Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Covid vaccines - thread banned users in First Post

15051535556251

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,343 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    Since boosters were available.

    Again to remind you your original claim was:

    Vaccines dont stop transmission though - fully vaccinated people just as likely to catch omicron as the great unwashed

    But what you're claiming now is that meant: "People who have had only two vaccines might be just as likely to catch omicron as unvaccinated people after 6 months."

    This actually is moving the goalposts I'm afraid. Especially given what your claim was originally replying to.

    Do you agree with the reports findings about the efficacy of the vaccines after boosters as well as their findings about the efficacy of it against transmission and severe disease? If so, then dohnjoe's point about encouraging people to get fully vaccinated stands.


    And if the data recorded Negative efficacy, why is it not at all discussed in the actual report? Why does it not bring up concerns that the vaccines might somehow be causing more infections?

    Why can't you point to any other sources and documents that mention it in the context of covid or any other vaccine?

    How do you believe that the vaccines might be causing this?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,451 ✭✭✭Hoop66


    I don't think you understand what "critical thinking" is.


    For instance, claiming that €1000 was spent on advertising for every man, woman and child in Ireland without stopping to think "hmmm, that sounds like it might be a bit high" is definitely not actively and skillfully analysing and evaluating information.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 915 ✭✭✭buzzerxx


    "Safe and effective" was a lie, is a lie, and will always be a lie.

    They are masters of data manipulation.

    Your blind faith in "science" will be your demise.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,343 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    lol very poetic. Also lies. Also probably stolen from some twitter grifter.


    Show us your evidence that the vaccine is dangerous. nearly a hundred pages and you guys have been unable to do that and made a complete joke out of yourselves in the process.



  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 24,118 Mod ✭✭✭✭robinph


    How is it shown to be unsafe compared to being unvaccinated?


    How is reduced hospital admission and deaths showing the vaccines as being ineffective?



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Meanwhile, here are the stats on critical care for the UK. Note how even the double vaccinated have substantial protection... And a fair proportion of those people would have received astrazeneca. The same can be seen across the globe.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,125 ✭✭✭timmyntc


    Most fully vaccinated people would be 6months+ their 2nd dose if they hadnt received a booster - only for them taking another shot (and another, and another no doubt) they would have 0 or negative efficacy against symptomatic disease. The point still stands, "fully vaccinated" as the term is actually defined (not by you) are ultimately just as likely to contract (and therefore spread) virus as the unvaccinated. Possibly moreso if natural immunity were taken into account - but we don't have sufficient data to quantify this effect.

    We've already seen from UKHSA data that efficacy trends to 0 (or possibly negative for AZ and Moderna), the only reason we dont know if the boosters do that is because they havent been administered for long enough to observe it.

    So what is the plan? Endless boosters every 6-3months for the rest of your natural life? Because right now that looks like the only way the vaccines could possibly be said to stop transmission.


    As to how vaccines can cause negative efficacy, there are a variety of methods. Some vaccines can affect Th1 or Th2 mediated responses to a pathogen (upregulating one, downregulating others). Original antigenic sin is another more likely answer - seeing as all vaccines are based on Wild-Type SARS-CoV-2, and currently the omicron variant is quite far removed from that, its possible that antibodies for the former are mostly ineffective against the latter, OAS dictates that previously used antibodies are preferentially produced for all similar future infections - so most antibodies a vaccinated individual would produce would be very similar to those they produced first time around against the vaccine, despite the current infection (omicron) being quite different.

    In the case of Dengue, antibody-dependent-enhancement (ADE) was the cause of negative efficacy (and much higher mortality), simple summary here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dengvaxia_controversy

    Here is a nice review of OAS in the past, including for past vaccinations against RSV. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2772613421000068



  • Registered Users Posts: 506 ✭✭✭Maewyn Succat


    I never said we can't do it. I just said it's pointless if the UK aren't doing it.

