Covid vaccines - thread banned users in First Post

hometruths

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118365407#Comment_118365407

Becaus quite obviously the one I chose was a recent example of one that was rushed through for emergency reasons. I chose it because there are a lot of parallels. This is not a hard concept to grasp.

generic_throwaway

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118365322#Comment_118365322

Russian troll farms continue to sucker folks looking for an alternative narrative. It's just sad.

Dohnjoe

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118365549#Comment_118365549

To get this straight. There are millions of people dying of Covid in the midst of a global pandemic, and you, a lay-person, think that a previous specific vaccine (out of countless vaccines) which had an isolated incidence of what, 1 in 18,000, chance of developing narcolepsy, you think that's a valid reason for the world to reconsider the Covid vaccines..

This is a question that most anti-vaxxers will dodge, but I'll try it anyway. It's 2020, you are in charge of the world's vaccination programme for Covid. Every day thousands are dying, when do you deploy the vaccines and why?

buzzerxx

BREAKING:

LAUSD, California's largest school district and the second largest school district in the US, suspends enforcement of injection mandate.

This is a MASSIVE victory for medical freedom in California and the nation. All because ordinary moms and dads linked arms and SHOWED UP to school board meetings and school rallies to hold the line in unwavering opposition to unconstitutional, unethical medical mandates on our children's bodies.

Congratulations to PERK, Children's Health Defense & Facts Law Truth Justice for fighting this good fight and for WINNING.

PintOfView

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118364979#Comment_118364979

But aren't you clearly using this question to spin your narrative? I can't see you are an objective observer in all this, but, like plenty of politicians, you seem to be clutching at bits of (mis)information that supports your narrative, and ignoring everything else!

Provide some reason to think that a large proportion of unvaccinated in hospitals are actually vaccinated within the last 14 days, because that's not plausible!

Also, even it that were the case the vaccine trials clearly showed that the protective effect of the vaccine took two weeks to achieve, so it supports the idea that unvaccinated individuals are a lot more at risk. Is this what you are trying to deny?

Dohnjoe

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118365800#Comment_118365800

The omitted context:

"The judge "concluded only the state can act regarding vaccinations, even though the law specifically allows and encourages local vaccination programs," Bresee said in a statement. "Even Judge Meyer acknowledged in his ruling that the vaccine mandate ‘appears to be necessary and rational, and the district’s desire to protect its students from COVID-19 is commendable.’""

https://www.ktvu.com/news/judge-rules-against-california-school-district-in-covid-vaccine-suit

buzzerxx

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118339087#Comment_118339087

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118364411#Comment_118364411

I have answered that question already and you replied. Are you regurgitating the same stupid questions from a shared script or something?

PintOfView

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118364010#Comment_118364010

"With a 94% take up of adults vaccinated there is no need to coerce the remaining 6% and to push the vaccines on children. And that’s assuming they’re relatively safe. Long term nobody knows."

I think we're in a good position with regards to vaccination, and I wouldn't be in favour of trying to coerce the remainder to go against their fears, etc. The main risk the remaining unvaccinated pose is to themselves, but they are also likely providing a disproportionate number of patients that need hospitalisation, so in that sense it would be better if they got vaccinated. If Omicron is as infectious as it seems then the question may be moot in a couple of months!

hometruths

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118365648#Comment_118365648

To get this straight. There are millions of people dying of Covid in the midst of a global pandemic, and you, a lay-person, think that a previous specific vaccine (out of countless vaccines) which had an isolated incidence of what, 1 in 18,000, chance of developing narcolepsy, you think that's a valid reason for the world to reconsider the Covid vaccines..

I think that it is a valid reason for an individual to reconsider the Covid vaccine, without being labelled a menace to society, blamed for thousands of deaths, discriminated against and coerced.

This is a question that most anti-vaxxers will dodge, but I'll try it anyway. It's 2020, you are in charge of the world's vaccination programme for Covid. Every day thousands are dying, when do you deploy the vaccines and why?

