• Please be aware we've switched the forums to their own URL. (again) You'll find the new website address to be www.steelernationforum.com Thanks
  • Please clear your private messages. Your inbox is close to being full.

Covid Vaccine

Funny how Ebola and Hantavirus revolve around ****. Coincidence?
 
fedderone said:
Oh, so it's not because it's mutated multiple times and became less deadly?
That has nothing to do with it?
Click to expand...
Or the fact that virtually everyone has already had it and developed natural immunity. Even the vast majority of vaccinated people.
 
oneforthebus said:
Or the fact that virtually everyone has already had it and developed natural immunity. Even the vast majority of vaccinated people.
Click to expand...
That's nice for them, since the Covid shot did not do that.
You know, provide immunity.
Like those who approved it, marketed it and mandated told everyone it would.

Who lied, knowingly, is the question.
 
Confluence said:
That's nice for them, since the Covid shot did not do that.
You know, provide immunity.
Like those who approved it, marketed it and mandated told everyone it would.

Who lied, knowingly, is the question.
Click to expand...
It reduced the incidence of serious illness and death. It did not prevent transmission and its immune protection waned rapidly. Not the most effective vaccine for sure, not entirely useless, but not the murderous poison some people claim. I know that’s not sexy but it’s what the data shows.

Lots of supposed benefits overstated for sure. Lots of supposed harms overstated too. Set science back a good ways.
 
IndySteel said:
Click to expand...

There are various treatments for HIV. Cancer is not even a virus so to even include that is idiotic. The common cold can be caused by up to 200 different viruses along with different strains of those. Creating a vax for the common cold is near impossible.
The covid "vax" was obviously rushed and did not go through legit safety testing, but you can't compare covid to these other diseases and not look like a moron.
 
jitter77 said:
There are various treatments for HIV. Cancer is not even a virus so to even include that is idiotic. The common cold can be caused by up to 200 different viruses along with different strains of those. Creating a vax for the common cold is near impossible.
The covid "vax" was obviously rushed and did not go through legit safety testing, but you can't compare covid to these other diseases and not look like a moron.
Click to expand...
Indy has his very own fact-checker following him around the board
. I, for one, am relived that jizzer is on the case and saving us from misinformation.
 
Booted said:
Indy has his very own fact-checker following him around the board
. I, for one, am relived that jizzer is on the case and saving us from misinformation.
Click to expand...
jizzer provides that service free of charge here. elsewhere, it's $50/mo
 
oneforthebus said:
It reduced the incidence of serious illness and death. It did not prevent transmission and its immune protection waned rapidly. Not the most effective vaccine for sure, not entirely useless, but not the murderous poison some people claim. I know that’s not sexy but it’s what the data shows.

Lots of supposed benefits overstated for sure. Lots of supposed harms overstated too. Set science back a good ways.
Click to expand...
the best benefit is the arm that can grow out of your back. that one is nice.

(no, dipshit Flog, it's sarcasm. or is it?)
 


"nothing to see here"
/flogtard

literally... nothing to see.
 
Djfan said:
Click to expand...

I encourage anyone who's interested in facts to read the actual study. It's complex, but the main points are: those with 4 or more doses had higher incidence of SOME respiratory infections, and LOWER incidence of others. They posit numerous different possibilities, from the fact that people who get immunized 4 times are likely an older, sicker cohort...that they may be more likely to seek medical care and testing in general and thus be diagnosed more often...the complexities arising from the steep drop in all respiratory infections during the pandemic followed by a resurgence, the fact that some respiratory illnesses becoming prevalent can cause other respiratory illnesses to recede...this is NOT evidence of "immune system collapse". It's more likely evidence that the lockdown and changing focus on medical care and diagnosis shifted patterns in the incidence of respiratory illnesses, though more study is needed. This is the interpretation of the study authors themselves, not the conclusion of an anti-vaxxer guy on the internet. It's a good example of how these folks cherry pick and twist data to create misinformation.

