The Vaccine

nino1

drunkmonkey wrote: »

https://www.fox26houston.com/news/studies-suggest-4-vitamins-to-prevent-severe-cases-of-covid-19

You really need to stop googling the answers that you are looking for to validate your opinion and look at the research objectively from numerous reputable sources. Then collate the points that back up your original opinion along with those that might be contrary to your opinion.

The above "evidence" you have posted is a perfect example. You clearly went searching for a reference to validate your point. You came up with quotes from a Dr. Osbourne who is not a medical doctor, who promotes a link with vaccines and autism and sells vitamin D on his website as a substitute for the covid vaccine!!

In the next study you have quoted you emitted to add the the study says that the deaths "could potentially" be avoided and stated it as fact and also ignore that its says that the results should be interpreted with caution and you don't discuss the potential of residual confounding or reverse causality.

I am not taking a view either way on the topic but this sort of childish googling of data to validate a point, which by many posters seem to not even read past the headline of the article, or look at any limitations of the study just to validate a pre-existing opinion really annoys me!

kippy

Quiner wrote: »

You're saying they're safe. You can't know they're safe unless you've read every single word in the trial data reports. Might be no harm in reading every book ever written on vaccines as well and then you'll definitely know they're safe.

I don't think they're unsafe. I'm not concerned about the vaccines. I won't be getting the jab, but that's a personal decision.

I'm using the argument used against the "conspiracy theorists" against the people who claim the vaccines are safe:

A. "The vaccines are safe. I haven't read the trial data reports, but they're safe."

"How do you know they're safe if you haven't read the reports?"

"I listened to doctors and scientists who said they were safe."

"Fair enough."

B. "The Great Reset is a cover for implementing a technocratic hell."

"Have you read the book?"

"I haven't, but I've read excerpts from it, have listened to what Schwab has said in interviews, have read all about it on WEF's own website, and have watched as the world's leaders followed the same script of 'new normal' and 'build back better', which amazingly just happens to be WEF speak ."

"Sorry, unless you've read the book then you don't know what you're talking about. Oh, and the articles you read are on fringe websites and the videos you watched were made by YouTube cranks."

At most points in your life you absolutely HAVE to trust other people and hope that the safeguards in place have been followed. You pretty much do it every hour of every day.
Conspiracy theories essentially make the assumption that nobody could or should be trusted, no matter what the theory. You have to ask yourself in this instance who exactly shouldn't be trusted and why?

drunkmonkey

King Mob wrote: »

But none of the links you've been posting seem to actually agree with your claims about them.

So you're not so much "putting them together" as overstating them and reaching a wild conclusion not supported by any of them.

What do you mean by "lead to believe" exactly?

Also, you seem to have missed my other questions there.
Why do you believe that more focus has been put on direct covid vaccines over a vaccine for a unrelated disease that might offer some slight immunity?

You said the claims were makey uppy, I've demonstrated otherwise.
Are you doubting them all, are you claiming when you add them altogether they won't help get us to a better place pronto.

Why the effort for the new vaccine, profit, BCG €2 and Pfizer €20 with licencing rights, double doses and yearly or bi yearly boosters.
30%+ isn't slight immunity along with healthy levels of Vitamin D, it is immunity.

nino1

nino1 wrote: »

You really need to stop googling the answers that you are looking for to validate your opinion and look at the research objectively from numerous reputable sources. Then collate the points that back up your original opinion along with those that might be contrary to your opinion.

The above "evidence" you have posted is a perfect example. You clearly went searching for a reference to validate your point. You came up with quotes from a Dr. Osbourne who is not a medical doctor, who promotes a link with vaccines and autism and sells vitamin D on his website as a substitute for the covid vaccine!!

In the next study you have quoted you emitted to add the the study says that the deaths "could potentially" be avoided and stated it as fact and also ignore that its says that the results should be interpreted with caution and you don't discuss the potential of residual confounding or reverse causality.

I am not taking a view either way on the topic but this sort of childish googling of data to validate a point, which by many posters seem to not even read past the headline of the article, or look at any limitations of the study just to validate a pre-existing opinion really annoys me!

You should also google the opposite of what you are looking for like
"no link" covid and vitamin D and you will get reullts like this

https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/covid-19-what-role-does-vitamin-d-play#Evidence-so-far

In August, a research team from the University of Glasgow, in the U.K., looked at the vitamin D levels of 341,484 participants in the U.K. Biobank health data repository. Of these, 656 had been to the hospital with COVID-19, and 203 had died.

