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
1…318319321323324…419

Comments

  • Options
    #9602
    kernkraft500
    Registered Users Posts: 181 ✭✭kernkraft500


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119443246#Comment_119443246

    Ivermectin is being studied at the moment, and is showing positive outcomes if administered within 48 hours of infection ...

    the catch about this is, Ivermectin is actually quite a nasty drug and interferes with numerous other medications, even in small doses (it also has the nasty effect of being easy to overdose and die from).

    Given COVID can take up to 48 Hours to show symptoms, most will be outside the window of it being useful when they realise they have it unless:

    a) they catch it through regular PCR tests (not lateral flow) then get prescribed Ivermectin immediately

    b) they load up on Ivermectin (even the manufacturer advises against this)

    What happened in 2020/21, where low levels were observed of infection, they looked at what other drugs were in circulation, and Ivermectin came up (along with Hydroxychloroquine) and people put 2+2 together and presumed causality ....

    The studies from Africa and South America in 2021 were actually found to be incorrect, and presumed protection from anecdotal evidence.. which resulted in official studies only being started late 2021, where we are only seeing the results in the last few months...



  • Options
    #9603
    hometruths
    Registered Users, Subscribers Posts: 5,984 ✭✭✭hometruths


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119443687#Comment_119443687

    I see that there are problems in conducting any more vaccine trials. So we just have to rely on the trials that were done. And hope that they were correct. I guess it would have helped if the vaccine manufacturers hadn't unblinded the trial and vaccinated the placebo recipients within weeks of the emergency use approval.

    I get that you don't think this is a big deal, but it sounds sub optimal to me.

    Perhaps this is why everybody has their head in the sand, and insists on telling themselves that the vaccines are working amazingly well like the Emperor's new clothes.

    It's too late to do anything about it, so why bother worry?



  • Options
    #9604
    hometruths
    Registered Users, Subscribers Posts: 5,984 ✭✭✭hometruths


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119443888#Comment_119443888

    Such as?



  • Options
    #9605
    kernkraft500
    Registered Users Posts: 181 ✭✭kernkraft500


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119444075#Comment_119444075

    Retevmo is an example drug who's use case keeps expanding with time..

    Please research this yourself, it's getting tiresome this playing dumb act, and trying to out pedantic people

    edit: EMA additional monitoring list.... its par for course that a cancer drug gets approved for one treatment and is trialled on other cancers

    List of medicinal products under additional monitoring (europa.eu)

    Currently 370+ drugs on the list for various conditions

    edit 2: Retevmo was initially a thyroid cancer treatment, specifically for use in cancers with RET mutations.... since then it's conditional approval has expanded to other common RET cancers(e.g. Lung) ... it is being studied off label for other cancers such as salivary gland and breast cancer, which will be added to the conditional list if results are favourable....

    If you even did a tiny bit of research, you'd understand this.

    Post edited by kernkraft500 on


  • Options
    #9606
    hometruths
    Registered Users, Subscribers Posts: 5,984 ✭✭✭hometruths


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119444240#Comment_119444240

    "specifically for use in cancers with RET mutations.... since then it's conditional approval has expanded to other common RET cancers(e.g. Lung)"

    "which will be added to the conditional list if results are favourable"

    i.e they will update the approval.

    Why can they not do that with the covid vaccines? Just update the approval to reflect it's primary benefit is now the prevention of severe covid, and not the prevention of covid?



  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #9607
    EyesClosed
    Registered Users Posts: 1,453 ✭✭✭EyesClosed


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119444584#Comment_119444584

    What strain was it initially approved for?

    And what is the current state of that strain?



  • Options
    #9608
    hometruths
    Registered Users, Subscribers Posts: 5,984 ✭✭✭hometruths


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119444627#Comment_119444627

    Extinct. So the approval should be extinct too. Or updated. Not a difficult point to grasp.



  • Options
    #9609
    kernkraft500
    Registered Users Posts: 181 ✭✭kernkraft500


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119444584#Comment_119444584

    As mentioned, it is being used off-label, which doesn't require an update, once there is sufficient evidence and cause...

    Approvals take time and money, the information on the delta and omicron variants was only reviewed by most governing bodies late 2021/early 2022. Pretty much all manufacturers are in the middle of approval for vaccines specific to the Delta and Omicron variants which will be out later this year.

    So the position is, there is a vaccine in place which isn't as effective against transmission and mild cases for variants, but will reduce severe infection and hospitalisations, which is a pretty convincing argument during a pandemic, and as a safety barrier until a variant becomes endemic.



  • Options
    #9610
    hometruths
    Registered Users, Subscribers Posts: 5,984 ✭✭✭hometruths


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119444700#Comment_119444700

    As mentioned, it is being used off-label, which doesn't require an update, once there is sufficient evidence and cause...

