Covid vaccines - thread banned users in First Post

odyssey06

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119372641#Comment_119372641

Do you have any source for this claim about doctors being struck off without a hearing? Struck off has a very specific meaning, so make sure that is what you are claiming.

How do you 'debate' mRNA vaccines? The premise of your question is nonsense. It's not rhetoric.

bad2thebone

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119372641#Comment_119372641

You're not meant to question it, and you're right people have been cancelled.

It's like a religious cult, let's all hail science.

There's nothing wrong with being sceptical.

Why are they suggesting boosters for the immunocompromised and elderly and nobody else ?

While they guilted the masses into taking a shot that didn't even work in the first place.

King Mob

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119372160#Comment_119372160

But we're not ignoring it. We're not rubbishing or denigrating it. We are not brushing it aside. Those are all strawmen on your part.

What we have been saying is that you guys have been misrepresenting that the VAERS data is and can do.

You cannot use the VAERS data to conclude anything about the vaccines. That's something that is directly and emphatically stated on the VAERS website.

And I refer to your dumps as dumps. Because that's what they are. You are simply dumping them in place of your own arguments and often times without actually reading them or looking into them.

This was demonstrated perfectly when you guys link dumped from Natural News and defended it as a legitimate source.

Not all sources are created equally. Some sources like Natural News have a history of false and ridiculous claims. Some source have no regulation or consequences for lying or distorting things. You guys don't seem to have a filter for bad sources.

Meanwhile, when I posted an example of a peer reviewed study posted in a journal you previously claimed was trustworthy, you immediately declared it was fraudulent.

odyssey06

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119372795#Comment_119372795

This is medical misinformation. You have made a statement of fact: "That didn't even work in the first place" without evidence.

Withdraw the claim or substantiate it.

bad2thebone

They were saying that the vaccines will prevent covid and then incrementally they rolled back on their own misinformation.

Substantiate that :)

bad2thebone

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119372956#Comment_119372956

https://youtu.be/KWqFmZHnt6U

Two to Three year's of protection, will you ask Mr O'Neill to substantiate his misinformation too ?

Now they're recommending to take it more often, follow the science @odyssey06

It's working so well.

Well???

Fighting Tao

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119373069#Comment_119373069

Did you miss the word “could” in what he said? Also, are you just pretending to be a fool and ignoring that the virus has mutated?

You are deliberately trying to push misinformation given the fact that you had to go back 8 months before omicron to try to score a silly point.

robinph

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119372641#Comment_119372641

Has there been a single debate on RTE or BBC from a qualified virologist or immunologist who has questioned the vaccine. I've never seen one.

As qualified immunologist or virologists are unlikely to be debating against themselves then it's unlikely. Did see a review of a program on BBC 2 from a couple of days ago where various anti vaxxers arguments are answered.

Not watched it myself yet, but sounds interesting...

https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2022/jul/20/unvaccinated-review-the-most-infuriating-tv-show-of-the-year-so-far

bad2thebone

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119373192#Comment_119373192

I know that the virus mutated, we've been telling the likes of you that the vaccines were brought out too late in the pandemic and due to the first strain mutating itself it's pointless taking a vaccine for something that's gone ahead of itself.

Are you a pretending to forget about that then,or are you acting the clown ?

Fighting Tao

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119373222#Comment_119373222

You are dragging up 8 month old stuff that had backing through very extensive studies to say that what was said 8 months ago was lies. It was not lies. The virus has mutated since then. So stop with the silly misinformation crusade to try and muddy the waters. It doesn’t wash here.

odyssey06

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119373069#Comment_119373069

This is what you wrote: "That didn't even work in the first place."

Find us what was wrong with the information presented above based on the information available at the time.

It is your claim, support it or withdraw it.

And the vaccines work. They worked better against earlier variants in terms of preventing infection but they still provide durable protection against severe covid measured in years.

Your statement "that didn't even work" is false and without foundation.

