Covid vaccines - thread banned users in First Post

Dohnjoe

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119858889#Comment_119858889

It's the same quackery, just rehashed.

Sure I'm concerned for anti-vaxxers, especially the older crowd, they are quite vulnerable to disinformation. It's literally putting their lives at risk, even you couldn't argue that away with pedantry. So why do you work so hard to defend "anti-vaxxers"?

Some posters here are so extreme you could argue they are the best defense against anti-vaxxers on this forum. All we need to do is keep them writing.

patnor1011

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119859200#Comment_119859200

Dunno, without any intention of insulting you, I am quite confident that that professor Ioannidis know more about it than you. Or anybody from your circle of friends.

Dohnjoe

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119859250#Comment_119859250

Most of the Irish population are vaccinated, the vaccines are safe and have significantly reduced hospitalizations and deaths from the virus.

That's not a personal opinion.

patnor1011

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119859324#Comment_119859324

The study is not about any of that. It is focused on CFR before mrna become available. Coincidentally it is also the time when virus was more dangerous than current variants.

King Mob

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119859175#Comment_119859175

Yes. You are once again linkdumping something you found on twitter.

As before I doubt you actually did anything to check any of the claims made.

Also again I notice you avoid calling the vaccines vaccines.

Dohnjoe

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119859480#Comment_119859480

So if I look that guy up, he will represent scientific consensus correct? He's not going to be some respected individual who has since developed controversial views that have drawn scientific criticism?

Because I am getting really tired of finding out that every expert the anti-vaccine movement discovers and wheels out is in fact someone with highly questionable views. Another Luc Montagnier or Swedish anti-mask libertarian.

I can wheel out an endless line of individual engineers and experts who believe 9/11 was an inside job, some of them have produced lengthy studies you couldn't even begin to wrap your head around..

hometruths

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119859200#Comment_119859200

So why do you work so hard to defend "anti-vaxxers"?

I detest the revisionism etc. I think it has profoundly damaging consequences. Like you I am disturbed by misinformation and I wish to question it.

I'm not worried in the slightest about the 5G misinformation, that's a minority of total nutjobs I personallly don't share your concern for. and their impact is meaningless compared to what I consider the more damaging misinformation - eg the vaccines is working as always intended, it was never intended to prevent infections etc etc.

On top of that I detest the ongoing censorship and denigration of academics and scientists who are challenging some of the supposed consensus. Whatever way you look at it, debate has been deliberately stifled on this subject. This is far from the same old quackery and it strikes me as far more anti scientific than any of the anti-vax nonsense proceeding Covid.

I've read a number of your posts on covid vaccines from late 2020, and my views were very similiar to yours were then: anti vax misinformation was a danger to all of us.

Now it is clear that the vaccines don't prevent infection or transmission sufficient for vaccine acquired herd immunity is not possible my views have changed.

It's now the illogical pro vax misinformation that is a danger to all of us, because when/if we get a vaccine that is capable of providing herd immunity the public confidence simply won't exist in order to achieve the necessary uptake.

Unfortunately a lot of the posters on this forum are too blinkered to comprehend this. I'm not sure if you are or not, but would welcome a good faith discussion exchange of views on it, and we both might learn something.

But if it is going to be more of the "But somebody who believes the earth is flat agrees with you, therefore you are wrong" sort of discussion then there is little point.

odyssey06

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119859175#Comment_119859175

Why do you keep trying to use phrases mRna injections? If you end up in hospital, are you going to say no medicines by injection? Well?

As for the study... has it been peer reviewed? And why does it cut off at age 69?

Also to reiterate, it was never just about IFR but how many people covid sent to hospital and ICU. The reason why the fatality rate wasnt worse for under 70s was due to ensuring there was hospital capacity to treat those who needed it.

The fatality rate is only one piece of the equation. The others being the hospitalisation rate. And the number of infections.

King Mob

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119859573#Comment_119859573

Except that you've been provided studies that directly show the impact of anti vaxx misinformation.

You've not shown anything to support the idea that this supposed "revisionism" and "pro vaxx" misinformation has had any impact.

You struggle to even show these things exist and have to bend over backwards with extremely silly bad faith interpretations to make them up.

Additional when antivaxx misinformation is pointed out to you, such as claims that VAERS shows the vaccines to be dangerous or that the vaccines are causing infertility, you dodge, ignore and avoid. You never seem to want to address these things and don't even want to label them as misinformation.

