Covid Vaccine

[Ironcitysteelers]

Damn Coolie. Be careful.

Man infected with monkeypox attended Daddyland Festival in Dallas

Health officials reported the first locally transmitted case of the monkeypox virus in Dallas after a man who attended the Daddyland Festival tested positive.

www.cbsnews.com

 

[Badcat]

523 pages, almost 2 years of discussions, and we're still trying to make sense of this bullshit. unreal!!

 

[Iron95]

When I say it’s a crap shoot I mean nothing is 100% guaranteed. I don’t mean some things aren’t statistically more likely than others. Your experience and my experience are not data. Data exists even if you think it’s bullshit. The vaccines aren’t a panacea, nor are they murderous poisons designed to harm us while enriching Pfizer. And I’m not fighting for anything, I’m disputing misinformation so people can make an informed decision. I’m giving my perspective just like everyone else here is. I have no dog in this fight, you do you.

How very liberal of you to spread your wisdom to the rest of us village idiots. We would have never been able to do our own research and formed our own opinions. Rule of thumb though, if Fouchi agrees with it, it is a lie.

 

[Tim Steelersfan]

I don’t consider .5% exceedingly low especially with how contagious this illness is. Don’t really want to die of the flu either if I can help it. Not to mention that death is only one possible complication.

Well, this is where my body my choice applies. Personal risk assessment. I don't think a 0.595 IFR is that deadly. I'm 53. A 0.291 IFR for age group 50-54 is really low. By compare, the IFR for the flu in 2018 was 0.27.

Confluence keeps saying it...for the vast majority of us, it's the flu.

There are indeed many potential complications from Covid. As there are hundreds of documented complications to the vaccines.

Thus, people have a personal choice to make.

Given the recent study I posted (NEJM) ...

• that showed two doses of Covid vaccines offer no protection against Omicron infection and may even increase the risk of infection within months,
• that people previously infected with earlier coronavirus variants had a 50 percent lower risk of Omicron infection (which remained steady even more than a year after the initial infection),
• that giving people who had natural immunity two shots of mRNA did nothing to increase that 50 percent protection (the public health argument that vaccination helps people even if they were already infected has proven wrong).

From the authors: The protection conferred by hybrid immunity of previous infection and two-dose vaccination was similar to that of previous infection alone, at approximately 50%, which suggests that this protection originated from the previous infection and not from vaccination.

...I see no personal reason to get the shot. It won't do anything to improve my current defenses.

Effects of Previous Infection and Vaccination on Symptomatic Omicron Infections | NEJM

Original Article from The New England Journal of Medicine — Effects of Previous Infection and Vaccination on Symptomatic Omicron Infections

www.nejm.org

 

[oneforthebus]

I don’t know who you’re arguing with. I’m well aware of your reasoning. I am not trying to convince you to get the vaccine. I’ve never been in favor of mandates. I simply correct misinformation when I see it. I do not have the time nor the inclination to read the reams of anti-vax propaganda that you post here and refute it point bu point. I refute things that I know are inaccurate when I see them. Everyone should be able to make up their own minds. Once again, you do you.

 

[oneforthebus]

How very liberal of you to spread your wisdom to the rest of us village idiots. We would have never been able to do our own research and formed our own opinions. Rule of thumb though, if Fouchi agrees with it, it is a lie.

So only people who are anti-vax are allowed to spread their wisdom here? Even if their wisdom contains proven lies?

Okey doke. This is why I rarely post here any more. Most here are not interested in hearing anything that might counter their preferred narrative.

 

[Iron95]

So only people who are anti-vax are allowed to spread their wisdom here? Even if their wisdom contains proven lies?

Okey doke. This is why I rarely post here any more. Most here are not interested in hearing anything that might counter their preferred narrative.

How many times did you use the term misinformation? Meaning every thing you believe is information. Everything else is misinformation. The CDC WHO and every other so called health organization has been lying to us for two years. Why should we believe any thing they say now?

 

[oneforthebus]

How many times did you use the term misinformation? Meaning every thing you believe is information. Everything else is misinformation. The CDC WHO and every other so called health organization has been lying to us for two years. Why should we believe any thing they say now?

Right, but anti-vaxxers on substack speak nothing but the God’s honest truth, right?
No worries, letting you guys get back to your echo chamber.

 

[Stainless]

Seems like years since I've opened this thread, but it only took seconds to remember why.