Your posts have zero credibility and are utterly dishonest exercises in weasel words and spreading unfounded scurrilous rumours.

bad2thebone

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119373252#Comment_119373252

Why didn't they explain that if the virus mutates that these vaccines we're telling you are your savior, might not work due to mutation then ?

They forgot about that I suppose or it wasn't important, just take this and you'll save us millions.

Fighting Tao

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119373304#Comment_119373304

Sure why didn’t they ask why is the sky blue? They were discussing research they had been released, not things they make anti-vaxxers pee their pants.

bad2thebone

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119373284#Comment_119373284

You're getting me mixed up with someone else, I never said doctors were struck off.

And you're trying to warp reality and deflect the discussion.

They don't provide protection from covid, a lot of people who were vaccinated caught covid and had similar symptoms to those who had covid during the first wave.

Protected means preservation from harm, so are you suggesting that nobody was harmed after they caught covid ?

Your response has zero credibility and you're posting here on and off and not once have you made any progress.

astrofool

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119372598#Comment_119372598

Sure, but that's implying that people are having some ongoing impact from the vaccines, which, if true, is a new area of science we can explore, it's not believable for a rational person to regret doing something that isn't causing them any issues unless they've some sort of an agenda to begin with (and as time as gone on, many of those posting reveal their agenda as their initial JAQ'ing off gets answered).

There is also no vaccine issue that impacts a fit and healthy person that doesn't impact the elderly and vulnerable more so (again, new science if you have examples).

And I was just pointing out your change of tactic from posting unsourced misinformation, I'm sure others have noticed as well (again, this points to an agenda rather than a desire for the truth).

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119372795#Comment_119372795

And just as quickly you've jumped back to claims without any backup.

bad2thebone

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119373374#Comment_119373374

Well you are invested in the discussion a lot longer than I, so it's obvious we all have an agenda.

You are confident that the vaccines are safe, effective and cause no harm. I have no issues with that.

But you're still here trying to convince everyone in opposition that they're categorically wrong. And it's possible that you have an agenda too.

Nobody takes a stance without any agenda or purpose.

odyssey06

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119373357#Comment_119373357

Ok, that was someone else's baseless claim.

But you are just playing semantic games with weasel words now.

Do air bags protect and seat belts protect you against harm in car crashes? And yet people still die in car crashes.

Are you better protected against covid - both infection and severe covid, hospitalisation - if you are vaccinated than not?

If we take a random selection of 1000 people, over the course of the pandemic, are you better off encountering covid vaccinated or un-vaccinated?

Anyone who says unvaccinated does not do so on the basis of evidence.

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/effectiveness/work.html

https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/news/preliminary-data-indicate-covid-19-vaccines-remain-effective-against-severe-disease-hospitalisation

astrofool

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119373394#Comment_119373394

Well, really it's to discuss conspiracies, like, if any of what you are saying had a tiny element of truth, then you'd be able to point to why (and possibly head down the WEF route or it's alternates).

It's basically 317 pages of proving vaccines are safe in great detail.

It's also interesting to see how gullible some people are (e.g. posting from grifting sites, picking up mocked up papers from random facebook groups, falling back to people like Robert Malone as trustworthy despite the verifiable lies he tells). Some posters build their entire identity on some untruth, then when it gets shown to be wrong, re-reg or just go quiet for a while before coming back (it's probably time for a GMO rant again). It's why everyone on forum will know you have an agenda that slips out now and then, but then you rein it back in a little bit.

Now, the other interesting thing to look at is why you have that agenda, what thought process led to it, is it genuine or contrarianism (I mean, debating is also fun, you can make pseudo-science look right and convince someone the earth is flat, or laugh as random youtubers try and do the same thing). Has the internet contributed to an increase in individuals like this as they can now find people who agree with their ideas, or is it the ability to have 2 opposing views no matter the subject.

bad2thebone

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119373409#Comment_119373409

I don't think it matters at this stage who you encounter whether you're vaccines or unvaccinated. But early on I don't think it would have made a difference for the average person who's not elderly or immunocompromised the pathogen had mutated to a lesser evil.

