Covid Vaccine

[Troglodyte]

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.

I think those are you words. The ACS is predicting cases will surpass 2 million for the first time. They estimate there were nearly 2 million in 2023.

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.

WTF? I ask? Who do I ask? I don’t care if they test the Covid Vaccine. I’m sure thousands are researching it.

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.

Now it’s a demand? OBEY MY AUTHORITI! I think you might be losing it.

You are this stupid.

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.

Again, serious people aren’t going to investigate various potential side effects based on “Well, a lot of people got vaccinated.” There has to be an objective reason to suspect causality. Being that the elderly got vaccinated at a very high rate and also represent the vast majority of cancer cases, I would suspect that most new cases are going to be among the vaccinated. That doesn’t suggest causality. You need a link even when controlling for other variables. There are tens of millions of doctors around the world, I’m sure some of them are looking for potential links.

 

[Troglodyte]

Demonstrate where they DID NOT.

What don’t you understand and about “aging and growth of the population”

https://www.cancer.org/research/acs-research-news/facts-and-figures-2024.html

. 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."

What spike? Your words.

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.

Again, because nobody has found a reason for such an investigation. Do you really think that the tens of millions of doctors around the world are asleep at the wheel on this and Tim Steelerfan has figured it out? Don’t answer that.

Get a textbook on Research Design and Analysis, read it, and then come back and apologize to OFTB and me for being such a naive, obstinate jerk.

 

[Confluence]

So, the CDC---during a "pandemic"---didn't want to shock/panic the people by releasing an alert that the mRNA Covid shots caused myocarditis.

This is stunning, and demonstrative that those with the power choose none of truth, science or care, but rather to exert greater influence by withholding health information in a time of unprecedented health scare. They chose their reputation over truth and actual disclosure of scientific data.

Why does the CDC exist?

 

[Confluence]

Get a textbook on Research Design and Analysis, read it, and then come back and apologize to OFTB and me for being such a naive, obstinate jejerk.

You are an obfuscating fool.

Grab a link---which OFTB posted long ago above---and read about how pFizer's own clinical trial submissions show that they repeatedly (pre-approval, during EUA, and post-approval ) moved the goalposts on the trials, and then simply cxld the the control group.
How is this richest drug ever known to man able to pass any reasonable test for safety and/or efficacy (you know, that they misled about) in the modern pharmaceutical research world?

Research Design and Analysis, you suggest Above. Do you even have a clue what you are referring to?

 

[oneforthebus]

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.

No it’s reality vs. fantasy. I have no dogmatic faith that the government or the medical industry is always right. Nobody in fact is always right and as I have mentioned as nauseum, EVERY medical treatment has adverse effects in some people. I simply occasionally point out misinformation and fear mongering when I see it. Lord knows this thread has enough people who fervently believe the vaccines are evil tools of the Illuminati and demonic pharmaceutical companies to slaughter people by the millions. I inject a little balance now and then for my own amusement.

 

[Tim Steelersfan]

I think

This is typically when you get into trouble.

WTF? I ask? Who do I ask? I don’t care if they test the Covid Vaccine.

Now you're contradicting yourself post by post, page by page. You said it is baseless to test the vaccines being linked to cancer.

I’m sure thousands are researching it.

As I said to OFTB, your faith in Government is disturbing. We have documented evidence of the CDC scrubbing VAERS, not investigating cases, autopsies intentionally not being performed on suspect vax victims...but you're sure they are testing the vaccines.

Now it’s a demand?

That is exactly how you come across. It's "baseless" so therefore, do not research it.

Again, serious people aren’t going to investigate various potential side effects based on “Well, a lot of people got vaccinated.” There has to be an objective reason to suspect causality. Being that the elderly got vaccinated at a very high rate and also represent the vast majority of cancer cases, I would suspect that most new cases are going to be among the vaccinated. That doesn’t suggest causality. You need a link even when controlling for other variables. There are tens of millions of doctors around the world, I’m sure some of them are looking for potential links.

"A lot of people got vaccinated" is but one data point. You consider them with other data points, like

• studies showing the shots cause suppressed immunity.
• studies showing suspected links between the shots and cancer (yes, they are out there and have been posted here)
• all of the data on excess mortality (in 2022, excess mortality rose by 44% in the UK, then by 10% in 2023; Australia and Canada were up by over 16% each)

Something(s) is/are killing a lot of excess people.

Those 3 simple bullets, and countless others, are why you investigate.

And I'm glad you're "sure" they are investigating. We are not.

 

[Tim Steelersfan]

What don’t you understand and about “aging and growth of the population”

SMDH. Aging has nothing to do with the rise in cancers in lower age groups.

