Lost count of the number of times I've said this but the Guardian, along with the Mail have been by some distance the worst in terms of stoking fear to get clicks.
The Guardian is a left wing version of the Mail. It needs to generate clicks and it’s readership overwhelmingly wants to read anti Tory and anti Brexit articles so this is what they serve up. As the government is attempting not to impose lockdowns their editorial policy is to constantly promote anyone calling for them.
Not sure how this idiot hasn’t been thread banned for his covid and vaccine disinformation
Viruses have always mutated and in the past they’ve always mutated to a weaker strain that has ended pandemics.
Oh right - so it's all about Big Pharma then, and not helping to protect people from getting seriously ill or worse. I didn't realise Ian Brown posted on here
I've been thinking the same thing for ages. This thread has attracted a few of them over the last year or two but they seem to disappear in the end, apart from this guy.
So in your previous post you said there was no evidence that a booster protected you better than just having 2 jabs. Now it's 88% vs 70%.
Only because they are more infectious than the original - barely any difference in virulence.
I thought Delta was similar in hospitalisations/severity but was more contagious.
Overall, add in the much lower risk to normal people of hospitalisation and the evidence from hospital admissions that they aren't being hospitalised and the difference is evidently negligible.
The truth is hardly disinformation.
More basis to it than the imaginary data showing normal, double jabbed being hospitalised and dying en masse to justify a booster.
Ok Ian
And what's the truth?
that being double jabbed for the vast majority of non-elderly and vulnerable people is sufficient in protecting against any meaningful illness against Omicron.