Your whinging here as always is complete hypocrisy.

Fighting Tao

But the revisionist in @hometruths ignores how vaccines protect more than the elderly by lowering the number of hospitalisations because without his/her revision their narrative falls apart and makes them look like an eejit. @hometruths is self flagellating again right now.

hometruths

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119859549#Comment_119859549

Here some of his highlights for your info. More on his bio page at Stanford University: https://med.stanford.edu/profiles/John_Ioannidis

Academic Appointments

• Professor, Medicine - Stanford Prevention Research Center
• Professor, Epidemiology and Population Health
• Professor (By courtesy), Statistics
• Professor (By courtesy), Biomedical Data Science
• Member, Bio-X
• Member, Cardiovascular Institute
• Member, Stanford Cancer Institute
• Affiliate, Stanford Woods Institute for the Environment

Administrative Appointments

• Co-Director, Meta-Research Innovation Center at Stanford (METRICS) (2013 - Present)
• Editor-in-chief, European Journal of Clinical Investigation (2010 - 2019)
• Member, Stanford Cardiovascular Institute (2010 - Present)
• Member, Stanford Cancer Center (2010 - Present)
• Affiliate, Stanford Center on Longevity (2012 - Present)
• Affiliated faculty, Woods Institute for the Environment (2011 - Present)
• Member, Stanford Diabetes Research Center (2018 - Present)
• Professor of Statistics (by courtesy), Stanford University School of Humanities and Sciences (2011 - Present)
• Professor of Health Research and Policy, Stanford University School of Medicine (2011 - Present)
• Professor of Medicine, Stanford University School of Medicine (2010 - Present)
• Professor of Biomedical Data Science (by courtesy), Stanford University School of Medicine (2016 - Present)
• Director, Stanford Prevention Research Center (2010 - 2016)

Honors & Awards

• ERA Chair holder, European Commission (2023-)
• QUEST fellow, Berlin Institute of Health (2022-)
• Inaugural Harwood Prize for Intellectual Courage, AIER (2022)
• President Elect, Association of American Physicians (to serve as Vice President 2022-2023, President 2023-2024) (2022)
• Albert Stuyvenberg Medal, European Society for Clinical Investigation (2021)
• Elected corresponding member, Accademia delle Scienze (Bologna) (2021)
• Haldane lecture, Wolfson College, Oxford University (2021)
• Honorary doctorate (medicine), University of Edinburgh (2021)
• J Arliss Pollock Award and Memorial Lecture, American Society of Neuroradiology (2021)
• Morris/Paffenbarger Exercise is Medicine® Keynote Lecture, American College of Sports Medicine (2021)
• Roy and Diana Vagelos inaugural lecture, World Hellenic Biomedical Association (2021)
• C.R. Stephen lecture, Washington University St. Louis (2019)
• Gordon Award, National Institutes of Health (2019)
• Honorary PhD, University of Tilburg (2019)
• Honorary President, Medical and Surgical Society of Corfu (2019)
• Elected member, National Academy of Medicine (2018-)
• David and Rosemary Adamson Lecture on Excellence in Reproductive Medicine, ASRM (2018)
• Einstein fellow, Berlin Institute of Health, Einstein Stiftung and Stiftung Charite (2018)
• Epiphany Science Courage Award, Novim (inaugural award) (2018)
• Gonatas memorial lectureship, University of Pennsylvania (2018)
• Elected Councilor, Association of American Physicians (2017-2022)
• Annual Distinguished Investigator, University of Connecticut School of Medicine and Health Center (2017)
• Chanchlani Award for Global Health, McMaster University (2017)
• David-Sackett-Preis, Deutsche Netzwerk Evidenzbasierte Medizin (2017)
• Honorary PhD (health sciences), University of Athens (2017)
• Snively visiting professorship, UC Davis (2017)
• Anatomy Lesson lecturer, University of Amsterdam and Academic Medical Center (2016)
• Harris lectureship in science and civilization, Caltech (2016)
• Levine lectureship, Yale (2016)
• Lifetime Achievement Award, Hellenic Society for Pharmacological Science (2016)
• Snyder Lectureship, University of Utah (2016)
• Elected member, European Academy of Sciences and Arts (2015-)
• Elected member, American Epidemiological Society (2015-)
• Honorary PhD, Erasmus University Rotterdam (2015)
• Litchfield Lectureship, Oxford University (2015)
• Medal for Distinguished Service, Teachers College, Columbia University (2015)
• Honorary member, FORTH (2014)
• Honorary professor (omotimos), University of Ioannina (2014)
• Elected fellow, European Academy of Cancer Sciences (2010-)
• President, Society for Research Synthesis Methodology (2009-2010)
• Elected member, Association of American Physicians (2009-)
• European Award for Excellence in Clinical Science, European Society for Clinical Investigation (2007)

