Covid vaccines - thread banned users in First Post

23-06-2021 6:00pm

Crazy mirror wrote: »

Yes the pHd of life? These vaccines are using experimental technology.(So we are told but who knows how long its been around). I find it strange that theories circulating early last year such as the lab theory; strange genome sequences in the virus and indirect funding from America are suddenly coming to the fore? I can't understand Dr Fauci's behaviour or the US CDC. Dr Fauci probably indirectly used a loophole to fund risky gain of function research in a lab with challenging safety procedures. Why deny it? So what if he used a loophole, i believe others have and did? The CDC it appeared decided to sit on confirmation that the vaccines were ready till after the US Election? The pollicisation of this drama is horrific when one stands back from it. The WHO appeared to bend over for China at least initially. If the lab theory is now getting traction, the next question was the virus deliberately released to make it appear as thou it was released there? There is a story that two Us Army doctors whom vaccinated or performed medical exams on athletes attending the Us Military Games in China in late 2019 were recently assassinated? Nothing but question, questions.............

Just to clarify, even if it did originate from a lab. There's absolutely no indication that it's artificial. Also no indication that Fauci is in some way at fault.

In relation to the weird implication that we've had the vaccine for a long time. Nope, no indication of that. Cuba even came up with one so it's more likely that dedicating a huge amount of resources into research is responsible. Also they've gone through rigorous testing.

And your claim of assassinations is entirely made up.

King Mob · 23-06-2021 9:47pm

Crazy mirror wrote: »

Yes the pHd of life?
.

So your medical opinion isn't actually based on anything.
Cool.

Why should anyone take it seriously?

Dohnjoe · 24-06-2021 12:19am

Crazy mirror wrote: »

Yes the pHd of life? These vaccines are using experimental technology.(So we are told but who knows how long its been around). I find it strange that theories circulating early last year such as the lab theory; strange genome sequences in the virus and indirect funding from America are suddenly coming to the fore? I can't understand Dr Fauci's behaviour or the US CDC. Dr Fauci probably indirectly used a loophole to fund risky gain of function research in a lab with challenging safety procedures. Why deny it? So what if he used a loophole, i believe others have and did? The CDC it appeared decided to sit on confirmation that the vaccines were ready till after the US Election? The pollicisation of this drama is horrific when one stands back from it. The WHO appeared to bend over for China at least initially. If the lab theory is now getting traction, the next question was the virus deliberately released to make it appear as thou it was released there? There is a story that two Us Army doctors whom vaccinated or performed medical exams on athletes attending the Us Military Games in China in late 2019 were recently assassinated? Nothing but question, questions.............

Questions that conveniently lead you to doubt Covid and vaccines. Almost as if that's the goal all along.

_Brian · 25-06-2021 8:31am

Crazy mirror wrote: »

Yes the pHd of life..........

It’s amazing how so few words can render poster so incredibly incongruous

PintOfView · 27-06-2021 10:44am

patnor1011 wrote: »

Funny indeed.
With current uptake of vaccines and some time we will have more data and an idea about what long term effects may be since we are practically in trial phase anyway.
I am in no rush since current vaccines only marginally improve chance of reducing severity of a generally very mild disease.

From Lancet:
Vaccine efficacy is generally reported as a relative risk
reduction (RRR). It uses the relative risk (RR)—ie, the
ratio of attack rates with and without a vaccine—which
is expressed as 1–RR. Ranking by reported efficacy gives
relative risk reductions of 95% for the Pfizer–BioNTech,
94% for the Moderna–NIH, 91% for the Gamaleya,
67% for the J&J, and 67% for the AstraZeneca–Oxford
vaccines. However, RRR should be seen against the
background risk of being infected and becoming ill
with COVID-19, which varies between populations and
over time. Although the RRR considers only participants
who could benefit from the vaccine, the absolute risk
reduction (ARR), which is the difference between attack
rates with and without a vaccine, considers the whole
population. ARRs tend to be ignored because they give
a much less impressive effect size than RRRs: 1·3% for
the AstraZeneca–Oxford, 1·2% for the Moderna–NIH,
1·2% for the J&J, 0·93% for the Gamaleya, and 0·84% for
the Pfizer–BioNTech vaccines.

Full link
https://www.thelancet.com/action/showPdf?pii=S2666-5247%2821%2900069-0

Let's try to get to the bottom of this, as reasonably as possible (sorry, this got a bit long!!).