    Surely the phrase "will be added to the conditional list" implies some sort of update? i.e this is a list of approved uses.



  • Options
    #9611
    EyesClosed
    Registered Users Posts: 1,453 ✭✭✭EyesClosed


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119444639#Comment_119444639

    So if it was approved for a strain that it initially worked against, so much so it helped remove that strain. It does not need to be reapproved for another strain... We know the virus mutates.

    Also I've asked over and over, what does this have to do with the safety of the vaccine? You know the point of this thread..



  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #9612
    King Mob
    Registered Users Posts: 25,236 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119444752#Comment_119444752

    It has nothing to do with the thread.

    Hometruths has long since conceded that he can point to any actual safety issues beyond the ones already known and accounted for.



  • Options
    #9613
    kernkraft500
    Registered Users Posts: 181 ✭✭kernkraft500


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119444733#Comment_119444733

    but that's the point, they are working off-label so won't be added to the list, this is because specific vaccines for variants will be available later in the year, and a re-certification for new elements can take 6-12 months (it can also revoke it for use for that new element)... there is no health or cost benefit to this.

    The reason Cancer drugs do it, is because a specific drug is usually not superseded by another drug for a number of years, so it makes sense to do it there.



  • Options
    #9614
    Fr0g
    Registered Users Posts: 594 ✭✭✭Fr0g


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119415847#Comment_119415847

    You tried to pass off old data in a vain attempt to discredit. The age of the data is significant since at the time of the data you quoted was prior to the 4th dose and therefore irrelevant. You already know this.

    My "claim" as you put it was an attempt at a simplified explanation since I was asked to explain it in my own words.

    I am going to post a video of an analysis of ONS (UK) data which shows that after the vaccine rollout in each age cohort there followed an unusual spike in deaths in the same cohort of those who had NOT taken the vaccine. It couldn't be covid as the distribution didn't make sense.

    Counter intuitive don't you think? Maybe you can give an explanation as to why that might be. This is by way of an example where controlling for age is important.



  • Options
    #9615
    snowcat
    Registered Users Posts: 1,218 ✭✭✭snowcat


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119444752#Comment_119444752

    As you might be slowly working out this is not solely a Vaccine Safety thread. A lot of posters have ended up here as this is the only place you can discuss any possible negative effects of the vaxx without getting banned.



  • Options
    #9616
    Fighting Tao
    Registered Users Posts: 6,485 ✭✭✭Fighting Tao


    Yes, the thread people come to in order to discuss (read push) lies and misinformation. The whole vaccine safety issue was obviously lies seeing that it’s no longer considered part of the thread by the conspiracy theorists. Everything but vaccine safety if brought up to deflect.



  • Options
    #9617
    snowcat
    Registered Users Posts: 1,218 ✭✭✭snowcat


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119446578#Comment_119446578

    Yes you have the extreme pro vaxxers who also believe that the vaccine is a gift from God. Has no negative effects whatsoever. Has saved millions of lives. Will not have any long term effects. That GMO will save the planet. That Chemicals and drugs are always good as long as they have been 'approved'. They love peer review. They dont really seem to think objectively for themselves but rely on scientists and regulators and follow the party line at whatever cost.



  • Options
    #9618
    Fighting Tao
    Registered Users Posts: 6,485 ✭✭✭Fighting Tao


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119446603#Comment_119446603

    You’ve posted in the thread enough to have read posts from non-antivaxxers that should alert you to the blatant lies you are telling in your first 2 sentences. No one has said that there are no negative effects at all, and no one believes they are a gift from god, as they are man made. Us humans can do spectacular things.



  • Options
    #9619
    kernkraft500
    Registered Users Posts: 181 ✭✭kernkraft500


    no medical intervention is without risk



  • Options
    #9620
    snowcat
    Registered Users Posts: 1,218 ✭✭✭snowcat


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119446613#Comment_119446613

    Ok Ill concede the first two. Do you believe all chemicals and drugs that are 'approved' are great for mankind? Like pesticides biocides, gmo chemicals like roundup. Drugs like prozac, oxycontin? Oxybenzone in sunscreen that is linked with hormone disruption and in itself is linked with causing cancer and killing coral reefs yet promoted by the drug industry as great for your skin and protection against sunburn. I would no more trust the pharma industry more than a travelling tarmac salesman.



  • Options
    #9621
    Fighting Tao
    Registered Users Posts: 6,485 ✭✭✭Fighting Tao


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119446638#Comment_119446638

    Tangent tangent tangent. You’ve done this many times already for your pet hate GMO. So you say that the thread is no longer about covid vaccines….is it not about covid either now? Maybe the title should be changed to Snowcats crap list or something like that.