Boards, Advisory Committees, Professional Organizations

• Chair, Scientific Advisory Board, Usher Institute for Population Health Sciences and Informatics, University of Edinburgh (2015 - Present)
• Faculty Fellow, Stanford Center for Innovation on Global Health (2015 - Present)
• Member, Scientific Advisory Board, Berkeley Initiative for Transparency in Social Sciences (2014 - Present)
• Member, Scientific Advisory Board, Center for Open Science (2013 - Present)
• Member, Scientific Advisory Board, International Epidemiology Institute (2012 - Present)
• Member, Scientific Advisory Board, Reproducibility Initiative (2012 - Present)
• Senior Advisor for Knowledge Integration, NCI, NIH (2012 - 2016)
• Member, Methodology Committee, PCORI (2011 - 2013)
• Executive Board Member and Center Director, Human Genome Epidemiology Network (2004 - Present)
• Vice President, Board of Directors, Hellenic Center for Infectious Disease Control (2000 - 2001)

Professional Education

• Fellowship, New England Medical Center, Tufts University School of Medicine, Infectious Diseases (1996)
• Residency, New England Deaconess Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Internal Medicine (1993)
• DSc, University of Athens School of Medicine, Athens, Greece, Biopathology (1996)
• MD, University of Athens School of Medicine, Athens, Greece, Medicine (1990)

Just another one of those new breed anti-vaxxers we were talking about earlier

hometruths

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119859623#Comment_119859623

Except that you've been provided studies that directly show the impact of anti vaxx misinformation.

Yes. Indeed. And as I've pointed out those studies say the impact is a reduction in our chances of achieving vaccine acquired herd immunity.

And you curiously ignored the fact that the bigger impediment to achieving vaccine acquired herd immunity is the lack of a vaccine sufficiently capable of preventing infection and transmission.

To remind you once again of my earlier post:

You need two things for vaccine induced herd immunity:

a) a vaccine that prevents infection and transmission

b) a sufficiently high level of vaccine uptake

If we don't have (a), as far as vaccine induced herd immunity is concerned, (b) is irrelevant.

So we're at a stage where people are arguing that anti-vaxxers claiming the vaccine does not prevent infection or transmission is dangerous misinformation that will prevent us from reaching the level of vaccine uptake required for herd immunity.

Yet nobody is arguing that even with 100% vaccine uptake we will reach vaccine induced herd immunity.

It is totally illogical.

Dohnjoe

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119859573#Comment_119859573

You aren't disturbed by misinformation. You never challenge any of the more extreme anti-vaxxers here. When questioned why you don't, you respond along the lines of "they can believe what they want" or some cop out.

So it doesn't bother you.

Dohnjoe

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119859657#Comment_119859657

Cool, there are millions of experts and scientists in the world, with billions of qualifications between them. We all know why you've "chosen" that guy. Note how you both did it and systematically do it throughout the thread. This is because people with extreme beliefs will always find experts who side with their beliefs. Conveniently ignoring the thousands that don't.

Let's take 5 seconds to have a look

https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/what-the-heck-happened-to-john-ioannidis/

Aaaannnd there it is, like clockwork.

If you want me to list out the qualifications of the engineers who believe 9/11 was an inside job, it's really very impressive, there are quite a few of them. These guys know a hell of a lot more about engineering than you, so they must know what they are talking about

hometruths

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119859679#Comment_119859679

You're missing what I've been saying - just hand waving about all misinformation is noisy nonsense. The discussion needs more context and specific examples.

Of course I am not concerned by every bit of misinformation. In some cases I'm not concerned because I don't share your view that it is damaging. In other cases I don't share your view it is actually misinformation. I appreciate this works both ways, I am sure there are examples of stuff I consider to be misinformation that you do not.

But this is a common trope on this thread - you never challenged so and so when they said such and such so you have no credibility. It's total nonsense.

