- This topic has 286 replies, 36 voices, and was last updated 1 year, 11 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
"One thing I can say with complete certainty is that it is a bad idea to trust the majority of experts in any domain in which both complexity and large amounts of money are involved."
Scott Adams
everybody here in this thread is a psychonaut and wants to see his favourite band live again, the needle junkies and the rebels too, so reach hands and dance together at the next show, that is, what this discussion shoud be about
@Punj
I like to look at it from a different perspective. This all is not about giving privileges to those who are vaccinated. It is about the restrictions that are imposed on those who are in danger of getting infected with the disease or spreading the disease. At the moment this includes all of us. If (and only if) it turns out that those who are vaccinated have a significantly low risk of getting infected or to put others in danger, then the restrictions cannot be justified anymore and so there is no reason to forbid these people to have a normal life including going to concerts. And that is why such a vaccination passport can make sense.
@the conscience and suntripper:
This forum is definitely not the place to discuss any offside conspiracy theories. If you are completely upset about what Bent said in this interview then go and follow artists you can agree with. For Germany I can recommend Xavier Naidoo or Michael Wendler, they are on your side. But please stop whining around here.
Looks like I've got to get into the Stone Roses then! Ian Brown has pulled out of a festival because he will not be part of anything where vaccine passports are a condition of entry.
Now that is admirable.
@ the conscience
I have not read the Arvay book but have looked him up and read a little about his thoughts regarding the vaccinations (of which there are now several being used, having been created by various organisations). I think we all should be sceptical about what we put in our body and, in relation to drugs, about the chemicals used and the processes by which they are brought to the public (or to the market, if you will). I am no fan of big pharma! Either way, though, the virus is with us, it is widespread, it trasmits much more easily and faster than flu and is much more deadly and can have dreadful long-lasting effects for some of those who recover. Given this reality, Big Pharma can either provide us with prevetative medicine (vaccines) or treatments/cures (it's a kind of "you pay me now or you pay me later" situation – if later, then lots of people will die in the meantime). I believe the former (prevention) is better than the latter (treatment/cure). In this regard, it seems clear that staying healthy through diet, exercise, mental care, care of the environment etc. are always, IMHO, better preventatives than drugs – but sometimes, those things are not enough, especially in a society that seems hell bent on destroying itself by ignoring those things. So a combination of the best possible solutions – not one thing to the exclusion of another – is what I would aim for.
I also noticed Arvay has talked about Bill Gates' involvement. Sadly, all the previous discussions I've seen about Bill Gates in this regard have come from people who also push very questionable theories, or whose ideas sit side by side on websites with people who follow QAnon, David Icke, and similar – this immediately turns me off.
@ the conscience (again)
If you want to see "all psychonauts" joining hands together, you would be advised not to charcaterise those who choose to be vaccinated as "needle junkies" (which is a clearly negative term), and those who do not choose to be vaccinated as "rebels" (which has for many many years been code for "cool"). Such charcaterisations do not bring people together, they divide them.
@ mister conclusion:
What you outline is pretty much where my head is at. I see vaccination passports as a temporary solution to enable clubs and the like to operate without the fear of their venue becoming a site for the spread of the virus. Once "herd immunity" is reached through vaccination and infection/recovery, then there would be no need for the passport.
Personally I believe vaccination should be entirely the individual's choice and if people choose not to be vaccinated for reasons of religion, vegetarianism, or whatever they happen to have read or understood about vaccinations and the virus (whether they are well informed, uninformed, or misinformed), then that's up to them.
PS I had my first vaccination shot on Sunday and am a vegetarian.
@Punj Lizard:
So glad you are being reasonable. What is the Arvay book? Did you think I'd made reference to it?
@ suntripper – ha ha, I just realised a post I had attributed to you was actually posted by the conscience! Apologies.
I'll edit my post above.
@ PunjLizard: (as I can remember) Arvay only mentionend (with scources) in which of the vaccines Gates invested, and what his role is because of the short (telescoping) testings and in the WHO
If you want to see "all psychonauts" joining hands together, you would be advised not to charcaterise those who choose to be vaccinated as "needle junkies" (which is a clearly negative term), and those who do not choose to be vaccinated as "rebels" (which has for many many years been code for "cool"). Such charcaterisations do not bring people together, they divide them.
Sorry, you are right, but maybe my sense of humour mutated after all I had to read before.
And thanx to keep a clear mind and do not judge, only because of somebody has another opinion.
And great to hear that you are a vegetarian again since last monday
People are people, but here is a simple playing with numbers you surely know. But if you like, you can call it conspiracy theory as well.
C-19 is a worldwide phenomen. There are 7.800.000.000 people living on earth.
2.600.000 people died at or with C-19
= 0,33 %. Not 2 % as mentionend anywhere in this thread.
