Anti-vaxxers

ancapailldorcha

badabing106 wrote: »

I'm not convinced you read the conclusion of the report?

10. Conclusion
Through a retrospective population‐based cohort study, we demonstrated that the
increased incidence of narcolepsy in children/adolescents in Ireland from 2009 was
associated with vaccination with Pandemrix. All cases who were tested and results available
at time of chart retrieval (n=17) occurred in those who are genetically susceptible. The
association could not be assessed accurately in adults because of the small number of cases
reported. Our results were very similar to the findings reported from Finland and other
Scandinavian countries.   
Although we cannot exclude any selection or confounding bias which might have
overestimated the risk of narcolepsy linked to Pandemrix vaccination, we believe that the
association was so high that it is unlikely to be explained by any possible bias.  Extensive case
finding was undertaken in Ireland over the last 6 months and it unlikely that 33 – 55 cases in
the unvaccinated cohort of 5‐19 year olds are awaiting presentation to primary care and or
investigation in secondary care.  
Further studies are awaited (e.g. the VAESCO study) that will consider possible confounders
and facilitate better understanding

Instead of dumping text without reading it, can you make a point in your own words? The association is there, this I have never disputed. It's just incredibly tiny.

badabing106

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Instead of dumping text without reading it, can you make a point in your own words? The association is there, this I have never disputed. It's just incredibly tiny.

There was a demonstrated increased incidence of narcolepsy in children/adolescents in Ireland from 2009 and that was associated
associated with vaccination with Pandemrix

ancapailldorcha

badabing106 wrote: »

There was a demonstrated increased incidence of narcolepsy in children/adolescents in Ireland from 2009 and that was associated
associated with vaccination with Pandemrix

You're back to parroting this disingenuous nonsense then.

badabing106

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

You're back to parroting this disingenuous nonsense then.

I literally repeated the first sentence of the conclusion of a 144 page scientific report on this issue......

ancapailldorcha

badabing106 wrote: »

I literally repeated the first sentence of the conclusion of a 144 page scientific report on this issue......

Exactly. You just lazily dumped it there without bothering to read the thing or to put the conclusion in its context. You found the bit that supported your anti-vaxx agenda and exploited it without putting in a shred of effort into what the report was actually saying.

Igotadose

badabing106 wrote: »

I literally repeated the first sentence of the conclusion of a 144 page scientific report on this issue......

And, what's your point? We can all read reports.

Hotblack Desiato

badabing106 wrote: »

Why are there at least 80 people taking legal action against Ireland and winning cases?

Because the taxpayer is a soft touch, tbh.

Timberrrrrrrr

badabing106 wrote: »

I literally repeated the first sentence of the conclusion of a 144 page scientific report on this issue......

And that's as far as you got!

badabing106

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Exactly. You just lazily dumped it there without bothering to read the thing or to put the conclusion in its context. You found the bit that supported your anti-vaxx agenda and exploited it without putting in a shred of effort into what the report was actually saying.

How can I lazily dump the conclusion of multiple European Scientific discovery's?

badabing106

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

And that's as far as you got!

Do you disagree with it? Do you think the scientific community got it wrong?

ancapailldorcha

badabing106 wrote: »

How can I lazily dump the conclusion of multiple European Scientific discovery's?

By copying and pasting with no effort.

Timberrrrrrrr

badabing106 wrote: »

Do you disagree with it? Do you think the scientific community got it wrong?

The same scientific community who say vaccines, masks and lockdowns are needed to beat Covid? The same scientific community that you are saying are wrong?

badabing106

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

By copying and pasting with no effort.

What does that mean?

badabing106

badabing106 wrote: »

How can I lazily dump the conclusion of multiple European Scientific discovery's?

By cherry picking and not taking into account the entire conclusion. Or the fact it's incredibly rare.

badabing106

Deleted User wrote: »

By cherry picking and not taking into account the entire conclusion. Or the fact it's incredibly rare.

Here is the full conclusion of an 144 page report. Where is the Cherry Picking?



