requirement of informed consent a mockery given the relentless and coercive push of the mass immunisation programme.

    We in the medical profession should remain not only vigilant to adverse events in the aftermath of vaccination but must also be advocates of our patients in timely intervention with the most appropriate medicines for any given clinical stage of illness presentation. Additionally, we must continue to support one another in the understanding of the pathophysiology of causally related adverse events so we are enabled to define with greater accuracy the risk factors of the vulnerable. Indeed, it would appear that many may not require vaccination while some are peculiarly susceptible not only to SARS-CoV-2 but to developing serious reactions to certain classes of the Covid vaccines.


    214 contenders for this particular poke? Bloomin' 'eck.

    ReplyDelete

Comments need a moniker of your choosing before or after ... no moniker, not posted, sorry.