Ali C

Senior Member
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Ali C last won the day on July 25

Ali C had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

2906 Excellent

About Ali C

  • Rank
    Alpaca packs pretty plates properly packed
  • Birthday 02/18/84

Contact Methods

  • Website URL

Profile Information

  • Gender

Previous Fields

  • County (UK Only)
  • Real Name
    Alastair Clarkson
  • Bike Ridden
  • Quick Spec
  • Country
    United Kingdom

Recent Profile Visitors

38722 profile views
  1. The only danger I can find associated with ivermectin is that it’s dangerous to take in large doses and can have adverse effects if taken alongside other drugs such as blood thinners…sounds similar to paracetamol. paracetamol was the first drug that came to mind though, if you want to compare it to something you think fits better then please do. I’m not having a go at you (I know you’re a smart guy) but from what you’ve written it suggests you think ivermectin is quite risky? It’s had billions of uses since being created and only a few hundred (I think, maybe less?) cases of severe reaction or death…I’m sure more people have died from paracetamol (though I’m sure a lot are from suicide).
  2. I feel I’m in danger of repeating myself now, that video covers pretty much everything I can think of. *new drug(s) haven’t had the same safety tests as usual and have had unprecedented numbers of reactions and deaths (but I agree this could be because more people are reporting these cases but even with extra reported cases it’s still a high % compared with ivermectin for example) *cheap, tested, safe drugs showed real life (as-in people in ICU recovered faster and others had a lesser effect when taken early) success and in (limited) testing. (Ivermectin is extremely safe btw, saying there’s a chance of an allergic reaction is like saying you refuse to take paracetamol or ibuprofen because you could have a reaction to that) *restricting freedoms for refusal to take an emergency vaccine is unethical, discriminatory and edging closer to a dictatorship (ok that last one is a little dramatic). *With the government’s non stop lies (even before Covid with things like Brexit) and non-stop corruption I can totally believe there’s something happening that they’re profiteering from, Covid is now a 100 billion dollar industry. With a less conspiracy approach I think the WHO (which I’m not against as a whole) dropped the ball with Covid and kept on offering advice only to withdraw it later and say something else but to go against their advice was dubbed “harmful” so because they didn’t really go down the ivermectin route it was deemed “harmful” to suggest we should be looking at it and social media would delete posts or even ban people…these aren’t conspiracy tin foil wearing nutters, they’re scientists and doctors trying to get alternative information to people. *Any action from me is only done with advice from my partner who is very scientific (as I mentioned she was a biomedical scientist and has studied infectious diseases and virology, knows how to read scientific papers and where to get unbiased information and respected peer reviewed reports etc), even though I have a dislike for the government I don’t act on emotions, I adhered to lockdown even though I think that was taken too far and face mask wearing even though I find them uncomfortable. Those were just inconvenient though but I want more data before I get any jabs and I don’t think that’s an unfair opinion. Don’t forget, this is a pandemic. People seem to want all tests neatly presented in a box with a nice ribbon but the reality is that things have been a bit all over the place and everyone’s still trying to make sense of it all. I just want to wait until things are calmer and there’s better tests with better data and more long-term info. I encourage people to do their own research but also be mindful that if you’re not a scientist then don’t pretend to be…find someone you can trust (ideally someone independent) and see if they can shed some light, if they come back in favor of taking the vaccine now without waiting then that’s great, maybe I’ll eventually get the same info and join you or maybe the other way round.
  3. In 40 years I’ll be happy to have made it to my 80s (well, late 70s)!
  4. Once more data comes in over a longer period and proves they’re safe then that’s fine, I’ll happily join the queue to get it but until then I’m just not happy to get it, especially when I don’t think it’s the only option. I’m not the only one who thinks this but I admit I’m in a smaller minority. As for vaccines being impossible to prove, I’m not sure what you mean? Vaccines given to me (and others) have had decades (and life cycles) of data to prove they’re safe, unless you mean that my vaccines as a baby/teenager might rear side effects a couple of generations down the line through my kids? It all comes down to the lack of data for long term side effects, like I said a few times before, I don’t think anyone’s out to purposely give us sketchy drugs and the majority of people who’ve had the vaccines are totally fine but I still think the whole situation of rushing out an emergency set of vaccines without the usual safety net of a longer trial period is sketchy, unnecessary and morally wrong when there’s potentially safer and cheaper alternatives, I’m not against Covid vaccines at all, if they had one with the long term data then I’d most likely have had the jab so I could travel to do shows in Europe.
