Covid vaccines - thread banned users in First Post

odyssey06

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119851192#Comment_119851192

Hong Kong shows what happens when Omicron hits an unvaxxed vulnerable population.

Why would 'shoeboxes' matter?

Omicron already emerged so how a petri dish effect comes into it only you seem to understand - but it aint science.

The reason why we dont have other examples to point to is because of the scale and success of the vaccine rollout.

Either you expose your vulnerable to covid at some point - and see many of them die. Or you protect them until you have vaccinated them.

It is obvious you have no way to rebut HK as proof of this other than poor attempts at deflection like 'legendary'.

It is not a legend.

It happened.

And people died from Omicron who could have lived had they been vaccinated.

King Mob

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119851008#Comment_119851008

For reference, and to contrast the complete lack of definition of the made up term "extreme pro vaxxer"...

You are not an anti vaxxer because you don't want to get the vaccine.

You are an anti vaxxer because you believe and spread a wide variety of false and debunked claims about the vaccine. You are an anti vaxxer because you repeatly use dishonesty to defend those beliefs. You are an anti vaxxer because you keep linking to propaganda mills like natural news and epoch times as well as grifters to support your claims.

You are an antivaxxer because you oppose vaccines to an irrational level and to the point that you refuse to call them vaccines.

odyssey06

Frankly it is embarrassing to be called an extreme pro vaxxer.

Clearly I am a super mega stage 4 xTreme pro vaxxer and any labels not addressed in my proper title will be treated with disdain.

* I have tried reasoning with posters on labels but sometimes, sarcasm is the only course to highlight the hollowness of a position

King Mob

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119851271#Comment_119851271

You only say that cause you haven't been given the all clear like I have.

I'm officially not an extreme pro vaxxer according to our resident labelers.

dwayneshintzy

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119851192#Comment_119851192

This is a completely nonsensical view of what happened in HK. Small apartments had nothing to do with the disaster that started back in January; people did not spend a year in isolation either.

hometruths

Hong Kong showed that age and lack of natural immunity is the biggest factor in vulnerability to Covid deaths - not vaccination status.

They were hit worse by Omicron because they had largely managed to shut out Covid completely before that.

If anything Hong Kong's experience suggests the Swedes had the right idea, not that the vaccines are manna from heaven.

hometruths

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119851339#Comment_119851339

Your activity on this forum suggests to me you're motivated more by being extremely anti conspiracy theories rather than extremely pro vaccines.

Years of mocking posters for their opinions on UFOs, JFKs death, 911 etc has left you ill prepared to debate arguments backed up by stats and data from sources such as medical journals.

Hence you're reduced to wittering on about links found on twitter or extremist websites in order to deride and ridicule of contributors asking questions or questioning information.

King Mob

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119852204#Comment_119852204

But this is just your own personal biased opinion that's the result of consuming social media supplied misinformation.

Are you moving away from your previous link dump already?

If so, you might wanna read the next one in full before dumping it. And I'd recommend skipping the stage of posting the odd local news source and just post the study directly. Your tactic doesn't prevent people from reading them and seeing how you are misrepresenting them.

hometruths

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119852233#Comment_119852233

QED.

King Mob

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119852229#Comment_119852229

And of course, you're misattributing arguments to me that I don't make.

Yes, I keep pointing out that you anti-vaxxers use twitter and extremist sources, because you keep using twitter and extremists sources.

Why shouldn't I point that out?

odyssey06

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119852204#Comment_119852204

People died in Hong Kong who would have had much better chance at survival if vaccinated.

Hong Kong showed that Omicron has the potential to cause significant deaths in an unvaxxed population. It shows that Omicron alone would not have spared us, had people not been vaccinated.

How do you acquire this natural immunity, other than running the risk of infection?

And in that process, you expose your vulnerable to risk of death and hospitalisation from covid.

Which is how Sweden ended up with significantly higher excess deaths than their peers and near neighbours in Scandinavia.

Genius plan.