Once the authors accounted for confounding factors, they concluded that there was no link between vitamin D levels and the likelihood of needing hospitalization for COVID-19 or dying from the disease.


Then weight up both sides

drunkmonkey

drunkmonkey wrote: »

You said the claims were makey uppy, I've demonstrated otherwise.
Are you doubting them all, are you claiming when you add them altogether they won't help get us to a better place pronto.

Why the effort for the new vaccine, profit, BCG €2 and Pfizer €20 with licencing rights, double doses and yearly or bi yearly boosters.
30%+ isn't slight immunity along with healthy levels of Vitamin D, it is immunity.

Your BCG vaccine link already specified how a covid specific vaccine is still entirely preferred.

King Mob

drunkmonkey wrote: »

You said the claims were makey uppy, I've demonstrated otherwise.

No you haven't. You've been posting links that that don't actually claim or support what you claim they do. So, it sounds a bit madey uppy still.

drunkmonkey wrote: »

Are you doubting them all, are you claiming when you add them altogether they won't help get us to a better place pronto.

Ok. Which doctors and medical organisations are recommending this?

drunkmonkey wrote: »

Why the effort for the new vaccine, profit, BCG €2 and Pfizer €20 with licencing rights, double doses and yearly or bi yearly boosters.

Yes. Please explain what you believe is the real reason. Is it purely the claim that the covid vaccine with earn them more money?

drunkmonkey wrote: »

30%+ isn't slight immunity along with healthy levels of Vitamin D, it is immunity.

Ok. Please supply the study that shows this.

drunkmonkey

nino1 wrote: »

You should also google the opposite of what you are looking for like
"no link" covid and vitamin D and you will get reullts like this

https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/covid-19-what-role-does-vitamin-d-play#Evidence-so-far

In August, a research team from the University of Glasgow, in the U.K., looked at the vitamin D levels of 341,484 participants in the U.K. Biobank health data repository. Of these, 656 had been to the hospital with COVID-19, and 203 had died.

Once the authors accounted for confounding factors, they concluded that there was no link between vitamin D levels and the likelihood of needing hospitalization for COVID-19 or dying from the disease.


Then weight up both sides

I have weighed up both sides. Sticking to my guns based on lived experience of vitamin D deficiency and respiratory infections.
Everyone is saying boost your vitamin D levels in winter, maybe it's just another conspiracy to sell more vitamin d by the HSE.

drunkmonkey

King Mob wrote: »

No you haven't. You've been posting links that that don't actually claim or support what you claim they do. So, it sounds a bit madey uppy still.


Ok. Which doctors and medical organisations are recommending this?


Yes. Please explain what you believe is the real reason. Is it purely the claim that the covid vaccine with earn them more money?


Ok. Please supply the study that shows this.

It's all a conspiracy, how about instead of me answering all your questions again you go debunk everything I've posted.

So I'll be waiting for your evidence to say, ivermectin, vitamin D, bcg vaccine are all snake oils that people should avoid as they offer nothing oh and for profit company's aren't in this for a profit...

Pfizer our vaccine is 90% effective
Modern our vaccine is 95% effective
Oxford hold my beer, ours is 100% effective

King Mob

drunkmonkey wrote: »

It's all a conspiracy,

Ok, What's the conspiracy?

drunkmonkey wrote: »

how about instead of me answering all your questions again you go debunk everything I've posted.

Not sure why you're so opposed to asking simple questions.

drunkmonkey wrote: »

So I'll be waiting for your evidence to say, ivermectin, vitamin D, bcg vaccine are all snake oils that people should avoid as they offer nothing oh and for profit company's aren't in this for a profit...

But that's not my position and that's not what I claimed.
You are misrepresenting me.

drunkmonkey wrote: »

Pfizer our vaccine is 90% effective
Modern our vaccine is 95% effective
Oxford hold my beer, ours is 100% effective

Are you saying that these claims aren't true?

drunkmonkey

drunkmonkey wrote: »

It's all a conspiracy, how about instead of me answering all your questions again you go debunk everything I've posted.

So I'll be waiting for your evidence to say, ivermectin, vitamin D, bcg vaccine are all snake oils that people should avoid as they offer nothing oh and for profit company's aren't in this for a profit...