0,33 % means 99,67% of all people worldwide died not at or with C-19
0,33 % That´s very tragic for everyone of them.
But the very most of this 0,33 % died at or with C-19 were very old, and/or very ill.
So decide yourself if 0,33 % is many or not many.
If you want to know, what also many is, or maybe much more than many…
Many peoply died in the last year because of nicotin
Many because of alcohol
Many because of hunger
Many because of eating too much or the wrong food
Many because of this disease, many of that disease…
Many rockstars, punks, hippies, psychonauts or whatever living in fear
Many people accept questionable restrictions since more than a year
Many people lost their jobs, went broke, became psychotic or depressed
Less people are able to compare and weigh up
Less people are still able for different thinking
@Punj Lizard
Having never been an 'anti-vaxxer', I am not familiar with Arvay!
Thanks again for being open to an intelligent, level-headed exploration of what flows
from Bent's intentions. I really appreciate it. I'm guessing a few quiet – perhaps
intimidated – lurkers might do too
I note you say you are not a fan of Big Pharma. I'm sure you have a good reason for that
stance. With my parents' backgrounds in dentistry and pharmacology, we pretty much
accepted the whole world of allopathic nedicine, trusting that all due care and
diligence was exercised. It was only after pharmaceutical drugs wreaked devastation in
the family, not once but twice, that we took a deep dive into, for example, how drugs are
researched, trialled and brought to market, 'peer review' and medical journals. What we
found absolutely shocked us. Perhaps you know the sort of thing?
You touch on the question of treatments and cures for COVID-19. Knowing what you know,
would you expect the pharmaceutical industry to allow cheap, out-of-patent, generic drugs
(with a long history of being safe) to be used on COVID-19 patients, when enormous sums
of money could be made with some other approach?
Doubtless you are aware of the questions being raised in the UK over the handing out of
contracts? Do you not wonder whether this might just be the tip of the iceberg?
Given your mistrust (if I am correct in using that term) of Big Pharma, if you
found that all the 'trusted' experts driving forward policy on the devastating lockdowns,
the roll-out of vaccines, etc., had deep links with the pharmaceutical industry,
wouldn't that make you just a tiny bit sceptical?
Get your shit together… all of you. What many people don’t get, this shouldn’t be about ideology. It’s just a crappy situation we got ourselves in, due too many decades of disastrous lifestyle in the Western Hemisphere. We all just try to hang on, and there are many arguments for even more different approaches to the whole situation. And all of them cause their own collateral damages, either way you do something, there will be damage. There’s no right or wrong in this (mostly, of course there is, but you know what I mean). And if some parts of the event industry decide, to install some passport system, so they can return to some kind of normal earlier, then it’s a legit decision. A decision PRO music and not AGaINST anybody. If you don’t want to get vaccinated, fine. Then you wait a little bit longer till you can visit some concerts. So what? Your decision, you’re free. Stop judging, all of you. And remember, there’s almost no one profiteering from this whole situation. Beside of Amazon. So if you want to attack someone, Jeff Bezos it is. I think, we can agree on this, if not on anything else. Sail on!
I'm really saddened and surprised by the self-righteous and dismissive attitude from some posters I've always held (and still do) in high regard. But I get that this triggers a lot of emotions. I'm also grateful that this discussion can happen at all here, which I think is more than fair, considering Bent's obnoxious comments. The last thing we need is more polarisation.
And If I could only ask you to read one related piece, it would be the Corman-Drosten Review Report on the PCR-test. If it gets too technical, at least read the points regarding the CT (cycle threshold). Then have a look at the list of names and credentials in the ICSLS consortium, and ask yourself why this isn't all over the media. It is the biggest scandal in the history of mankind.
@the conscience: If you want to play around with numbers then at least don`t do it in the dumbest possible way. Of course you don't divide the Covid deaths by earths population, because that would imply that everyone on this planet was infected by the virus. The 2% death toll (I don't know if this number is correct, but that doesn't matter) ist the percentage of infected people that died. As there are loads of cases without symptoms that number ist probably a lot higher.
I'll miss live music as much as the next guy, but I will not attend a gig unless at least I am vaccinated.
@Devotional: That so called "report" has been debunked as a piece of nonsense of people who don't know what they are talking about by a lot of sources.
For a rather scientific answer (in german) see here: https://www.ag-evolutionsbiologie.net/html/2021/drosten-pcr-borger-corona-kreationismus.html
The biggest scandal in the history of mankind is maybe instead the amount of false and idiotic thinking that corona deniers and such present every day on Facebook and whereever.
@Be.If it was not dumb enough for everybody. Here again. You are right what you say about the 2% I am full aware bout that, some other guy talked about 2% of the whole population, so I tried to clear that.
What you said is possible,but speculation, maybe conspiacy theory. I only played a dumb game with the official numbers.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.