Covid vaccines - thread banned users in First Post

King Mob

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119302892#Comment_119302892

Lol. Yea, more good examples of strawmen.

You are misrepresenting statements to claim they say things they don't.

For example, look at the link you posted. 91.3 is less than 100.

You either know this and you're doing it deliberately. Or you don't understand that's what you're doing. Either way, no point it explaining it to you.

And again, why bother when you'll just ignore and avoid and dodge when things get too difficult for you?

Fr0g

We could all do with a good laugh. Why don't you search for "100% safe and effective" in YouTube. YT has been scrubbed clean of any of that nasty anti vaxxer stuff you banging on about.

It's a safe space 🙄

shillyshilly

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119302472#Comment_119302472

in fairness, they've picked apart numerous points which have either been left unanswered, or just descended into name calling... your post is case and point, where you've assumed a collective opinion of a poster, as if you are the chairperson, it's kind of ironic...

Fr0g

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119302943#Comment_119302943

Also 100 = 100. It's down there at least twice.

I guess Joe forgot to mention the 95.3%

shillyshilly

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119302892#Comment_119302892

they were actually correct, the vaccine was very effective preventing symptomatic COVID for the original and Alpha variants...

unfortunately mutations happen, and the vaccine isn't as effective in preventing symptomatic cases, much like getting the bird flu vaccine, then complaining it doesn't work when you catch swine flu.

Your biology knowledge is embarrassing.

bad2thebone

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119302892#Comment_119302892

Absolutely shocking to say the least. Lies and more lies being told to the people. The land of the free, freedom from responsibility too I see.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119302813#Comment_119302813

They pulled out of India as well earlier in the year. Failed to meet local drug regulator's requirement for local safety study. That's 1billion+ potential customers.

"The U.S. company, which was the first drugmaker to seek emergency approval in India for its vaccine developed with Germany’s BioNTech, made the withdrawal decision after a meeting with India’s Central Drugs Standard Control Organisation (CDSCO) on Wednesday.

The drug regulator said on its website its experts did not recommend the vaccine because of side effects reported abroad were still being investigated. It also said Pfizer had not proposed any plan to generate safety and immunogenicity data in India.

“Based on the deliberations at the meeting and our understanding of additional information that the regulator may need, the company has decided to withdraw its application at this time,” Pfizer said in a statement.

https://www.reuters.com/article/health-coronavirus-india-pfizer-idUSKBN2A50GE

Keep Calm and Trust The Science

King Mob

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119302956#Comment_119302956

Lol

Yes. And they explain what they mean and the context of it.

Vaccine was 100% effective in preventing severe disease as defined by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and 95.3% effective in preventing severe disease as defined by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration

Vaccine was 100% effective in preventing COVID-19 cases in South Africa, where the B.1.351 lineage is prevalent

Preventing severe disease is not the same as preventing infection.

Preventing COVID in one variant doesn't mean that it is equally as effective to variants that come later.

There's some other numbers in that link. Did you miss them?

Particularly this one on the top of the article:

Analysis of 927 confirmed symptomatic cases of COVID-19 demonstrates BNT162b2 is highly effective with 91.3% vaccine efficacy observed against COVID-19, measured seven days through up to six months after the second dose

Or perhaps the headline:

Pfizer and BioNTech Confirm High Efficacy and No Serious Safety Concerns Through Up to Six Months Following Second Dose in Updated Topline Analysis of Landmark COVID-19 Vaccine Study

High efficacy isn't 100% effective.

Results from this analysis of 46,307 trial participants build upon and confirm previously released data and demonstrate strong protection against COVID-19 through six months post-second dose. From the 927 confirmed symptomatic cases of COVID-19 in the trial, 850 cases of COVID-19 were in the placebo group and 77 cases were in the BNT162b2 group, corresponding to vaccine efficacy of 91.3% (95% confidence interval [CI, 89.0, 93.2]).

Thirty-two cases of severe disease, as defined by the CDC, were observed in the placebo group versus none in the BNT162b2 vaccinated group, indicating that the vaccine was 100% efficacious in this analysis against severe disease by the CDC definition (95% CI, [88.0,100.0]). Twenty-one severe cases, as defined by the FDA, were observed in the placebo group versus one case in the BNT162b2 vaccinated group, indicating 95.3% efficacy by the FDA definition (95% CI, [71.0, 99.9]).

Efficacy was generally consistent across age, gender, race and ethnicity demographics, and across participants with a variety of underlying conditions.

A total of 697 cases of COVID-19 were observed in the United States; 647 cases of COVID-19 were observed in the placebo group versus 50 in the vaccine group, indicating vaccine efficacy of 92.6% (95% CI, [90.1, 94.5]).

I count 4 mentions of less than 100% numbers.

So yea, strawman.

Also, I'm going to assume that you believe that all of these results are false and fraudulent because they aren't conducive to your beliefs. If this isn't the case, please just say so.

I'd ask, but we both know I wouldn't get a straight answer.