  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #9622
    snowcat
    Registered Users Posts: 1,218 ✭✭✭snowcat


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119446647#Comment_119446647

    Indeed. I would much rather be called an anti drugger, or anti gmoer than an anti vaxxer.



  • Options
    #9623
    hometruths
    Registered Users, Subscribers Posts: 5,984 ✭✭✭hometruths


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119444752#Comment_119444752

    Also I've asked over and over, what does this have to do with the safety of the vaccine? You know the point of this thread..

    I've restated this over and over again. Snowcat posted this about 3 months ago:

    However when the vaccices started to underperform the platform shifted. We had a divergence from the vaccines will protect you (full Stop) to the vaccines will protect you from serious illness and death. (We sort of expected that!). 

    And I thought they were spot on, so I replied:

    This is my problem with the vaccines. When the vaccines were first rolled out the clear expectation was that the primary function was to prevent catching Covid.

    When it became abundantly clear that this was not working as intended, but they were having good effect in preventing serious illness and death, very few vaccine proponents acknowledged this. It was spun as if the primary function all along was to reduce serious illness and death, and anybody who thought they were taking the vaccine to prevent them getting Covid just didn't understand how vaccines worked.

    This is total and utter nonsense, and as far as I am concerned it undermines all subsequent claims about the vaccine efficacy and safety.

    Since then most of my posts on here have been arguing with posters claiming that the primary function all along was to reduce serious illness and death and I just didn't understand how vaccines worked.

    Which rather emphasises my original point rather than disproves it.



  • Options
    #9624
    kernkraft500
    Registered Users Posts: 181 ✭✭kernkraft500


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119446695#Comment_119446695

    which circles back to the same point you have been told numerous times, that it did this with the original and alpha variants, issues with lower performance is with other variants



  • Options
    #9625
    snowcat
    Registered Users Posts: 1,218 ✭✭✭snowcat


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119446695#Comment_119446695

    Yes and it has done untold damage to the reputation of vaccines. We traditionally believed that a vaccine stopped us getting a symptiomatic illness. That has now shifted to you will still get infected, still get sick, maybe end up in hospital and maybe die but those odds are reduced..great.



  • Options
    #9626
    EyesClosed
    Registered Users Posts: 1,453 ✭✭✭EyesClosed


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119446695#Comment_119446695

    But the vaccine worked... It worked so well that the original strain as you said yourself is gone.

    What's the safety issue with it?



  • Options
    #9627
    kernkraft500
    Registered Users Posts: 181 ✭✭kernkraft500


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119446715#Comment_119446715

    more fool you for believing that... certain types of the MMR has less efficacy than the COVID jabs, certain types of flu jabs have less efficacy than COVID jabs (some are designed to last as little as a month or 2, to get you through flu season)...

    the reason everyone thinks it's all gravy is because if an outbreak occurs, you have an already immunised population which will vastly slow down any transmission... the COVID jabs were deployed in a pandemic, and are still firefighting, everyone is expecting them to be a silver bullet which they would never be, especially against variants they weren't designed for.



  • Options
    #9628
    hometruths
    Registered Users, Subscribers Posts: 5,984 ✭✭✭hometruths


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119446716#Comment_119446716

    But you still have people saying the vaccines are working amazingly well, double boosted folk on their third round of covid this year saying thank goodness for my vaccine! Nuts.

    It's the wholesale revisionism that bothers me. The idea that because good efficacy against severe disease etc is/was demonstrated that this is evidence of the vaccine working as intended.

    And then using that as justification to vaccinate every man, woman and child irrespective of their risk profile for severe covid.



  • Options
    #9629
    kernkraft500
    Registered Users Posts: 181 ✭✭kernkraft500


    for some fundamentals...

    for a vaccine to work, a host needs to be infected to kill an infection off...

    if a vaccinated host is infected, they will kill of a virus faster and more efficiently that an unvaccinated host, this is how transmission is stopped, it stops the daisy chain effect.... you will still have people getting infected, that's how it works



  • Options
    #9630
    snowcat
    Registered Users Posts: 1,218 ✭✭✭snowcat


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119446746#Comment_119446746

    Yes but they told us they could tweak the vaccines in 28 days for variants? Why has that not happened? It has not happened because they are making enough money and have enough stock of crap vaccine so they could not be bothered.



  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #9631
    kernkraft500
    Registered Users Posts: 181 ✭✭kernkraft500


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119446761#Comment_119446761

    approval studies and approval bodies... your friend @hometruths like to think he's inhouse expert for the EMA, so he can break it down for you...

    28 days to tweak the vaccine, 3 months to run a study, month to consolidate and publish info, 6 months minimum for approval bodies to decide, all while running concurrent studies and updating approval bodies.... its easily 10 months to a year turn around, and that's under emergency legislation...

    But being anti-pharma, I'm struggling as to why you care, other than to pick another tangent to try and argue from?



Advertisement