A Daily Sceptic reader sent us the letter he received recently from the Office for National Statistics, a Government body, in which it states that “having had a COVID-19 infection before usually gives a stronger immune response than vaccination”.
Our bodies respond to infection and to vaccination in slightly different ways. Having had a COVID-19 infection before usually gives a stronger immune response than vaccination. To get a similar level of protection from vaccination alone, a higher level of antibodies is needed.
Given how often this has been denied by Government scientists and advisers keen to encourage those who’ve been previously infected to get vaccinated anyway, this is an important admission.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
All this shall come to pass when there is a Reform UK Government if they keep their promise for a Great Repeal Bill and reversal of other lunacy regarding Net Zero and immigration.
What Labour is doing is only building on what the “Conservatives” did beforehand. The Con-servatives cannot be trusted to undo what Labour is doing and it is likely they will just add to it.
It will be up to the electorate.
Has Reform pledged to repeal Net Zero?
FUNDING OF REFORM UK PLANS SAVINGS PLEDGES Policy Area Immigration Savings Employer Immigration Tax Energy Savings – tax subsidies & scrap Net Zero Benefit Saving – 1 million plus back to work Transport & Utilities Savings Slash wasteful Government spending Annualised Savings Over 5 Year Electoral Term Amount in £ billions £5 £4 £30 £15 £5 Save £5 in 100 incl govt depts. quangos, commissions Stop bank interest on QE reserves Cut foreign aid by 50% £50 £35 £6 Sub-Total Potential Savings = £150 billion pa = Almost £3,000 per Adult
Reform_UK_Our_Contract_with_You.pdf
Is that scrapping the Climate Change Act? Or is it just some part of it as part of their funding plans?
Have they come out unambiguously like Trump and said – this climate change stuff is a scam, we’re done with it. We are going to abolish the Climate Change Act? Or are they speaking out of both sides of their mouth and trying to “soften” the Net Zero stuff, because it’s economically very painful, while trying not to say too much about whether climate change is an existential problem or not?
No mention of climate change in general or the act, lots of reference to “scrap net zero”. Maybe that’s fine detail they don’t feel they need to include, maybe they think the appeal to people’s pockets is a better way to tackle it than trying to argue about “the science”. Maybe they would be right about that. They are the best of the “mainstream” parties on this, by far. Would they deliver? I guess I would like to find out.
Quite straightforward really – until China and India do anything about it there is no point the UK destroying its economy and industry for Net Zero. As we know, Two Tier Kier will be talking with a melodious voice to match Richard Burton before either of them do anything towards Net Zero.
If more is required, the flaws in Net Zero can be highlighted and the work of Bjorn Lomborg used to show that adaption is the only affordable route forward. So at no point do you need to go near the fact that CO2 has no measurable effect on the climate.
I like the adaptation argument.
Maybe Reform are best on offer
But I don’t think the climate industrial complex can be dismantled without destroying the fundamental premise.
One doesn’t have to get into a debate about “the science”. They can do what Trump has done, which is declare it a hoax and everything else can follow logically.
The climate people haven’t imposed their agenda by proving their case scientifically. They’ve declared it so and then fabricated and cherry picked evidence to construct a case.
In short, this is a battle won by force of persuasion, not of evidence, and a lot of compulsion. And you can’t bring people along if they still fear a climate catastrophe, no matter how expensive.
When we were in the midst of the covid terror when everyone had been terrified to death it was very clear to me that the only way the nightmare ended was whenever people lost their fear and couldn’t be manipulated by fear any more. And that is pretty much how it was. It happened by itself when every man and his dog caught the “omicron” variant, despite several jabs, could see they weren’t dying and the fear dissolved.
Climate change will be the same. The moment people stop believing it, the con will end. Only then.
You may be right. I think it’s hard to tell. My gut feel is that people SAY they are bothered about “climate change” but while some are true believers, others just say they are because they think it’s what’s expected of them and if someone tells them their energy bills will drop like a stone their “fear” will evaporate. I think the “fear” is a lot more distant than “covid”, for most.
That’s true. It’s not as real and visceral for most.
And yet the Heritage party proudly proclaims to ditch Agenda 2030 from day one. I suppose Reform is the best of the worst bunch available.
As explained in a recent Zerohedge article, the UK will become a tech backwater if doesn’t allow full encryption.
Ad that to all the other ways it’s a backwater – manufacturing, energy – and the future doesn’t look too bright.
Oh to be an online fly on the wall inside Number 10, Number 11 or Labour Head Office, spying at the interface between Socialism, Theatre of the Absurd and Pure Comedy Gold.
Off-T
A first class article pointing out how the left is destroying Western civilisation with its insistence on immigration. We MUST stop this before it’s too late and end all aid.
https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2025/02/rush_was_right_about_illegal_immigration.html
A well-written article indeed. Thank you. (So refreshing to see “presently” used correctly for once.)
Yeah that’s a real throwback word that my dad used to use. Old fashioned as a mile of bibles!
Maybe I don’t fully appreciate things but the only thing that Apple’s compliance with the UK government’s diktat would result in would be that users who are concerned about privacy would move to a different platform.
Apple would lose business and the government would still not have access to encrypted messages.
Or am I missing something?
The only thing you’re missing I think is – which other platform? Apple is unusual in that its business model is based on hardware & software sales and subscriptions. I can’t think of another tech manufacturer that wouldn’t be tempted to sell its influence over your behaviour.
Over the years, Apple’s stance on security has become one its major USPs. I can’t see the company complying, certainly not to a wimp like Starmer.
Should such ‘backdoors’ come to pass I imagine that any canny lawyer could argue that their clients’ security had been breached and therefore evidence gathered this way might not be permitted in court
The fruit of the poison tree doctrine is not something that English law appears to care about, at least on the prosecution side. If TPTB have it, they will use it even if obtained unlawfully. Don’t trust the establishment, it is not on the side of the common man.
As the Author so rightly says, it is the fact they have tried, which is most frightening, as it shows a level of ignorance that is terrifying.