Covid vaccines - thread banned users in First Post

its probably ten fold if not hundreds those odds for measles, mumps, rubella, polio, tetanus etc... yet we still take them...

why? so there is an element of endemic protection so when an occurrence does happen, it can be controlled much better..

there is a much bigger picture which the "sure it won't effect me" brigade don't grasp

and in all honesty, that's fine, nobody is forcing you to get it....

but this whole argument of "well if I'm not getting it because I don't need/trust it" being automatically translated into "this vaccine isn't safe because I said so, here's some links I didn't read", yet ignoring or dismissing multitudes of verified scientific research is getting a bit lame.

Why would they have said that? It would have been false based on the information available for the vaccines in trials and in performance versus the pre-Omicron variants.

In the Lancet study there were 3 times as many cases in unvaccinated as vaccinated.

In the Lancet study there were 3 times as many cases in unvaccinated as vaccinated.

Your point is strawman nonsense.

correct, and herd immunity is easily achieved when you don't have a transmissibly active pathogen... it is also easy to contain when there is an outbreak ... both scenarios haven't been achieved yet with COVID ... this isn't solely due to the vaccine not being effective, it was highly effective against the strain it was designed for, but the landscape has since changed...

so you have the option then of:

-do nothing

-use a vaccine which is still quite effective and will reduce severe sickness and hospitalisations

With Ireland's shitbox healthcare system, you know the option that will be pushed...

That can be compared with the likes of the UK with the NHS, although at creaking point, it can and has weathered numerous spikes in infections which resulted in higher than average hospitalisations. Majority of the country have only had 2 or 3 injections, and has been pretty much open since April 2021.

As I said, it's quite easy just to say "this vaccine is stupid, and no point of having it" when you don't appreciate the bigger picture.

While it's not currently as effective against current strains, it's still a very successful tool in reducing transmission and hospitalisations.

if you don't want to take it, cool, don't. But don't try and let your rational for not taking it turn into a convoluted argument about it's safety where we're still looking for some actual evidence of that from you.

But you keep shifting the goalposts here.

You previously claimed that the vaccines were more harmful than beneficial for people outside those you deem need it.

Now you're saying that "there's little individual benefit."

How much benefit exactly?

You've conceded that the vaccine is effective in reducing severe disease in all age groups.

You've conceded that the vaccines are more dangerous than the virus.

heart attacks aren't long term heart conditions, and can I have a link to to this increase of weird cancers please? Anything I have seen is showing normal incidence of cancers, but the delay in diagnosis and treatment resulting in far quicker progression to stage 4.

Ok. Great, CQD's claim is false then.

Nope. People were encouraged to take the vaccine. That is not "pressure."

You're trying to pretend that this was "pressure" and there was something wrong about it because you're still grasping at straws for something bad to say about the vaccine given that you've abandoned the claims about it's safety.

No, it's false. You've no actual evidence to support it besides a story about a nurse friend you have that you barely remember.

On the other hand, we've reams and reams of safety data that shows there aren't "weird cancers" occurring due to the vaccine.

Or if you prefer, I have like 5 nurse friends and 5 doctor friends who all say that the vaccines aren't causing cancers.

It's anecdotal, so you can't say it's false.