• 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

The mortality rate from measles is actually pretty low and was even before the vaccine was developed in the early '60's. That not to say that I don't think the M-M-R isn't a good thing, because I believe that it is. What I find troubling is that even though there have always been years where outbreaks have occurred, even after the development of the vaccine, this particular spike is adamantly being blamed on the "anti-vaxxers", solely, absolutely no doubt about it. If the subject of 20 million unvaccinated migrants flowing in from 3rd world countries is brought up it's summarily dismissed as a possible factor in the current spike of measles cases and once again making this another politically charged, emotionally ladened issue.
People always talk about mortality rates but rarely mention that measles can also cause severe illness and hospitalization, pneumonia, deafness, encephalitis etc.

Certainly any group of unvaxxed people including unvaxxed migrants will lead to outbreaks. Vaccination rates are dropping and that's not a good thing. Anti-vaxxers share the blame for that.
 
Don't you all think doctors, pharma and hospitals would make a lot more money treating all of these preventable diseases than they do giving vaccines? This is exactly why insurance companies push vaccines all the time. The argument for financial motivation makes no sense.
 
Don't you all think doctors, pharma and hospitals would make a lot more money treating all of these preventable diseases than they do giving vaccines? This is exactly why insurance companies push vaccines all the time. The argument for financial motivation makes no sense.
no.

Still searching for a ranking of vaccines by safety. Did you ever come across comparative safety data or other for vaccines?
 
Here is a short watch that helps to illustrate. Watch for the ADHD stats:

 
no.

Still searching for a ranking of vaccines by safety. Did you ever come across comparative safety data or other for vaccines?
Give it a rest. Again, there is no such thing as a "ranking of vaccines by safety". It would be a meaningless statistic. Morphine likely ranks lower than than Advil for safety, what would that demonstrate exactly? Comparing apples to oranges. You give people with a headache Advil, you give people dying of cancer morphine. You give people with an infection antibiotics, you give people with cancer chemo. You don't say "Morphine is less safe than Advil, therefore we should never use it" or "Chemo is less safe than antibiotics therefore we should never use it". Every medical intervention in existence has its own risk/benefit calculation based on its uses and effects. Vaccines in general have very rare serious adverse events, on par with or probably less than many other common medical treatments that no one has their panties in a bunch about.
 
People always talk about mortality rates but rarely mention that measles can also cause severe illness and hospitalization, pneumonia, deafness, encephalitis etc.

Certainly any group of unvaxxed people including unvaxxed migrants will lead to outbreaks. Vaccination rates are dropping and that's not a good thing. Anti-vaxxers share the blame for that.
When did I say that they weren't?
 
So, the vaccines are nothing I trust, and I would bet that there are some MDs who would agree, if they could be honest publicly. That being said, giving a vax to someone shows that there was due diligence about the illness and the potential of it. Even if they don't believe in the vax, they are legally covered as far as malpractice or negligence is concerned.
 
Give it a rest. Again, there is no such thing as a "ranking of vaccines by safety". It would be a meaningless statistic. Morphine likely ranks lower than than Advil for safety, what would that demonstrate exactly?
They are drugs with specifuc uses, and morphine is addictive. Both have clear product specifications and dosing, and because morphine is so potent and potentially harmful, its use is highly restricted.

Neither are propsed as prophylatics for kids or adults, and neither have liability shields for manufacturers.
Comparing apples to oranges.
Yes, you are!
You give people with a headache Advil, you give people dying of cancer morphine. You give people with an infection antibiotics, you give people with cancer chemo. You don't say "Morphine is less safe than Advil, therefore we should never use it" or "Chemo is less safe than antibiotics therefore we should never use it".
You seem confused. Ibuprofen is an analgesic offered as both a non-prescription and a prescription product, dependent on an MD or other prescriber's judgment. Morphine is used for painkilling because it provides dissociative relief. NEITHER of these is used IN ADVANCE of a medical need, but rather for the treatment of pain.

Vaccines are administered for future protection, not in reaction to a medical condition.
Every medical intervention in existence has its own risk/benefit calculation based on its uses and effects.
Again, vaccines are prophylactic, not medical interventions to effect a symptom or cause.
Vaccines in general have very rare serious adverse events, on par with or probably less than many other common medical treatments that no one has their panties in a bunch about.
What do you mean "on par with or probably less"? That is not a true statement. If it is you can show me any proof whatsoever. Find one vaccine package insert that does this, please.