But are you prepared to give me a specific example of the type of extreme misinformation you think I should have challenged?

If so I will give you my views on that specific example of misinformation, but it is totally pointless to just refer to misinformation in general.

Dohnjoe

1. Act contrarian about vaccines, play the "just concerned" act
2. Wheel out individual controversial expert from anti-vax feed
3. Cherry-pick ambiguous study from anti-vax feed
4. Do this alongside people who believe space flight is faked without blinking
5. On a conspiracy forum
6. Rinse
7. Repeat

King Mob

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119859678#Comment_119859678

Yes. I've told you I'm not going to acknowledge any of that waffle. You can stop badgering me about it.

You accept that studies are legitimate.

They show the impact of anti-vaxx misinformation.

You cannot show anything to support your notion that "pro vaxx misinformation" causes any sort of impact never mind more of one than caused by anti vaxx misinformation.

And notice how you avoid the fact that you refuse to even address or identify anti vaxx propaganda when it's presented to you.

I will therefore go forward with the assumption that you don't believe that the claims about VAERS and infertility are misinformation.

If that's not the case all you need to is to state you believe that they are misinformation.

hometruths

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119859718#Comment_119859718

In the 5 seconds I had a look I saw that the article says "John Ioannidis is one of the most published and influential scientists in the world", but recently has "been publishing dubious studies that minimize the dangers of the coronavirus"

Do you know anything about what was dubious about his views or is that 5 second look enough to ensure with certainty that one of the most published and influential scientists in the world can be dismissed as some sort of fringe extremist.

Dohnjoe

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119859727#Comment_119859727

So you aren't concerned about anti-vax disinformation at all? or you are about "some" of it? Or how does it work?

King Mob

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119859679#Comment_119859679

It's very easy for him to dismiss the 5G stuff as the only misinformation since the posters who were claiming that stuff are long gone. That stuff is too extreme and obviously embarrassing so there's no issue throwing those anti vaxxers under the bus.

But when it comes to the anti vaxxers still on the thread and peddling more subtle more acceptable misinformation, that's when the avoiding and sudden bouts of blindness come in.

Especially since they are the only people agreeing with him.

Honestly it's kind of shocking none of them have tried to claim this affliction of temporary selective vision impairment is a side effect of the vaccines.

odyssey06

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119859727#Comment_119859727

Point us to one piece of mis-information you challenged directly.

Go on.

Because there is no way all the anti vaccine info on the thread falls into your neat little categories.

Any claim to the contrary has zero credibility.

It is a common trope because it is true.

Simply put - actions speak louder than words. And you havent once acted. Not once.

Dohnjoe

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119859769#Comment_119859769

Yeah, it's the usual act to give an air of "objectivity".

hometruths

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119859762#Comment_119859762

As I've already asked. Give me a specific example of disinformation and I will tell you how it works.

King Mob

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119859792#Comment_119859792

Ive pointed out two to you. You as always ignored.

The original claim that the VAERS data is showing that the vaccine is more dangerous that was claimed by authorities.

The claim that there is a clear link between the vaccines and infertility.

There's plenty to choose from but those two are a good starting point for all of your dodging and excusing.

Dohnjoe

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119859792#Comment_119859792

I know how the disinformation works.

Dohnjoe

Some individuals decide the best way for them to protest vaccines is to go online and make vast numbers of contrarian pedantic posts about the subject. Which is another obvious red flag.

hometruths

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119859788#Comment_119859788

Because there is no way all the anti vaccine info on the thread falls into your neat little categories.

And I haven't claimed it has.

I haven't challenged any of the anti-vaccine info that you think I should be challenging because I am supremely unconcerned by it. Unlike you I don't believe extremist anti-vaxxers are biggest problem concerning Covid vaccines.

As I pointed out to DohnJoe my concerns and thus interest in this subject are more about disinformation along the lines of Covid vaccines were never intended to prevent infection, they were originally intend to reduce severe disease/death etc etc . And as you are aware I have challenged that many times.

I have no interest in 5G/Bill Gates/The Great Reset etc, and it's bizarre the pressing need you have for me and others to discuss these things with you.

If you are worried by people making what you consider to be outrageous claims, fair enough, I am sure nobody is stopping you from expressing your opinions on that.