 
oneforthebus said:
I encourage anyone who's interested in facts to read the actual study. It's complex, but the main points are: those with 4 or more doses had higher incidence of SOME respiratory infections, and LOWER incidence of others. They posit numerous different possibilities, from the fact that people who get immunized 4 times are likely an older, sicker cohort...that they may be more likely to seek medical care and testing in general and thus be diagnosed more often...the complexities arising from the steep drop in all respiratory infections during the pandemic followed by a resurgence, the fact that some respiratory illnesses becoming prevalent can cause other respiratory illnesses to recede...this is NOT evidence of "immune system collapse". It's more likely evidence that the lockdown and changing focus on medical care and diagnosis shifted patterns in the incidence of respiratory illnesses, though more study is needed. This is the interpretation of the study authors themselves, not the conclusion of an anti-vaxxer guy on the internet. It's a good example of how these folks cherry pick and twist data to create misinformation.

Click to expand...
Reading studies is always the best way to become informed well. The problem is that the causal reader doesn't have the background, or the time, often. So, we rely on those who get out the info based on those studies. Therein lies the problem.
 
oneforthebus said:
I encourage anyone who's interested in facts to read the actual study. It's complex, but the main points are: those with 4 or more doses had higher incidence of SOME respiratory infections, and LOWER incidence of others. They posit numerous different possibilities, from the fact that people who get immunized 4 times are likely an older, sicker cohort...that they may be more likely to seek medical care and testing in general and thus be diagnosed more often...the complexities arising from the steep drop in all respiratory infections during the pandemic followed by a resurgence, the fact that some respiratory illnesses becoming prevalent can cause other respiratory illnesses to recede...this is NOT evidence of "immune system collapse". It's more likely evidence that the lockdown and changing focus on medical care and diagnosis shifted patterns in the incidence of respiratory illnesses, though more study is needed. This is the interpretation of the study authors themselves, not the conclusion of an anti-vaxxer guy on the internet. It's a good example of how these folks cherry pick and twist data to create misinformation.

Click to expand...
Thanks for your interpretation OFTB.

I guess "these folks" are those that may have other interpretations from yours, lol.

Wouldn't it be best if similar logic to the rationale used for approving Covid shots was used to judge them? For instance, using the above speaker's rationale, we could ask for more evidence, a conclusive mechanism for his assertions, etc. You know, the science. Oh, yeah, that didn't happen with any science around Covid.

But simply rejecting his hypothesis with your version of " they got the flu" (yes that is my summary of your words), is exactly counter to what we were all told about Covid and then asked to believe by the so-called well-intentioned profiteers of the sham science surrounding all of Covid:
- its US funded origins,
- it's incredibly lucky treatment readiness via Moderna ( though Bayer now asserts thievery of means of production),
- the unscientific mandates,
- the horrid treatment forced upon victims by unsound medical practices ( think intubation),
- the clearly wrong "gold standard" PCR test results that just counted flu as Covid,
- the unfair exclusion of members of society from jobs, events, family, etc based upon risk that was not assessed properly because some entities held their thumbs on the scales of science, justice and liberty
- many more needless expenses, psychological damages, societal tolls, etc.


Or do we just forgive those who knowingly misled the people, the MDs, the patients, the families? They told us it was a horrid pandemic, needing great, unusual steps to save humanity. So now you brush it off?

Why wouldn't, in a sense of appropriate response to the long list of injustices perpetrated via Covid machinations, we at least listen to the alternatives from those speaking for those damaged?

Why would you seek, again, to diminish the voices of those sounding the alarm --- as you did for hundreds of pages in this very thread --- rather than giving them a listen because you and your people got it so absolutely pFucking wrong for so long on this very subject?
 