My issue is informed consent, which is supposed to a foundational tenet of medical care. This informed consent requires accurate information about drug/vaccine risks/benefits and for vaccines they simply do not exist. The second part of informed consent requires the medical provider to explain this to the patient/consumer in a manner they can comprehend.

This last part is impossible because the MD doesn't understand the vaccine risk/benefit because his/her employer doesn't understand the risk/benefit because the manufacturer has never done the safety studies that underpin the risk part.

These so-called professionals get compensated based on the percentage of vaccine penetration that their victims face! With no possibility of informed consent because no one knows how safe the products are.

That is just immoral and wrong.
 
So, the vaccines are nothing I trust, and I would bet that there are some MDs who would agree, if they could be honest publicly. That being said, giving a vax to someone shows that there was due diligence about the illness and the potential of it. Even if they don't believe in the vax, they are legally covered as far as malpractice or negligence is concerned.
Unless there was no informed consent.

If docs say "it's safe" and it's not safe, that is legal question about malpractice or fraud. I use fraud because I think many professionals rely on info from the manufacturer, which probably is fraudulent, because vaccines, as a class of medicines, does not have typical safety data.
 
People always talk about mortality rates but rarely mention that measles can also cause severe illness and hospitalization, pneumonia, deafness, encephalitis etc.
How about the various other issues adjacent to and perhaps caused by unsafe vaccines? ADHD, spectrum disorders, etc.
Certainly any group of unvaxxed people including unvaxxed migrants will lead to outbreaks. Vaccination rates are dropping and that's not a good thing. Anti-vaxxers share the blame for that.
****** products are to blame, not the people who point out the flaws and the horrendously negative effects on the lives of so many.
 
They are drugs with specifuc uses, and morphine is addictive. Both have clear product specifications and dosing, and because morphine is so potent and potentially harmful, its use is highly restricted.

Neither are propsed as prophylatics for kids or adults, and neither have liability shields for manufacturers.

Yes, you are!

You seem confused. Ibuprofen is an analgesic offered as both a non-prescription and a prescription product, dependent on an MD or other prescriber's judgment. Morphine is used for painkilling because it provides dissociative relief. NEITHER of these is used IN ADVANCE of a medical need, but rather for the treatment of pain.

Vaccines are administered for future protection, not in reaction to a medical condition.

Again, vaccines are prophylactic, not medical interventions to effect a symptom or cause.

What do you mean "on par with or probably less"? That is not a true statement. If it is you can show me any proof whatsoever. Find one vaccine package insert that does this, please.

My issue is informed consent, which is supposed to a foundational tenet of medical care. This informed consent requires accurate information about drug/vaccine risks/benefits and for vaccines they simply do not exist. The second part of informed consent requires the medical provider to explain this to the patient/consumer in a manner they can comprehend.

This last part is impossible because the MD doesn't understand the vaccine risk/benefit because his/her employer doesn't understand the risk/benefit because the manufacturer has never done the safety studies that underpin the risk part.

These so-called professionals get compensated based on the percentage of vaccine penetration that their victims face! With no possibility of informed consent because no one knows how safe the products are.

That is just immoral and wrong.
That’s a lot of words but unfortunately most of it is false. All vaccines have safety studies, they are readily available from a multitude of sources, of course you will just say the sources are lying. Do you have kids? I was given a sheet of paper with every vaccine my kids ever received that outlined the risks and benefits. If I ever had any questions my physician, a person with years of medical training and experience, answered them.Your kids’ (if you have them) physician should have been doing rhe same. The problem is you guys take VAERS reports as safety data, they are not as has been discussed here ad nauseum. The idea that vaccine safety hasn’t been studied is ludicrous. In the case of the covid vaccine when it’s emergency use because of the pandemic, the studying was rushed, I’ll agree with you there. The virus itself was new and waning immunity wasn’t understood. Studies after the fact conclude the vaccine is largely safe except in rare cases, though I’ll agree with you it’s not nearly as effective as originally believed. It’s not completely ineffective though. There are many studies showing lower hospitalization and death rates in vaccinated cohorts. I’m not going to waste my time googling them for you just to have you discredit the sources, but you know they’re out there and you can find them.
Now you’ll just ask me again and again for a “ranking of vaccines by safety” which doesn’t exist because it’s irrelevant. You picked apart my analogies while the point of them flew right over your head. We don’t compare the relative safety of individual medical treatments to each other because they are individual treatments. Every vaccine has a different risk/benefit profile. What is compared is the risks of getting each vaccine vs. the risks of not getting it. In today’s world where we’ve eliminated a variety of diseases because of vaccination it’s super easy for people to believe there are minimal risks of not getting vaccines. The risks are that ever greater numbers of people believe this and eliminated diseases resurge.