But it is totally bizarre that you are fixated on the fact I have no interest wasting my time on that stuff. I spend far too much time on here having largely pointless discussions about the stuff that does interest me, without getting dragged in pointless discussions about stuff I have no interest in.

But if you really want to, and are genuinely interested in my opinion on something, then link to a specific claim and I will give you my opinion on it. But please stop with the "Some people have said X,Y and Z, and you haven't challenged that opinion, therefore why should we take your opinion seriously"

If you don't want to take my opinion seriously, just ignore me. You're wasting your time with the what some people think about X,Y and Z nonsense.

King Mob

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119859601#Comment_119859601

He and other antivaxxers refuse to call the vaccines vaccines because:

1. They are trying to make the vaccines sound scarier and more sinister. (Or in most cases that's what the Twitter grifters do to bilk their audiences, and posters here are only parroting these terms.)

And 2. Because some, Pat in particular, contend that the vaccines aren't really vaccines. The usual refrain is that they are "mRNA gene therapy" or similarly scary sounding technical term.

King Mob

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119859872#Comment_119859872

But it's been pointed out to you and shown with studies that the "5G NWO" misinformation (as well as the more subtle misinformation you ignore) does have an impact.

You've yet to show that what you believe to be pro vaccine misinformation has had any impact beyond turning yourself into an extreme anti vaxxer.

King Mob

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119859872#Comment_119859872

If you have no interest in conspiracy theories and consider discussing them a waste of time, why are you posting on a conspiracy forum?

King Mob

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119859718#Comment_119859718

Dr. Judy Wood earned a Ph.D. Degree from Virginia Tech and is a former professor of mechanical engineering. She has research expertise in experimental stress analysis, structural mechanics, deformation analysis, materials characterization and materials engineering science. Her research has involved testing materials, including complex-material systems, in the area of photomechanics, or the use of optical and image-analysis methods to determine physical properties of materials and measure how materials respond to forces placed on them. Her area of expertise involves interferometry in forensic science. She taught graduate and undergraduate engineering classes and has authored or co-authored over 60 peer-reviewed papers and journal publications in her areas of expertise.

...

Dr. Wood received her:

B.S. (Civil Engineering, 1981) (Structural Engineering),

M.S. (Engineering Mechanics (Applied Physics), 1983), and

Ph.D. (Materials Engineering Science, 1992) from the Department of Engineering Science and Mechanics at Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University in Blacksburg, Virginia.

Her dissertation involved the development of an experimental method to measure thermal stresses in bimaterial joints.

She has taught courses including:

Experimental Stress Analysis

Engineering Mechanics

Mechanics of Materials (Strength of Materials)

Strength of Materials Testing

Judy D. Wood is a former professor of mechanical engineering with research interests in experimental stress analysis, structural mechanics, optical methods, deformation analysis, and the materials characterization of biomaterials and composite materials. She is a member of the Society for Experimental Mechanics (SEM), co-founded SEM’s Biological Systems and Materials Division, and has served on the SEM Composite Materials Technical Division.

From 1999 to 2006 Dr. Wood has been an assistant professor in the Mechanical Engineering Department at Clemson University in Clemson, South Carolina. Before moving to Clemson she spent three years as a postdoctoral research associate in the Department of Engineering Science and Mechanics at Virginia Tech.

One of Dr. Wood's research interests is biomimicry, or applying the mechanical structures of biological materials to engineering design using engineering materials. Other recent research has investigated the deformation behavior of materials and structures with complex geometries and complex material properties, such as fiber-reinforced composite materials and biological materials. Dr. Wood is an expert in the use of moiré interferometry, a full-field optical method that is used in stress analysis, as well as materials characterization and other types of interference. In recent years, Dr. Wood and her students have developed optical systems with various wavelengths and waveguides. Dr. Wood has over 60 technical publications in refereed journals, conference proceedings, and edited monographs and special technical reports.

List of academic degrees:

B.S. Civil Engineering, 1981 (Structural Engineering), Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University in Blacksburg, Virginia.

M.S. Engineering Mechanics (Applied Physics), 1983, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University in Blacksburg, Virginia.

Ph.D. Materials Engineering Science, 1992, from the Department of Engineering Science and Mechanics at Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University in Blacksburg, Virginia.