Oh, and Sweden were to the forefront in rolling out vaccines.

odyssey06

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119852229#Comment_119852229

The links are being posted from twitter and extremist websites onto this forum. Of course, it would suit you to try to lay down ground rules that it is out of bounds to note this.

And in many cases, the claims made on those websites do not match the contents of the original stats and data.

King Mob

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119852287#Comment_119852287

The claims made by Hometruths rarely match the contents.

Just look at the last few examples.

Claimed that one study showed "extreme pro vaxxers" were on the decline. Reduced to claiming that the study doesn't support anything and is just "interesting" Claimed that the study didn't show that 21.6% of people didn't say their confidence in vaccines had increased.

I don't think any of us need to prepared to debate anyone on stats and data when they can be debunked by simply reading what they clearly don't.

hometruths

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119852266#Comment_119852266

Irrespective of the content linked your repeated argument to dismiss the poster is "I think you found that on twitter or an unreliable source".

You do this because you are unable to make a sensible argument against the content actually posted.

Your MO is not to argue the point being made, and not even to dismiss the evidence for the point made, it is to dismiss what you think is the source of the source of the evidence for the point made. It is nonsense.

Or if somebody expresses an opinion, you simply say their opinion is not valid because it is the result of consuming social media supplied misinformation.

Your inability to actually discuss or debate why their opinion might be wrong is transparent.

hometruths

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119852287#Comment_119852287

I don't use twitter and I have not posted a single link to an extremist website on this site.

The point I am making is content from sources like the BMJ are dismissed lazily with a "you probably found that on twitter or an extremist website"

King Mob

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119852304#Comment_119852304

Lol Nope. that's not what I'm arguing. More misattribution.

You also ignore the fact that I do often address and counter the claims you make, you just also ignore it when I do that.

For example, in your previous linkdump from social media, you started by claiming the point was that the study showed or had something to do with "Extreme pro vaxxers".

But then, I explained in detail and directly how the study cannot say anything about that. You ignored this because your "MO" is to ignore things you can't address under the guise of "wanting to preserve discussion".

You then also changed what your point was to be something about vaccine messaging causing the decline in confidence. Right up until you were challenged on this and changed your point again.

This is all aside from the reason I bring up the fact you got this from some social media.

odyssey06

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119852333#Comment_119852333

Strange, apparently you have been reading the thread, and missed all the posts with stuff sourced from dodgy websites and random twitter feeds. And not once have you challenged or engaged with them... You seem to have blinkers on.

You also seem to have had those same blinkers on because multiple posters have challenged not just the source, but the content of these articles, including ones posted by you. Usually with reference to the contents of the underlying study. In the last 48 hours, you will see lots of such posts.

So your statement is demonstrably false and self - serving. You have may have convinced yourself of this falsehood, but it is a self deception.

King Mob

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119852333#Comment_119852333

No one has "dismissed content from sources like the BMJ" except for your anti-vaxxers. More misattribution.

I distinctly remember posting a study from the BMJ that showed the vaccines were responsible for saving millions of lives. You guys dismissed this among general ignoring and accusations of fraud.

Fighting Tao

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119852282#Comment_119852282

I think your question just shows how logic fails conspiracy theorists and anti-vaxxers. It’s a question that if answered proves that the whole Hong King argument they are trying to push is basically bullshit and just regurgitated from elsewhere without any little bit of thought.

Some people just can’t think about and question logically but they insist they can and it results in a weird situation where they end up flogging themselves repeatedly and they seem to enjoy it. Case in point with Hong King, and Hometruths and Snowcats insistence that studies state things that they don’t, even so far as one poster contacting a study author only for the poster to be told that that they are misinterpreting the study. This wasn’t good enough for the poster so they still argued their claim. It reminds me of self flagellation. The pain of looking foolish is a pleasure.

hometruths

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119852302#Comment_119852302

Again this is all total nonsense.

For example:

Claimed that the study didn't show that 21.6% of people didn't say their confidence in vaccines had increased.

No I did not claim that.

You claimed that study showed vaccine confidence increased by 21.6%.

