Covid vaccines - thread banned users in First Post

What stem field?

I think it's pretty obvious it's not medicine else youd have mentioned.

And you are an antivaxxer. You tried to claim this in your last account as well and you exposed yourself as a liar there too.

Why pretend?

Well no, I gave you my definition of what an anti-vaxxer is. You fit that definition I fear.

And lol, back this this "extreme pro -vaxxer" crap. You ran away last time this was challenged. You weren't able to actually point to examples of the stance because you were caught out in a lie. It's very dishonest for you to now repeat your nonsense after you abandoned it.

But this is a typical tactic for anti-vaxxers.

And I don't have any expertise. I never claimed otherwise and don't use my meager personal qualifications as an argument from authority.

Just because you have a qualification in an unrelated stem field, it doesn't follow that you therefore know about peer review.

The only thing I claim to have is a basic level of critical thinking and the ability to ask questions about things.

Which is why I don't subscribe to anti-vaxx beliefs or conspiracy theories.

So again, why are you still pretending not to be an anti-vaxxer? Why are you pretending to be a different poster?

That's very dishonest of you. Why do it? How does it help you? Cause to most reasonable people such tactics are very obviously underhanded and deceitful and would only make them not trust you or your arguments.

Lol. What a full and erudite reply. Doesn't sound like you're running away again at all.

But seriously though, why are you pretending to be a new poster? Why do you guys keep reregging and playing this game?

Lol, Snowcat, why are you switching back to your old account now to drag up the sad, pathetic anti-vaxx argument that exposed yourself last time?

Nah, it's not shame. They just know that their claims pile up too much and they become too much of a laughing stock. People just laugh them off rather than engage with their silly points.

If they were ashamed, they won't be making the arguments in the first place.

Ok. I don't believe you. But I'll play along.

Do you agree with Phishnet's argument then? Is he an example of a "extreme anti-vaxxer"?

But let me guess, you're going to suddenly tell us that you haven't been reading the thread and don't have any interest in discussing the conspiracy theories?

Prior to the pandemic the anti-vaxxers were screeching about vaccines we all had at birth.

Now they are screeching about the multiple shots 95% of Irish adults received last year

Maybe, just maybe, vaccines are overwhelmingly safe.

Yea, the last few years have been a boon for them and the grifters behind them. For a while it was on a bit of a down swing and they were pretty much a laughing stock.

But now, with the uncertainty of the pandemic and the streamlining and modernising of a lot of disinformation grifts they were able to snatch up a whole bunch of new followers.

And a lot of the old followers and easily lead conspiracy theorists came along for the ride.

Yes. I don't know anything the FDA doesn't.

As was explained to you before in ladybird fashion, you are misrepresenting things because you are an anti vaxx conspiracy theorist.

No, I think you and you fellow anti-vaxx buddies are misrepresenting things and statements.

You did this already when you claimed the CDC lady said something she didn't. You did this when you claimed I dismissed her because she's a lady.

You do believe the government is lying because of some big global conspiracy. You claimed that the CDC lady was lying on national TV.

So again mate, why should we believe you?

Why are you posting here?

No vaccine is 1000% safe, this has been explained to death here. One country might decide that for example 2 deaths related to a vaccine in 2 million people is fine, another country, at this stage in the pandemic, might decide it's not good enough (considering the other options available)

There are multiple vaccines available. If one is shown to cause e.g. severe reactions in e.g. 50 out of a million uses, and another is shown to cause severe reactions in 5 out of a million. A country, or regulator may decide to drop the first vaccine (depending on many factors)

This has been explained so many times in threads like this I've lost count. Safety is relative.

People who can only think in black or white with black/white world views either can't understand that concept, or don't want to. Vaccines are either "100% safe" or "dangerous" to those individuals.

It's also been explained to him that the J&J vaccines weren't just left behind the other vaccines because of safety. It was explained how there were a ton of factors including production schedules, availibilty, relative effectiveness and public confidence.

He ignored all of that.

He also ignore the fact that it was still being offered by the FDA and would not explain why that was the case.

Do you agree with this statement:

Or are they lying/wrong about that?