List of peer-reviewed publications:

Dissertation: "Determination of thermal strains in the neighborhood of a bimaterial interface"

http://scholar.lib.vt.edu/.../available/etd-06072006-124140/

Wood, J. D., et. al., "The Effect of Delaminations on the Thermal Expansion Behavior of Quasi-Isotropic Composite Laminates," Proceedings of the ASTM Symposium on Effects of Defects in Composite Materials, (December 1982).

Wood, J. D., et. al., "Deformation of Composite Multispan Beam Shear Specimens," Proceedings of the Fifth International Congress on Experimental Mechanics, Montreal, Canada, pp. 297-298 (June 1984).

Wood, J. D., et. al., "Relative Displacement Measurements for Two-Body Problems," Proceedings of the Society for Experimental Mechanics (SEM) Spring Conference, Las Vegas, Nevada, pp. 309- 314 (June 1985).

Wood, J. D., "Detection of Delamination Onset in a Composite Laminate Using Moiré Interferometry," Composites Technology and Research, Vol. 7, no. 4, pp. 121-128 (Winter 1985).

Wood, J. D., et. al., "Deformation and Strains in a Thick Adherend Lap Joint," Adhesively Bonded Joints: Testing, Analysis, and Design, ASTM STP 981, W. S. Johnson, Ed., American Society for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia, pp. 107-118 (1988).

Wood, J. D., et. al., "Thermal Strains in a Bimaterial Joint," Proceedings of the Seventh ASCE/Engineering Mechanics Division Specialty Conference, Blacksburg, Virginia (May 1988).

Wood, J. D., et. al., "Thermal Strains in a Bimaterial Joint: Experimental and Numerical Analysis," Proceedings of the Society for Experimental Mechanics (SEM) Spring Conference, Cambridge, Massachusetts, pp. 543-551 (May 28-June 1, 1989).

Wood, J. D., et. al., "Determination of Thermal Strains by Moiré Interferometry," Experimental Mechanics, Vol. 29, no. 3, pp. 318-322 (Sept. 1989).

Wood, J. D., et. al., "Micromechanical Study of Thermal Strains near the Interface of a Bimaterial Joint by Microscopic Moiré Interferometry," Proceedings of the Seventh International Congress on Experimental Mechanics, Las Vegas, Nevada (July 1992).

Wood, J. D., et. al., "Thermal Stresses in a Bimaterial Joint: An Experimental Analysis," ASME J. of Applied Mechanics, Vol. 61, (no. 1), pp. 192-198 (March 1994).

Wood, J. D., et. al., "Residual Material Properties in Aging of Composites," Proceedings of ASME Conference, Atlanta, Georgia (August 1996).

Wood, J. D., et. al., "Designed Polymeric Interphases", Gordon Conference on Composites, Ventura, California (January 1997).

Wood, J. D., et. al., "Aging of Polymer Matrix Composites: The Reverse Thermal Effect," The International Composites Expo (ICE) ‘1997, Nashville, Tennessee (January 1997) p. 14.

Wood, J. D., et. al., "Effect of Sizing on Shear Properties of Hybrid Composite Materials Using Moiré; Interferometry," Proceedings of the Society for Experimental Mechanics (SEM) Spring Conference, Seattle, Washington (June 1997).

Wood, J. D., et. al., "Effects of Temperature Sequencing During Hygrothermal Aging of Polymers and Polymer Matrix Composites: The Reverse Thermal Effect," Proceedings of the International Conference on Composites in Infrastructure (ICCI), Tucson, Arizona (January 1998).

Wood, J. D., et. al., "Influence of Matrix Chemistry on the Short Term, Hydrothermal Aging of Vinyl Ester Matrix and Composites Under Both Isothermal and Thermal Spiking Conditions," Journal of Composite Materials (USA) Vol. 33. (no.20), pp.1918-1938 (July 1999).

Wood, J. D., et. al., "Measurement of Strain Distribution and Viscoelastic Characteristics in Layers of a Soft-Core Sandwich Beam Using Moiré Interferometry," Society for Experimental Mechanics, Milwaukee, Wisconsin (June 2002).

Wood, J. D., et. al., "Strain distribution within multilayer thermoplastic elastomers using Moiré interferometry," Society for Experimental Mechanics, Milwaukee, Wisconsin (June 2002).