    What has this got to do with the conspiracy around the safety of vaccines....or are you ready to admit there is no conspiracy and you're just having a whinge about how the government are handling a continuously changing predicament that they have no control over and that you don't seem to fully understand?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,125 ✭✭✭timmyntc


    And how does that disprove my point (or the UKHSA data) on efficacy versus symptomatic disease, not hospitalisation.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,343 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    Again, you seem to be moving the goal posts.

    Your original claim was that people who were vaccinated had the same chances of being infected by omicron as unvaccinated people.

    This claim is not true. On several levels.

    In the 6 months where 2 doses of vaccine is definitely effective, who is going to have more of chance of catching and spreading the virus? (And also remember that Delta is still making the rounds as well.)

    And this is all ignoring the other effects of the vaccine as outlined in the report you linked.

    Who is more likely to have symptoms? Who is more likely to become severely ill? Who is more likely to die? Who is more likely to be more resistant to future variants.

    Claiming that there is no difference between being vaccinated and unvaccinated is silly.


    So what is the plan? Endless boosters every 6-3months for the rest of your natural life? Because right now that looks like the only way the vaccines could possibly be said to stop transmission.

    Like the flu vaccine you mean?

    Also you are making the same fallacy that the goal or only worthwhile outcome is to 100% stop transmission. No one is claiming this is the goal or that it is a realisitc possibility. The goal is to reduce infection, transmission and incidents of severe illness and death. The vaccines (including boosters) do this and help reduce the knock on strain on health systems.


    What alternative do you suggest? Just let the virus go nuts?


    As to how vaccines can cause negative efficacy, there are a variety of methods. 

    Ok great. I didn't know that was a thing.

    So how come the report you linked doesn't make mention of it outside that one graph you are inferring from?



  • Registered Users Posts: 226 ✭✭cannonballTaffyOjones


    So when are people gonna acknowledge the massive increase in cardiac arrests amoungst footballers, and in the general population ??



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,343 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    The second any conspiracy theorist can show this is actually happening and that it's due to the vaccine.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 455 ✭✭KieferFan69


    Plenty of professional athletes (tennis, basketball, volleyball, football etc. etc.) coming forward with (sometimes career ending) pericardium now. The idea that taking this pharmaceutical product should be anything other than a personal choice (with no discrimination against the vax-free or passport system) is absurd and dangerous.

    May well be that the athletes who opt out will be seen hailed as the clever and socially-considerate ones in the years ahead.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Haha..

    I said I'd bring some levity..We're not all as anal about these things as yourselves..

    And he was right about the lab leak a year before anyone else..



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,487 ✭✭✭Fighting Tao


    How come there are never new non-CT’ist accounts?



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,041 ✭✭✭✭The Nal


    Eriksen? Didnt get the vaccine

    Charlie Wyke? Didnt get the vaccine

    Ageuros wasnt related to vaccines or covid. Lindelof the same. Same for John Fleck.

    Seems theres quite a few who haven't had the vaccine.



  • Subscribers Posts: 41,863 ✭✭✭✭sydthebeat


    to what do you account for the unusually high professional footballer death rate in 2016??

    pre covid blues??



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,343 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    Cool. Evidence for this please and the evidence that this is being caused by vaccines?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,343 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    Lol Wait, are we back to taking Alex Jones seriously?

    Jesus man. Do you not read your own posts?



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]




  • Advertisement
  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    I'm inclined to say that reflects more negatively upon you than anything else.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,343 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    Yes. You do seem to put an awful lot of stock and trust into obvious grifters because they stroke your worldview while ignoring reasonable people.

    It's how you were duped into believing all the shite you do.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Do you accept that the lab leak is the most likely origin story by now?..

    He was saying that from the start..



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,041 ✭✭✭✭The Nal


    So did you take his Covid cure?

    SuperSilver Whitening Toothpaste and SuperSilver Wound Dressing Gel 🤭

    FYI hes banned from Facebook, Apple, YouTube, Instagram, Pinterest, Twitter, Spotify and PayPal and he was selling fake Covid cures at the start of the pandemic to poor people for his own personal gain.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,451 ✭✭✭Hoop66


    You'd take seriously someone who has themselves admitted they are not to be taken seriously? A person who spouts and supports vile conspiracies, but when it comes down to hitting his pocket admits it is all made up?