What spike? Your words.

Not my words. The American Cancer Society's words: "New cancer diagnoses in the U.S. are expected to top 2 million for the first time in 2024, driven in large part by an alarming increase in cancers among younger Americans"

Again, because nobody has found a reason for such an investigation. Do you really think that the tens of millions of doctors around the world are asleep at the wheel on this and Tim Steelerfan has figured it out? Don’t answer that.

There are an inordinate number of reasons to test them as listed.

Good Lord, are you going to stick to a position? You've gone from "nobody has found a reason for such an investigation" to "it's baseless" to do testing to "I'm sure they are doing testing." WTF??

What will your next Fleggo position be???

 

[Tim Steelersfan]

So, the CDC---during a "pandemic"---didn't want to shock/panic the people by releasing an alert that the mRNA Covid shots caused myocarditis.

"But I'm sure they are doing testing on the vaccines' potential link to cancer. Sure of it."

 

[Tim Steelersfan]

So, the CDC---during a "pandemic"---didn't want to shock/panic the people by releasing an alert that the mRNA Covid shots caused myocarditis.

This is stunning, and demonstrative that those with the power choose none of truth, science or care, but rather to exert greater influence by withholding health information in a time of unprecedented health scare. They chose their reputation over truth and actual disclosure of scientific data.

Why does the CDC exist?

To what you refer. They have our best interests in mind.

EXCLUSIVE: Email Reveals Why CDC Didn’t Issue Alert on COVID Vaccines and Myocarditis​

CDC officials were worried about causing panic.

https://www.theepochtimes.com/article/exclusive-email-reveals-why-cdc-didnt-issue-alert-on-covid-vaccines-and-myocarditis-5571675?src_src=epochHG&src_cmp=CFP

 

[Troglodyte]

Research Design and Analysis, you suggest Above. Do you even have a clue what you are referring to?

It’s a thing.

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/book/10.1002/9781119563600

 

[Troglodyte]

Now you're contradicting yourself post by post, page by page. You said it is baseless to test the vaccines being linked to cancer.

Researching the vaccine. Assuming the vaccine could be linked to cancer because “A lot of people got vaccinated” is baseless.

As I said to OFTB, your faith in Government is disturbing. We have documented evidence of the CDC scrubbing VAERS, not investigating cases, autopsies intentionally not being performed on suspect vax victims...but you're sure they are testing the vaccines.

And your conviction that Pfizer not only controls the US Government and the CDC, but all health agencies (not to mention universities) across the world is delusional.

That is exactly how you come across. It's "baseless" so therefore, do not research it.

I’m telling you why, Tim.

"A lot of people got vaccinated" is but one data point. You consider them with other data points, like

• studies showing the shots cause suppressed immunity.
• studies showing suspected links between the shots and cancer (yes, they are out there and have been posted here)
• all of the data on excess mortality (in 2022, excess mortality rose by 44% in the UK, then by 10% in 2023; Australia and Canada were up by over 16% each)

Something(s) is/are killing a lot of excess people.

Those 3 simple bullets, and countless others, are why you investigate.

And I'm glad you're "sure" they are investigating. We are not.

No, you investigate because there’s a plausible and demonstrable causation, not a vague correlation between what could very likely be two unrelated events.

 

[Troglodyte]

SMDH. Aging has nothing to do with the rise in cancers in lower age groups.

The 2 million cases is for all age groups.

Not my words. The American Cancer Society's words: "New cancer diagnoses in the U.S. are expected to top 2 million for the first time in 2024, driven in large part by an alarming increase in cancers among younger Americans"

View attachment 12114


There are an inordinate number of reasons to test them as listed.

No. First you have to show that the rates are significantly higher among vaccinated individuals. That’s your ideological assumption.

The ACS findings have absolutely nothing to do with the Covid vaccine. FACT

Good Lord, are you going to stick to a position? You've gone from "nobody has found a reason for such an investigation" to "it's baseless" to do testing to "I'm sure they are doing testing." WTF??

It is baseless. The ACS findings predate the vaccines. The vaccines are being researched by serious, objective people, but since you’re so convinced, I’ll let you ponder this: Do you know where cancer rates are the highest? In the lower vaccinated Southern US.

What will your next Fleggo position be???

Same one, you’re a loon.

 

[ZonaBurgh]

Lord knows this thread has enough people who fervently believe the vaccines are evil tools of the Illuminati and demonic pharmaceutical companies to slaughter people by the millions.

Going to need a list of names and phone numbers.

 

[Confluence]

It’s a thing.

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/book/10.1002/9781119563600

Great.

Now apply that to the pFizer Covid shots real history.