And again, doctors would make a lot more money treating kids hospitalized with pneumonia or encephalitis from measles so if they are purely profit motivated why would they want to push an inexpensive vaccine instead of the big pile of money they could make treating illnesses?
 
Last edited:
How about the various other issues adjacent to and perhaps caused by unsafe vaccines? ADHD, spectrum disorders, etc.

****** products are to blame, not the people who point out the flaws and the horrendously negative effects on the lives of so many.
Vaccines as cause of autism has been studied extensively in thousands and thousands of people in numerous different countries and no link has ever been found. I don’t off the top of my head know about vaccines and ADHD, I’ve never heard anyone claim a link to that. There are very few people who have “horrendously negative” effects from vaccines. Serious adverse events happen but they are rare. Meanwhile before the advent of vaccines 20% of children DIED before their 5th birthday. Millions more disabled by preventable illnesses.You want to go back to the “good old days”. I don’t.
 
Last edited:
Here is a short watch that helps to illustrate. Watch for the ADHD stats:


Classic example of how vaccine misinformation purveyors use bogus studies.


I can say definitively that the study by Henry Ford Health researchers has serious design problems that keep it from revealing much about whether vaccines affect children’s long-term health. In fact, a spokesperson at Henry Ford Health told journalists seeking comment on the study that it “was not published because it did not meet the rigorous scientific standards we demand as a premier medical research institution.”


The study’s weaknesses illustrate several key principles of biostatistics.

Study participants and conclusions​

The researchers examined the medical records of about 18,500 children born between 2000 and 2016 within the Henry Ford Health network. According to the records, roughly 16,500 children had received at least one vaccine and about 2,000 were completely unvaccinated.

The authors compared the two groups on a wide set of outcomes. These included conditions that affect the immune system, such as asthma, allergies and autoimmune disorders. They also included neurodevelopmental outcomes such as attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, or ADHD, autism and speech and seizure disorders, as well as learning, intellectual, behavioral and motor disabilities.


Many diagnoses of common childhood conditions like asthma and ADHD occur after children start school. Ariel Skelley/DigitalVision via Getty Images

Their headline result was that vaccinated children had 2.5 times the rate of “any selected chronic disease,” with 3 to 6 times higher rates for some specific conditions. They did not find that vaccinated children had higher rates of autism.

The study’s summary states it found that “vaccine exposure in children was associated with increased risk of developing a chronic health disorder.” That wording is strong, but it is not well supported given the weaknesses of the paper.

Timeline logic​

To study long-term diseases in children, it’s crucial to track their health until the ages when these problems usually show up. Many conditions in the study, like asthma, ADHD, learning problems and behavior issues, are mostly diagnosed after age 5, once kids are in school. If kids are not followed that long, many cases will be missed.

However, that’s what happened here, especially for children in the unvaccinated group.

About 25% of unvaccinated children in the study were tracked until they were less than 6 months old, 50% until they were less than 15 months old, and only 25% were tracked past age 3. That’s too short to catch most of these conditions. Vaccinated kids, however, were followed much longer, with 75% followed past 15 months of age, 50% past 2.7 years of age and 25% past 5.7 years of age.

The longer timeline gave the vaccinated kids many more chances to have diagnoses recorded in their Henry Ford medical records compared with the nonvaccinated group. The study includes no explanation for this difference.

When one group is watched longer and into the ages when problems are usually found, they will almost always look sicker on paper, even if the real risks are the same. In statistics, this is called surveillance bias.

The primary methods used in the paper were not sufficient to adjust for this surveillance bias. The authors tried new analyses using only kids followed beyond age 1, 3 or 5. But vaccinated kids were still tracked longer, with more reaching the ages when diagnoses are made, so those efforts did not fix this bias.

More opportunities to be diagnosed​

Not all cases of chronic disease are written down in the Henry Ford records. Kids who go to a Henry Ford doctor more often get more checkups, more tests and more chances for their diseases to be found and recorded in the Henry Ford system. Increased doctor visits has been shown to increase the chance of diagnosing chronic conditions, including autism, ADHD, asthma, developmental disorders and learning disabilities.

If people in one group see doctors more often than people in another, those people may look like they have higher disease rates even if their true health is the same across both groups. In statistics, this is called detection bias.