I have absolutely no problem answering that question. I would have deployed it exactly as most countries did in the beginning - start with the most vulnerable in society, the old, infirm and immunocompromised as the risk/reward ratio was clearly in favour of vaccination.

Furthermore I would have adopted exactly the same position the EU did in January 2021 when the Parliamentary Assembly adopted Resolution 2361: Covid-19 vaccines: ethical, legal and practical considerations:

7.3.1 ensure that citizens are informed that the vaccination is not mandatory and that no one is under political, social or other pressure to be vaccinated if they do not wish to do so;

7.3.2 ensure that no one is discriminated against for not having been vaccinated, due to possible health risks or not wanting to be vaccinated;

What I emphatically would not have done is, after a year of vaccination and subsequent climbing case rates worldwide, abandoned the above policy and started exerting political, social and other discriminatory pressures on people to be vaccinated.

And I would have not done a 360 degree about turn from the above position to the latest position from the EU parliamentary assembly talking about the introduction of mandatory vaccination.

Why did the EU change their position so drastically? Was it because they were wrong in January? Or are they wrong now?

King Mob

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118365865#Comment_118365865

Lol. You think that's an actual answer?

What a simple and childish worldview you have. No wonder that grifters are able to sucker you in so easily.

hometruths

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118365870#Comment_118365870

Agree with the above. Particularly on Omicron. Fingers crossed!

PintOfView

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118364742#Comment_118364742

"that any and all symptoms from every vaccine ever has been known within weeks of taking the vaccine "

If that were true then I'd have absolutely no concerns about the safety of the vaccines. But if that were true we would not currently be paying out compensation to kids who developed narcolepsy from Pandemrix.

Have you actually checked how long the side effects from Pandemrix took to appear? It's irrelevant that compensation is being paid out many years later!

Have you any example of side effects from a vaccine that showed up more than a few weeks after vaccination?

323

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118318829#Comment_118318829

Where are the long term studies?

They would be due after completion of clinical trials which in Pfizer's case don't end until May 2023.

hometruths

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118365902#Comment_118365902

No I do not have any examples of side effects from a vaccine that showed up more than a few weeks after vaccination?

No I haven't checked how long the side effects of Pandemrix took to appear. I believe those who say narcolepsy was known as a side effect within a couple of weeks.

I stand corrected.

So, the manufacturers and regulators knew narcolepsy was a potential problem within a few weeks, and ignored it? Or what happened?

If the problems were known within a few weeks and disregarded, then that is a far worse reflection on the safety record than the effects showing up a few years later.

whippet

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118365330#Comment_118365330

Absolute lies ... this is a line that is trotted out by the financial / legal / immunology/ virologist/ social warrior Ben Gilroy all the time

King Mob

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118366046#Comment_118366046

So what are you claiming?

That all pharma companies are covering up the side effects of the vaccines?

How then do you explain all the adverse side effects reports you were using eariler?

Kinda looks like you got called out for using antivaxxer misinformation you didn't think about, now you're trying to move the goalposts.

Lex Luthor

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118365348#Comment_118365348

where are the lies?

All deaths were confirmed by PCR

All PCR tests were overamplified with cycle thresholds of 40-45

your attempt at gaslighting by trying to divert the conversation from the obvious doesnt phase me and nobody is swallowing it apart from the rest of the One Direction members

astrofool

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118365305#Comment_118365305

No, it's blaming the old oak tree as it will get blown down at some stage, it just happened that the latest wind did it. Almost had the analogy right.

PintOfView

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118366046#Comment_118366046

"No I do not have any examples of side effects from a vaccine that showed up more than a few weeks after vaccination?

No I haven't checked how long the side effects of Pandemrix took to appear. I believe those who say narcolepsy was known as a side effect within a couple of weeks.

I stand corrected.

So, the manufacturers and regulators knew narcolepsy was a potential problem within a few weeks, and ignored it? Or what happened?

If the problems were known within a few weeks and disregarded, then that is a far worse reflection on the safety record than the effects showing up a few years later."

