Covid Vaccine

[Troglodyte]

Again, for about the 5th time in the last 4 pages, a notable increase in the increase is an increase.

Got it?

The ESTIMATED INCREASE has absolutely nothing to do with the Covid vaccine as it’s based on data from PRIOR to the vaccine.

Got it?

https://acsjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.3322/caac.21820

 

[Troglodyte]

I didn't say that this shot didn't reduce mortality rates for the vulnerable percentage of the population when the virus first appeared in 2020.
What I did say is that it can't be proven that it does anything in 2024 to reduce symptoms, when symptoms today are little more than sniffles.

Not true, people are still being hospitalized with Covid and dying from it.

What marketing is saying is "I tested positive for Covid, so I'm not taking a chance and will consume yet another medication." Go Pfizer!!
The risk-benefit of this product doesn't warrant it's continued use.

Source? People have been saying that about the flu vaccine for years and accusing it of causing autism. That doesn’t make it true.

I'm not aware of any current study saying that it absolutely reduces symptoms of those that continually test positive, even after receiving every possible booster.

https://doh.wa.gov/sites/default/files/2022-02/421-010-CasesInNotFullyVaccinated.pdf

People testing positive isn’t proof that it doesn’t work. People continue to get hurt and killed in car accidents, that’s not proof that seat belts and air bags don’t work.

Getting another booster in 2024 is prompted by fearmongering, greed and nothing more. My opinion. And after all of this, it's still a product that did not go through normal FDA testing, which means this story will continue to unfold.

It’s been over three years, how long did you want the testing to go on?

 

[Troglodyte]

It is 1,000% obfuscating because it has been stated over and over that there is an UPTICK in the rise in cancer cases (predicted) that you want to ignore. You explain away the predicted uptick by using the historical "cases have been rising." Convenient. Lazy. Predictable for an ideologue.

OMFG! Because the ACS, that you repeatedly referred to, used historical (prior to the Covid vaccine) data for that estimate.

You’re so ideological you’re forgetting how this argument started.

I didn't link it to the vaccines. You're just a bumbling retard, but we knew this. Go back to the original post and read what I said. "Why aren't we questioning the vaccines as a potential culprit?"

You didn’t link it to the vaccines, you just asked “why not link it to the vaccines?”

There's no linking there. There's a request to question the vaccines as a potential cause.

You obfuscate.

No, it’s baseless and pointless. Just ask the ACS, who recommends the vaccine.

And I've only addressed this now 14 times. The ACS is predicting a record number of cases and the other article corroborate we will set records we shouldn't be setting.

Based on data that has nothing to do with the Covid vaccine.

See? Complete ideology. You literally believe the vaccines cannot have caused one cancer, one death, one injury.

You cannot be reasoned with. The flu vaccine has done these things. But the Covid vaccine is your Holy Grail and shant be questioned.

No one correlated. We said the vaccines should be a suspect, just like jelly beans, preservatives, grilled food, and everything else that is studied as a potential cause of cancer.

You're this retarded.

No, there’s a basis for processed food to be suspected in causing cancer, just like alcohol and tobacco.

Retarded is inventing your own science and playing make believe as a grown *** man.

 

[ZonaBurgh]

I’m not going to argue this is an especially effective vaccine and I think most people don’t believe these boosters that are developed for three variants ago are doing much at all. I’m not arguing everyone should go out and get as many boosters as they can. I’m simply arguing that a lot of the fear mongering about deadly side effects is based in misinformation and twisting of data that has little or no relevance to the topic. You as a medical professional know this is true. You must.

Of course I do. However, I'm also keeping an open mind that we don't know everything yet. This product, I won't call it a vaccine, because it doesn't fall into the definition of a vaccine, does have more side effects than any previously released vaccine. Damn, I said I wouldn't use that term.

