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

Covid vaccines - thread banned users in First Post

Options
1202203205207208419

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 25,236 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    Yup. You said that in your last post to.

    How is that different or any less tasteless and ghoulish than you trying to claim it's the vaccines based on zero evidence?


    Are you just going to continue spamming the thread now with these people's deaths to play into your fantasy?



  • Registered Users Posts: 547 ✭✭✭shillyshilly


    triple jabbed, when she died last summer, when majority people were only on 1st jab... cool story bro



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Absolutely fcuking reprehensible behaviour to attempt to link these tragic deaths with vaccines for no reason other than to further your own political fcukology. You've provided zero evidence to link the two, they could've been un-vaccinated and the deaths could have been caused by Covid for all you know.

    But no, let's try to trigger the "pro-vaxxers" by using two tragedies as political footballs and then scurry away like the rat that you are. Bleeding lowlife.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]



    They're trying to blame it on a madman with an assault rifle, FFS.

    But we know better, Eh, Buzzer?



  • Registered Users Posts: 913 ✭✭✭buzzerxx


    The massive global vaccination campaign – which quickly reached a frenzied pitch – was launched less than 8 months from the start of the clinical trials. In a period of less than fourteen months more than 4.7 billion people received at least one COVID shot. Tens of millions received as many as four doses. To begin administering a vaccine to the general population within such a short trial period was wholly unprecedented in the annals of modern medicine.

    Injecting more than half of all humankind with inadequately tested, dangerous pharmaceuticals based on a never-before-tried technology while claiming that that they are “completely safe” constitutes probably the greatest crime against humanity ever committed. Never before has any government, an international actor or a transnational cabal undertaken an act that would expose such a big swath of humanity to such serious danger.

    This operation was carried out under false pretenses and those who initiated it knew that their claims were unsubstantiated and false.

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-10860261/Another-20-British-children-struck-mysterious-hepatitis.html?fbclid=IwAR0vvXtsZRsd40jy5DRWECPwqNXD_f21oZbtwFFaMWbT78nvaySNMbDkr6A



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 12,803 ✭✭✭✭The Nal


    That article doesnt mention anything about vaccines causing it.

    On the contrary. As per your link:

    "UKHSA officials said there is no evidence linking the outbreak to the Covid vaccine as most cases have been in children under five years old, who have not been jabbed."

    lol

    Another own goal from Buzz. Keep them coming. Fantastic entertainment.



  • Subscribers Posts: 41,596 ✭✭✭✭sydthebeat




  • Registered Users Posts: 17,988 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe


    90% of population vaccinated. Someone dies. "It must be the vaccines!".



  • Registered Users Posts: 6,485 ✭✭✭Fighting Tao


    Just when you think conspiracy theorists and anti-vaxxers couldn’t go any lower @buzzerxx scrapes through the scum at the bottom of the barrel and none of his cohort even bat an eyelid.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    "those who initiated it knew that their claims were unsubstantiated and false."

    Takes a special kinda ostrich to claim the above while ignoring the multiple clues, questions and evidence that disprove the shite you're shoveling down people's necks. S'pose we can add rank hypocrisy to the list......



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 17,988 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe



    Is it like a herd thing? When the alpha anti-vaxxer comes in with their insane stuff, do all the other milder anti-vaxxers meek and cower, never daring to challenge them? Just trying to figure out how this works



  • Registered Users Posts: 13,520 ✭✭✭✭Igotadose


    They're all betas.



  • Registered Users Posts: 16,673 ✭✭✭✭astrofool


    Some vaccines provide sterilising immunity, many don't, SARS-COV2 vaccines don't, the nasal delivery version might,

    However, in all cases with every single vaccine, the immunity is not 100%, which by your criteria means that every single vaccine ever has failed.

    And that the approval for every single vaccine ever was flawed.

    Which is of course not the case.

    The flaw is in your understanding of everything.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,218 ✭✭✭snowcat


    Its great we get persons who actually understand vaccines and understand the limitations of vaccines. The Covid mRNA vaccine has been a relative failure in comparison to traditional vaccines. Thank you



  • Registered Users Posts: 16,673 ✭✭✭✭astrofool


    As you've been shown before, the SARS-COV2 Vaccines are more effective than many traditional vaccines for other virus.



  • Registered Users, Subscribers Posts: 5,982 ✭✭✭hometruths


    My criteria is not that the vaccine is 100% effective at providing sterilising immunity. I have never claimed that, and it is totally unreasonable to expect that from any vaccine.

    But it is true that the vaccines approvals were based on trial results that showed very high levels of effectiveness at preventing symptomatic infection. And my criteria for vaccine failure is word for word the EMAs criteria, using approved standards from the Council for International Organizations of Medical Sciences - I have linked all this before.

    My problem is not that the vaccines did not prove to be as effective as hoped for under real world conditions, there was always a chance of that given the circumstances.

