Covid vaccines - thread banned users in First Post

patnor1011

Preprint study which show how most of what is discussed here. How immunity wane and is actually lower compared to unvaccinated and how boosters increase risk of neurological diseases.

SARS-CoV-2 Spike Protein in the Pathogenesis of Prion-like Diseases

https://www.authorea.com/users/455597/articles/582067-sars-cov-2-spike-protein-in-the-pathogenesis-of-prion-like-diseases?commit=ec67777168a037cafa8038aaa936fae419d4e9c8

Dohnjoe

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119741880#Comment_119741880

Is your personal take on things. It's clear you are fixated on this whole preventable thing to an extreme degree.

I remember thinking early on that vaccinations would "stop" Covid, as time went on, more info became available, more warnings in the press and from experts it became clear they wouldn't meet everyone expectations. The vaccines still reduce transmission and have saved countless lives.

King Mob

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119741882#Comment_119741882

A study that isn't peer reviewed and doesn't actually say what you claim.

It's really odd how you guys keep spamming these studies.

When it suits you you have no issue declaring that any and all scientists are part of the conspiracy. But at the same time you're telling us that these scientists are somehow incorruptible and somehow are able yo avoid the wrath and power of the conspiracy to post these studies.

This is illustrative of why conspiracy theorists ate so evasive about the conspiracy theory they are suggesting. If it's laid out in clear terms it will both sound ridiculous and become too inflexible to allow for goalposts shifting.

hometruths

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119741865#Comment_119741865

i am talking about the political line in December 2020 and you’re citing an article referencing public opinion in Nov 21 to contradict this? That’s just a total waste of time.

i’m referring To the views of a non legislative group as evidence of the political thinking at the time, the agenda as it were - December 2020. According to your Reuter’s link:

But resolutions made by  the Assembly are not legally binding on member states or on the EU, though the Ho ld political influence and moral authority.

Though it has no power to pass binding laws, PACE holds a constant dialogue with governments, national parliaments, other international organisations and civil society which ‘sets the agenda’,” the Assembly says (. “In this way, its texts filter down through law and practice to improve the lives of Europeans everywhere.” 

i was asking about the shift December 2020 to December 2021, but Again there is no point in just repeating the question, mindful of recent mod comments I’ll leave it there.

Dohnjoe

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119741951#Comment_119741951

You wrote:

Out of interest what caused the change in thinking in the EU from nobody shall be coerced or pressurised in any way to take the vaccines, nor shall they be discriminated against if don't take it, to the commonplace use of vaccine certs and talk of mandatory vaccination?

EU = European Union. You seem to be equating the views of this PACE group with that of Europe because of some blurb on their website. What does that group think? Don't know, don't care.

Polls demonstrated that several European countries supported mandatory vaccines. Politicians in Austria ushered in a countdown to mandatory vaccine, likewise parliament in Italy passed mandatory vaccinations for over 50's. France and Greece took action against the unvaccinated. As mentioned a majority of Europeans supported vaccine certs.

Seems to me that when a pandemic peaks, majorities of the public in certain countries (and as such their politicians) have shown they can (and do) support compulsory vaccination and other related measures. It makes sense, less people die, less people hospitalised which puts less pressure on national health systems. Plus people don't have much sympathy for anti-vaxxers at the best of times, much less so in the midst of a pandemic when national health systems are under strain.

patnor1011

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119741947#Comment_119741947

It actually does say what I claimed. You just need to spend more time reading it instead of typing generic reply you keep spamming here time and again. It usually starts with "You guys" blah blah blah, conspiracy blah blah blah, antivaxx, goalposts, peer reiewed, science and more blah blah blah...

Conclusion of said study for your convenience.

8. Conclusion

In this paper, we have examined the evidence from the extensive research literature

that the SARS-CoV-2 spike glycoprotein is a neurotoxin, and that the mRNA vaccines are

capable of delivering the spike protein to the brain, likely via exosomes released from the

spleen, increasing the risk of neurodegenerative disease. Figure 2 shows a schematic of

the likely sequence of events leading to neurodegeneration, beginning with the injection

in the deltoid muscle.