Now, do we definitively know that it's responsible for every complication attributed to it? No, we do not, but we would be ignorant to blindly not question and pursue those answers.
What we know now, as opposed to what we were led to believe in 2020, is all any rational person needs to know, that "the science" changes, it always does.

Risk/benefit, it applies to every action, or non-action, in life.

I'm not sure Tim believes some of the stuff he posts, using some just to get a reaction. Trog on the other hand.........

 

[xjx]

The few that were able to get any compensation for their heart problems due to vaccinations only got around $1500 and were sent packing.

 

[Tim Steelersfan]

Again, for it to be related to the vaccines, you would have to see an anomaly in the data that....

Full stop, didn't read beyond. Why? Because you continue to ASSUME I or someone else said the vaccines ARE causing cancer.

Repeating again because the point doesn't seem to stick...

1. I posted links about the PREDICTED overall increase in diagnoses in 2024 that are primed to set records
2. I noted further that we will see increases in younger age groups that are alarming
3. I ASKED why more studying isn't being done on the vaccines as it relates to cancer.

You continue to point fingers at people accusing them of saying that the vaccines DO cause cancer.

 

[Tim Steelersfan]

You’re so ideological you’re forgetting how this argument started.

Again, stop stealing my lines. I know exactly how this thread started. I shared articles where the ACS is predicting massive record numbers of cancer diagnoses. I wondered out loud why more focus isn't on studying the vaccines and their potential link to said cancer growth.

You didn’t link it to the vaccines, you just asked “why not link it to the vaccines?”

Once again, don't go full retard. You can't help yourself. See above. See original post.

TSF: "There's a request to question the vaccines as a potential cause [of cancer]"

No, it’s baseless and pointless. Just ask the ACS, who recommends the vaccine.

This comment takes the cake. Proof positive of your faith and ideology. You actually say it is baseless to investigate the vaccines for potentially causing cancer. Jesus H Christ. WTF is wrong with you? ALL drugs are mandated to go through rigorous and continual testing, but you want this one to be an exempt?? A drug that's in 72% of human beings worldwide....you want to be exempted from further testing. Dayum. Just dayum.

There's some serious **** broken in you.

Based on data that has nothing to do with the Covid vaccine.

That we know of, given the incredibly limited amount of testing.

No, there’s a basis for processed food to be suspected in causing cancer, just like alcohol and tobacco.

Each of which were and are still studied as it relates to cancer, unlike these mRNA vaccines.

Retarded is inventing your own science and playing make believe as a grown *** man.

Suggesting medicines go through rigorous testing and evaluation is not inventing or re-inventing science. That's advocating for the tried and true methods of science to be applied - as they are for all drugs.

Inventing science is like you, above, suggesting we shouldn't even test/research/evaluate the mRNA vaccines as being potential carcinogens. You literally suggested throwing science out the window.

 

[Tim Steelersfan]

The ESTIMATED INCREASE has absolutely nothing to do with the Covid vaccine as it’s based on data from PRIOR to the vaccine.

Got it?

https://acsjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.3322/caac.21820

It's amazing how this simple premise escapes you...that you can't understand it.

ACS predicts alarming new rise in cancer cases (a greater increase than increases we've been seeing)
The ACS was asked why? Why are we going to see these alarming, greater than normal increases
Everything was pointed to as a potential suspect EXCEPT the vaccines that conveniently were injected into 72% of the worldwide population.

This crowd, this group asked - why are vaccines not a part of the suspected list of potential culprits.

You read the above and say (while drooling) - They are saying the vaccines cause cancer!!!

You are this stupid.

 

[Tim Steelersfan]

Not true, people are still being hospitalized with Covid and dying from it.

LMAO, as OFTB likes to say, this is how misinformation begins. LOL

The 7-day moving average for Covid deaths on the planet is 214 deaths. PER DAY. For the ENTIRE planet.
On average, 795 to 1,781 die per day from Influenza.

Jesus Christ.

It's no longer "It's just the flu bro." It ain't even the flu.