Wood, J. D., et. al., "Utilization of moiré interferometry to study the strain distribution within multi-layer thermoplastic elastomeric samples," Journal of Biomaterials, Polymer division, Vol. 13. (no.9), pp.1051-1065 (October 2002). (http://www.catchword.com/.../vsp/09205063/v13n9/contp1-1.htm)

Wood, J. D., "Determining Thermal Stressess Near a Bimaterial Interface," Handbook of Moire Measurements, C. Walker, Ed., Dept. of Mechanical Engineering, University of Strathclyde, UK, Chapter 8: Residual Stresses (2), pp.287-293, (2004, IOP Publishing Ltd).

Wood, J. D., et. al., "Designing a Perfect Bimaterial Interface," Society for Experimental Mechanics, Costa Mesa, California (June 2004).

Wood, J. D., et. al., "Development of a Real-Time Microscopic Moiré Interferometry System," Society for Experimental Mechanics, Costa Mesa, California (June 2004).

She seems to be a highly qualified engineer who's opinions should be taken seriously if we take Hometruth's logic.

She also believes that the twin towers were destroyed using a secret space based energy weapon.

odyssey06

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119859872#Comment_119859872

So you're supremely unconcerned about all this anti-vaccine info.

But extremely concerned about information presented to challenge that anti-vaccine info.

In fact, only recently you were challenging information I presented in response to disinformation posted by another poster.

Yet you showed zero concern for the original disinformation.

One doesn't have to be 'fixated' to notice that when you insert yourself into a debate.

King Mob

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119860414#Comment_119860414

Cause either according to him, it wasn't really disinformation, or it was completely justified.

Anti-vaxx misinformation only exists for him when it's not being presented by someone who's supporting him.

hometruths

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119859901#Comment_119859901

Having no interest in conspiracies theories about covid vaccines and 5G/Bill Gates/The Great Reset does not equal having no interest in other conspiracy theories about covid vaccines.

A conspiracy theory is an explanation for an event or situation that invokes a conspiracy by sinister and powerful groups, often political in motivation, when other explanations are more probable.

For example - the consensus that Covid vaccines are safe and effective, and have a favourable risk/benefit profile for everybody.

I think that's bollocks and the conspiracy theory is that powerful groups, often political in motivation are actively engaged in promoting this consensus by censoring etc anybody who disagrees.

There are a number of previously distinguished academics, scientists and medics who have challenged the orthodox views on the Covid.

In his comments above on John Ioanddis, DohnJoe offers what he believes to be the more probable explanation than a conspiracy theory, which is that these hitherto respected and influential scientists have suddenly developed "questionable" views, and because their views are questionable they can be dismissed as irrelevant, thus the consensus remains.

Fine, that's a difference of opinion. I'd welcome the opportunity to discuss that difference in good faith but sadly it seems to be impossible. I will continue to post in the hope that there are lurkers who would have an interest in discussing this in good faith, but as long as you and your ilk are posting in the manner that you do, I suspect others will continue to stay away.

hometruths

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119860414#Comment_119860414

In fact, only recently you were challenging information I presented in response to disinformation posted by another poster.

Yet you showed zero concern for the original disinformation.

I'm not sure what you are referring to here, but if you remind of the specifics I will happily try and address/clarify whatever it is.

King Mob

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119860461#Comment_119860461

Ok. Great. Finally you admit that you are a conspiracy theorist and you are proposing a conspiracy theory.

Could have saved a lot of hassle if you didn't try to pretend otherwise.

As we've seen however, this conspiracy is complete nonsense and it's not at all supported by any rational evidence.

It's no better than the theories you openly disagree with, or the theories you're too afraid to openly disagree with.

Also, lol. "your ilk."

King Mob

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119860470#Comment_119860470

More of that selective blindness. Might want to get that checked. You might even be able to claim that the vaccine caused it.

hometruths

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119860519#Comment_119860519

As we've seen however, this conspiracy is complete nonsense and it's not at all supported by any rational evidence.

I must have missed that bit. But we can certainly agree that this is a difference of opinion.

King Mob

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119860545#Comment_119860545

It was the part where you've failed to produce any rational or convincing evidence and the parts where your arguments rely on complete fiction and dishonesty.

it's fine though, like when your friends post conspiracy misinformation you don't want to acknowledge, you just seem to miss a lot.

Like I said, it's the same as the folks who were claiming shite about 5G and Bill Gates.

odyssey06

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119860470#Comment_119860470

Millions die everyday from many preventable illnessness 

Now we need to explain why 10's of millions of people above the normal fatality rate are dying worldwide and get a definite explanation that is/is not linked to a mass rollout of a new tech vaccine.

