[News] Nigel Farage and Reform

Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊



chip

Well-known member
Jul 7, 2003
1,465
Glorious Goodwood
There is 4000 odd studies there? Can you be a bit more specific, they are quite long.
We may be at cross-purposes here. I was just pointing out that there is a known condition associated with the transmission of electricity, not that in and of itself it causes any condition.

PubMed is the go to for health researchers. If you want to do a meta study, you probably start there. I do not want to do a meta study on this subject, I use PubMed to much as it is.
 




TomandJerry

Well-known member
Oct 1, 2013
12,559
Much as I would prefer not to have to look at the pylons and turbines that spoil my view across the Mersey estuary, and don'twant the solar farm that has also been proposed as that will be another eyesore, I am not voting Reform just because of my nimbyism.

Although another of people did and I am now lumbered with a Reform MP making nonsense noises all over.

The care home my wife is in had to recruit staff from Nigeria because they couldn't get any locals to work there, so I am in favour or more boats, not fewer.
Reform support immigration of skilled workers.
 


Cheshire Cat

The most curious thing..




BadFish

Huge Member
Oct 19, 2003
19,794
Back when it happened, the report wasn't debunked at the time, I believe ? (Not sure when it was debunked) And that opinion has been long onto
Any link between vaccines and autism has been debunked, it doesn't matter when it happened. There is no link between the two.
 




BadFish

Huge Member
Oct 19, 2003
19,794
I support the stopping of boat crossings, too many people are dying in the ocean.
Me too, let them apply in France and then bring them over while their claims are processed.

The Tories flatly refused this idea a couple of years ago if I recall correctly.
 


chip

Well-known member
Jul 7, 2003
1,465
Glorious Goodwood
There is 4000 odd studies there? Can you be a bit more specific, they are quite long.
if you put "power cable leukemia" into PubMed you get three results which show no assiation between power cables and leukemia, including one UK study. It's very useful to check these sorts of claims.
 


BadFish

Huge Member
Oct 19, 2003
19,794
We may be at cross-purposes here. I was just pointing out that there is a known condition associated with the transmission of electricity, not that in and of itself it causes any condition.

PubMed is the go to for health researchers. If you want to do a meta study, you probably start there. I do not want to do a meta study on this subject, I use PubMed to much as it is.
Yes I think we are. I was asking for you to point me to the study you were talking about that shows the figures you quoted.

Like you say I don't want to wade through 4000 studies.
 








Harry Wilson's tackle

Harry Wilson's Tackle
NSC Patron
Oct 8, 2003
59,774
Faversham
The MMR vaccine and Autism issue has a direct impact on someone with in my family which I won't go into detail on here, it's sometimes difficult to separate the truth from the different varieties of the truth that people tell
It may be, but it shouldn't be.
Read up on what actual experts (in the MMR case, medical epidemiologists) say.
There are no varieties of truth about MMR. It does not cause autism.
Medicines are judged on risk versus benefit.
It is unequivocal that the risk of adversity from the vaccine (there is risk, but not autism)
is disproportionately low compared with the risk on bot being vaccinated.

The numbers are very similar to the seatbelt data.
The benefit of wearing a seatbelt vastly outweighs the risk of dying from wearing a seatbelt.
This does not mean that in a freak accident you may get trapped by the seatbelt,
and burn to death in your car, but the numbers are clear - benefit outweighs risk.
(In fact MMR is not documented to have killed a single person)

Now, if someone in your family had a freak accident and died due to seatbelt-inflicted incapacitation,
I would be very disappointed, and in fact angry, if you started promoting the notion
that wearing seatbelts is dangerous.

I would be very annoyed if you said
" we cannot be sure that seatbelts are safe"
or more precisely "we cannot be sure that seatbelts are always safe"

I would be increasingly annoyed if you added
"I'm not saying that you shouldn't wear a seatbelt, but we don't really understand the risks"

Do you understand now how personal experience and the natural human ability to see patterns
that don't exist can trigger a survival reflex, because we are hyper-tuned to easily avoidable risk exposure?

