[WO/Hat-Gang Only - MODERATED] The fucking COVID vax thread (No hat? Fuck off!)

[OutOfMemory]

I'm a pro-vaxxer. Surprised?
Let me explain: I see conventional, sterilizing vaccines (measles, smallpox...), which underwent a full approval process and turned out to be +99,999% safe as a gain for humanity. I also most likely will welcome the upcoming vaccines on the market that are about to finish phase-3, use the full, sterilized virus. These type of vaccines are not as "effective" as mRNA, so they say, but remember that the mRNA vaxx weren't tested as thoroughly, study details were classified by their vendors, while you can read something about their true effectiveness (EDIT: and (un)safety, most important) out of the stats made in the last year, which you also have to search for under the radar sometimes.

I am always open to criticism on (conventional, safe, correctly reviewed) vaccines, too. I don't try to paint the world using only black and white.

A person that believes in safe, effective vaccines is not in my mind a "fanatical pro-vaxxer". I too believe in safe, effective vaccines, so does that make me a pro-vaxxer?

Had 3 shots .lived with 2 people while they had the virus,shared bathrooms and bed but I never tested positive for covid so in my case it worked.

Or so you believe. Typical logical fallacy on display.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5362774.msg59044083#msg59044083

For me it's a ballance of risk. My age I smoke(green) and don't like the prospect of suffocating

I can only go on my own experience.

Can't be bothered to squabble with anyone,especially here.
It's every man for himself as I see it


Like I said I'm pro choice 😎

For the record I had 2×Oxford 1× moderna booster

While cannabinoid acid(s) in the (green) herbs are good against catching and widly replicating SARS-CoV-2, too.
I think i even posted a link to the study here. Can't remember if it was in-vitro or in-vivo study.

But whatevs, it's your life. Just don't support mandates, it's tyranny.

Clearly. And they are used (but less useful) to keep the wrecked health system running (more like going, but yeah).
What i am so upset about is that even when it's "individual choice" people base their choice on incomplete or faked information.
Vendors say mRNA is safe, so they have to be safe, right?
We know a lot better now, but we're still a minority.
People are manipulated into making "right" choices for too long now. Either we are fuck dumb as a species or this circus will blow up soon.

[1713832157]

1713832157

[1713832157]

1713832157

[1713832157]

1713832157

[vapourminer]

But it's kind of sad to some of us, that you folks that thought so little of the ability of your own innate immune system to handle things, that you rushed out to get an experimental, risky vaccine shot (perhaps multiple times) with an absolutely horrible track record.

i support giving MY immune system a heads up as to what may be coming down the pike at it.

yes thats right i dont fight fair with infections, ill take whatever advantage i can get and hand it to my immune system to take care of.

i mean its not the SHOT that helps prevent severe infections, its still the immune system that does the fighting.

[suchmoon]

Keep in mind that with 2.7M+ ADRs and 18,000 recorded deaths (~1% of underreported deaths in VAERS) in a year

Another debunked nonsense. VAERS data comes with the following disclaimer, which conspiratards completely ignore because it doesn't fit the doomsday narrative:

VAERS accepts reports of adverse events and reactions that occur following vaccination. Healthcare providers, vaccine manufacturers, and the public can submit reports to the system. While very important in monitoring vaccine safety, VAERS reports alone cannot be used to determine if a vaccine caused or contributed to an adverse event or illness. The reports may contain information that is incomplete, inaccurate, coincidental, or unverifiable. In large part, reports to VAERS are voluntary, which means they are subject to biases. This creates specific limitations on how the data can be used scientifically. Data from VAERS reports should always be interpreted with these limitations in mind.

The strengths of VAERS are that it is national in scope and can quickly provide an early warning of a safety problem with a vaccine. As part of CDC and FDA’s multi-system approach to post-licensure vaccine safety monitoring, VAERS is designed to rapidly detect unusual or unexpected patterns of adverse events, also known as “safety signals.” If a safety signal is found in VAERS, further studies can be done in safety systems such as the CDC’s Vaccine Safety Datalink (VSD) or the Clinical Immunization Safety Assessment (CISA) project. These systems do not have the same scientific limitations as VAERS, and can better assess health risks and possible connections between adverse events and a vaccine.

Key considerations and limitations of VAERS data:

 - Vaccine providers are encouraged to report any clinically significant health problem following vaccination to VAERS, whether or not they believe the vaccine was the cause.
 - Reports may include incomplete, inaccurate, coincidental and unverified information.
 - The number of reports alone cannot be interpreted or used to reach conclusions about the existence, severity, frequency, or rates of problems associated with vaccines.
 - VAERS data is limited to vaccine adverse event reports received between 1990 and the most recent date for which data are available.
 - VAERS data do not represent all known safety information for a vaccine and should be interpreted in the context of other scientific information.