Fr0g

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119302980#Comment_119302980

Except now we know from the Pfizer document dump they were next to useless from the beginning. Nice try though.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119302803#Comment_119302803

See, this is why people assume you're autistic.

He said 40k deaths. I said at least 100k deaths/serious side effects.

So let's say, hypothetically, there was 40k deaths and 70k serious side effects, then our estimations were both correct.

Do you understand? It's not difficult.

This is an ongoing situation. You can't undo the shots. I hope not, but there's a possibility of many deaths and serious side effects over time.

I know you have skin in the game, but stop obsessing over numbers we'll never have an exact figure for. You can't control it, nor can we.

shillyshilly

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119303111#Comment_119303111

with the original and alpha variant pretty much eradicated from last year, definitely didn't work.

Fr0g

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119303015#Comment_119303015

Nobody reads the Pfizer website. My point, which you know, is that people were lied to. They were told it was 100% safe and effective. How many people went to to the Pfizer website to check it out.

The commentators saw "100% effective" and ran with that.

After which it slides gradually in increments over the months down to 12% for a week and then drops towards zero. As per Pfizer's own documents that they were forced to release

I'm sorry you fell for it but there you go.

Pfizer have a terrible history and reputation for fraud which is turned up with a quick Google. As does the pharma industry in general.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_largest_pharmaceutical_settlements

odyssey06

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119302119#Comment_119302119

Your own graph disproves your claims.

Where were the peak deaths? Match-April 2020 before vaccination & January 2021 again before vaccination.

Delta hit in June 2021 when vaccination programme was rolling out, and many older people only partially vaccination.

You are comparing the 2015-2019 figures with 2021 'raw'. This is not a like for like comparison as you must be aware.

The demographics of the country shift over time and by 2021 there were more older people than in 2015.

Otherwise, if you are looking at the raw data, the figures will look higher because there are more older people and so more older people dying off. Adjusting excess deaths for age is standard accepted practice to adjust for such trends.

This is is basic stuff.

Fr0g

"A good example of a strawman is how you were suggesting people believed that the vaccine was 100% safe and effective. No one claims that."

We were told it by the media, politicians, the so called experts when in fact Pfizer knew all along it did very little.

We were told if you take the vaccine you won't get COVID you won't pass it on.

Why are you trying to deny this? Are you happy you were lied to? Coerced into getting a vaccine based on false promises?

Is it my fault that I questioned it and decided to look a bit closer?

Turns out I was right not to take it. But you want to deny it all in the face of overwhelming evidence that is both useless and dangerous

Good luck!

shillyshilly

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119303002#Comment_119303002

Couple of queries, that you probably won't answer

1) I thought we weren't supposed to trust Reuters links, as according to you earlier in the thread

Reuters are highly connected to Pfizer through corporate relationships, and are also connected at board level 😁

It's the same as I told you earlier re: your general mainstream media. Vanguard and Blackrock own it. Guess who's also the largest shareholders in Pfizer? Thats right...Vanguard and Blackrock. You guys never learn, lol.

I'm curious as to why they would report negatively on a company they are in bed with?

Do we just dis-believe the positive stories, but believe the negative ones?

2) With this thought stream going of countries and companies looking after their own self interest, do you think this didn't have a factor in allowing any multinational company into one of the biggest generic medicine manufacturing countries in the world? Much like trying to get into the Russian and Chinese markets (although Pfizer seems to be the vaccine of choice in locations where Sinovac and Sputnikvax have failed).

With all the calls of "safety concerns" against Pfizer, who at the time had over 6 months of phase 4 data, and by Sep 2021 when they got shot down again by India, had billions of people vaccinated, it's funny how they recently approved their own mRNA vaccine with a combined phase2/3 trial of 4,000 people....

MRNA vaccine: Panel recommends emergency use nod to India's 1st mRNA vaccine - The Economic Times (indiatimes.com)

follow the money as you say... you're just doing it wrong.

for ref:

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119286441#Comment_119286441

flexcon

Just chiming in here as someone who took the double dose But refused the booster.

I had a horrible reaction to the second one, my heart was doing some really weird stuff. In the end it went away after a few days, however, the thought of it alone made my nervous of the booster.

Second reason was, as mentioned here I took a bet that the vaccine in its current form was doing a lousy job of preventing spread. I am sure I am misguided in this, however, I am not an anti vax person.

I work with data daily and I know the power of numbers, and I also know that you can use numbers to tell whatever story you want to tell, regardless of where you stand on the subject.

Either way, enjoying reading the content here the past few pages, the discussion is really interesting from all perspectives.

Fr0g

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119303185#Comment_119303185

Delta was milder as was every subsequent variant since the original that is how viruses go.

Most of the susceptible died in 2020. We didn't suddenly import a load of grannies in June 2021.

I repeat again. There were less COVID deaths in 2021 than 2020. What you are seeing is not COVID deaths. Demographics is irrelevant.