Last edited:
Djfan said:
Reading studies is always the best way to become informed well. The problem is that the causal reader doesn't have the background, or the time, often. So, we rely on those who get out the info based on those studies. Therein lies the problem.
Click to expand...
Yes. Nicolas Hulscher is part of the McCullough Foundation, one of the most well-known purveyors of medical misinformation around.
 
Confluence said:
Thanks for your interpretation OFTB.

I guess "these folks" are those that may have other interpretations from yours, lol.

Wouldn't it be best if similar logic to the rationale used for approving Covid shots was used to judge them? For instance, using the above speaker's rationale, we could ask for more evidence, a conclusive mechanism for his assertions, etc. You know, the science. Oh, yeah, that didn't happen with any science around Covid.

But simply rejecting his hypothesis with your version of " they got the flu" (yes that is my summary of your words), is exactly counter to what we were all told about Covid and then asked to believe by the so-called well-intentioned profiteers of the sham science surrounding all of Covid:
- its US funded origins, it's incredibly lucky treatment readiness via Moderna ( though Bayer now asserts thievery of means of production),
- the unscientific mandates,
- the horrid treatment forced upon victims by unsound medical practices ( think intubation),
- the clearly wrong "gold standard" PCR test results that just counted flu as Covid,
- the unfair exclusion of members of society from jobs, events, family, etc based upon risk that was not assessed properly because some entities held their thumbs on the scales of science, justice and liberty
- many more needless expenses, psychological damages, societal tolls, etc.


Or do we just forgive those who knowingly misled the people, the MDs, the patients, the families? They told us it was a horrid pandemic, needing great, unusual steps to save humanity. So now you brush it off?

Why wouldn't, in a sense of appropriate response to the long list of injustices perpetrated via Covid machinations, we at least listen to the alternatives from those speaking for those damaged?

Why would you seek, again, to diminish the voices of those sounding the alarm --- as you did for hundreds of pages in this very thread --- rather than giving them a listen because you and your people got it so absolutely pFucking wrong for so long on this very subject?
Click to expand...
Me and my people? LOL. I'm not part of any "people". I try to look at real science and real facts. I was misled about certain things early on like everyone else, the difference is I believe it was honest lack of knowledge in the rush to try and do something to stem what everyone feared was going to be a wave of deaths, rather than out of some evil conspiracy to murder us all and make money doing it. There was a learning curve, yes. My biggest fear out of all of this is the lack of trust in science now. Because we just got lucky that this one didn't turn out to be nearly as deadly as they feared, and when the one comes along that is, a lot of people aren't going to believe it.

The covid vaccine showed promise early on...turns out it is not particularly effective. It's not effective at all in terms of spreading the illness but it is mildly effective at reducing serious illness and death in those at risk of those things. It actually did cause myocarditis in too many young healthy males, who were at very little risk from covid itself. Like any vaccine (or any medical treatment for that matter) it does have the potential to cause adverse reactions like anaphlyaxis and auto-immune issues in very small numbers of people. Those are provable facts. Almost all of the other anti-vax nonsense is easily disprovable if someone's willing to do the research, and by research I mean actual peer reviewed scientific studies and not anti-vax gobbledy gook.

Science is imperfect, yes, but when someone takes a study and intentionally leaves out major portions of the information as well as completely twists the authors of the study's own conclusions, that's not "imperfect science". It's deliberate dishonesty.

Vaccine misinformation is dangerous. Like, life and death dangerous. Babies are needlessly getting sick, hospitalized and dying because of it. I don't have the time or desire to refute every single instance of it I see here, it's kind of an exercise in futility, but when I can fairly quickly and easily, I will.
 
Sorry to get on my high horse, I found out recently I have a friend who is probably gonna die of breast cancer because she bought into all of the "chemo is poison, I'm gonna cure my cancer naturally" bullshit, and before you ask, no she didn't get the covid vax. Now that it's spread into her spine she's finally getting chemo (after months of urging by her doctors) but it may be too late.

Not to mention another one who refuses to get a mammogram because she read they cause cancer.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top