Particularly concerning is the evidence that CD16+ monocytes can continuously produce spike protein for months after vaccination, possibly through reverse transcription of

the mRNA into DNA. It has become clear that the antibodies induced through vaccination

wane over time, necessitating frequent boosters to raise the antibody levels for sufficient

protection from COVID-19. With each booster comes an increased risk of neurodegenerative disease sometime in the future. The good news is that, if the theoretical analyses are

correct, the current Omicron variant has a greatly reduced prion-like capability, which

may account for its observed decreased virulence.

A study published in the Lancet tracked the effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines over

time. It showed that, once eight months had elapsed since the second injection of the twoinjection series, immune function was lower than that among unvaccinated individuals

[95]. While boosters can temporarily restore higher levels of antibodies, frequent boosters

could further erode innate immune function, for an indefinite period of time, leading to

an increased risk to various infections as well as cancer. Furthermore, the rapid evolution

of the virus is resulting in ever weakening antibody binding to the spike protein of the

now dominant strain. Fortunately, the current strain of the virus appears to be less virulent than the original one. This may be a consequence of the decreased potential for prionlike misfolding.

In light of these considerations, the risk/benefit ratio for the mRNA vaccines needs to

be reevaluated. With every vaccine comes a flood of spike protein released into the circulation, further advancing the potential for amyloidogenic effects and increasing the risk

to future neurodegenerative disease. A comment by Kenji Yamamoto published in BMC

is urging the medical community to keep track of the date of the most recent vaccination

of hospital patients, in order to be better able to assess what role the vaccine may have

played in any manifest disease or condition. He also is strongly discouraging policy that

promotes continued boosting of anyone other than the most at-risk patients to death from

COVID-19 [96]. There is an urgent need for governments to reconsider a blind policy that

assumes that repeated vaccine boosters is a valid approach to dealing with COVID-19.

King Mob

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119742057#Comment_119742057

If you say so.

However I don't have any confidence that antivaxxers accurately represent any papers or their contents. Experience has shown me otherwise.

The point remains however that the paper is not actually published or peer reviewed. In the past anti-vaxxers have pointed to pre print studies when they popup with these shocking headlines. But there never seems to be any follow up on how that publishing actually goes.

Not does it make any sense in the context of the conspiracy theory being vaguely hinted at.

By the logic being used in this thread the authors behind it shouldn't have been allowed to write it, never mind actually put it out.

Personally a giant gaping plot hole like that would cause me to question stuff.

snowcat

https://www.cbc.ca/news/health/covid-vaccines-menstrual-cycle-timing-1.6606802

Dohnjoe

Note how any piece of news, or study, or anything that can be deemed negative or interpreted negatively in any way about vaccines is posted.

Doesn't matter that they've saved millions of lives, the only thing that matters to these individuals is attacking them.

Was precisely the same before the pandemic with other vaccines. There was a thread in after hours and it was identical. It's equivalent to people having an agenda against seat-belts because they cause a handful of deaths every year.

King Mob

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119742308#Comment_119742308

It's all being passed on fresh from Twitter. I doubt there's more than a few minutes between seeing the tweet and when it's reposted here.

We've seen many times on this thread that conspiracy theorists rarely actually read these studies themselves.

King Mob

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119742294#Comment_119742294

Physicians, reassuringly, said it wouldn't.

While cycle fluctuations can be upsetting, said Dr. Noah Ivers, from Women's College Hospital in Toronto, there's no evidence that COVID vaccines impact reproductive health.

"It doesn't affect your fertility," he said. "It won't impact your cycles in the long run."

And...

There's also scientific consensus that COVID vaccines are a far safer alternative than actually becoming infected with COVID for people of reproductive age, including those who get pregnant.