And as I'm not allowed to give out medical advice, I'd leave people make up their own mind.

By putting in the word weasel is just being judgemental and not helping the discussion. We've all had our warnings. And that goes for everyone here, you're not exclusive.

bad2thebone

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119373454#Comment_119373454

Are you trying to be psychoanalytic or just curious, I asked you about your agenda and you didn't answer me, but you went on to turn it inside out and go off on one.

So tell me why you post here.

odyssey06

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119373627#Comment_119373627

We're not talking at this stage. You weren't talking about at this stage. We were talking about over the entire pandemic

I'm attacking the post not the poster. Your posts use weasel words. You say one thing and then when challenged, change it to a different time or variant to make it look like your original remark was still valid. That is not helping the discussion. It is just going around in circles as you jump from claim to claim.

This is what I wrote:

If we take a random selection of 1000 people, over the course of the pandemic, are you better off encountering covid vaccinated or un-vaccinated? Anyone who says unvaccinated does not do so on the basis of evidence.

"Early on I don't think it would have made a difference... the pathogen had mutated."

How can you be talking about "early on" if you are talking about the pathogen mutating?

This is exactly what I'm talking about with shifting of goalposts and spinning around and deliberate use of vagueness to create ambiguity. See your earlier semantic games with the meaning of the word protect you then walk back on.

You shift the goalposts talking about "at this stage". But earlier you weren't just talking about "at this stage". You are using Omicron in a deliberately deceptive manner to rewrite history as if we only ever had to worry about Omicron and not earlier variants. Multiple posters have called you out on it.

Your claims are false, entirely baseless and you provide no evidence to substantiate them except semantic games.

The vaccines provide protection from covid. Note I said covid. If you disagree you do not do so on the basis of evidence.

Fr0g

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119373219#Comment_119373219

Once again you answer my question perfectly. There are many highly qualified experts who do question the jab. ( Ask yourself why you don't know this).

But instead of interviewing the highly qualified professionals and asking why they question the jab they go after the general public. These people simply ask legitimate questions about this one new vaccine and they are made to look like idiots. What chance do they have up against all the resources the BBC have at their disposal to discredit them. Including being able to edit the show to follow their own narrative. Do you honestly believe that the participants will be shown in a good light? It's a complete whitewash and a cowardly move from the BBC.

Fr0g

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119372785#Comment_119372785

https://extra.ie/2021/08/25/news/irish-news/irish-doctor-suspended-vaccine

And

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/health/gp-suspended-by-medical-council-over-refusal-to-give-covid-19-vaccine-1.4516239

Now I know what you're going to say. Your going to quibble over the terms "struck off" and "suspended". They amount to the same thing. They can no longer practice. Message sent. Do not question the vaccine or you will pay the consequences.

robinph

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119373807#Comment_119373807

So why are these highly qualified experts who are questioning the vaccines not getting coverage in the media?

Please explain exactly how every newspaper, TV news channel and legitimate news website globally has been bought off by whoever is behind your conspiracy? If there was something to your claims then why is it only the crank websites which are "reporting! on this, and why are the "reports" really just twisting of the data and misunderstanding of scientific papers published on websites using garish layouts from the early 2000's?

Is it really believable that every journalist and news organisation globally is in on the conspiracy?

SuperBowserWorld

Person concerned with safety of covid vaccine, dies of heart attack due to stress thinking about safety of covid vaccine.

bad2thebone

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119373756#Comment_119373756

You're warping the whole thing into your own version of reality.

I've no time for having a cryptic discussion about you said I said, remember when you said, but you shouldn't say...

You're post is an absolute mess.

The vaccines do not provide protection from covid, note how you obfuscate you lack of clarity...

If they protected people from covid, nobody would be told to isolate for two weeks or whatever.

The flu vaccine stops symptoms with almost everyone who took it, but this covid vaccine almost everyone who catches covid gets symptoms even if they're on their 4th shot ...

