169 Kids with "mystery" Hepatitis- are they vaxxed?

a reply to: nonspecific

We can't live in bubbles or cages forever, masked and afraid to go outside. We've co-existed and evolved alongside these organisms throughout history, they're a part of nature just like us.

I talks to my daughter about any sick children where she works at, she said nothing related to this virus, no in Florida soo far.

I never said that we should?

I was saying that if we agree that a downside of lockdowns and social distancing and wearing masks is that it prevents the spread of viruses then we also have to agree that they worked as a measure to prevent the spread of covid as it was intended to do.

So so you agree that (other issues and effects aside) those measures did in fact do what was intended?

originally posted by: Grenade
a reply to: nonspecific

We can't live in bubbles or cages forever, masked and afraid to go outside. We've co-existed and evolved alongside these organisms throughout history, they're a part of nature just like us.

a reply to: nonspecific

If the intention was to risk the health of our children, elderly and vulnerable, then yes, mission accomplished.

So you are saying that they intentionally put people at risk of getting sick by taking measures that were intended to prevent the spread of viruses and did indeed prevent the spread of viruses then I'm going to say that your logic seems flawed to me.

What does the data show in non covid 19 deaths attributed to lowered immunity to other viruses in the UK?

originally posted by: Grenade
a reply to: nonspecific

If the intention was to risk the health of our children, elderly and vulnerable, then yes, mission accomplished.

a reply to: nonspecific

I'm saying they introduced mandates and measures, in what would best be described as a media driven, politicised, hysterical clusterfluck.

The whole pandemic response was never really about health, now we're just facing the consequences of the mass stupidity.

I do believe there's a hint of biological warfare, however as someone who depends on sources that would never dare report such conjecture, i won't waste our time.

If you think we should take a similar response to future pandemics then clearly we've learned nothing, even you aren't stubborn enough to think mandates and masks are totally beneficial.

originally posted by: nonspecific
So if lockdowns and masks and social distancing meant that most people did not get the colds and viruses that normally go about and therefore have reduced immunity to those colds and flu's and seasonal viruses is that not a clear indication that lockdowns and masks and social distancing are all actually effective at stopping the spread of these things?

I don't think anyone said the lockdowns weren't effective at that one little thing. It is primarily the masks and social distancing garbage that was essentially of ZERO effect.

Of course, if you lock people into their homes and no one goes anywhere... EVER... that will obviously reduce the spread (depending on the severity of the actual lockdowns) of things that spread by virtue of social activity.

It is the fact that the devastatingly negative impact of the lockdowns themselves were far, far, FAR more damaging than the virus would have been had it simply been allowed to spread normally to speed up the process of reaching real, actual herd immunity (if there is such a thing). Add in some simple, rational actions like protecting the most vulnerable, especially in situations where they are concentrated (old folks homes etc), and Covid and the last 2 1/2 years would have gone unnoticed by virtually everyone.

Spot on and it could be a factor. Dont fevers help kill the virus by raising the bodies temperature ? I am sure that it is a little more complex than that however yeah I think you may right. a reply to: rickymouse

a reply to: GlobalGold

Whew! Thank heavens health officials do not deceive!