 

[Tim Steelersfan]

Of course I do. However, I'm also keeping an open mind that we don't know everything yet. This product, I won't call it a vaccine, because it doesn't fall into the definition of a vaccine, does have more side effects than any previously released vaccine. Damn, I said I wouldn't use that term.

Now, do we definitively know that it's responsible for every complication attributed to it? No, we do not, but we would be ignorant to blindly not question and pursue those answers.
What we know now, as opposed to what we were led to believe in 2020, is all any rational person needs to know, that "the science" changes, it always does.

Risk/benefit, it applies to every action, or non-action, in life.

I'm not sure Tim believes some of the stuff he posts, using some just to get a reaction. Trog on the other hand.........

The majority of what I post is to reinforce the points you made above so eloquently, specifically:

• ...we don't know everything yet.
• This product does have more side effects than any previously released vaccine.
• "the science" changes, it always does

It angers me that the Left, the media (all of it) and the machine just blindly state "The Science is Settled" given what you've said.

If this were a run of the mill vaccine, it would be different.

This is an all new, radical technology that had never previously worked that is now in 72% of the world's population (much of it by force and coercion) and we are doing LESS questioning, studying and evaluating of it.

We should be doing far more testing/evaluation on these drugs.

 

[Steeltime]

The ESTIMATED INCREASE has absolutely nothing to do with the Covid vaccine as it’s based on data from PRIOR to the vaccine.

Got it?

https://acsjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.3322/caac.21820

So they stopped counting cancer deaths as of January 1, 2021? Okaaaay ...

No, you blithering imbecile, you idiot, you moron, you brain-dead Covidian, health agencies still count cancer deaths and the number of cancer deaths among the under-50 population has increased (that means gone up, more of that condition, a higher number) since the vax/shot was forced on us introduced.

Is that due to the vax/shot? Very possibly particularly where the data show that the increasing cancer deaths among the under-50 population was actually declining before the vax/shot and no other explanation has been offered.

Your moronic obstinance in evaluating this point ("cAnCeR HiGh BeEfOrE vAx ShOtZ!") simply underscores how dumb you are. And you claim to be responsible for looking after the elderly in care facilities? Jesus, we might want to look at the mortality rate in Floggy-run death mills.

 

[Troglodyte]

Again, stop stealing my lines. I know exactly how this thread started. I shared articles where the ACS is predicting massive record numbers of cancer diagnoses.

And I showed you how they arrived at that prediction. It has absolutely nothing to do with the Covid vaccine. FACT.

I wondered out loud why more focus isn't on studying the vaccines and their potential link to said cancer growth.

Because it’s baseless and therefor pointless. Why aren’t they studying the Covid vaccine as possibly preventing cancer cases from being even higher?

This comment takes the cake. Proof positive of your faith and ideology. You actually say it is baseless to investigate the vaccines for potentially causing cancer. Jesus H Christ. WTF is wrong with you? ALL drugs are mandated to go through rigorous and continual testing, but you want this one to be an exempt?? A drug that's in 72% of human beings worldwide....you want to be exempted from further testing. Dayum. Just dayum.

There's some serious **** broken in you.

How do suppose scientists secure funding for research? By throwing out random events and baselessly suggesting they may not be coincidental? **** no! They need to establish a plausible causation or use existing research to support their hypothesis.

That we know of, given the incredibly limited amount of testing.

Each of which were and are still studied as it relates to cancer, unlike these mRNA vaccines.

Suggesting medicines go through rigorous testing and evaluation is not inventing or re-inventing science. That's advocating for the tried and true methods of science to be applied - as they are for all drugs.

Inventing science is like you, above, suggesting we shouldn't even test/research/evaluate the mRNA vaccines as being potential carcinogens. You literally suggested throwing science out the window.

Again, it been over three years. Billions of vaccines administered worldwide. Who says it’s not being researched and evaluated. That’s your twisted dystopian fantasy. Like any and all scientific research is passed by you first.