Do you notice the disconnect between what is supposed to happen and what pFizer did? And what FDA approved?

 

[Steeltime]

Dr. Flogstain learns that two people in North Dakota have not had the shotz:

 

[oneforthebus]

SMDH. Aging has nothing to do with the rise in cancers in lower age groups.



Not my words. The American Cancer Society's words: "New cancer diagnoses in the U.S. are expected to top 2 million for the first time in 2024, driven in large part by an alarming increase in cancers among younger Americans"

View attachment 12114



There are an inordinate number of reasons to test them as listed.

Good Lord, are you going to stick to a position? You've gone from "nobody has found a reason for such an investigation" to "it's baseless" to do testing to "I'm sure they are doing testing." WTF??

What will your next Fleggo position be???

LOL, again you post this "alarming" headline with no link or article, probably because plain as day in that exact article it states:

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/study-alarming-rise-cancer-people-under-50/

According to a new study published this week in BMJ Oncology, cancer rates worldwide have risen dramatically in people under the age of 50.

Researchers examined data from 204 countries between 1990 and 2019. They found that there were more than 3.26 million early-onset cancer cases reported in those countries in 2019, up from 1.82 million in 1990, an increase of 79.1%.

The study defined early-onset cancer as a diagnosis that occurs between the ages of 14 and 49.

The study is "new" because it was just recently published. The data from the study ends in 2019. Before the covid vaccines were a twinkle in Bill Gates' eye.
It has absolutely nothing, nada, zero to do with covid vaccines yet you continually post about this same study and about the same "alarming increases" that all happened before there was any such thing as a covid vaccine. You think if you just keep repeating things over and over again they will start to be true but sorry, this just isn't. It's classic misinformation...post something scary sounding even if it can't possibly in any way shape or form be related. You are studying the Epoch Times well.

 

[Stewey]

Lord knows this thread has enough people who fervently believe the vaccines are evil tools of the Illuminati and demonic pharmaceutical companies to slaughter people by the millions. I inject a little balance now and then for my own amusement.

That'd be me!
Damn you're good! lol

 

[Tim Steelersfan]

Researching the vaccine. Assuming the vaccine could be linked to cancer because “A lot of people got vaccinated” is baseless.

Dance more Fleggo. You contradicted yourself in two pages 3 times.

You research the vaccines (you don't assume) because of the safety signals outlined.

And your conviction that Pfizer not only controls the US Government and the CDC, but all health agencies (not to mention universities) across the world is delusional.

Go back and post one link, anywhere....where I have said:
Pfizer controls the US Government
Pfizer controls the CDC
Pfizer controls all health agencies

I'll wait (till hell freezes over, because you can't)

You operate in a state of perpetual confusion - I think you're thinking of @Confluence who can fully back his claims.

I’m telling you why, Tim.

You're justifying your ideology. "Do Not investigate the vaccines for any potential links to cancer because it's baseless and Rachel Madcow told us so." And then you close your eyes to all warning signs to the contrary.

No, you investigate because there’s a plausible and demonstrable causation, not a vague correlation between what could very likely be two unrelated events.

No, when you have mass excess deaths and every other point I brought up...you investigate all potential causes. It's literally that simple. Especially one potential cause that is in 3/4 of mankind that is all new.

 

[Tim Steelersfan]

The 2 million cases is for all age groups.

Correct. You tried explaining it all away based on the age of the population. You are this stupid.

No. First you have to show that the rates are significantly higher among vaccinated individuals. That’s your ideological assumption.

You Fleggo again. You said those were my words. I demonstrated they were not. So now you deflect back to a different argument. Let's revert to the point you made. "Those were my words, not the words of the ACS." The articles I posted used the word alarming. They used the word alarming because it's abnormal. You continue to say "it's all normal." It is not.

The ACS findings have absolutely nothing to do with the Covid vaccine. FACT

Provide evidence to support this. We have an ALARMING predicted rise in cancers. The vaccines are tied to immunosuppression. Which is tied to a rise in cancers.

Post your evidence that exonerates the vaccines unequivocably.

It is baseless. The ACS findings predate the vaccines.

The ACS predictions do not. This is what your ideological, illogical *** continues to not see.

 

[Tim Steelersfan]

LOL, again you post this "alarming" headline with no link or article, probably because plain as day in that exact article it states:

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/study-alarming-rise-cancer-people-under-50/

The quote I posted came from this Axios article: https://www.axios.com/2024/01/17/new-cancer-diagnoses-record-high

Emphasized by the CBS article. Both of which called the rise "alarming."

The study is "new" because it was just recently published.

Bingo. As is the "prediction."