 

[oneforthebus]

If anyone is actually interested in learning how VAERS works and what it means and what it doesn’t, this article is a good in-depth one.

Don’t Fall for the ‘VAERS Scare’ Tactic

The Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System or VAERS is being misused by anti-vaxxers to terrify the public. It’s a shame because VAERS plays a vital role in detecting important but rare reactions caused by vaccines. The weaponization of VAERS by anti-vaccine activists serves as a reminder that...

www.mcgill.ca

 

[Troglodyte]

I'll leave it at this, thalidomide was a hell of a drug for morning sickness, until it wasn't.

AND… the FDA didn’t approve it.

 

[Tim Steelersfan]

I don’t know who you’re arguing with. I’m well aware of your reasoning. I am not trying to convince you to get the vaccine. I’ve never been in favor of mandates. I simply correct misinformation when I see it. I do not have the time nor the inclination to read the reams of anti-vax propaganda that you post here and refute it point bu point. I refute things that I know are inaccurate when I see them. Everyone should be able to make up their own minds. Once again, you do you.

Do you ever self-correct? You seem to want to be the Czar of Misinformation here. In this ever changing world over the past two years, much has changed. We've learned quite a bit of course. I'll acknowledge that.

One of your common lines in this long thread is to repeat that the vaccines are effective at preventing serious illness and death. We continue to learn that too isn't as true as it used to be, or even at all true today.

Just some of your quotes...

"There is plenty of evidence that it reduces risk of serious illness and death" - July 6, 2022, yesterday

Yet just days before, you appear to question this claim:

While I'm not as convinced of the high rates of serious adverse events as some of you, it's clear these vaccines are useless against these variants. They say they protect against severe disease and illness. Well duh, is that the vaccines or is it simply the fact that this disease was only dangerous to a small portion of the population to begin with, and the variants have been progressively less virulent, as viral variants tend to be. And that so many people have been infected at this point and have some natural immunity. Logic and reason tells us all of these factors are likely in play but "science" tells us these vaccines that apparently do absolutely nothing to prevent infection are almost solely responsible for keeping people out of the hospital.

"They do appear extremely effective at preventing serious illness and hospitalization which is pretty important" - April 15, 2021

"Except the vaccine doesn’t just prevent death, it prevents illness." - December 7, 2020

As I posted yesterday, this dynamic has drastically changed, as I argued with Flog it would. The NYT stopped updating these charts as the lines began to merge months ago. I'd be willing to be there is now minimal to literally no difference between the vaxed and the unvaxed. And the statement - the vaccines prevent serious illness and death is now officially misinformation.



I could accuse you of spreading misinformation as well. Pick apart other claims you've made. It's not my mode.

My mode, as you know, is to share what I see that is developing, new, and hopefully true. I'll admit some of it has turned out to be wrong, like so much has been over two+ years. But I'm confident the majority of my predictions on where this was going to go came to be.

 

[Tim Steelersfan]

Fewer than 1-2% of parents are getting their toddlers the vax. Smart move. From the WSJ: https://archive.ph/t6eLa, published July 4

Tremendous article, urge all to read it.



More troubling, vaccinated toddlers in Pfizer’s trial were more likely to get severely ill with Covid than those who received a placebo. Pfizer claimed most severe cases weren’t “clinically significant,” whatever that means, but this was all the more reason that the FDA should have required a longer follow-up before authorizing the vaccine.

Also worrisome: Most kids who developed multiple infections during the trial were vaccinated. This warranted more investigation, since experimental vaccines for other diseases sometimes increase susceptibility to infection.

Scientists are also discovering that triple-vaccinated adults who were previously infected with the Wuhan variant have a weaker immune response to Omicron, leaving them more susceptible to reinfection. This phenomenon, called “immunological imprinting,” could explain why children who received three Pfizer shots were more likely to get reinfected.

The FDA brushed aside the risk that inoculating infants against a variant no longer circulating could blunt their immune responses to Omicron and its offshoots. There’s a reason vaccine trials usually take a decade. Some steps can be accelerated, but an extended follow-up is often necessary to ensure potential side effects aren’t overlooked.

 

[oneforthebus]

Fewer than 1-2% of parents are getting their toddlers the vax. Smart move. From the WSJ: https://archive.ph/t6eLa, published July 4

Tremendous article, urge all to read it.