 

[Troglodyte]

It's amazing how this simple premise escapes you...that you can't understand it.

ACS predicts alarming new rise in cancer cases (a greater increase than increases we've been seeing)
The ACS was asked why? Why are we going to see these alarming, greater than normal increases

No they did not! They know why based on projections using historical data from PRIOR to the vaccine. If the vaccine is also causing cancer cases it has nothing to do with their estimate. HTFG!

Everything was pointed to as a potential suspect EXCEPT the vaccines that conveniently were injected into 72% of the worldwide population.

How were they supposed to include a potential cause that didn’t exist in their data collection period?

This crowd, this group asked - why are vaccines not a part of the suspected list of potential culprits.

BECAUSE.
THEY.
DIDN’T
EXIST.

 

[Troglodyte]

So they stopped counting cancer deaths as of January 1, 2021? Okaaaay ...

No, you blithering imbecile, you idiot, you moron, you brain-dead Covidian, health agencies still count cancer deaths and the number of cancer deaths among the under-50 population has increased (that means gone up, more of that condition, a higher number) since the vax/shot was forced on us introduced.

First off all, it’s CASES we’re discussing. Secondly, read the ACS study. That’s what started this whole **** sandwich eating contest by you loons. It has NOTHING to do with anything after 2020.

Again, no ******* way you were a lawyer.

Is that due to the vax/shot? Very possibly particularly where the data show that the increasing cancer deaths among the under-50 population was actually declining before the vax/shot and no other explanation has been offered.

No it wasnt, you ******* moron. It’s been increasing for decades. Tim doesn’t even know what his screen shot graph represented. He was throwing **** against the wall.

Your moronic obstinance in evaluating this point ("cAnCeR HiGh BeEfOrE vAx ShOtZ!") simply underscores how dumb you are. And you claim to be responsible for looking after the elderly in care facilities? Jesus, we might want to look at the mortality rate in Floggy-run death mills.

No, I don’t care for elderly in a care center. Another thing you’re completely wrong about.

 

[oneforthebus]

Full stop, didn't read beyond. Why? Because you continue to ASSUME I or someone else said the vaccines ARE causing cancer.

Repeating again because the point doesn't seem to stick...

1. I posted links about the PREDICTED overall increase in diagnoses in 2024 that are primed to set records
2. I noted further that we will see increases in younger age groups that are alarming
3. I ASKED why more studying isn't being done on the vaccines as it relates to cancer.

You continue to point fingers at people accusing them of saying that the vaccines DO cause cancer.

1. If cancer is increasing every year, then every year we will “set records”. That is what “increasing” means. It doesn’t mean that 2024 will be an anomaly that is out of line with the trend over the last several years. The chart you posted about overall cancers shows them increasing up through 2020. A year before there were vaccines and probably close to two years before most people had gotten them. The fact that cancers continue to increase after people got them is not a signal that the vaccines might be responsible. Unless the increase is above and beyond the trend that already existed.
2. We noted that the “alarming increases in cancers in younger people”, according to the article whose headline you yourself posted, began in the 1990s and continues on to this day.
3. If there are signals that cancers are increasing at even faster rates since the widespread administration of the vaccines, that will surely be studied. Maybe there are, but I have not seen data to indicate there are. You have posted no data that indicate there are. To my knowledge there is no vaccine (or shot, if you prefer) that has ever been shown to cause cancer. Absent any signal of an unusual increase since the widespread administration of the vaccines, there would not be much scientific evidence to initiate such a study. They don’t normally initiate a study of every drug in the manner of “I wonder if it causes illness a. Or illness b. Or any number of thousands of other illnesses.” That would not be feasible. There were signals that other illnesses, such as myocarditis for one, were happening at greater rates than was normal or trending. That was studied, and the world was informed about it. Not sure why you think the same wouldn’t be done if a cancer signal was being seen.

