Distaval can be given with complete safety to pregnant women and nursing mothers without adverse effect on mother or child. please log in to view this image
https://bnf.nice.org.uk/drug/ibuprofen.html#cautions Amongst others... Specific side-effects Uncommon With oral use headache; nausea... Medicine moves on, nothing is 100% safe and if we worried about every medical risk / contraindication we would probably all be dead by now or at least have worse headaches
Hang on. How are these stats compiled? Have all 40,000 people in the trial been exposed to COVID-19? What is the chance that only 8 people trialling the vaccine have had any meaningful exposure to the virus?
Should be interesting Fair play we all use wiki One prominent Oxford University scientist told MailOnline using Wikipedia to guide Britain through the crisis was 'absolutely unacceptable', describing it as a 'damning reflection of our lack of preparedness'. Professor Ian Hall, deputy chair of the SAGE subgroup SPI-M, said: 'The public may be surprised that we were using Wikipedia to get data very early on in the pandemic, but that was really the only data that was publicly available that we could access.' The revelations will further dent public confidence in SAGE's use of data at a time where Boris Johnson pledged to 'follow the science', including the most criticised model that forecasted 500,000 Covid-19 deaths in the UK during the first wave and was used to shut down Britain. It's unclear if data from Wikipedia was used by the team at Imperial led by Professor Neil Ferguson, who resigned from SAGE in May after having secret trysts with his married lover while lecturing Britain on the need to stay apart in Lockdown to stop the spread of the killer virus. The new documentary 'Lockdown 1.0 – Following the Science?', which airs on BBC Two tonight at 9pm, also reveals:
if only the Government still had the eminent Sir David King (Wan to his mates) we could have obtained all the information by endlessly thumbing though ancient tomes of leather bound medical encyclopaedia and ancient parchments to get the information rather than log onto the internet which is clearly a load of bollocks created by the spawn of lucifer
Might the UK vaccine being developed be the real good news we've been waiting for. Easier to store, less expensive and showing all the right signs with published results expected by Christmas... 100 million units ordered by uk government...
The vaccine isn't the magic bullet everybody is thinking it will be. Taking it won't make you immune, it will just make you less sick. You have the flu jab, but it doesn't stop you getting the flu, it just increases your body's capabilities in terms of fighting it and reduces your symptoms. You can still infect other people. This is why anti-vax theory is so dangerous, people who don't get the vaccine will be relying on those that do to provide herd immunity, but if enough people don't get it because they're worried about Bill Gates putting little microchips (I've always just eaten them in boxes of three because you only get about six chips in a box, the ****s them) into people to track them, there could be a problem. Thankfully, we seem to have more sense than to allow such wild conspiracies to propagate so hopefully this will give us a platform to build on.
I blame the Anti-Vax stuff on that Dyson bloke and find it amusing that those worrying about microchips communicating this on there mobile phones...
My point exactly. Like many of these social media fuelled theories, they fall apart as soon as you start poking holes.
Don't get the vac. They're going to inject a chip into you and from then on, they will control you and make you do whatever they want you to do. This stuff is hilarious. But then again, its not funny at all. Why? Because too many people really believe it. Covid does seem to be having an effect on people's mental health.
They do it because social media has run riot with freedom of speech. We all have it, we know we have it, but the second somebody suggests a bit of responsibility, people go mental because they feel they are being infringed. Again, it didn't use to be like that. People who never had a voice can now broadcast their thoughts to millions of people and the balance of probability suggests that there will be some who agree with that person and that's how it starts. Because content isn't really filtered very well, more of this harmful stuff is getting into the mainstream. The likes of Facebook and Twitter want to be seen as bastions of free speech, but it's gone too far the other way, it's moved away from people saying "no, that's bollocks" to "oh, let him get on with it, it's harmless". Everybody has a right to an opinion, but there's no obligation for anybody to take that opinion seriously and wires appear to be crossed because people take disagreement as infringement. I know a lot will disagree with me, but if social media didn't allow bullshit like that in the first place, it would remove the option of people believing it. Just can it at the source, make it clear that it's total bollocks from the outset. That way, if they really wanted crank conspiracy theories they can look them up in the obscure corners of the Internet where they originate from and then think about them in their own place, rather than sharing potentially harmful material and guiding the easily led down a somewhat dark path. People actually complained that stuff has been fact checked, but why shouldn't it be? If untruths can be prevented from spreading then that's a good thing, especially in the midst of a crisis.
So what of the MSM, are we to believe and trust them implicitly,don't they have a responsibility to deliver fact or are they immune from criticism?
On the back of the recent Danish study on face masks come this concluding they don't make a difference but hand hygiene makes some difference https://www.cochranelibrary.com/cdsr/doi/10.1002/14651858.CD006207.pub5/full https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-facemasks-idUSKBN27Y1YW
The Danish research was only on what protection was gained by the wearer. It's fairly well accepted, I think, that the main reason for wearing masks was to prevent the wearer infecting others.
Hang on - give the full results on none at all. what it actually says is a mask cannot stop you getting the virus but it can stop you spreading the virus 2 totally separate things