10. Conclusion
Through a retrospective population‐based cohort study, we demonstrated that the
increased incidence of narcolepsy in children/adolescents in Ireland from 2009 was
associated with vaccination with Pandemrix. All cases who were tested and results available
at time of chart retrieval (n=17) occurred in those who are genetically susceptible. The
association could not be assessed accurately in adults because of the small number of cases
reported. Our results were very similar to the findings reported from Finland and other
Scandinavian countries.
Although we cannot exclude any selection or confounding bias which might have
overestimated the risk of narcolepsy linked to Pandemrix vaccination, we believe that the
association was so high that it is unlikely to be explained by any possible bias. Extensive case
finding was undertaken in Ireland over the last 6 months and it unlikely that 33 – 55 cases in
the unvaccinated cohort of 5‐19 year olds are awaiting presentation to primary care and or
investigation in secondary care.
Further studies are awaited (e.g. the VAESCO study) that will consider possible confounders
and facilitate better understanding

Former Former Former

To be clear on this, no-one should ever think or claim that vaccines are 100% free of side effects, but equally it's not reasonable to say that people should not get vaccinated if there are side effects.

Whether it's narcolepsy from Pandemrix or blood clots from Covid vaccines, the benefit-risk of taking the vaccine is still very strongly on the benefit side of the ledger.

CramCycle

volono wrote: »

To cram , those quotes are from my first couple of posts on this tread, they're a misrepresentation in isolation imo.

I had clicked on them before you responded.

You say "it's for everyone else", that's just another dismissive response that explains absolutely nothing.

It has actually been explained numerous times in thread already, it may sound dismissive but eventually it gets tiring when the same thing is repeated ad nauseum. It isn't a dig at you, it is just fatigue on my part.

He posters Tazcruel, neyite and Astrof made an effort to respond and I thank them for it. From one of the articles I read thru their posts , it doesn't seem your other response is entirely true. From what I read , depending when I or anyone else contracted covid it depended on the viral load at the time of infection, if you where infected your body had an immune response though. It also said they couldn't be sure how long your immunity will last, maybe up to 8 months..

Yes and no, the viral load isn't anything to do with it though, it depends on your immune response, which is effectively what can kill some people but grants immunity. As for the 8 months, it again is a person to person scenario, no noticeable immune response, potentially no immunity (although you could have full immunity), but a recognisable (to an observer without testing response), could be anywhere between 2 and 12 months, some people might get 24 months, some might get a few weeks, it is not established enough but if I was a betting man, it is well under a year for many people.

It went on to say that they recommend persons like meself to get the vaccination anyway because it quarantees a uniform immune response in people that take it. That all sounds logical to me tbf. Not to be repeating myself but I don't understand where the dismissive attitude comes from here.

The dismissive attitude comes from the first few posts which stank of selfishness and refusal to even ask, only when it was pointed out that it wasn't for your benefit did you say well I want to know more, why is everyone so dismissive. I mean herd immunity through vaccine is pretty well established principle and while I get that not everyone on the street understands it, after a global pandemic and with access to the internet, it is hard to understand how someone would comment on it with out looking up or trying to understand the fundamentals of what they were talking about.

I want as much info so as to understand what these vaccines are etc etc. I'm not sure what the problem is with that. To hotblack I literally have no clue what your talking about, forgive my ignorance on the two things you menrioned

Which is fine, but why not ask rather than say, I am not having a vaccine because loads of people survive and I won't die (which you could do by the way, and lets not get into long covid). Also Hotblack is talking about Ivermectin, it is for treating parasites in Cattle and Sheep, it is not a known anti viral at this point, and people certainly shouldn't be taking drugs specifically formulated for Cattle or sheep even if there is a human formulation available, there may be wildly different dosage requirements, concentrations, and other constituents that might not be suitable for one species but perfectly OK for another.

ancapailldorcha

badabing106 wrote: »

Here is the full conclusion of an 144 page report. Where is the Cherry Picking?

It's your constant ignoring of the miniscule risk of contracting narcolepsy (as I demonstrated above because it does not suit your agena.

badabing106

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

It's your constant ignoring of the miniscule risk of contracting narcolepsy (as I demonstrated above because it does not suit your agena.

The miniscule risk of narcolepsy. Why are there 80 plus cases against the Irish Government now?

badabing106

badabing106 wrote: »

The miniscule risk of narcolepsy. Why are there 80 plus cases against the Irish Government now?

80 plus cases doesn't mean that 80 are legit. Particularly when groups such as regret are egging them on. Out of interest, do you think the hpv vaccine is good or bad overall?

astrofool

Deleted User wrote: »

80 plus cases doesn't mean that 80 are legit. Particularly when groups such as regret are egging them on. Out of interest, do you think the hpv vaccine is good or bad overall?