    My problem is that rather than say hang on, this is not working as well as we had hoped but it does have other benefits, governments shifted the goalposts continually, changing the narrative at what was deemed to be successful, as they shifted their rationale to encourage mass vaccination from herd immunity to the reductions of hospital/ICU admissions/mortality.

    They simultaneously shifted their goalposts on policy. For example the EU went from a position of nobody will be discriminated against or pressurised into getting a vaccine in December 2020 to vaccine passports and talk of mandatory vaccination in December 2021.

    And in December 2020 they had less favourable but more realistic expectations of what the vaccine would achieve based on years worth of real world data. It defies all common sense.



  • Registered Users Posts: 16,673 ✭✭✭✭astrofool


    My criteria is not that the vaccine is 100% effective at providing sterilising immunity. I have never claimed that, and it is totally unreasonable to expect that from any vaccine

    You've just conceded all of your points.

    The vaccines remain highly effective against Omicron as data released in the past few days has been showing. The unvaccinated continue to die at a far higher rate from COVID.



  • Registered Users, Subscribers Posts: 5,982 ✭✭✭hometruths




  • Registered Users Posts: 16,673 ✭✭✭✭astrofool


    You can pick it up on the COVID forum threads.

    That's what I was going to say, but here's a decent comment from the Lancet that links to all the required data:

    COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness against the omicron (BA.2) variant in England - The Lancet Infectious Diseases

    Before you asked the question, did you even attempt to search for an answer? Just trying to get a read on what level of spoonfeeding is required in the future (after the last time when you took many many posts to post your scottish data without a source and when found said the opposite of everything you were posting).

    And any acknowledgement of all your previous points being conceded? Or just pretending it didn't happen and waiting a few pages to start it again? (maybe under another username).



  • Registered Users Posts: 25,236 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    @snowcat @hometruths no reaction to @buzzerxx's most recent claims?

    Nothing at all?

    Why are you guys unwilling to challenge him when he's dragging your antivaxxery down?

    Would you not tell him to cop on so you can make the real points?

    Or is it that you actually agree with him and just don't want to admit it?



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 25,236 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    I think it's because they are painted into a corner.

    They have to disagree with him cause they're pretending that they don't believe the vaccine is dangerous, "they just have concerns".

    But they can't disagree with him because challenging other conspiracy theorists is verboten. If they challenge other conspiracy theorists they might have to point out why they are wrong, like how buzzer is parroting Twitter feeds. And if they start point out stuff like that it draws too many uncomfortable comparisons to their own claims.


    The best they can do is ignore and pretend he and the other people willing to make the extreme claims don't exist. And act shocked when people don't take antivaxxers seriously. And pretend to not understand why they're relegated to this forum

    They might say they disagree with the extreme type if you spend a few pages of posts pinning them down and dragging an opinion out of them, but thats about all the detail you'll get.

    Post edited by King Mob on


  • Registered Users Posts: 913 ✭✭✭buzzerxx


    Sickening



  • Registered Users Posts: 25,236 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    Lol well if it's written on the back of a t-shirt it must be true.


    Keep going buzz.



  • Registered Users Posts: 6,485 ✭✭✭Fighting Tao


    It’s an old one Buzz. Nothing more current? Only a complete idiot would accept something like that written on the back of ant-shirt without question. Even worse than an idiot would then go on to share it.



  • Registered Users Posts: 17,988 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe




  • Posts: 25,611 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Dude wait til you hear about these things called books, your mind is going to be **** blown.



  • Registered Users Posts: 25,236 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    Yea but is that paper published on some dude's back?



  • Registered Users, Subscribers Posts: 5,982 ✭✭✭hometruths


    No I did not search for Covid vaccine effectiveness data, I was specifically interested in the data you were referencing, that you said had been released in the last few days.

    I acknowledge that you said "You've just conceded all of your points."

    However just stating that, does not mean I just conceded all my points. That's ridiculous. By all means make a sensible argument in good faith to contradict me and I'll engage in good faith.



  • Registered Users Posts: 13,520 ✭✭✭✭Igotadose


    They're all betas.

    This explains the CT loons and their international travel. I wondered where they were going - of course, anti-vaxx boot camps!





  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 25,236 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    The argument is that if your concerns about the vaccine possibly increasing the chances of infection, then you should be easily able to point to other sources of information that support that idea.

    You should be able to point to ther data sets from other countries that indicate a similar anomaly is happening.

    You should be able to point to doctors, experts and medical organisations that share your concern and say so directly.

    You at the least should be able to point to where the people who produced the reports you're clinging to said that they share your concerns.

    In addition you should be able to explain why those same people would instead suggest an explanation that is false.


    You've not addressed or acknowledged these points.

    So you've conceded them.

    You can't point to any other evidence to support your concern. You can't point out any experts that share your concern. You can't explain why the experts would lie and give a false explanation for the data.

    So why aren't you able to do this?

    Is it because there's some sort of secret effort to suppress this information perhaps?



Advertisement