Those ARR numbers do look very low,
so it's understandable why people might conclude that the vaccines are hardly worth taking!!
But that would be a very wrong conclusion!!

See below for a graph of the actual results from Pfizer clinical trial data
(from here --> https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7745181/)

In this trial of 43,548 people, half were given a placebo, and half the vaccine, on day 1 and again on day 21.
The graph below shows the percentage of each group (vaccinated vs placebo takers)
who developed symptomatic Covid-19 in the 100 or so days that followed.

As you can see, as time went on, a much higher percentage of placebo takers got symptomatic Covid vs the vaccinated.
The table tells us that 162 placebo takers got Covid, but only 8 of the vaccinated got Covid.

This is where they get the 95% effectiveness from.
You'd expect 162 of the vaccinated to get covid (same as the placebo takers)
but only 8 got it, which is (8/162) or 5%, so 95% were saved from getting it by the vaccine.

So how do we calculate the Absolute Risk Reduction? It's simply
the percentage of the placebo group who got Covid - the percentage of the vaccinated group who got covid.
From the graph this looks something like 2%

The ARR looks artificially low because in the 100 days only a small number of the trial participants would catch Covid.
If all participants were deliberately exposed to Covid (obviously this wouldn't be allowed)
then we would have a much higher ARR.

So, do you see why ARR can be misleading,
and why the RRR (of 95%) gives a much clearer idea of the vaccine protection?

6034073

See here for more details --> https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7745181/figure/f1/?report=objectonly
This shows the numbers that progressed through the trial (lots dropped out, etc)

Also, see the following interesting excerpt from the trial report
"Two BNT162b2 (vaccine) recipients died (one from arteriosclerosis, one from cardiac arrest),
as did four placebo recipients (two from unknown causes, one from hemorrhagic stroke, and one from myocardial infarction).
No deaths were considered by the investigators to be related to the vaccine or placebo.
No Covid-19–associated deaths were observed."

PintOfView · 28-06-2021 10:01am

patnor1011 wrote: »

The European database of suspected drug reaction reports is EudraVigilance, which also tracks reports of injuries and deaths following the experimental COVID-19 “vaccines.”

...
...

For anyone who is not bothered to search through database here is summary:

Total reactions for the experimental mRNA vaccine Tozinameran (code BNT162b2,Comirnaty) from BioNTech/ Pfizer: 5,368 deaths and 170,528 injuries to 08/05/2021
12,435 Blood and lymphatic system disorders incl. 54 deaths
8,551 Cardiac disorders incl. 636 deaths
62 Congenital, familial and genetic disorders incl. 4 deaths
4,828 Ear and labyrinth disorders incl. 3 deaths
153 Endocrine disorders
5,413 Eye disorders incl. 9 deaths

etc
etc

Can you tell me how you got the summary you included in that comment?

I've had a look at some of that data and the reported fatalities are from all sorts of things,
and many, perhaps most, from conditions that couldn't have developed since taking the vaccine.

If you look at my previous comment you'll also see that 6 people died during the Pfizer vaccine trial.
Two of the people who died were from the vaccinated cohort, and four from the placebo cohort.
Neither the vaccine nor the placebo were deemed to have contributed to these deaths!

Doesn't this put things in perspective?
ie. that people don't stop dying (from natural causes) just because they take a vaccine (or a placebo).

I'd like the take a closer look at the data you referenced (EudraVigilance)
but I can't find the summary, which includes deaths, like you showed.

Dohnjoe · 28-06-2021 12:34pm

PintOfView wrote: »

Can you tell me how you got the summary you included in that comment?

I've had a look at some of that data and the reported fatalities are from all sorts of things,
and many, perhaps most, from conditions that couldn't have developed since taking the vaccine.

If you look at my previous comment you'll also see that 6 people died during the Pfizer vaccine trial.
Two of the people who died were from the vaccinated cohort, and four from the placebo cohort.
Neither the vaccine nor the placebo were deemed to have contributed to these deaths!

Doesn't this put things in perspective?
ie. that people don't stop dying (from natural causes) just because they take a vaccine (or a placebo).

I'd like the take a closer look at the data you referenced (EudraVigilance)
but I can't find the summary, which includes deaths, like you showed.

Anti-vaxxers are continually using open source stats for any deaths or injuries that occur within the period that a vaccine is given in order to disingenuously scare-monger that the deaths/injuries are caused by the vaccine itself

We've had it numerous times in this thread, it gets explained, they ignore it. Big overlap between them and conspiracy theorists.