    Do you believe that the Sandy Hook school shooting was a "false flag", and that the parents of murdered children are "crisis actors"?



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Ah, under the new definition, the stuff Jones sells can be considered a vaccine..



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,343 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    Lol. Nope.

    I don't believe his idea that the virus was created in a lab for the express purpose of creating a pandemic to help a cabal of secret child eating communist/satanists take over the world.


    Why would I accept that idea?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 794 ✭✭✭phater phagan


    I omitted to mention in my post that the data from A.P. was referring to infections on a per capita rate. Apologies for that.

    My main point, though, was that people should, in the spirit of goodwill, should get the vaccine. It is a lifesaver for vulnerable people.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,343 ✭✭✭✭King Mob




  • Advertisement
  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    I think you'll find it is..It came from the lab..

    So King of the Mob, would you say Alex Jones was right?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,041 ✭✭✭✭The Nal


    Better buy some then! He still sells it on Amazon I think. Put your money where your mouth is.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Did he have any evidence at the time to backup the claim? He makes every claim going, even now it still amounts to a possibility. Jones meanwhile claims everything as a fact without any evidence. Previous claims have included FEMA death camps and crisis actors in Sandy Hook so the fact you have so much confidence in him is more a sign of how gullible you are tbh. David Icke sometimes got it a tiny bit right in the past, similar to Jones it was more a fluke.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,343 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    No I wouldn't. Because even if the virus did come from a lab, that's not what Alex Jones claimed.

    He was claiming that it was created to fake a pandemic. Was he right about that?

    He was claiming that it was created by a cabal of secret satanist.communists. Was he right about that?

    No, CQD, he wasn't.


    He was not making his claim based on any secret insider knowledge. He was not making the claim because he's a super smart invetigator.

    He made the claim cause he always makes that claim about everything. He claimed it about SARS, MERS and the Swine and avian Flu. Pretty sure he claimed it about AIDS as well.

    Was he right about those?


    Please keep defending Alex Jones. You are making my job so very easy today. I might cut you in on that shill money.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    It's always the strawmen with you..



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,343 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    What strawmen?

    I don't think you know what that word means.


    Are you claiming that Jones didn't make those claims?

    Was he right about them or not?

    I've answered your silly question clearly and directly.

    The least you could do is the same.

    But you won't. Cause you can't.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,041 ✭✭✭✭The Nal




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,125 ✭✭✭timmyntc


    And this is all ignoring the other effects of the vaccine as outlined in the report you linked.

    Irrelevant, because we're discussing symptomatic disease and transmission

    Who is more likely to have symptoms?

    Who is more likely to become severely ill?

    Who is more likely to die?

    Who is more likely to be more resistant to future variants.

    Symptoms is equal likelihood after 6 months, as proven by UKHSA

    Severe illness and death is more likely in naive unvaccinated individuals - I've never disputed that. Nor were we ever discussing it. Seems like cope from you bringing it up.

    Most resistant to future variants? People with natural immunity. Natural immunity based on the entire virus (as opposed to just S1 epitope) has a far greater diversity of antibodies and memory B cells, meaning such people are better equipped to deal with variants with a greater antigenic drift.

    Claiming that there is no difference between being vaccinated and unvaccinated is silly.

    Where did I claim that exactly? According to you my original claim was that people who were vaccinated had the same chances of being infected by omicron as unvaccinated people.

    Like the flu vaccine you mean?

    Do you know anything about vaccines? Influenza vaccines are different every single year. They target different lineages and subvariations thereof. Totally different scenario to taking the same vaccine ad infinitum in an attempt to stave off negative efficacy.

    So how come the report you linked doesn't make mention of it outside that one graph you are inferring from?

    lol are you trying to disprove the concept of negative efficacy based on the UKHSA not commenting on it in a weekly roundup of covid stats?