And can you not see that in the case of MMR the hazards of not vaccinating are grossly disproportionate to the miniscule statistical risks of adversity?

I would suggest reading more on the topic but in fact it may be better for you to read less.
To still be 'conflicted' about MMR after all these years does not bode well.
 




TomandJerry

Well-known member
Oct 1, 2013
12,559
It may be, but it shouldn't be.
Read up on what actual experts (in the MMR case, medical epidemiologists) say.
There are no varieties of truth about MMR. It does not cause autism.
Medicines are judged on risk versus benefit.
It is unequivocal that the risk of adversity from the vaccine (there is risk, but not autism)
is disproportionately low compared with the risk on bot being vaccinated.

The numbers are very similar to the seatbelt data.
The benefit of wearing a seatbelt vastly outweighs the risk of dying from wearing a seatbelt.
This does not mean that in a freak accident you may get trapped by the seatbelt,
and burn to death in your car, but the numbers are clear - benefit outweighs risk.
(In fact MMR is not documented to have killed a single person)

Now, if someone in your family had a freak accident and died due to seatbelt-inflicted incapacitation,
I would be very disappointed, and in fact angry, if you started promoting the notion
that wearing seatbelts is dangerous.

I would be very annoyed if you said
" we cannot be sure that seatbelts are safe"
or more precisely "we cannot be sure that seatbelts are always safe"

I would be increasingly annoyed if you added
"I'm not saying that you shouldn't wear a seatbelt, but we don't really understand the risks"

Do you understand now how personal experience and the natural human ability to see patterns
that don't exist can trigger a survival reflex, because we are hyper-tuned to easily avoidable risk exposure?

And can you not see that in the case of MMR the hazards of not vaccinating are grossly disproportionate to the miniscule statistical risks of adversity?

I would suggest reading more on the topic but in fact it may be better for you to read less.
To still be 'conflicted' about MMR after all these years does not bode well.
I appreciate the response, it's just a sensitive matter for me personally. I suppose that's where my conflicting thoughts come from.
 


BadFish

Huge Member
Oct 19, 2003
19,794
I appreciate the response, it's just a sensitive matter for me personally. I suppose that's where my conflicting thoughts come from.
I can empathise with this as we went through a similar through process after diagnosis.
 


chip

Well-known member
Jul 7, 2003
1,465
Glorious Goodwood
Yes I think we are. I was asking for you to point me to the study you were talking about that shows the figures you quoted.

Like you say I don't want to wade through 4000 studies.
And that's often why these ideas persist. I remember that when lead was removed from petrol a similar notion existed that benzine caused childhood leukemia because children sat in the rear of a car close to the fuel tank filler.

the numbers for electromagnetic hypersensitivity came from here: https://www.webmd.com/a-to-z-guides/electromagnetic-hypersensitivity
 




Harry Wilson's tackle

Harry Wilson's Tackle
NSC Patron
Oct 8, 2003
59,774
Faversham
It's hard to try and understand why they voted that way if they can't explain.

I think most people recognise that Brighton is different, many of us love it because of this. As you say though Brighton's vote also counts.

How are you suggesting we do things differently on here? I am confused.
I understand both your and @Commander 's points of view.

I think the answer is that most people who vote Remain don't really want to go into too many details.

This is partly because it involves explaining a range of things that are not true (mostly around how easily Nigel can fix all the problems with a click of his fingers - so far untested so something to cling on to).

And it is partly because of things most 'nice' people don't like to broadcast:
"Nigel will stick it to all those people I don't like and who I blame for the state of the nation":
(any individual can pick and choose - Reform is entirely inclusive and who cares if targets are conflicted)
Foreigners,
people ramming their perverted sexuality in my face,
womens libbers,
people playing the 'mental health card',
blacks who won't integrated into my culture,
blacks who have 'integrated' and have taken my job/shagged my bird,
muslims,
football hooligans,
people who are against ordinary white blokes having banter at the football,
people who can't take a joke,
the nanny state,
social workers,
nonces,
cyclists


and so on.