VAERS data available to the public include only the initial report data to VAERS. Updated data which contains data from medical records and corrections reported during follow up are used by the government for analysis. However, for numerous reasons including data consistency, these amended data are not available to the public.

[Torque]

Keep in mind that with 2.7M+ ADRs and 18,000 recorded deaths (~1% of underreported deaths in VAERS) in a year

Another debunked nonsense. VAERS data comes with the following disclaimer, which conspiratards completely ignore because it doesn't fit the doomsday narrative:

blah blah blah

That disclaimer doesn't mean shit. Nice try at gaslighting though.

[suchmoon]

That disclaimer doesn't mean shit. Nice try at gaslighting though.

The disclaimer means that VAERS data does not substantiate your "18000+ recorded deaths" statement. Referring to VAERS as the source of such claim is a blatant lie.

[Poker Player]

I don't know if it has been mentioned in the thread but recently I have heard politicians and health authorities where I live say that they are going to distinguish now between patients (and deaths) due to coronavirus and those with coronavirus (usually asymptomatic). Which is to say that the statistics have been inflated.

Some time ago I already posted a debate in the Irish parliament about it in the P&S section. Someone who was admitted to a hospital without any symptoms of coronavirus and for another cause, with a positive pcr result counted as another admission due to coronavirus, and they are going to start separating that from now on, two years later.

[thisisntbic]

That disclaimer doesn't mean shit. Nice try at gaslighting though.

The disclaimer means that VAERS data does not substantiate your "18000+ recorded deaths" statement. Referring to VAERS as the source of such claim is a blatant lie.

How does that unsubstantiate the claim, I don't see any numbers of deaths in that statement?
 
The entire thing is one big CYA essentially saying the data may or may not be valid. If anything, that statement confirms his claim that the data contained in VAERS is underreported.

[suchmoon]

How does that unsubstantiate the claim, I don't see any numbers of deaths in that statement?

It clearly says "VAERS reports alone cannot be used to determine if a vaccine caused or contributed to an adverse event or illness". Which is directly contradicting what all those muppets using VAERS data are doing - assuming that VAERS data is showing the number of deaths caused by the vaccines. It's not.
 

The entire thing is one big CYA essentially saying the data may or may not be valid. If anything, that statement confirms his claim that the data contained in VAERS is underreported.

No, it doesn't say that the data "may or may not be valid" (for determining the number of adverse events caused by vaccines). It clearly says that the data is not valid for that purpose - "cannot be used", doesn't get any more definitive than that.

[jojo69]

[Torque]

No, it doesn't say that the data "may or may not be valid" (for determining the number of adverse events caused by vaccines). It clearly says that the data is not valid for that purpose - "cannot be used", doesn't get any more definitive than that.

Yeah, let's just go over and check the vaccine(s) own clinical trial data and see what....

...oh wait.   🤡🤡

Someone who was admitted to a hospital without any symptoms of coronavirus and for another cause, with a positive pcr result counted as another admission due to coronavirus, and they are going to start separating that from now on, two years later.

How conveeeeeenient for them that they didn't do that before?

[shahzadafzal]

GOD or Vaccine choice is yours!!!

Cyprus Orthodox Church threatens to suspend priests if they refuse to get vaccinated



https://aje.io/chau9h

[OutOfMemory]

Over here, infections with mainly Omicron B1 still ramp up (at least one ATH this cycle).
Contact tracing is being turned off, "lockdown for unvaccinated"  ended, businesses are open for the unvaccinated next week, mandatory masks in elementary school will be restricted to shared spcaes out of classrooms, the vaccinated are now considered immune only for 6 months after the second shot, contact person regulations got dropped for the boostered and when said persons wore masks in presence of an infected person. The "experts" tell our goverment to do so because it's the best.
Government tries to force people to take mRNA jabs through vaccine mandate, about three months before conventional vaccines will be available for the public.

What could possibly go wrong? 

Why not taking all rules out of effect, let it run, because Long Covid doesn't even exist? ("it's only psychic, muh doctor says").
Four councellors, three governments within the last three years. Say hello to Banana Country. 

[Poker Player]

Someone who was admitted to a hospital without any symptoms of coronavirus and for another cause, with a positive pcr result counted as another admission due to coronavirus, and they are going to start separating that from now on, two years later.

How conveeeeeenient for them that they didn't do that before?

I don't know, I don't want to get too conspiratorial either, but the other day I saw Rand Paul talking about the same thing: that the statistics had been inflated by including as Covid cases and Covid deaths completely asymptomatic people who had been admitted to hospitals, etc. for other causes.

[suchmoon]

I don't know, I don't want to get too conspiratorial either, but the other day I saw Rand Paul talking about the same thing: that the statistics had been inflated by including as Covid cases and Covid deaths completely asymptomatic people who had been admitted to hospitals, etc. for other causes.