You may not be outright saying the vaccines cause cancer, but you are certainly implying there is reason to be concerned that they are when no such reason currently exists. You know it, everyone does.

 

[IndySteel]

1. If cancer is increasing every year, then every year we will “set records”. That is what “increasing” means. It doesn’t mean that 2024 will be an anomaly that is out of line with the trend over the last several years. The chart you posted about overall cancers shows them increasing up through 2020. A year before there were vaccines and probably close to two years before most people had gotten them. The fact that cancers continue to increase after people got them is not a signal that the vaccines might be responsible. Unless the increase is above and beyond the trend that already existed.
2. We noted that the “alarming increases in cancers in younger people”, according to the article whose headline you yourself posted, began in the 1990s and continues on to this day.
3. If there are signals that cancers are increasing at even faster rates since the widespread administration of the vaccines, that will surely be studied. Maybe there are, but I have not seen data to indicate there are. You have posted no data that indicate there are. To my knowledge there is no vaccine (or shot, if you prefer) that has ever been shown to cause cancer. Absent any signal of an unusual increase since the widespread administration of the vaccines, there would not be much scientific evidence to initiate such a study. They don’t normally initiate a study of every drug in the manner of “I wonder if it causes illness a. Or illness b. Or any number of thousands of other illnesses.” That would not be feasible. There were signals that other illnesses, such as myocarditis for one, were happening at greater rates than was normal or trending. That was studied, and the world was informed about it. Not sure why you think the same wouldn’t be done if a cancer signal was being seen.

You may not be outright saying the vaccines cause cancer, but you are certainly implying there is reason to be concerned that they are when no such reason currently exists. You know it, everyone does.

The spiders turn into tumors And clots. Duh, everybody knows that.

 

[Tim Steelersfan]

And I showed you how they arrived at that prediction. It has absolutely nothing to do with the Covid vaccine. FACT.

The only thing you've said is it was based on prior projections. You did not demonstrate why the ACS predicts this uptick will be HIGHER than the general increases we have been seeing.

Because it’s baseless and therefor pointless.

Negative. They continually test all drugs on the market. You ask that these drugs be exempt. You are therefore an ideologue. These drugs, more than any others, should be under rigorous inspection.

How do suppose scientists secure funding for research? By throwing out random events and baselessly suggesting they may not be coincidental? **** no! They need to establish a plausible causation or use existing research to support their hypothesis.

Complete diversion Fleggo. You're once again dancing and deflecting from the premise. You demand these vaccines are NOT studied. You also assume that the ONLY research done on drugs is by scientists seeking funding.

You are this stupid.

Again, it been over three years. Billions of vaccines administered worldwide. Who says it’s not being researched and evaluated. That’s your twisted dystopian fantasy. Like any and all scientific research is passed by you first.

And as has been stated in this thread hundreds of times over, this vaccine has more safety signals and has caused more human harm than any vaccine in current circulation by epic proportions. That...is...why.

I say, and the evidence shows, it's NOT being investigated and researched to the degrees it should be. Case in point, autopsies on supposed vaccine victims. That's one of a thousands of data points. There's mountains of factual evidence showing these vaccines are not being held to the standards every prior drug has been.

 

[Tim Steelersfan]

No they did not!

Demonstrate where they DID NOT.

How were they supposed to include a potential cause that didn’t exist in their data collection period?

. LMAO...when you have a spike in cancers, you investigate ALL potential causes. You don't dismiss them because Lester Holt told you "they are safe."

BECAUSE.
THEY.
DIDN’T
EXIST.

NOW.

They are not NOW being investigated as a potential carcinogen. In a day and age of rising cancers, and rising cancers among the young, they are NOT being investigated to the degree they should be.

 

[Tim Steelersfan]

1. If cancer is increasing every year, then every year we will “set records”. That is what “increasing” means.

Fully aware, don't be insulting. Many of the reports are calling the increases "alarming" - which means, more than normal.