The question then is fourfold:
Can labour recognise the grievances of these people?
Can labour do anything to help them feel better?
How much damage will be done to labour if they rightly tell these people to grow up or f*** off?
How much damage will be done to Labour if they try to pander to this tosh?


The problem is there is mass of voters who don't care about details.
They seem like football fans who would rather lose a match than get a correct decision via VAR
They just want visceral excitement
They want to feel they are getting the upper hand over all those they feel as threat
They cannot be shown they are voting against their own best interest.
They are certain, just like the folk who no longer read NSC because it is woke.
They are unreachable.

They will change only when they suffer and can see this is because of Reform
This will require Reform exercising government power, because locally failure can be blamed on Deep State.
These people are not reading NSC.
They are not reading the BBC.
They don't even know anyone who thinks differently.

How did we allow Farage to grow this filthy mess? :down:
 




Harry Wilson's tackle

Harry Wilson's Tackle
NSC Patron
Oct 8, 2003
59,774
Faversham
I appreciate the response, it's just a sensitive matter for me personally. I suppose that's where my conflicting thoughts come from.
PM me if you wish. I suspect you may be stuck in a possible 'cause and effect' conundrum, perhaps with associated unjustified guilt.

As a parent I still blame everything bad that happens to my son on something I did wrong as a dad.
I know it is probably not true, but sometimes it is an overwhelming feeling :down:
 


Sid and the Sharknados

Well-known member
NSC Patron
Sep 4, 2022
5,896
Darlington
And care workers don’t count. What about hospitality and seasonal agricultural? Jobs locals don’t want due to seasonal nature so can’t base life around them easily.
Fortunately, once all of Lincolnshire has been dug up to install pointless cables, there won't be any farms needing seasonal workers left.

Now I've thought about it, they really have considered everything. I know who I'm voting for at the next election.
 




TomandJerry

Well-known member
Oct 1, 2013
12,559
I understand both your and @Commander 's points of view.

I think the answer is that most people who vote Remain don't really want to go into too many details.

This is partly because it involves explaining a range of things that are not true (mostly around how easily Nigel can fix all the problems with a click of his fingers - so far untested so something to cling on to).

And it is partly because of things most 'nice' people don't like to broadcast:
"Nigel will stick it to all those people I don't like and who I blame for the state of the nation":
(any individual can pick and choose - Reform is entirely inclusive and who cares if targets are conflicted)
Foreigners,
people ramming their perverted sexuality in my face,
womens libbers,
people playing the 'mental health card',
blacks who won't integrated into my culture,
blacks who have 'integrated' and have taken my job/shagged my bird,
muslims,
football hooligans,
people who are against ordinary white blokes having banter at the football,
people who can't take a joke,
the nanny state,
social workers,
nonces,
cyclists


and so on.

The question then is fourfold:
Can labour recognise the grievances of these people?
Can labour do anything to help them feel better?
How much damage will be done to labour if they rightly tell these people to grow up or f*** off?
How much damage will be done to Labour if they try to pander to this tosh?


The problem is there is mass of voters who don't care about details.
They seem like football fans who would rather lose a match than get a correct decision via VAR
They just want visceral excitement
They want to feel they are getting the upper hand over all those they feel as threat
They cannot be shown they are voting against their own best interest.
They are certain, just like the folk who no longer read NSC because it is woke.
They are unreachable.

They will change only when they suffer and can see this is because of Reform
This will require Reform exercising government power, because locally failure can be blamed on Deep State.
These people are not reading NSC.
They are not reading the BBC.
They don't even know anyone who thinks differently.

How did we allow Farage to grow this filthy mess? :down:
Cameron opened Pandora's box when he decided to hold a referendum
 


pocketseagull

Well-known member
Dec 29, 2014
1,504
Anti vaccine misinformation is now mainstream in the US with nutjob RFK in government, looks like that's now permeating back over here where it's been mostly a settled issue.

To be clear, unvaccinated children are now dying of preventable illnesses in America because of this.
 


Albion and Premier League latest from Sky Sports


Top