View attachment 8903

More troubling, vaccinated toddlers in Pfizer’s trial were more likely to get severely ill with Covid than those who received a placebo. Pfizer claimed most severe cases weren’t “clinically significant,” whatever that means, but this was all the more reason that the FDA should have required a longer follow-up before authorizing the vaccine.

Also worrisome: Most kids who developed multiple infections during the trial were vaccinated. This warranted more investigation, since experimental vaccines for other diseases sometimes increase susceptibility to infection.

Scientists are also discovering that triple-vaccinated adults who were previously infected with the Wuhan variant have a weaker immune response to Omicron, leaving them more susceptible to reinfection. This phenomenon, called “immunological imprinting,” could explain why children who received three Pfizer shots were more likely to get reinfected.

The FDA brushed aside the risk that inoculating infants against a variant no longer circulating could blunt their immune responses to Omicron and its offshoots. There’s a reason vaccine trials usually take a decade. Some steps can be accelerated, but an extended follow-up is often necessary to ensure potential side effects aren’t overlooked.

Fewer than 1-2% of parents are getting their toddlers the vax. Smart move. From the WSJ: https://archive.ph/t6eLa, published July 4

Tremendous article, urge all to read it.

View attachment 8903

More troubling, vaccinated toddlers in Pfizer’s trial were more likely to get severely ill with Covid than those who received a placebo. Pfizer claimed most severe cases weren’t “clinically significant,” whatever that means, but this was all the more reason that the FDA should have required a longer follow-up before authorizing the vaccine.

Also worrisome: Most kids who developed multiple infections during the trial were vaccinated. This warranted more investigation, since experimental vaccines for other diseases sometimes increase susceptibility to infection.

Scientists are also discovering that triple-vaccinated adults who were previously infected with the Wuhan variant have a weaker immune response to Omicron, leaving them more susceptible to reinfection. This phenomenon, called “immunological imprinting,” could explain why children who received three Pfizer shots were more likely to get reinfected.

The FDA brushed aside the risk that inoculating infants against a variant no longer circulating could blunt their immune responses to Omicron and its offshoots. There’s a reason vaccine trials usually take a decade. Some steps can be accelerated, but an extended follow-up is often necessary to ensure potential side effects aren’t overlooked.

I’ve already stated numerous times that I agree that the risk benefit for young healthy people makes no sense. I’ve already stated numerous times that these vaccines are clearly less than a success especially against the newer variants. Did you not read that? Apparently you are incapable of distinguishing between “some of the things posted here are misinformation” and “everyone must rush out and get vaccinated even toddlers”. My quibble is not with your characterization of the mediocre efficacy of the vaccines, it’s with the misinformation about their supposed dangers. I would not give my baby or toddler these vaccines because of their lack of risk from Covid, the waning efficacy of the vaccines, and the real if rare risk of the vaccine adverse effects. That doesn’t mean I would advise a 60 year old that getting a vaccine is more risky than being unvaccinated and getting Covid. The data doesn’t support that.

 

[oneforthebus]

My mode, as you know, is to share what I see that is developing, new, and hopefully true. I'll admit some of it has turned out to be wrong,

There is a difference between new, developing or changing information and blatant lies made up by an organized anti-vaxx community that has existed for decades. E.G. saying Australia just started a SADS registry because of a sudden rise in SADS when it actually started the registry in 2019. Or a video claiming animal trials were stopped because all the animals were dying which has been debunked over and over again. Or distorting VAERS data over and over again to claim it says something it doesn't. Which has been going on in the anti-vax movement for decades, has been debunked by dozens of scientists but persists to this day. So the CDC is lying to us but people who spread these kinds of blatant distortions are telling us the truth. That's what you'd have us believe.

You are smarter than that.

 

[Iron95]

Right, but anti-vaxxers on substack speak nothing but the God’s honest truth, right?
No worries, letting you guys get back to your echo cham

Why must you assign names to other people? I dont know what substack is. I just use my common sense.

 

[oneforthebus]

Why must you assign names to other people? I dont know what substack is. I just use my common sense.

Assign names to who? I wasn't referring to you. I was referring to the sources of some of Tim's posts, some of which are long time anti-vaxxers.

 

[Iron95]

Assign names to who? I wasn't referring to you. I was referring to the sources of some of Tim's posts, some of which are long time anti-vaxxers.

OK I dont want to fight with you. I have never had any issues with you before and I have always had high respect for you. We just have differing opinions. And I dont want to take it too far.

 

[ZonaBurgh]

AND… the FDA didn’t approve it.