    Why did they graph their data with a negative axis going right down to -60? Negative efficacy is a very real concept, trying to argue it doesnt exist is head in the sand stuff.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Dude..To be honest, for your sake I kinda hope you are getting paid..Because if not there's something wrong with you..



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,453 ✭✭✭EyesClosed




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,343 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    Symptoms is equal likelihood after 6 months, as proven by UKHSA

    And in those 6 months? Are they the same?


    Most resistant to future variants? People with natural immunity. Natural immunity based on the entire virus (as opposed to just S1 epitope) has a far greater diversity of antibodies and memory B cells, meaning such people are better equipped to deal with variants with a greater antigenic drift.

    Cool. Got evidence for this?

    Have you evidence that this outweighs the risks that this brings from the increase in the chances of infection, transmission, illness and death?


    Do you know anything about vaccines? Influenza vaccines are different every single year. They target different lineages and subvariations thereof. Totally different scenario to taking the same vaccine ad infinitum in an attempt to stave off negative efficacy.

    Yes. And? Why wouldn't they be doing this with the covid vaccines?


    lol are you trying to disprove the concept of negative efficacy based on the UKHSA not commenting on it in a weekly roundup of covid stats?

    Nope. That's a strawman on your part.

    Why did they graph their data with a negative axis going right down to -60? Negative efficacy is a very real concept, trying to argue it doesnt exist is head in the sand stuff.

    Because they probably know it was a statistically anomaly and not an indication that this was actually happening.

    If it was, then they would comment on it.

    Why do you believe they did not comment on it?


    Also, could you maybe explain what point it is you're trying to make?

    That people shouldn't get the vaccines cause they stop working after 6 months?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,343 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    Lol. Insults rather than answering simple questions.

    Pretty typical.


    Honestly dude, what do you tell yourself when you do that? Do you think it's helping you or convincing people?

    Do you think you're fooling people or...?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,343 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    Ok. So what's the real reason they've dropped the requirment?

    Why are you afraid of telling us?

    Is it because you don't have any special knowledge and you don't actually know?

    Or because your answer is very silly and extreme and you still want to pretend to have a reasonable point to make?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,343 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    Oooh ok. So then it's just makey uppy pretend times so you boys can feel like big boy investigators.

    That's cute.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,865 ✭✭✭✭Igotadose


    So, you're just pulling the long finger or whatever? This is amusement and a pastime for you, but actually facts or investigations or information are just for laughs?


    It's good to know you actually don't care about the truth, just doing it for the yuks.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,343 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    Ok. So there's no conspiracy. You just know better because you've read a lot of twitter. That's nice.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,487 ✭✭✭Fighting Tao


    Troll just trolling again. Be a good boy and grow up.



  • Registered Users Posts: 506 ✭✭✭Maewyn Succat


    Is that the conspiracy? Are we back to this whole thing was created to sell vaccines?

    Can you promise without knowing anything about my health or risk category that I will be ok if I don't take the booster and contract covid19?



  • Registered Users Posts: 506 ✭✭✭Maewyn Succat


    This is the thing...I don't know best and have no superior knowledge but I listen to the people who have the knowledge and experience to try to come up with the best advice instead of believing I'm some sort of Dunning Kruger protege because I've seen a few YouTube videos or Twitter posts that sound convincing.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,865 ✭✭✭✭Igotadose


    Still, you haven't pointed out any conspiracy here. Is someone keeping something secret that only you know about? Yes, Omicron is more transmissible. Thank you, unvaccinated, for that. Now, it may be that additional boosters are pointless against Omicron. Fortunately, the vaccines are keeping the far deadlier initial, Kent (Alpha) and Delta variants from causing too much havoc. Vaccinated people contracting Omicron - are they clogging hospitals and ICUs?


    I still think you're just doing this for laughs, but feel free to convince me you're onto something here.



  • Advertisement
Advertisement