Excess death numbers matched or exceeded reported COVID-19 deaths throughout 2020-2021, and also matched the spikes. This means that if COVID-19 numbers were inflated, these people still died of something that they wouldn't have died of otherwise... so is there another pandemic that we don't know about?

[Torque]

This means that if COVID-19 numbers were inflated, these people still died of something that they wouldn't have died of otherwise... so is there another pandemic that we don't know about?

I guess we will never know, because the tracking of that other thing suspiciously dropped off the charts.

[suchmoon]

I guess we will never know, because the tracking of that other thing suspiciously dropped off the charts.

It's almost as if distancing and masks may slow the spread of some infections.

And if you had bothered to pay attention, you would have seen that the projected number of deaths has seasonal spikes including the flu from previous years, and excess deaths are above that. I know that you can't verbalize your own statements so perhaps you meant to say that there is no COVID but there is a very bad strain of flu going around?

[Torque]

It's almost as if distancing and masks may slow the spread of some infections.

But yet had zero effect of slowing the spread of Covid during the same period. How odd.

[suchmoon]

It's almost as if distancing and masks may slow the spread of some infections.

But yet had zero effect of slowing the spread of Covid during the same period. Quite odd.

You forgot to supply the data or even a screenshot from twitbook.

[thisisntbic]

I don't know, I don't want to get too conspiratorial either, but the other day I saw Rand Paul talking about the same thing: that the statistics had been inflated by including as Covid cases and Covid deaths completely asymptomatic people who had been admitted to hospitals, etc. for other causes.

This is why I have always questioned the reported cases numbers. This inflation of numbers was admitted in press conferences as far back as April, 2020: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tw9Ci2PZKZg


Another thing about asymptomatic people that seems to have been memory holed: the WHO Technical Lead saying, according to the studies and data they have, it's "very rare" for asymptomatic people to pass on the virus:https://www.cnbc.com/video/2020/06/08/who-coronavirus-patients-who-dont-show-symptoms-arent-spreading-new-infections.html

They came out a day or two later trying to walk back her statement, and the only thing they could say was, "computer models make it look way worse", but according to the data they have in the real world, it is very rare.

---------------------------------

It clearly says "VAERS reports alone cannot be used to determine if a vaccine caused or contributed to an adverse event or illness".
...
No, it doesn't say that the data "may or may not be valid" (for determining the number of adverse events caused by vaccines). It clearly says that the data is not valid for that purpose - "cannot be used", doesn't get any more definitive than that.

"VAERS is designed to rapidly detect unusual or unexpected patterns of adverse events...  This creates specific limitations on how the data can be used scientifically. Data from VAERS reports should always be interpreted with these limitations in mind.”

1. It can detect patterns of adverse events, but can not be used to to determine if adverse events occur? This is GIGO (Garbage in, Garbage out). Either the entire system is useless, or the data is valid (mostly valid? whatever sliding scale you'd like to use) => may, or may not be valid...
2. The statement "VAERS shows 18,000 people died" is a true statement. Did 18,000 people actually die? Maybe; maybe more, maybe less. VAERS is limited, but that doesn't make it inherently false.

Unless, the data is valid:

"Updated data which contains data from medical records and corrections reported during follow up are used by the government for analysis. However, for numerous reasons including data consistency, these amended data are not available to the public."

Has anyone with access to the Gov, updated version invalidated the claims made by "conspiritards"? Or do you use a blanket statement that contradicts itself to "debunk" it? The updated data is there, why hasn't it been shared?

[suchmoon]

1. It can detect patterns of adverse events, but can not be used to to determine if adverse events occur? This is GIGO (Garbage in, Garbage out). Either the entire system is useless, or the data is valid (mostly valid? whatever sliding scale you'd like to use) => may, or may not be valid...

It's not all or nothing. There are uses for the data but not for determining the number of deaths caused by the vaccines. The disclaimer quite clearly describes the data being used by CDC as signals for further investigation.

2. The statement "VAERS shows 18,000 people died" is a true statement. Did 18,000 people actually die? Maybe; maybe more, maybe less. VAERS is limited, but that doesn't make it inherently false.

Being not fit for a certain purpose doesn't make it true or false. It's just not fit for a certain purpose. However claiming or implying that VAERS shows 18,000 deaths caused by the vaccines is false, because VAERS doesn't and can't show such a thing.

Has anyone with access to the Gov, updated version invalidated the claims made by "conspiritards"? Or do you use a blanket statement that contradicts itself to "debunk" it? The updated data is there, why hasn't it been shared?

Except it has been:

As of January 27, 2022, more than 18.1 million doses of the J&J/Janssen COVID-19 vaccine have been given in the United States. [...] identified nine deaths that have been caused by or were directly attributed to TTS following J&J/Janssen COVID-19 vaccination.

That's out of ~12000 (not 18000) reported to VAERS.