Did you not understand the point of the post, or are you being intentionally obtuse?

Never mind, rhetorical question.

But you are correct that it never did get FDA approval, however tens of thousands of Americans did take the drug during clinical trials in this country, before they realized the danger.

The problem I have with the approval process for the messenger RNA vaccines is that steps taken for approval were rushed, skipped or completely ignored.

The general public is the clinical trial.

 

[Tim Steelersfan]

There is a difference between new, developing or changing information and blatant lies made up by an organized anti-vaxx community that has existed for decades. E.G. saying Australia just started a SADS registry because of a sudden rise in SADS when it actually started the registry in 2019. Or a video claiming animal trials were stopped because all the animals were dying which has been debunked over and over again. Or distorting VAERS data over and over again to claim it says something it doesn't. Which has been going on in the anti-vax movement for decades, has been debunked by dozens of scientists but persists to this day. So the CDC is lying to us but people who spread these kinds of blatant distortions are telling us the truth. That's what you'd have us believe.

You are smarter than that.

The notion of misinformation is one-sided and wrong. It always is historically speaking. The popular thinking of the moment always rules. Any who have contradictory opinions are cast as misinformation spreaders. “Popular” thinking is the accepted thought of the day or of the time, right or wrong. Those who subscribe to the popular thinking “du jour” are protected, because it is the majority thought in that moment in time.

This dynamic has existed throughout the history of mankind.

There used to be the worldwide belief that the earth was flat. It was the “science.” It wasn’t questioned. When it was questioned, those who did were labeled heretics. When people knew that the earth was flat, any opposing thought was condemned. Those who challenged that thinking were ostracized, laughed at, labeled heretics, called crazy, or worse.

It is easy to be on the side of popular theory because the majority subscribe to it.

We have seen this dynamic throughout the pandemic. Doctors who challenged the popular thinking about lockdowns, the vaccines, etc were condemned, banned from social media, labeled “misinformation spreaders.” They were called dangerous. Accused of killing people even. Because they dared question the flat earth theories of the moment. No different than what happened thousands of years ago.

It provides for an interesting situation. If you subscribe to the popular theory, you are protected. Even if that popular theory is wrong. Flat out wrong. Later proven false.

The popular majority can always later fall back on excuses like “we were learning” or “we didn’t know better at the time” or “the science evolved.” But the fact remains, at the time, they were indeed spreading misinformation. But it won’t be - when corrected - labeled as having been spreading misinformation. Ever.

Think about the the origins of the Covid virus. The MSM-supported messaging was the virus leaped from an animal to man. It COULD NOT have been lab-borne. Anyone speaking to the contrary was labeled a misinformation spreader. Those subscribing to the popular theory were “in the right.” Those opposing that view were conspiracy theorists.

But it turns out, the conspiracy theorists were right. It was lab-borne. Which also means that those who held the “popular” theory du jour - that the virus emanated from an animal-to-man transmission were indeed misinformation spreaders. Yet never labeled as such when the truth came to light.

Over the past 2 plus years, there have been many misinformation spreaders. The majority labeled as such were those questioning the popular thinking. Those going against the CDC, the WHO, the White House, the MSM. Widely condemned in the media and elsewhere for their non-compliant thinking.

Yet so often those questioning proved right as time passed. Think of everything that was labeled misinformation that ended up being true.

• The origins of Covid was shown to be wrong.
• The US Government’s funding of gain of function research was proven to have happened
• The testing and trialing of the vaccines was proven to be far less than it was claimed to have been
• People claimed the pharmas were hiding the negative aspects of their vaccine trials
• We were told the vaccines would prevent the spread of Covid.
• We were told the vaccines were superior to natural immunity
• We were told that those vaccinated were 20x less likely to die of Covid than those unvaccinated. Then 10x. Then 5x. Then 2x. Then?
• We were told masking worked.
• We were told that social distancing worked.
• We were told these vaccines were as safe as any other vaccines previously introduced.
• We were told that VAERS reports were being investigated (FOIA documents showed they weren’t)
• We were told that the Covid death numbers provided by the CDC were accurate.
• We were initially told the vaccines had no effects on your heart, clotting, reproductive issues

Anyone and everyone claiming any of the above was true (now proven to be false or seriously in question) were spreading misinformation.

Yet no one sharing any of the above thoughts will ever be accused of spreading misinformation. Because it was the popular (yet erroneous) thinking of the day.

