John Campbell on Vitamin D

Status
Not open for further replies.
When someone says someones great opposite is more near the truth.

So will pass on video as got by this long without listening to these internet Drs.
 
nonethewiser said:
When someone says someones great opposite is more near the truth.

So will pass on video as got by this long without listening to these internet Drs.
Click to expand...

I prefer my Doctor to be medically trained, not a nurse with a PhD on developing methods of teaching via digital media such as online videos on you tube.
 
why is this thread titled 'B12' :rofl:
 
Well, a vitamin's a vitamin.
From the quality of evidence, it'll work equally well for either I guess.
 
I’ve updated the thread title, to make it less confusing @void
 
I think the doctor was quoting from published papers so who are these know it alls on here?
My doc advised Vit D a few months ago as part of a blood sugar reduction plan and things are improving. I conclude that the Campbell critics are those who hate anti vaxxers.
 
Turnbullissimo said:
I conclude that the Campbell critics are those who hate anti vaxxers.
Click to expand...
Yes, but not just the anti vaxxer in the typical sense. Anti vaxxer and Conspiracy theorist became the go to word to slander or dismiss anyone who did or didn't catch covid before the vaccine rollout who then decided to rely on their innate and acquired immunity for protection.
 
Amity Island said:
the go to word to slander or dismiss anyone who did or didn't catch covid before the vaccine rollout who then decided to rely on their innate and acquired immunity for protection.
Click to expand...

Someone who decided against the vaccine then?

I get the impression @Amity Island that for you the term ‘anti vax’ has taken on other layers of meaning and stigma? Which seems to cause you quite a lot of frustration. :(

But at its root, surely it just means someone who was hesitant or uncertain enough about taking the recommended vaccine to decide against getting their dose, and subsequent boosters? A number of vaccines were developed and offered in the UK, that had good evidence to show they reduced risks associated with catching sars-cov2, developing Covid-19, and then either having a severe case, or potentially giving it to others who might. But some people decided against that vaccine. They were not pro-vaccine, if you like. People read things that made them worry about the vaccine and they decided against (anti) getting the vaccine (vax).

In order for a vaccination programme to be effective, it’s important that there is a significant take-up - in recent years cases of measles in the US have sky rocketed because fewer children had been vaccinated after (now discredited) stories of risk. And more cases of measles among unprotected children mean that the disease spreads, because it’s so highly contagious. And eventually lands on some poor kid who has a really bad case, with potentially life-changing, or tragically life-ending consequences.
 
everydayupsanddowns said:
that had good evidence to show they reduced risks associated with catching sars-cov2, developing Covid-19, and then either having a severe case, or potentially giving it to others who might.
Click to expand...
Did they?
"Good evidence" I think is rather lacking for the claims you then make about the "experimental mRNA product" that most were injected with.
Reducing infection was never trialled and the banning of the AZ due to myocarditis and deaths is fairly well publicised...
 
Bruce Stephens said:
Reducing infection isn't something they could have practically been done in a trial. The evidence for that came in later observational studies.
Click to expand...
There was no evidence for it ...even though it was sold on the 95% relative risk of infection reduction..
 
bulkbiker said:
There was no evidence for it ...even though it was sold on the 95% relative risk of infection reduction..
Click to expand...
You might have heard that (and likely some people said that) but the trials were clear that it was 95% relative risk reduction of laboratory confirmed COVID-19 (aka symptomatic infection confirmed with a test). I'm sure they'd have tested for asymptomatic infection too, but I think at the time routinely testing that large a group of people wasn't feasible even in the UK and US.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top