Pfizer our vaccine is 90% effective
Modern our vaccine is 95% effective
Oxford hold my beer, ours is 100% effective

Ivertmecin,a quick Google of available papers is that further research into its efficacy is needed..
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7521351/

Meanwhile all the vaccines you've cited are viewed as effective and all trial data etc is readily available to go through for each of them. So ultimately they're already far more established than the likes of the bcg vaccine which there's not huge clarity on in terms of how it even works.

Now we've got preventative measures rather than things that will limit the seriousness of the illness. Also strongly doubt that 1.7 million deaths were preventable with vitamin D on own..

drunkmonkey

King Mob wrote: »

Ok, What's the conspiracy?

Not sure why you're so opposed to asking simple questions.

But that's not my position and that's not what I claimed.
You are misrepresenting me.


Are you saying that these claims aren't true?

#this whole hostage situation we're stuck in until we get the new jab.

#simple question, you won't accept simple answers though

#ah so you might think there is some merit to my claims.

#are the claims of the vaccine effectiveness true, I wouldn't think so if they are claiming it's all down the the vaccine and giving no weight to underlying immunity from a multitude of sources such as vitamin d levels, bcg, exposure to other coronaviruses etc, yea I'd call bull**** unless it's noted in the trials.

King Mob

drunkmonkey wrote: »

#this whole hostage situation we're stuck in until we get the new jab.

And the conspiracy is...?

drunkmonkey wrote: »

#simple question, you won't accept simple answers though

I will accept answers. If the answers aren't true, I'll point that out. If the questions are dodged, I'll point that out too.

drunkmonkey wrote: »

#ah so you might think there is some merit to my claims.

No, that's another misrepresentation.

drunkmonkey wrote: »

#are the claims of the vaccine effectiveness true, I wouldn't think so if they are claiming it's all down the the vaccine and giving no weight to underlying immunity from a multitude of sources such as vitamin d levels, bcg, exposure to other coronaviruses etc, yea I'd call bull**** unless it's noted in the trials.

This statement doesn't make a whole bunch of sense.
Trials on the effectiveness of medicines don't "claim it's all down to" anything.

You believe that the vaccine trials are fraudulent.
Ok. What evidence do you have for this?

Also, you are now claiming that vitamin d, the TB vaccine and other coronavirus make people immune. None of those things are true.
And again, I'm made to wonder if a conspiracy theorist even knows the fundamental concept of how vaccines, viruses and immunity work.

Lex Luthor

People ask about a conspiracy..........

You have a vaccine being rushed through to apparently quash a virus, that has a pandemic declared based on the confirmation of the virus on a flawed testing procedure

Why? MONEY and MONEY MEANS POWER

If you dont have inflated positive test results, then you dont have a pandemic

If the testing procedure was accurate, the confirmed death rate from COVID would be a lot lower and hence no pandemic

But when you have a flawed and questionable testing procedure that produces untrustworthy results, then the whole thing falls apart

Lockdowns are being driven by PCR test results, not ICU or hospital admissions.

The PCR test detects viral fragments, previous infections and non related viral particles.
CDC statement that the PCR may not indicate the presence of infections
When you run PCR tests at 35-40 cycles then you will have a lot of false positives (maybe up to 97%)

Imagine after the roll out of the vaccine, the recommendation changes to run PCR test cycles in the recommended range of < 25 cycles and then they see more accurate results and numbers decrease. Voila, the vaccine worked or we are getting more accurate results? You decide.

pwurple

Quiner wrote: »

Is it not that people believe a chip could be used to control people as opposed to tracking them? For example, say something the government doesn't like and the chip is turned off.

That's a leap. What are people smoking around here? But let's go with it.

Well, first of all, we are the government. We govern ourselves. You don't like what your neighbour said so you turn off some chip? Right. Then what? The imaginary chip bring turned off would do what? Now it doesn't work. So what?

nino1

drunkmonkey wrote: »

I have weighed up both sides. Sticking to my guns based on lived experience of vitamin D deficiency and respiratory infections.
Everyone is saying boost your vitamin D levels in winter, maybe it's just another conspiracy to sell more vitamin d by the HSE.