That in my opinion is not a good treatment.

robinph

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119373853#Comment_119373853

Just on a quick googling on the first named GP you gave and there are a bunch of issues with them coming up prior to the suspension for refusing to give vaccines. Seems to have been a local councilor as well until they got suspended by their party(?) for something else.

odyssey06

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119373853#Comment_119373853

They don't amount to the same thing. Struck off is permanent. A suspension is interim and time limited.

Did you read the Irish Times article you linked to?

You said they were struck off without a hearing. "Without even a hearing".

The doctors (a) were not struck off and in the ROI case the suspension case was heard in the High Court.

https://www.mhc.ie/latest/insights/high-court-gp-temporarily-suspended-for-claiming-covid-19-is-a-hoax

Did you know this and still post misleading information? Or perhaps this might make you consider the trustworthiness of where you get your information from.

bad2thebone

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119373756#Comment_119373756

Sorry I read your question wrong, I have my glasses on now, my bad as I have a problem with words jumping around and I don't read properly without them.

I'd say most people who are not vaccinated, are unvaccinated through choice . Then obviously you'll have the people who think it's the mark of the beast or that they're trying to kill us off, turn off the immune system or have people dependable on Pfizer or moderna for the rest of their lives.

I'm unvaccinated because I knew I am fit and healthy and I made the right decision

I've all the other vaccines and I take prep, I also take the flu jab every year and get a tetanus shot as I'm working outdoors and get cuts a lot.

I'm Vaccine hesitant I'd consider myself, and ironically I caught it from someone who was on their 3rd shot.

odyssey06

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119373894#Comment_119373894

My statement was very clear:

Are you better protected against covid - both infection and severe covid, hospitalisation - if you are vaccinated than not?

If we take a random selection of 1000 people, over the course of the pandemic, are you better off encountering covid vaccinated or un-vaccinated?

Anyone who says unvaccinated does not do so on the basis of evidence.

And I provided supporting references for my claim.

You are the one engaging in cryptic games, changing the context of what you are talking about depending on what suits your argument in the present moment. You use covid as it is now (Omicron) to argue against vaccines as they were rolled out over a year ago. You engage in semantic games with the meaning of the word 'protected' which I have already shown it to be an invalid use with reference to airbags and seatbelts, and protection against severe covid.

You have noticeably failed to dispute the protection vaccines provide against severe covid. You have failed to challenge the evidence of the protection against infection and transmission the vaccines provided against the original, Alpha, Delta variants. So to state that the vaccines do not protect and then cite the flu vaccine in comparison shows that I think you have misunderstood things.

If you accept the flu vaccine at providing protection, you should accept covid vaccines on same basis, for the reasons outlined:

Does the flu vaccine stop symptoms as per the 'perfect' standard you set? No. And it certainly doesn't in the years where the variants included in the vaccine are not the variants in circulation, which unfortunately does happen.

• During seasons when flu vaccine viruses are similar to circulating flu viruses, flu vaccine has been shown to reduce the risk of having to go to the doctor with flu by 40 percent to 60 percent.
• Flu vaccination has been shown in several studies to reduce severity of illness in people who get vaccinated but still get sick.
• Among adults hospitalized with flu, vaccinated patients were 59 percent less likely to be admitted to the ICU than those who had not been vaccinated.

https://www.cdc.gov/flu/prevent/keyfacts.htm#:~:text=Some%20people%20who%20get%20vaccinated,vaccinated%20but%20still%20get%20sick.

I should also note that there is another issue with the flu vaccine, that the immune response often does not trigger in over 65s for whom it is most needed. It may be that mRNA vaccines for older people such as the covid ones are especially important for this reason rather than typical inactivated strain vaccines.

The traditional vaccine may not work so well in older people because of an idea known as immune senescence, which posits that as people age, their immune systems weaken, resulting in poor vaccine response, especially to inactivated strain.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/flu-shots-may-not-protect-the-elderly-or-the-very-young/