I'm not familiar with all the details in the Pandemrix case, but it would seem that it was some time before the pattern was noticed (first by health authorities in Sweden and Finland). The reason was likely because it was only a small number of vaccinated who got the narcolepsy (wikipedia says 1 in 18,000 = 55 in every million), and would be difficult to spot in the initial trials due to the relatively low numbers (eg. the Pfizer Covid trial was with 40,000 people).

Dohnjoe

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118365875#Comment_118365875

How is it a valid reason? The chances that an adult will contract Covid and die from it are astronomically higher than dying from the vaccine.

As for previous points on the "longer term risks" with vaccine - there may be long term risks with Covid. We have experience with vaccines and we generally know that issues will emerge early on, we have little experience with Covid, and already there are alarming signs that point towards longer term effects from Covid. It would be a bizarre contradiction to be highly concerned with longer term effects from vaccines, but not from Covid.

No need to play the victim card for anti-vaxxers. It's their choice to increase the risks to themselves and others, as well as put the health system under increased unnecessary burden.

If an individual country has a low vaccine uptake, I don't see an issue with a vaccine mandate.

Change position? Countries change positions all the time, the virus doesn't have a "contract", it's not a political party, we are reacting to it. If another mutation comes along with e.g. a far higher fatality rate we may see vaccine mandates everywhere.

Lex Luthor

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118365648#Comment_118365648

a global pandemic based on a fallacy of the PCR test

Millions are not and havent died from COVID, this has already been documented and reported

The people in charge of the vaccination programme are who? Pfizer? WHO? CDC?

The only reason you get emergency approval for a vaccine is when you deem it that there are no reliable treatments

These were all taken off the shelves (ie Ivermectin, HCQ) for this purpose, its not hard to grasp and now Pfizer have a new anti viral treatment

If you are still falling for this, then you are lost, sorry to say

Lex Luthor

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118365830#Comment_118365830

I dont need to prove it, what I am saying is that you cannot show data to say that x % of people in hospital & ICU are unvaccinated without breaking it down as misleading to create a narrative

Lex Luthor

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118365870#Comment_118365870

just because its infectious doesnt make it dangerous

the common cold is more infectious than Ebola but I know which I'd prefer to have

PintOfView

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118366181#Comment_118366181

Sorry, I don't follow you? How is it misleading to count how many people in hospital due to Covid are vaccinated or not?

Dohnjoe

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118366163#Comment_118366163

If I am following you correctly, you claimed millions have been wrongly diagnosed with Covid and that they went to hospitals, where they died of "neglect", which begs the question what was their cause of death? starvation? or?

I am trying to follow it but it's your personal conspiracy and it's different from all the others presented here.

King Mob

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118366163#Comment_118366163

Nope. Lie.

5.38 million people have died from covid.

If this isn't the correct number, provide what you believe is the correct number and your source for that.

Twitter is not a valid source.

PintOfView

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118366163#Comment_118366163

"a global pandemic based on a fallacy of the PCR test

Millions are not and havent died from COVID, this has already been documented and reported

The people in charge of the vaccination programme are who? Pfizer? WHO? CDC?

The only reason you get emergency approval for a vaccine is when you deem it that there are no reliable treatments

These were all taken off the shelves (ie Ivermectin, HCQ) for this purpose, its not hard to grasp and now Pfizer have a new anti viral treatment

If you are still falling for this, then you are lost, sorry to say"

Why do you say the PCR test is a fallacy. Do you have any link that explains why it's a fallacy?

And a link to someone else just saying it's a fallacy won't cut it, you need to provide a bit of proper information, with a scientific explanation.

Lex Luthor

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118366195#Comment_118366195

I said unvaccinated

When they state unvaccinated they need to break it down that the numbers are associated with people who have taken 1 or 2 shots if thats the case

Lex Luthor

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118366198#Comment_118366198

I posted a link earlier stating up to 85% died with covid but have several other serious underlying conditions

and using PCR at 40-45 cycle thresholds is over amplifying, Muller said it, Fauci said it, too sensitive making the numbers inflate well above what they should

As for what people died from, there is a vast array of causes, but they werent all FROM covid

Lex Luthor