With respect, i don't think you have looked into the opposing view at all.
If you take the Vitamin D as an example.
I think you would be better off looking at the studies in more detail rather than basing your opinion on your "lived experience of vitamin D" whatever that means!

If you looked at both sides in this case what was is about the study by researchers in Glasgow with 348,598 participants that was published in pubmed and found no correlation with hospitalisations or deaths and vitamin D that you didn't agree with or that didn't sway your opinion even slightly to even mention that your assertion may not be correct?

When you google the result that you are looking for its also important to look at the publication that carries the study. They need to be a reputable publication. Pubmed is a reputable publication. MPSI is not.
It takes payments for articles and is a money machine that favours quantity and thus money, over quality. It was placed on the list of predatory open access publishing companies in 2014 and is not a good source to be validating any points particularly when an opposing view is present in a reputable journal.

kippy

Lex Luthor wrote: »

People ask about a conspiracy..........

You have a vaccine being rushed through to apparently quash a virus, that has a pandemic declared based on the confirmation of the virus on a flawed testing procedure

Why? MONEY and MONEY MEANS POWER

If you dont have inflated positive test results, then you dont have a pandemic

If the testing procedure was accurate, the confirmed death rate from COVID would be a lot lower and hence no pandemic

But when you have a flawed and questionable testing procedure that produces untrustworthy results, then the whole thing falls apart

Lockdowns are being driven by PCR test results, not ICU or hospital admissions.

The PCR test detects viral fragments, previous infections and non related viral particles.
CDC statement that the PCR may not indicate the presence of infections
When you run PCR tests at 35-40 cycles then you will have a lot of false positives (maybe up to 97%)

Imagine after the roll out of the vaccine, the recommendation changes to run PCR test cycles in the recommended range of < 25 cycles and then they see more accurate results and numbers decrease. Voila, the vaccine worked or we are getting more accurate results? You decide.

Who is behind this conspiracy?
Why? Money? Really.....

King Mob

nino1 wrote: »

If you looked at both sides in this case what was is about the study by researchers in Glasgow with 348,598 participants that was published in pubmed and found no correlation with hospitalisations or deaths and vitamin D that you didn't agree with or that didn't sway your opinion even slightly to even mention that your assertion may not be correct?

It bares highlighting that the study provided from MDPI is a review of a another study that involved only 185 people.

storker

Lex Luthor wrote: »

Why? MONEY and MONEY MEANS POWER

That's not a why, that's a weak catchphrase. Whose money? Whose power? How are these increased by the conspiracy of which we're still waiting to hear the details?

All you've got so far is a fairy tale and nothing more. Hell, Hans Christian Andersen's yarns probably had more basis in fact.

drunkmonkey

King Mob wrote: »

This statement doesn't make a whole bunch of sense.
Trials on the effectiveness of medicines don't "claim it's all down to" anything.

You believe that the vaccine trials are fraudulent.
Ok. What evidence do you have for this?

Also, you are now claiming that vitamin d, the TB vaccine and other coronavirus make people immune. None of those things are true.
And again, I'm made to wonder if a conspiracy theorist even knows the fundamental concept of how vaccines, viruses and immunity work.

So when they say our vaccine is 100% effective what are they claiming? To me they are making that claim, they are taking all the credit.

You've no evidence to say vitamin d, underlying immunity or bcg don't provide immunity, the evidence suggested they do, the tests haven't even been invented yet to check for some types of immunity.

storker

Quiner wrote: »

The Mark of the Beast was mentioned the other day. Ex presidential candidate, Kanye West, who finished third in the 2020 Presidential Election, claimed back in August that the coronavirus vaccines were the Mark of the Beast: https://www.msn.com/en-sg/entertainment/celebrity/kanye-west-coronavirus-vaccines-are-the-mark-of-the-beast/ar-BB16uTEp

"... when they say the way we're going to fix covid is with a vaccine, I'm extremely cautious. That's the mark of the beast."

Where in the Book of Revelations are vaccines mentioned. At all? Never mind even equating them with the "mark of the beast"?

King Mob

drunkmonkey wrote: »

So when they say our vaccine is 100% effective what are they claiming? To me they are making that claim, they are taking all the credit.

What do you mean by "taking all the credit"?

drunkmonkey wrote: »

You've no evidence to say vitamin d, underlying immunity or bcg don't provide immunity, the evidence suggested they do, the tests haven't even been invented yet to check for some types of immunity.

