Covid vaccines - thread banned users in First Post

hometruths · 09-11-2022 10:00AM

Hong Kong showed that age and lack of natural immunity is the biggest factor in vulnerability to Covid deaths - not vaccination status.

They were hit worse by Omicron because they had largely managed to shut out Covid completely before that.

If anything Hong Kong's experience suggests the Swedes had the right idea, not that the vaccines are manna from heaven.

hometruths · 09-11-2022 10:07AM

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119851339#Comment_119851339

Your activity on this forum suggests to me you're motivated more by being extremely anti conspiracy theories rather than extremely pro vaccines.

Years of mocking posters for their opinions on UFOs, JFKs death, 911 etc has left you ill prepared to debate arguments backed up by stats and data from sources such as medical journals.

Hence you're reduced to wittering on about links found on twitter or extremist websites in order to deride and ridicule of contributors asking questions or questioning information.

09-11-2022 10:08AM

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119852204#Comment_119852204

But this is just your own personal biased opinion that's the result of consuming social media supplied misinformation.

Are you moving away from your previous link dump already?

If so, you might wanna read the next one in full before dumping it. And I'd recommend skipping the stage of posting the odd local news source and just post the study directly. Your tactic doesn't prevent people from reading them and seeing how you are misrepresenting them.

hometruths · 09-11-2022 10:13AM

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119852233#Comment_119852233

QED.

09-11-2022 10:21AM

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119852229#Comment_119852229

And of course, you're misattributing arguments to me that I don't make.

Yes, I keep pointing out that you anti-vaxxers use twitter and extremist sources, because you keep using twitter and extremists sources.

Why shouldn't I point that out?

odyssey06 · 09-11-2022 10:28AM

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119852204#Comment_119852204

People died in Hong Kong who would have had much better chance at survival if vaccinated.

Hong Kong showed that Omicron has the potential to cause significant deaths in an unvaxxed population. It shows that Omicron alone would not have spared us, had people not been vaccinated.

How do you acquire this natural immunity, other than running the risk of infection?

And in that process, you expose your vulnerable to risk of death and hospitalisation from covid.

Which is how Sweden ended up with significantly higher excess deaths than their peers and near neighbours in Scandinavia.

Genius plan.

Oh, and Sweden were to the forefront in rolling out vaccines.

odyssey06 · 09-11-2022 10:31AM

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119852229#Comment_119852229

The links are being posted from twitter and extremist websites onto this forum. Of course, it would suit you to try to lay down ground rules that it is out of bounds to note this.

And in many cases, the claims made on those websites do not match the contents of the original stats and data.

09-11-2022 10:36AM

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119852287#Comment_119852287

The claims made by Hometruths rarely match the contents.

Just look at the last few examples.

Claimed that one study showed "extreme pro vaxxers" were on the decline. Reduced to claiming that the study doesn't support anything and is just "interesting" Claimed that the study didn't show that 21.6% of people didn't say their confidence in vaccines had increased.

I don't think any of us need to prepared to debate anyone on stats and data when they can be debunked by simply reading what they clearly don't.

hometruths · 09-11-2022 10:37AM

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119852266#Comment_119852266

Irrespective of the content linked your repeated argument to dismiss the poster is "I think you found that on twitter or an unreliable source".

You do this because you are unable to make a sensible argument against the content actually posted.

Your MO is not to argue the point being made, and not even to dismiss the evidence for the point made, it is to dismiss what you think is the source of the source of the evidence for the point made. It is nonsense.

Or if somebody expresses an opinion, you simply say their opinion is not valid because it is the result of consuming social media supplied misinformation.

Your inability to actually discuss or debate why their opinion might be wrong is transparent.

hometruths · 09-11-2022 10:43AM

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119852287#Comment_119852287

I don't use twitter and I have not posted a single link to an extremist website on this site.

The point I am making is content from sources like the BMJ are dismissed lazily with a "you probably found that on twitter or an extremist website"

09-11-2022 10:45AM

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119852304#Comment_119852304

Lol Nope. that's not what I'm arguing. More misattribution.

You also ignore the fact that I do often address and counter the claims you make, you just also ignore it when I do that.

For example, in your previous linkdump from social media, you started by claiming the point was that the study showed or had something to do with "Extreme pro vaxxers".

But then, I explained in detail and directly how the study cannot say anything about that. You ignored this because your "MO" is to ignore things you can't address under the guise of "wanting to preserve discussion".

You then also changed what your point was to be something about vaccine messaging causing the decline in confidence. Right up until you were challenged on this and changed your point again.