Donald Trump lodged and lost 86 lawsuits about the election, a large number of lawsuits means nothing other than solicitors are happy to take people's money.

badabing106

[Deleted User] wrote: »

80 plus cases doesn't mean that 80 are legit. Particularly when groups such as regret are egging them on. Out of interest, do you think the hpv vaccine is good or bad overall?

Well, this drug was given full scientific approval in 2009, Scientific evidence changed from the summer of 2010 onwards that it could cause serious adverse conditions and it did , in 2011 Irish government not bothering to inform people of that and still administering drug equals full culpability, hence legal issues

Be right back

I see where Aisling O'Loughlin has had some of her instagram posts removed due to inaccurate comments on the vaccine.

badabing106

Deleted User wrote: »

80 plus cases doesn't mean that 80 are legit. Particularly when groups such as regret are egging them on. Out of interest, do you think the hpv vaccine is good or bad overall?

I'd say they could be very legitimate cases. This is a case from a couple of weeks ago. 1.28 million is significant

Who is to blame? The drug company was given impunity therefore the state has to take full responsibility

[url] https://www.breakingnews.ie/amp/ireland/16-year-old-who-sued-over-swine-flu-vaccine-awarded-e1-28m-1123356.html[/url]

ancapailldorcha

badabing106 wrote: »

The miniscule risk of narcolepsy. Why are there 80 plus cases against the Irish Government now?

I suggest you do your own research.

badabing106

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

I suggest you do your own research.

I did and scientific evidence changed in the summer of 2010, the EMA were aware of this in 2010. The drug was still being administered in 2011 in Ireland. Why?

The lack of transparacy by health authorities is a possible reason for distrust? . I presume the chief medical officer in Ireland in 2011 would have been aware of these concerns? If he wasn't aware, that might be even more concerning? Considering the EMA was aware of it in 2010

ancapailldorcha

badabing106 wrote: »

I did and scientific evidence changed in the summer of 2010, the EMA were aware of this in 2010. The drug was still being administered in 2011 in Ireland. Why?

The lack of transparacy by health authorities is a possible reason for distrust? . I presume the chief medical officer in Ireland in 2011 would have been aware of these concerns? If he wasn't aware, that might be even more concerning? Considering the EMA was aware of it in 2010

You clearly haven't as you're just repeating the same tired old conspiracy nonsense.

badabing106

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

You clearly haven't as you're just repeating the same tired old conspiracy nonsense.

As you quoted my post above, Can you tell me
Which specific part is the conspiracy theory in that post ? Everything is easily verified unless you have spotted some conspiracy I've missed

pearcider

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Saying that there's plenty of evidence while providing absolutely none isn't convincing.

Wait the HSE aren’t incompetent? Are you having a giraffe? Worst performing health service per euro spent in the OECD. Three examples anyway. Children’s hospital meant to have cost 400m now going to close 3 billion. Cervical cancer. 250,000 people on waiting list more than a year. This despite the fact we spend 30% more than the average OECD country. Let’s not forget all the extra icu beds added during covid. 65. This is the same shower that blow their budget by a billion plus every single year. Joke.

volono

Thanks for responding Craw, I really appreciate it. I never actually looked at the rest of the thread before posting tbf, so I can well imagine fatigue must of set in, with yourself and maybe other posters here. I originally posted what I did because it made sense to me , was pausible tbh , I know think an awful less so!!.
About your other comment, that's why I've been asking posters to point me in the right direction. No slight on yourself , or your posts by the way, but maybe I and others aren't as adapt as yourself at sourcing out this information.
With the last point , I certainly did ask and was basically shot down. Thanks for clearing up Hotblades post, never heard of it tbh but sounds like your infering in it that people are taking those type of drugs, crazy tbf, but each to their own I suppose.
Im a long time member of boards, although never a big poster. I've never started a thread before but I will tomorrow, entitled "Vaccine Information" or along those lines. To let people in this thread , that response to me like Afrof, neyite, Tazcruel and others to post links and information regarding these vaccinations, studies etc etc etc.
I genuinely want to know about them, understand them......I don't want to be dismissed because of it.
It's a silly example but one that did happen to me personally, off of boards. I was told!!!! in conversation , paraphrasing here but "You'll probably die if you don't take it, kill others because you don't".
I'm not sure what yourself or others think, I genuinely believe that's insane, it goes back to a complete lack of information and all you hear is soundbites, ya know