Given that that you jumped on the difference between 15 and 6 million. Yet you show absolutely zero concern for the disinformation in the figures above, which are evidently picked from thin air - given less than 100 million die per year. I am not picking a post at random here, I am picking posts from a chain you responded to.

Dohnjoe

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119860461#Comment_119860461

"The global view of Covid is wrong, it's all part of a plot that only I know about, any scientist or expert who has any opposing view will do"

Fine, which groups are involved in your conspiracy and what are the details?

King Mob

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119860578#Comment_119860578

"A global plot I figured out by reading twitter/parler/whatever."

hometruths

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119860572#Comment_119860572

I am not picking a post at random here, I am picking posts from a chain you responded to.

I didn't respond/comment to anything about this, you dragged me into it with this "oh and care to comment" whataboutery:

Oh and care to comment on the misinformation on the thread that millions of people die from preventable illnesses every day. It was posted on this thread, you must have seen it as you commented on my post in response to it.

At the time I told you I didn't. I responded:

Eh?! I don't think I did comment on your post in response to it?

But I did respond to your whataboutery. I told you that I had no idea how many die every day. That's why I had/have zero concern for the original disinformation because I was not even aware it was disinformation.

The idea that I was recently challenging information you presented in response to disinformation posted by another poster is total garbage. If I am wrong no doubt you will correct me by linking to the posted in which I commented challenging it.

King Mob

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119860725#Comment_119860725

Ah so if you personally don't know it's disinformation or not, then it's not disinformation and it's not worth addressing.

odyssey06

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119860725#Comment_119860725

Your dragged yourself into it.

Total garbage? Nope. It is right here.

The disinformation was posted here.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119855043#Comment_119855043

It was challenged by multiple posters with reference to the 6 million 'official' death toll and specifically that millions do not die every day of preventable illnesses; which the poster was trying to use to belittle 6 million as a 'statistical non event'.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119855182#Comment_119855182

You then jumped in to challenge the 6 million figure.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119855171#Comment_119855171

Nothing in claims of millions of deaths every day from preventable illnesses OR tens of millions in excess deaths insinuated as connected to the vaccines struck you as odd, or dangerous or scaremongering... but yeah you jumped all over the 6 million figure.

Conveniently you either don't think it is disinformation or don't realise it is disinformation - but the truth is you only take an interest in the information presented in support of the consensus.

I think readers of the thread can judge for themselves the intellectual honesty of the contents of your posts.

Find us a single post where you challenged disinformation about the consensus on vaccines or covid. One single post.

You won't be able to. Because everything that has been said about blinkers on this thread when it comes to disinformation is true.

hometruths

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119860814#Comment_119860814

And your links show quite clearly that I did not challenge information you presented in response to another posters claims that millions die every day, nor did I even comment on your post in response to another posters claims that millions die every day, nor did I even post on anybody else's comment on another posters claims millions die every day.

You dragged me into this garbage with your "oh and care to comment" whataboutery".

odyssey06

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119860928#Comment_119860928

It's not whataboutery - it highlights your inconsistency. It was part of the thread discussion you were involved in, and made great play out of the risk of scaremongering with inaccurate data.

hometruths

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119860937#Comment_119860937

Ah ok, so you've moved on from the specific complaint: "you were challenging information I presented in response to disinformation posted by another poster"

We've clarified that I didn't challenge the information you presented, so now the problem is I didn't make any comment on this disinformation that was "part of the thread discussion" I was involved in.

Given that I've already explained why I did not make any comment on it, can we leave it at that and agree to move on?

I am sure nobody else is too interested in this lengthy discussion about a comment I didn't make.

Dohnjoe

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119861016#Comment_119861016

This conspiracy you referring to earlier, how does it work?

It seems to be very, very similar to the whole climate change denial thing. Whereby a vast amount of scientists and experts are incapable of seeing an obvious conspiracy containing false information, or they are "in on it".

Yours seems essentially the same.

King Mob

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119861016#Comment_119861016

Nope. We're all pretty interested in you explaining why you don'y acknowledge and avoid talking about any of the misinformation from anti vaxxers.

You could just say that snowcat was spreading misinformation, but against this goes against the religious prohibition you guys have against disagreeing with each other. So we are also interested in watching the mental gymnastics you have to go through to avoid this.

It's very entertaining.