Again, I'm pretty sure you don't know how viruses and vaccines work.

drunkmonkey

kippy wrote: »

Who is behind this conspiracy?
Why? Money? Really.....

I wouldn't think it's money, it does allow government to take advantage of the situation though, the €9 meal for example, nothing in the slightest to do with Covid but suits an agenda to change our behavior.

kippy

drunkmonkey wrote: »

I wouldn't think it's money, it does allow government to take advantage of the situation though, the €9 meal for example, nothing in the slightest to do with Covid but suits an agenda to change our behavior.

What is this agenda? I seriously don't get it.
I think people are seriously overthinking this.

drunkmonkey

King Mob wrote: »

What do you mean by "taking all the credit"?

Taking all the credit for someone not getting sick with Covid because they had their vaccine, that is what they are claiming correct?

Quiner

Lex Luthor wrote: »

People ask about a conspiracy..........

You have a vaccine being rushed through to apparently quash a virus, that has a pandemic declared based on the confirmation of the virus on a flawed testing procedure

Why? MONEY and MONEY MEANS POWER

If you dont have inflated positive test results, then you dont have a pandemic

If the testing procedure was accurate, the confirmed death rate from COVID would be a lot lower and hence no pandemic

But when you have a flawed and questionable testing procedure that produces untrustworthy results, then the whole thing falls apart

Lockdowns are being driven by PCR test results, not ICU or hospital admissions.

The PCR test detects viral fragments, previous infections and non related viral particles.
CDC statement that the PCR may not indicate the presence of infections
When you run PCR tests at 35-40 cycles then you will have a lot of false positives (maybe up to 97%)

Imagine after the roll out of the vaccine, the recommendation changes to run PCR test cycles in the recommended range of < 25 cycles and then they see more accurate results and numbers decrease. Voila, the vaccine worked or we are getting more accurate results? You decide.

Spot on. Dr Mike Yeadon has been tweeting about the PCR test for months:

https://mobile.twitter.com/MichaelYeadon3/status/1343212450729107456

No flawed test, no pandemic, as you say. And yet they're going on about a "third wave".

But they know it's flawed. They're using it on purpose.

King Mob

drunkmonkey wrote: »

Taking all the credit for someone not getting sick with Covid because they had their vaccine, that is what they are claiming correct?

Yes. What's the issue you have with this?

Again, you've kind of demonstrated that you don't understand the basics behind vaccines and viruses. So don't you think it's possible that you don't understand a scientific paper based on these things?

runawaybishop

Quiner wrote: »

Spot on. Dr Mike Yeadon has been tweeting about the PCR test for months:

https://mobile.twitter.com/MichaelYeadon3/status/1343212450729107456

No flawed test, no pandemic, as you say. And yet they're going on about a "third wave".

But they know it's flawed. They're using it on purpose.

You mean discredited former Pfizer employee Mike yeadon? He's full of ****.

drunkmonkey

kippy wrote: »

What is this agenda? I seriously don't get it.
I think people are seriously overthinking this.

Simon Harris had and still has an agenda when it comes to Alcohol. Wind back to January before Covid, https://www.irishtimes.com/business/agribusiness-and-food/simon-harris-in-lecturing-preening-interfering-mood-when-it-comes-to-alcohol-1.4135028
As for Tony "The virus loves alcohol, and we have a challenge with alcohol in this country’ , need I say more.

kippy

drunkmonkey wrote: »

Simon Harris had and still has an agenda when it comes to Alcohol. Wind back to January before Covid, https://www.irishtimes.com/business/agribusiness-and-food/simon-harris-in-lecturing-preening-interfering-mood-when-it-comes-to-alcohol-1.4135028
As for Tony "The virus loves alcohol, and we have a challenge with alcohol in this country’ , need I say more.

You give politicians far too much credit......

King Mob

drunkmonkey wrote: »

Simon Harris had and still has an agenda when it comes to Alcohol. Wind back to January before Covid, https://www.irishtimes.com/business/agribusiness-and-food/simon-harris-in-lecturing-preening-interfering-mood-when-it-comes-to-alcohol-1.4135028
As for Tony "The virus loves alcohol, and we have a challenge with alcohol in this country’ , need I say more.

Ok. So the conspiracy now is that the virus is being faked so that they can outlaw drinking alcohol?