It is clear from the graphic that all cause mortality is steady for 6 years until a sudden rise in June 2021. Apart from the peak in spring 2020. That was the pandemic it came and went. Numbers since then are background noise

The data is from the CSO. Any other source would be ridiculed here. You have to accept official sources or its pointless continuing. You can't pick and choose.

shillyshilly

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119303259#Comment_119303259

can you give a crash course on the difference between credible and confidence interval...?

Confidence using the Bayesian & Clopper and Pearson methods

Credible using Beta Binomial

Because there are a lot of people in here making out they understand it, but are seriously butchering the interpretation of them, and being self declared experts on something that usually takes 2 semesters of college to understand.

shillyshilly

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119303288#Comment_119303288

That's not how viruses go, there is no consciousness to a virus where is says "ahh, we're at a happy equilibrium, I get warm fuzzy hosts, and nobody dies"... it will mutate into other variants which may or may not be more dangerous... please stop undermining over 100's years of virology studies with stupid comments like that.

odyssey06

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119303288#Comment_119303288

I accept official sources. I don't accept the false claims and lies spun around them by using them out of context.

If the data is from the CSO, show us the source page where it gives the context for the data.

Is it using the same sources of data for all years?

Is it counting total deaths? Is it measuring excess deaths? It is age adjusted?

If covid deaths are excluded from the comparison, what is the real difference between say 2017 and 2021?

Because the CSO will also tell you:

A rise in deaths from one year to another is not automatically considered to be excess deaths. The number of deaths per calendar year has followed an increasing trend since 2010.

King Mob

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119303171#Comment_119303171

You provided the Pfizer website as evidence for your claim.

The website does not claim what you said it did.

That's a classic strawman.

You either did it on purpose, or you didn't even actually read the link in the first place. I'd ask you which it was, but you won't answer.

You are now once again trying to dodge and deflect.

Fighting Tao

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119303226#Comment_119303226

My memory is different to your memory about what we were informed. What media/blogs/social media outlets were you using?

King Mob

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119303402#Comment_119303402

Yea, I remember when experts were adding caveats and disclaimers about the vaccine, such as pointing out that new variants might make it less effective, conspiracy theorists were using those statements to beat the vaccines as well.

"See they're already saying that it doesn't work! Conspiracy!"

King Mob

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119303158#Comment_119303158

Again man, you're making the accusation that I'm paid to post. You know this is false. You know that you're only throwing this accusation out because you're upset along with your other insults.

Fr0g

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119303353#Comment_119303353

Ridiculous. Viruses only purpose in life is to replicate. It is one of the most basic forms of life. Killing the host is not in its best interest. You have an estimated 380 trillion viruses in your body you don't even know about because they have mutated to be harmless. They are the truly successful ones. Evolution will naturally select a more infectious and milder variant because they are the ones more likely to survive and spread. Basic science. A variant that is more deadly is less successful. It has absolutely no intelligence whatsoever. It has no desire to do you harm. It is what it is.

That's what happened to the Spanish flu. It's descendants probably exist today as a common cold

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119303244#Comment_119303244

I knew that question might get asked when I posted the Reuters link. When a company posts something that could be regarded as "negative news" or FUD in relation to their own connected interests, I always feel it is more likely to be true. For obvious reasons. Of course I referenced other sources to confirm before posting:

https://www.cnbc.com/2021/02/05/pfizer-withdraws-application-for-emergency-use-of-its-covid-19-vaccine-in-india.html

Re: your second question, I was actually surprised India refused the Pfizer initially. Corruption is rampant and big money talks. Maybe it was a self-interest decision re: their own mRNA, or maybe they indeed had legit safety concerns with Pfizer's product. Government heads are on the line here as big pharma insist on indemnity with these shots. Perhaps Western politicians and the EU were more easily influenced financially, or maybe just more willing take the risk.

drunkmonkey

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119301678#Comment_119301678

it gets better, "His workmate, who also got boosted at the weekend, tested positive too and is also suffering badly."

Pfizer knew in early 2021 it impedes your immune system and said nothing, brushed it off as not clinically relevant, that was after one jab, these people are now on their 4th and 5th and the gang here are saying it's not a rolling experiment. 🤨

King Mob

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119303519#Comment_119303519

Ok. We're back to the claim that it's imeding people's immune system. Cool.

@DrFrost

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119303422#Comment_119303422

Mate, I'm getting concerned about your mental state and cognitive ability in general.

The joke was not that you're a paid shill, but rather that you're on the dole and hence I'm paying for you to be on here.

Do you get it now? 😄

----------------------------------------------

@DrFrost as per the site rules: attack the post, not the poster.

And just for the record, you're not paying anyone anything to be on here. So take that argument elsewhere.

Fr0g

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119303389#Comment_119303389

You're misunderstanding again. I didn't say that COVID was excluded from the figures. It is all cause mortality over 7 years. I'm saying that the rise in numbers from June is not accounted for by COVID. It is something else.

You try to explain it away in one post and then deny it in another. How am I supposed to keep up with you moving the goalposts around.

What is your explanation for the sudden and clear rise in all cause mortality from June 2021 which has extended into 2022?