Why is it that the popular theory supporters are never labeled misinformation spreaders when proven wrong? Yet those who question popular thought always are?

Over the past two years, the largest spreaders of misinformation have indeed been our Governments and agencies and media who’ve non-stop communicated such false information to the populace. None of them will suffer what others have for questioning the popular, yet incorrect thinking.

I hope more “misinformation” spreaders continue to question popular thought.

 

[Tim Steelersfan]

I’ve already stated numerous times that I agree that the risk benefit for young healthy people makes no sense. I’ve already stated numerous times that these vaccines are clearly less than a success especially against the newer variants. Did you not read that? Apparently you are incapable of distinguishing between “some of the things posted here are misinformation” and “everyone must rush out and get vaccinated even toddlers”. My quibble is not with your characterization of the mediocre efficacy of the vaccines, it’s with the misinformation about their supposed dangers. I would not give my baby or toddler these vaccines because of their lack of risk from Covid, the waning efficacy of the vaccines, and the real if rare risk of the vaccine adverse effects. That doesn’t mean I would advise a 60 year old that getting a vaccine is more risky than being unvaccinated and getting Covid. The data doesn’t support that.

Rather egocentric to think that my posting of the WSJ was aimed at you. I didn't tag you. I posted it here for all to read. For general awareness - to inform this public that getting toddlers vaxed isn't smart.

Why did you think that was directed at you specifically?

 

[Tim Steelersfan]

Assign names to who? I wasn't referring to you. I was referring to the sources of some of Tim's posts, some of which are long time anti-vaxxers.

Labeled "anti-vaxxers" because they have dared challenge the popular thought of the day.

I wouldn't label Alex Berenson and Steve Kirsch anti-vaxxers. They are anti-covid-vaccines. Big difference. Steve Kirsch funded Covid trials. Kirsch founded the Covid-19 Early Treatment Fund (contributing $1 million of his own money) and bringing in donations from Silicon Valley to try to find cures to Covid early on.

The media canceled him because he also supported the use of hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin (which I took). The popular thought was they wouldn't work. So he was eradicated and banned from social media for supporting their use, like so many medical personnel were.

You know, because Ivermectin is horse-dewormer. Whoopi says so.

 

[Tim Steelersfan]

The problem I have with the approval process for the messenger RNA vaccines is that steps taken for approval were rushed, skipped or completely ignored.

The general public is the clinical trial.

Reposted for emphasis.

 

[Tim Steelersfan]

There is a difference between new, developing or changing information and blatant lies made up by an organized anti-vaxx community that has existed for decades. E.G. saying Australia just started a SADS registry because of a sudden rise in SADS when it actually started the registry in 2019. Or a video claiming animal trials were stopped because all the animals were dying which has been debunked over and over again. Or distorting VAERS data over and over again to claim it says something it doesn't. Which has been going on in the anti-vax movement for decades, has been debunked by dozens of scientists but persists to this day. So the CDC is lying to us but people who spread these kinds of blatant distortions are telling us the truth. That's what you'd have us believe.

You are smarter than that.

Yet no acknowledging the rest of my post that you indeed have spread misinformation as well...something you so vehemently condemn here. You selectively cut out the rest of the post where I copied and pasted your vacillating comments over 2+ years about the vaccines preventing serious illness and death...including you contradicting yourself over the span of two days...over the past 3 days alone.

You're smarter than that.

 

[oneforthebus]

Yet no acknowledging the rest of my post that you indeed have spread misinformation as well...something you so vehemently condemn here. You selectively cut out the rest of the post where I copied and pasted your vacillating comments over 2+ years about the vaccines preventing serious illness and death...including you contradicting yourself over the span of two days...over the past 3 days alone.

You're smarter than that.

My comments have vacillated over the years because the effectiveness of the vaccines has changed with changing variants. The virulence of the variants has changed over the years. You know this, but great example of how you twist things to try and say something that isn’t true.

My last comment that you posted was asking a question. It wasn’t stating anything as a fact. And data has since shown that the vaccines do reduce hospitalization with omicron though to a lesser degree and duration than with earlier variants. I won’t bother posting because of course if it’s on the CDC website it’s a lie. Omicron of course appears to be less virulent but in people who are at risk the extra protection is important. Hopefully they’ll come up with more effective vaccines as I’ve also repeatedly stated. For now these offer some protection though it isn’t perfect by any means.