The chart you posted

From the American Cancer Society, that refutes your claim about the trend from the 1990s, if you recall.

Unless the increase is above and beyond the trend that already existed.

Which is what some of these articles, interpreting the ACS report, are saying. It will be an abnormal increase.

2. We noted that the “alarming increases in cancers in younger people”, according to the article whose headline you yourself posted, began in the 1990s and continues on to this day.

Who's headline I did not write, so it must be misinformation, amirite?

3. If there are signals that cancers are increasing at even faster rates since the widespread administration of the vaccines, that will surely be studied.

Your faith in Government is somewhat disturbing. I'll defer to @Confluence who is deeper on this topic than I am, but these vaccines were released upon mankind bypassing the rigorous standard testing they should have gone through. Throughout this thread, we've demonstrated how autopsies aren't performed on suspected vaccine death victims. We've shown how the CDC purges records to VAERS and how records are not investigated.

I have zero faith they will "surely be studied." Evidence indicates otherwise.

Maybe there are, but I have not seen data to indicate there are. You have posted no data that indicate there are.

I have posted data/suspicions that there are. This may have been during periods you tapped out. Or data you conveniently classified as misinformation.

To my knowledge there is no vaccine (or shot, if you prefer) that has ever been shown to cause cancer.

Have any vaccines caused suppressed immune systems that allow cancers to develop, grow, take over? These vaccines in innumerable studies have been identified as potentially causing suppressed immunity issues.

Absent any signal of an unusual increase since the widespread administration of the vaccines, there would not be much scientific evidence to initiate such a study.

Absent normal, rigorous testing of a drug (that all other drugs needed to go through prior to be given to mankind), one would assume they would be looking into this - like you assume the CDC is looking at all reported incidents.

They don’t normally initiate a study of every drug in the manner of “I wonder if it causes illness a. Or illness b. Or any number of thousands of other illnesses.” That would not be feasible.

No, one would not want to see if a new vaccine might cause blepharitis given it's rare and not deadly. One WOULD imagine they would want to look at every single new drug introduced anywhere on the planet for a link to cancer, one of the top killers of mankind.

You may not be outright saying the vaccines cause cancer

I have not said that. You and Floggy misread and assumed I (or others) said directly it was causing cancer. I said...we should be studying it deeply to see how the vaccines are affecting the human body (given the number of studies out there that ARE indicating it may be contributing to the rise in cancers).

but you are certainly implying there is reason to be concerned

I absolutely am saying there is a reason to be concerned.

that they are when no such reason currently exists. You know it, everyone does.

So investigate it. That's what I asked before you and Floggy put words in my mouth.

 

[Stewey]

Vaccinations cause global warming too.

Shouldn't that be a concern to you libs?

https://www.politico.eu/article/mass-coronavirus-vaccinations-environmental-impact-climate-change/

 

[Confluence]

Vaccinations cause global warming too.

Shouldn't that be a concern to you libs?

https://www.politico.eu/article/mass-coronavirus-vaccinations-environmental-impact-climate-change/

3 years old.
Maybe floggy will like it

 

[Stewey]

3 years old.
Maybe floggy will like it

This thread is older than that.
Dec 16th was it's 4th year anniversary!

 

[Sarge]

This thread is older than that.
Dec 16th was it's 4th year anniversary!

That explains the senility in this thread.

 

[Confluence]

That explains the senility in this thread.

It's not senility. It's dogmatic faith in what people are being told by government agencies vs critical thinking.

Just like 2 generations ago when Pentagon spending on $90 hammers and $800 toilets caused frustration and outrage, but no real change happened because of fear of Soviets and cold war. Look what the MIC did with the "peace dividend " and uniparty Superpower.

Now we have a plainly emerging Pharmaceutical Regulatory Capture problem. Watch the WHO erode individual liberties in the name of health, while people eat **** foods and grow weaker and sicker.

Teach your children well.

 

[ZonaBurgh]