The data from the study ends in 2019. Before the covid vaccines were a twinkle in Bill Gates' eye.

Correct. But the prediction is alarming. It rises beyond the predicted normal rise.

It has absolutely nothing, nada, zero to do with covid vaccines

We don't know this. We LITERALLY do not know this. We do have evidence the vaccines cause suppressed immunity...which is tied to a higher incidence of cancer.

So why not study it?

yet you continually post about this same study and about the same "alarming increases" that all happened before there was any such thing as a covid vaccine.

I continue to post this same study because you and Floggy continue to obfuscate the simple point I made when I brought it up. There is a predicted, ALARMING rise in cancers and we should investigate all potential causes.

It's really a simple, logical position.

You think if you just keep repeating things over and over again they will start to be true but sorry, this just isn't. It's classic misinformation...post something scary sounding even if it can't possibly in any way shape or form be related. You are studying the Epoch Times well.

Epic OFTB. And one could equally say you're an easily feed sheep of the establishment.

Despite your own claims of misinformation (the VAERS reports are being studied - debunked), we know these vaccines were not tested to the levels others should have been. We know evidence of the harms they have cause have been buried, hidden, removed. Court documents support this. We know all about the missed steps in testing.

To ask that they are tested for possible links to rises in cancers isn't tin foil hat stuff. It's a logical, simple, expectation...that we have for all things we consume.

That you object to that expectation is more surprising.

 

[oneforthebus]

The quote I posted came from this Axios article: https://www.axios.com/2024/01/17/new-cancer-diagnoses-record-high

Emphasized by the CBS article. Both of which called the rise "alarming."

View attachment 12118




Bingo. As is the "prediction."



Correct. But the prediction is alarming. It rises beyond the predicted normal rise.




We don't know this. We LITERALLY do not know this. We do have evidence the vaccines cause suppressed immunity...which is tied to a higher incidence of cancer.

So why not study it?



I continue to post this same study because you and Floggy continue to obfuscate the simple point I made when I brought it up. There is a predicted, ALARMING rise in cancers and we should investigate all potential causes.

It's really a simple, logical position.



Epic OFTB. And one could equally say you're an easily feed sheep of the establishment.

Despite your own claims of misinformation (the VAERS reports are being studied - debunked), we know these vaccines were not tested to the levels others should have been. We know evidence of the harms they have cause have been buried, hidden, removed. Court documents support this. We know all about the missed steps in testing.

To ask that they are tested for possible links to rises in cancers isn't tin foil hat stuff. It's a logical, simple, expectation...that we have for all things we consume.

That you object to that expectation is more surprising.

No matter how many words you use to try to obfuscate the central truth remains the same…the “alarming rises in cancer” you keep referring to predate the vaccines. You have no data that refers to an incremental rise since the vaccines were administered that exceeds this years long trend. You have no data that shows an increase in cancers in vaccinated people vs. unvaccinated people. Let me know if you ever find any of this data. Then you might have a point. Until then you’re just trying to outlast the argument by posting more and more meaningless words in order to wear other people down.
In that regard you win. I’m not going to waste any more of my time coming up with numerous different ways to say the same thing.

 

[oneforthebus]

The quote I posted came from this Axios article: https://www.axios.com/2024/01/17/new-cancer-diagnoses-record-high

Did you read your Axios article? It is all based on data that ends in 2019. Probably from the same “alarming but predates Covid vaccines” study that is referenced in your other headlines.

• New cases of prostate, liver, kidney and HPV‐associated oral cancers and melanoma each rose 2% to 3% annually between 2015 and 2019.

 

[Stewey]

The word of the day:
Obfuscate.
Actually everyday...the most frequently used word in this thread.

 

[Stewey]

The quote I posted came from this Axios article: https://www.axios.com/2024/01/17/new-cancer-diagnoses-record-high.

Emphasized by the CBS article. Both of which called the rise "alarming."

Wow. The projection for 2024 especially as it pertains to younger folks.. That is alarming.

New cancer diagnoses in the U.S. are expected to top 2 million for the first time in 2024, driven in large part by an alarming increase in cancers among younger Americans, according to new American Cancer Society data.

Why it matters: There have been major improvements in cancer survival, but there's a worrying rise in some cancers at the same time doctors are trying to figure out why they're seeing more young patients with cancer.

I personally doubt that the vax is causing this, but it's good that they're trying to figure it out. And I certainly hope they do figure it out. It better not be the vax causing this or we are in serious trouble.

 

[IndySteel]

Soooooo many dumb mfers in this thread, not named Tim. Actually only two or three because 21tard21 is away trying to have his SFB edited so that people who are not special needs can read it at a normal pace.