Which is total garbage. I simply pointed out your misunderstanding that there is a difference between 21.6% people saying their confidence in vaccines has increased and claiming vaccine confidence increased by 21.6%

King Mob

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119852355#Comment_119852355

Lol. More desperate word games to try and avoid points.

This is also your "MO".

You ignore the majority of points to nitpick at one to distract from the long list of factual errors, mistruths and lies you try to tell.

And of course, this is complete hypocrisy on your part. Whinging about people misattributing arguments to you, while then claiming people did and said things they don't.

King Mob

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119852340#Comment_119852340

It took a good two pages just to get him to admit that Natural News was not a good source. And even then it was kind of a sideways backhanded admission.

Conspiracy theorists are not permitted to disagree with each other. They can't point out that their fellows sources are obviously dodgy, because their own sources are equally as dodgy, just with different reputations and openness about their dodgy nature.

Likewise they can't acknowledge that there is misinformation being spread on the thread because that too would draw the obvious comparison.

hometruths

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119852398#Comment_119852398

Likewise they can't acknowledge that there is misinformation being spread on the thread because that too would draw the obvious comparison.

Unfortunately the whole topic of covid and the vaccines is riddled with misinformation from all angles. And for sure it is present on this thread.

For example the claims that spreading misinformation about vaccines is dangerous because it reduces our chances of sufficient uptake to reach herd immunity because of vaccine hesitancy is, ironically enough, pure misinformation.

We will not reach herd immunity thanks to the vaccines because the vaccines do not prevent infection or transmission.

It's nothing to do with vaccine hesitancy caused by misinformation. To claim otherwise is pure misinformation.

King Mob

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119852597#Comment_119852597

But I posted several studies that discuss the effects of misinformation against vaccines and shows what impact it has.

You are now rejecting and dismissing these studies despite the fact they are peer reviewed and published in journals such as Nature. More hypocrisy.

You are also now trying to deflect back to your particular bug bear that's been addressed over and over and over and is also based on misattributed arguments.

And this of course is aside from the points I was actually making in my post which you do not address at all. You don't even acknowledge them.

Hilariously hypocritical.

hometruths

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119852786#Comment_119852786

What is the official line on vaccine induced herd immunity at the minute? Is it possible to achieve?

King Mob

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119852844#Comment_119852844

Lol. No man. You don't get to dodge the vast majority of my points then badger me for the answer to some random off topic question.

According to you, the studies I provided from Nature are all misinformation and you are dismissing them. Ok. Cool. As I said, this makes you a massive hypocrite for whinging at us for supposedly doing the same thing about stuff being published in the BMJ (which again, no one did.)

My point is made.

hometruths

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119852914#Comment_119852914

It is not off topic.

The point I am making is that there is all sorts of flavours of misinformation relating to covid and covid vaccines.

For example clearly the idea that the vaccines are a mechanism to implant the global population with 5G for mind control is utter nonsense and total misinformation without a shred of credible evidence.

But saying that covid vaccines will not achieve herd immunity because they do not protect infection or transmission is less clear. There is very credible evidence for this statement but it is often dismissed as misinformation, or at least has been in the past.

I am just wondering what the consensus line on this is at the minute? I presume those on here who are constantly hand waving about the dangers of misinformation being spread unchecked will be able to enlighten us?

King Mob

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119853001#Comment_119853001

OK. So you believe that Nature is an example of a source providing misinformation.

And as such you are dismissing the studies I posted from there.

hometruths

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119853008#Comment_119853008

No, I didn't say that.

I wondering what you think about the claims regarding herd immunity as you posted two studies from there.

I am also wondering what anybody else thinks about the claims of herd immunity. Is it currently misinformation or not?

The point I am making is that a lot of what was considered misinformation 12 months ago is currently considered credible. And vice versa.

So vague handwaving about spreading misinformation is totally pointless. What misinformation are you specifically worried about?

King Mob

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119853132#Comment_119853132

Ok. So then you agree that the studies i posted are not misinformation. Cool.

Weird that you tried to claim they were misinformation previously.

Also weird you're still badgering me to answer your silly question.