This is all aside from the reason I bring up the fact you got this from some social media.

odyssey06 · 09-11-2022 10:45AM

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119852333#Comment_119852333

Strange, apparently you have been reading the thread, and missed all the posts with stuff sourced from dodgy websites and random twitter feeds. And not once have you challenged or engaged with them... You seem to have blinkers on.

You also seem to have had those same blinkers on because multiple posters have challenged not just the source, but the content of these articles, including ones posted by you. Usually with reference to the contents of the underlying study. In the last 48 hours, you will see lots of such posts.

So your statement is demonstrably false and self - serving. You have may have convinced yourself of this falsehood, but it is a self deception.

09-11-2022 10:47AM

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119852333#Comment_119852333

No one has "dismissed content from sources like the BMJ" except for your anti-vaxxers. More misattribution.

I distinctly remember posting a study from the BMJ that showed the vaccines were responsible for saving millions of lives. You guys dismissed this among general ignoring and accusations of fraud.

Fighting Tao · 09-11-2022 10:49AM

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119852282#Comment_119852282

I think your question just shows how logic fails conspiracy theorists and anti-vaxxers. It’s a question that if answered proves that the whole Hong King argument they are trying to push is basically bullshit and just regurgitated from elsewhere without any little bit of thought.

Some people just can’t think about and question logically but they insist they can and it results in a weird situation where they end up flogging themselves repeatedly and they seem to enjoy it. Case in point with Hong King, and Hometruths and Snowcats insistence that studies state things that they don’t, even so far as one poster contacting a study author only for the poster to be told that that they are misinterpreting the study. This wasn’t good enough for the poster so they still argued their claim. It reminds me of self flagellation. The pain of looking foolish is a pleasure.

hometruths · 09-11-2022 10:49AM

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119852302#Comment_119852302

Again this is all total nonsense.

For example:

Claimed that the study didn't show that 21.6% of people didn't say their confidence in vaccines had increased.

No I did not claim that.

You claimed that study showed vaccine confidence increased by 21.6%.

Which is total garbage. I simply pointed out your misunderstanding that there is a difference between 21.6% people saying their confidence in vaccines has increased and claiming vaccine confidence increased by 21.6%

09-11-2022 10:53AM

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119852355#Comment_119852355

Lol. More desperate word games to try and avoid points.

This is also your "MO".

You ignore the majority of points to nitpick at one to distract from the long list of factual errors, mistruths and lies you try to tell.

And of course, this is complete hypocrisy on your part. Whinging about people misattributing arguments to you, while then claiming people did and said things they don't.

09-11-2022 11:03AM

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119852340#Comment_119852340

It took a good two pages just to get him to admit that Natural News was not a good source. And even then it was kind of a sideways backhanded admission.

Conspiracy theorists are not permitted to disagree with each other. They can't point out that their fellows sources are obviously dodgy, because their own sources are equally as dodgy, just with different reputations and openness about their dodgy nature.

Likewise they can't acknowledge that there is misinformation being spread on the thread because that too would draw the obvious comparison.

hometruths · 09-11-2022 11:50AM

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119852398#Comment_119852398

Likewise they can't acknowledge that there is misinformation being spread on the thread because that too would draw the obvious comparison.

Unfortunately the whole topic of covid and the vaccines is riddled with misinformation from all angles. And for sure it is present on this thread.

For example the claims that spreading misinformation about vaccines is dangerous because it reduces our chances of sufficient uptake to reach herd immunity because of vaccine hesitancy is, ironically enough, pure misinformation.

We will not reach herd immunity thanks to the vaccines because the vaccines do not prevent infection or transmission.

It's nothing to do with vaccine hesitancy caused by misinformation. To claim otherwise is pure misinformation.

09-11-2022 12:41PM

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119852597#Comment_119852597

But I posted several studies that discuss the effects of misinformation against vaccines and shows what impact it has.

You are now rejecting and dismissing these studies despite the fact they are peer reviewed and published in journals such as Nature. More hypocrisy.

You are also now trying to deflect back to your particular bug bear that's been addressed over and over and over and is also based on misattributed arguments.

And this of course is aside from the points I was actually making in my post which you do not address at all. You don't even acknowledge them.

Hilariously hypocritical.

hometruths · 09-11-2022 12:59PM

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119852786#Comment_119852786

What is the official line on vaccine induced herd immunity at the minute? Is it possible to achieve?

09-11-2022 01:27PM

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119852844#Comment_119852844

Lol. No man. You don't get to dodge the vast majority of my points then badger me for the answer to some random off topic question.