In the Henry Ford system, vaccinated kids averaged about seven visits per year, while unvaccinated kids had only about two. That gave the vaccinated kids many more chances to be diagnosed. The authors tried leaving out kids with zero visits, but this did not fix the detection bias, since vaccinated kids still had far more visits.

Another issue is that the study doesn’t show which kids actually used Henry Ford for their main care. Many babies are seen at the hospital for birth and early visits, but then go elsewhere for routine care. If that happens, later diagnoses would not appear in the Henry Ford records. The short follow-up for many children suggests a lot may have left the system after infancy, hiding diagnoses made outside Henry Ford.

Apples and oranges​

Big differences between the groups of vaccinated and unvaccinated children can make it hard to know if vaccines really caused any differences in chronic disease. This is because of a statistical concept called confounding.

The two groups were not alike from birth. They differed in characteristics like sex, race, birth weight, being born early and the mother experiencing birth complications – all factors linked to later effects on health. The study made some adjustments for these, but left out many other important risks, such as:

• Whether families live in urban, suburban or rural areas.

• Family income, health insurance and resources.

• Environmental exposures such as air and water pollution, which were concerns in Detroit at that time.


Many factors can affect how often a child visits a health care provider.
These factors can affect both the chance of getting vaccinated and the chance of having health problems. They also change how often families visit Henry Ford clinics, which affects what shows up in the records.

When too many measured and unmeasured differences line up, as they do here, the study is unable to fully separate cause from effect.

Bottom line​

The Henry Ford data could be helpful if the study followed both groups of kids to the same ages and took into account differences in health care use and background risks.

But as written, the study’s main comparisons are tilted. The follow-up time was short and uneven, kids had unequal chances for diagnosis, and the two groups were very different in ways that matter. The methods used did not adequately fix these problems. Because of this, the differences reported in the study do not show that vaccines cause chronic disease.

Good science asks tough questions and uses methods strong enough to answer them. This study falls short, and it is being presented as stronger evidence than its design really allows.
 
That’s a lot of words but unfortunately most of it is false. All vaccines have safety studies, they are readily available from a multitude of sources, of course you will just say the sources are lying. Do you have kids? I was given a sheet of paper with every vaccine my kids ever received that outlined the risks and benefits. If I ever had any questions my physician, a person with years of medical training and experience, answered them.Your kids’ (if you have them) physician should have been doing rhe same. The problem is you guys take VAERS reports as safety data, they are not as has been discussed here ad nauseum. The idea that vaccine safety hasn’t been studied is ludicrous. In the case of the covid vaccine when it’s emergency use because of the pandemic, the studying was rushed, I’ll agree with you there. The virus itself was new and waning immunity wasn’t understood. Studies after the fact conclude the vaccine is largely safe except in rare cases, though I’ll agree with you it’s not nearly as effective as originally believed. It’s not completely ineffective though. There are many studies showing lower hospitalization and death rates in vaccinated cohorts. I’m not going to waste my time googling them for you just to have you discredit the sources, but you know they’re out there and you can find them.
Now you’ll just ask me again and again for a “ranking of vaccines by safety” which doesn’t exist because it’s irrelevant. You picked apart my analogies while the point of them flew right over your head. We don’t compare the relative safety of individual medical treatments to each other because they are individual treatments. Every vaccine has a different risk/benefit profile. What is compared is the risks of getting each vaccine vs. the risks of not getting it. In today’s world where we’ve eliminated a variety of diseases because of vaccination it’s super easy for people to believe there are minimal risks of not getting vaccines. The risks are that ever greater numbers of people believe this and eliminated diseases resurge.

And again, doctors would make a lot more money treating kids hospitalized with pneumonia or encephalitis from measles so if they are purely profit motivated why would they want to push an inexpensive vaccine instead of the big pile of money they could make treating illnesses?
 
Sounds like OFTB took ALL the vaxxes.
Yes I did. Most of the people I know did. I’m 59, a bit overweight, healthy, all of my labs are perfect or nearly so. I don’t know a single person who got sick or died from taking vaccines. I know three unvaxxed people who died of covid. Two had serious underlying conditions. One was a healthy, athletic, active 52 year old.
 
Yes I did. Most of the people I know did. I’m 59, a bit overweight, healthy, all of my labs are perfect or nearly so. I don’t know a single person who got sick or died from taking vaccines. I know three unvaxxed people who died of covid. Two had serious underlying conditions. One was a healthy, athletic, active 52 year old.
How many clot shots did you take?
 
Top