  5. I disagree, I’m mostly going on what I’m told from a scientists point of view rather than feelings. The evidence to me is sketchy and backed up with reports and papers, if I was going by my feelings alone I’d be getting my facts from The Sun or something and ignoring the evidence I’ve been told. i still think that video describes most of my thoughts about the whole thing. I won’t deny that there'll be plenty of data coming in but it’s still vaccines that have been given emergency status and will be missing the vital long-term data you’ll usually get. I’m not saying the vaccine will kill you but I am saying there are inherent risks and I’d rather take my chances. If you feel safer taking a vaccine then go ahead, I’ve no issues with people making up their own mind. As for Ivermectin, that’s had decades of data now and out of billions of uses it’s had next to zero percent incidents. Funding for research was cut drastically since Covid vaccines became number one priority (and some reports are suspected to have been funded by peoples with ulterior motives (happens more often than you’d think in all kinds of industries)) but before ivermectin was censored some of the more genuine research papers showed it to be effective. Not much money to be made from that though.
  6. What I mean is if there are vaccines that are “safer” then why aren’t we using those instead of ones with apparent evidence of risk? I assume because they are deemed less effective?
  7. Nope, mostly hearsay and guesswork and no changes to the terms and conditions either.
  8. They do update the algorithm every few years to adjust how people see what videos they see, at first they just rewarded clicks which resulted in click-bait content, then they changed to how many minutes are watched which made people make longer videos and now they’ve done something else which is resulting in people’s videos not being recommended to people, I’m not the only one who’s channel is suffering so I’m hoping something will change soon!
  9. I’ve no clue about the different types of vaccines, I’m sure some are safer than others but I’m no scientist so I’m basing my thoughts on what others (who I deem knowledgeable in this subject) are saying…I’ve not heard these people mention that we should be taking one vaccine over the other, only that we should question the ethics of pushing them on the public without more data, this suggests to me that if there are safe vaccines then they’re not actually doing much so not worth taking and the ones that people say are effective have these suspected health ramifications.
  10. Do they tell you about the yellow card system when you get jabbed? I hadn’t heard of it until that video. I agree that needing to know more about the figures would be important (like I mentioned previously), the vaccine does seem to effect the cardiovascular system though which I feel has to increase the risk of strokes and heart attacks…it’s very hard to prove it was the drug or just a coincidence I agree, but there seem to be a lot of coincidences which worry me (Next door neighbor died from a blood clot in his pelvis the day after taking the vaccine, a cycling friend has “heart pain” months after taking his too (younger than me and in good health)). As mentioned in the video this vaccine was given emergency status which means it isn’t given the same strict safety standards as usual, rolling it out to the entire world without more data is very risky in my opinion.
  11. Jane just found this video, an interview with a member of the FLCCC (independent doctors searching for what they think is the best solution to the pandemic)…she covers a lot of the points which we’ve (well, Jane) found from researching papers and reports. It’s a 15 min watch but covers a lot of the reasons why I’m skeptical about the vaccines.
  12. I mean either choice is a bit of a gamble but with insider knowledge from someone who has a human biology degree and has worked in labs dealing with contagious diseases (and has previously been seriously ill with a mystery virus years ago) who also likes to read research papers and medical reports I’m backing the other horse in this race
  13. My issue still is that there’s no historical data on any of these vaccines. Even if they are modified versions of past drugs they should still have years of data to prove their safety before they’re even considered to be released to market. The current vaccines are still less than a year old and I’m not comfortable putting something that young in my body, maybe I would if it was a truly awful illness that was guaranteed to cause life threatening issues but Covid seems to be a bit more random with how it effects you and despite causing some pretty horrible effects in quite a few people, many more seem to be just getting slightly ill and getting recovered (we have a supply of ivermectin we would hope aid our recovery if we did catch it) so to me being fit and healthy I feel weird about 100% putting a young drug with no historical data in my body compared with a random chance of getting a virus that then has a random chance of being serious or not
  14. The thing with flu is that vaccines are just predictions on how the strain is going to mutate, that’s why it can’t be eradicated because it’s changing so much. We’ve got pretty good at working out what will work year on year with the flu and we hand out vaccines to the vulnerable because it can be deadly if your immune system is compromised. That’s why I think working on trying to eradicate Covid is the wrong move…I agree that it’s a decent idea to try and lower the waves but I think working on a way to make people healthy again once they’ve caught it would be a good option, no rushed vaccines and people’s immunity would naturally increase from exposure and recovery. I’ve just confirmed I can’t join Drop And Roll with some European shows in September due to Germany requiring a vaccine passport, quite annoying but I guess I made my bed and now I’vegotta sleep in it
  15. Just be a bit weary of holding too much opinion from looking at stats. I avoid stats because I’m not a statistician, it’s very easy to assume an answer from looking at them but often you need to know how to interpret them (which isn’t always easy) to get a more accurate outcome. In this thread alone people have quoted numbers as meaning one result only to have someone else argue that they confirm something else. Not saying don’t look at stats but just don’t rely on them too much unless you know the bigger picture