According to you, the studies I provided from Nature are all misinformation and you are dismissing them. Ok. Cool. As I said, this makes you a massive hypocrite for whinging at us for supposedly doing the same thing about stuff being published in the BMJ (which again, no one did.)

My point is made.

hometruths · 09-11-2022 01:52PM

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119852914#Comment_119852914

It is not off topic.

The point I am making is that there is all sorts of flavours of misinformation relating to covid and covid vaccines.

For example clearly the idea that the vaccines are a mechanism to implant the global population with 5G for mind control is utter nonsense and total misinformation without a shred of credible evidence.

But saying that covid vaccines will not achieve herd immunity because they do not protect infection or transmission is less clear. There is very credible evidence for this statement but it is often dismissed as misinformation, or at least has been in the past.

I am just wondering what the consensus line on this is at the minute? I presume those on here who are constantly hand waving about the dangers of misinformation being spread unchecked will be able to enlighten us?

09-11-2022 01:55PM

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119853001#Comment_119853001

OK. So you believe that Nature is an example of a source providing misinformation.

And as such you are dismissing the studies I posted from there.

hometruths · 09-11-2022 02:25PM

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119853008#Comment_119853008

No, I didn't say that.

I wondering what you think about the claims regarding herd immunity as you posted two studies from there.

I am also wondering what anybody else thinks about the claims of herd immunity. Is it currently misinformation or not?

The point I am making is that a lot of what was considered misinformation 12 months ago is currently considered credible. And vice versa.

So vague handwaving about spreading misinformation is totally pointless. What misinformation are you specifically worried about?

09-11-2022 02:32PM

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119853132#Comment_119853132

Ok. So then you agree that the studies i posted are not misinformation. Cool.

Weird that you tried to claim they were misinformation previously.

Also weird you're still badgering me to answer your silly question.

hometruths · 09-11-2022 02:49PM

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119853150#Comment_119853150

It's not a silly question. If we learn something new that contradicts what was previously thought to be true, then we need to update what we consider to be misinformation. Pretending otherwise is silly.

One of the studies you posted is a perfect example of what I am talking about and is most certainly not misinformation, or at least it wasn't at the time it was published - February 2021.

Back then the vaccines were all about herd immunity and the worry was low uptake would mean we wouldn't reach herd immunity. Now we know that was a pipe dream. So yes, to make that claim today is misinformation.

I am familiar with one of the authors and find him to be very credible - Alex de Figueiredo of the Vaccine Confidence Project - and indeed have cited his work in the BMJ here before about extreme pro vaccine advocates and coercive covid vaccine policies damaging the long term confidence in all vaccines.

Ironically enough he subsequently got banned from Twitter for spreading misinformation about vaccines. Or at least what Twitter deemed to be misinformation.

But I believe Twitter has since updated its guidelines and some, if not all, of what he got banned for is now consensus.

09-11-2022 02:54PM

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119853213#Comment_119853213

But it is a silly question as you're only asking it as a distraction from all of the points and questions you are dodging. I told you I'm not going to respond to it any more than you are going to respond to the hundreds of questions of mine and others you've ducked.

As you agree, the studies I posted are not misinformation and you accept their findings. Discussion done.

hometruths · 09-11-2022 03:01PM

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119853244#Comment_119853244

I would be a lot more hesitant than you are to label something as misinformation.

But I do think posting this sort of thing in November 2022 as evidence of the dangers of misinformation is laughable:

It is estimated that a novel COVID-19 vaccine will need to be accepted by at least 55% of the population to provide herd immunity, with estimates reaching as high as 85% depending on country and infection rate. Reaching these required vaccination levels should not be assumed given well-documented evidence of vaccine hesitancy across the world, which is often fuelled by online and offline misinformation surrounding the importance, safety or effectiveness of vaccines.

Dohnjoe · 09-11-2022 03:11PM

The 400 pages of this thread really demonstrates there are no coherent conspiracies, and reinforces that there will always be a determined group of individuals who will attempt to malign vaccines in any way possible, regardless of benefits.

Polls have also demonstrated that a vast majority of anti-vaxxers still wouldn't get shots even if there were no side effects whatsoever, and that very little will change their minds.

09-11-2022 03:19PM

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119853282#Comment_119853282

No. I'm pretty confident in labeling things from sites like Info Wars, Natural News and Epoch Times as misinformation.

But ok, you're back to dismissing the studies I posted again. Cool.

Covid vaccines - thread banned users in First Post

Comments