Large analyses of U.S. and Norwegian population-level data reporting on a combined total of more than 120,000 pregnancies have demonstrated no evidence of increased risk for early pregnancy loss following COVID vaccination.

The shots have also proven to be highly protective against serious COVID during pregnancy — a time when individuals are at a much higher risk of severe outcomes themselves, along with complications such as premature birth or infant admission to a neonatal intensive care unit.

King Mob

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119742294#Comment_119742294

Also an interview with the lead author of that paper:

https://www.keranews.org/2022-10-02/how-the-covid-19-vaccine-affects-your-menstrual-cycle

RASCOE: OK. So is this kind of extended-cycle menstruation cycle - is that harmful? Is that something to be concerned about?

EDELMAN: So normally, no. But what happened at the beginning of the vaccine rollout is we just didn't have any information at all, and people were having this experience. And then we didn't have any information to give them. So they - you know, we were getting a lot of the public reporting pushback that, you know, their providers were saying this couldn't be possible, this isn't happening. And they were reporting that it did happen. And so it's information that we didn't have before around vaccines, and so we're pleased to be able to have that information now, so that people can know what to expect.

...

RASCOE: And I know that this study did not look at necessarily, like, why this happened, but can you talk about - or do you - is there any sense or any guess that you might have for why this happened? And I bring this up only because, around vaccines, there's been a lot of talk about people being concerned about it affecting fertility, et cetera.

EDELMAN: That's a great question. You know, because menstrual cycles really mean a lot to individuals. They mean that people are metabolically normal, healthy and then they also give us a look into future for fertility. And so I want to reassure people that, really, we are not seeing a signal that's harmful. But we're seeing something that people want to know about. They want to know what to expect, what to experience.

hometruths

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119742631#Comment_119742631

So they - you know, we were getting a lot of the public reporting pushback that, you know, their providers were saying this couldn't be possible, this isn't happening. And they were reporting that it did happen. 

"We were "told" this was impossible."

And so I want to reassure people that, really, we are not seeing a signal that's harmful.

"Ah so it turns out it was possible after all. You were wrong about that?"

"We're not infallible, this is all very new, information changes and we learn from that"

"So if we were "told" it was not possible that vaccines could affect cycles, could it be possible that you're wrong about this not being harmful?"

"No it's not possible we're wrong about this. Stop whining about what you were "told" and trust the experts."

King Mob

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119742842#Comment_119742842

I'm sorry. I don't understand what point your trying to make by imagining a conversation and making up quotes that this person did not say.

The point I'm making was that the person who wrote the study is pretty emphatic about much much she supports the notion that the vaccines affect fertility.

hometruths

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119742860#Comment_119742860

Yes, she is pretty emphatic.

But not quite as emphatic as the experts who said it was not possible that vaccines were affecting menstrual cycles.

You cannot get much more emphatic than "It is impossible."

Yet they were wrong.

King Mob

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119742903#Comment_119742903

Ok. But that's not what was being argued though. Weird tangent to butt in with...

But since she could we wrong we can then conclude that she also could be wrong about the link between the vaccines and slight changes in periods, so we can dismiss the study entirely.

snowcat

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119742903#Comment_119742903

Yes Luke O'Neill the expert and Pat Kenny the other expert had a discussion in the early days of the shots stating there was no mechanism that the injection could affect menstrual cycle or fertility. I think the general consensus now is that it does affect the menstrual cycle and its only a matter of time before the consensus moves or confirms it affects fertility..probably with the caveat that its only temporary and transitory.

hometruths

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119745602#Comment_119745602

Becoming quite the pattern. Dismissing concerns as impossibilities and anybody who says otherwise is a deranged anti vaxx lunatic, only to discover later that those who had concerns were correct, but hey it's no big deal.

At least in the case of menstrual cycles most accept that people did raise concerns about odd cycles in the early days of vaccine roll out. With a lot of other things we're just told "That never happened, you're just remembering stuff wrong. Probably because you're a thick anti vaxxer."

snowcat

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119745643#Comment_119745643

Or is quite the trend here. The holier than thou attitude of some posters who believe they are more intelligent than the mRNA sceptics and believe that anyone who queries anything on their beloved GMO drugs get their information from 'twitter'.

Dohnjoe

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119745643#Comment_119745643

From your posts you show no concern for the millions who have died to this virus.

Yet you are completely and utterly hysterical about a tiny handful who have been injured or died due to the vaccines. Vaccines that have saved countless lives.

It's bald-faced concern-trolling.

snowcat

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119745736#Comment_119745736

This is a thread about conspiracy theories and covid vaccines. Not a sympathy thread.

hometruths

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119745736#Comment_119745736

Concern-trolling?! I had to look that up, and this is the definition I found:

the action or practice of disingenuously expressing concern about an issue in order to undermine or derail genuine discussion.

snowcats response is a fair point, well made.

odyssey06

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119745769#Comment_119745769

There is no balance.

You show zero concern for pregnant women (a) infected by covid but jump on any study that you think shows the (b) slightest risk to them from vaccines.

Being concerned about the group for both reasons is balanced. Being concerned only from B is not in my opinion.

So it is entirely reasonable to point out that you only express concern for this group from vaccines - and not what might happen to them without it. If the people promoting the vaccines do so from a genuine concern of (a) there is no conspiracy.

Dohnjoe

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119745693#Comment_119745693

Perhaps or perhaps your posts are coming across as "holier than thou". You represent 5 in every 100 Irish adults. The people posting alongside you believe that space travel is fake and that the NWO puts demonic symbolism on baby clothes. The researchers, scientists, regulators and developers of these vaccines, whose families, friends, colleagues will be taking them don't seem to share your views about them, but you appear to think you know better.

Crazy thought, maybe you aren't a skeptic, maybe you've already made your mind up. A bit like when Alex Jones claims he is "just asking questions" about Sandy Hook.

Food for thought.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119745769#Comment_119745769

Not seeing many conspiracies really, you have one?

snowcat

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119745839#Comment_119745839

Yes but pregnant women did not participate in the vaccine trials. Effects on menstruation and fertility were not a part of vaccine trials. We are now beginning to get results for these cohorts and we still do not fully understand the effects on men and women after the mass vaxx campaign with these completely new mRNA drugs. Hopefully we will not see any long term negative effects.

snowcat

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119745850#Comment_119745850

You seem to think anyone who questions anything on the Covid Vaccine is one of those 'anti vaxxers' or flat earthers or agree with Alex Jones . Its comical really as I am very pro vax but certainly am not a fan of GMO drugs or mRNA tech. I had huge hope for the Covid vaccine rollout but it has been a resounding failure in my personal opinion.

King Mob

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119745602#Comment_119745602

But the links youve posted all say the opposite to that.

odyssey06

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119745930#Comment_119745930

But all the evidence shows mRNA vaccines as more effective than the traditional ones. I dont think you have provided any evidence contesting that.

If you think the mRNA ones are failures then I dont know on what basis you could consider traditional ones a success.

So perhaps instead of being so critical of mRNA vaccines you should consider resetting you view of how difficult a challenge covid represented for all vaccines.

And likewise I dont think you have provided any evidence showing that women would be better off pregnant and unvaccinated getting covid versus getting vaccinated before hand.

Doc07

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119741882#Comment_119741882

This isn’t a study. There is no original research or data here. It absolutely 100% does not show that immunity is lower in vaccinated compared to unvaccinated. It is a review with deliberate misinterpretation of mostly irrelevant articles and the ramblings of a diehard anti-vaxxer Peter McCollough

May I politely suggest you have been caught up in the anti-vax capture phenomenon

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_A._McCullough

King Mob

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119746356#Comment_119746356

His last link directly stated that pregnant women are more at risk from covid than from even the slight, harmless changes that the study is discussing.