PintOfView · 28-06-2021 1:24pm

Dohnjoe wrote: »

Anti-vaxxers are continually using open source stats for any deaths or injuries that occur within the period that a vaccine is given in order to disingenuously scare-monger that the deaths/injuries are caused by the vaccine itself

We've had it numerous times in this thread, it gets explained, they ignore it. Big overlap between them and conspiracy theorists.

It seems to be very easy for people to misunderstand these stats,
or to look at them out of context, and draw wrong conclusions.
The wrong conclusions are passed on to others, who often unquestioningly accept them.

In addition you seem to have the 'for profit' peddlers of misinformation, who deliberately sensationalise
the wrong conclusions so they go viral, and then they get more clicks, sell more merchandise, etc.

The end result is ordinary decent people who come to believe stuff that isn't true,
and who sometimes end up aggressively defending this bunkum!

King Mob · 28-06-2021 2:11pm

PintOfView wrote: »

It seems to be very easy for people to misunderstand these stats,
or to look at them out of context, and draw wrong conclusions.

Which is why the VAERS and EudraVigilance have big bolded warnings and disclaimers on the websites telling people that they can't use the data for those kind of conclusions.

And it's why conspiracy folks tend to leave out the links to the data. Either they weren't show it from the crank they're swallowing stuff from, or they know and they're avoiding it.

PintOfView · 28-06-2021 7:45pm

King Mob wrote: »

Which is why the VAERS and EudraVigilance have big bolded warnings and disclaimers on the websites telling people that they can't use the data for those kind of conclusions.

I completely agree. These systems encourage everyone to report anything that might
possibly be connected to a vaccine, or other medicine, and even anonymously.

The benefits are that patterns can be discerned through the noise for rare events,
such as the AstraZeneca clotting issue,
but they hand the anti-vax people data mixed with noise that can be easily misinterpreted.

As this Newsweek article says URL="https://www.newsweek.com/how-well-meaning-us-government-database-fuels-dangerous-vaccine-misinformation-1594392"]https://www.newsweek.com/how-well-meaning-us-government-database-fuels-dangerous-vaccine-misinformation-1594392[/URL
"VAERS is a noisy system by design. It collects unverified reports of
any adverse health events reported to have happened following vaccination.
The database includes reports based entirely on hearsay, or lacking a plausible link to a vaccine,
such as someone dying in a car accident on their drive home from getting a vaccine.
Although vaccine manufacturers are required to submit reports, anyone can submit a report to VAERS,
without providing a name or contact information"

PintOfView · 01-07-2021 7:11pm

patnor1011 wrote: »

Funny indeed.
With current uptake of vaccines and some time we will have more data and an idea about what long term effects may be since we are practically in trial phase anyway.
I am in no rush since current vaccines only marginally improve chance of reducing severity of a generally very mild disease.

From Lancet:
Vaccine efficacy is generally reported as a relative risk
reduction (RRR). It uses the relative risk (RR)—ie, the
ratio of attack rates with and without a vaccine—which
is expressed as 1–RR. Ranking by reported efficacy gives
relative risk reductions of 95% for the Pfizer–BioNTech,
94% for the Moderna–NIH, 91% for the Gamaleya,
67% for the J&J, and 67% for the AstraZeneca–Oxford
vaccines. However, RRR should be seen against the
background risk of being infected and becoming ill
with COVID-19, which varies between populations and
over time. Although the RRR considers only participants
who could benefit from the vaccine, the absolute risk
reduction (ARR), which is the difference between attack
rates with and without a vaccine, considers the whole
population. ARRs tend to be ignored because they give
a much less impressive effect size than RRRs: 1·3% for
the AstraZeneca–Oxford, 1·2% for the Moderna–NIH,
1·2% for the J&J, 0·93% for the Gamaleya, and 0·84% for
the Pfizer–BioNTech vaccines.

Full link
https://www.thelancet.com/action/showPdf?pii=S2666-5247%2821%2900069-0

Just wondering if your failure to respond means that you saw from subsequent posts
that you were mistaken re the "marginal" effects of the vaccine ?
(preventing symptoms in 95% of people exposed to Covid is hardly marginal!)

patnor1011 · 29-07-2021 12:18pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117564635#Comment_117564635

Nah, because "preventing symptoms" argument is hardly quantifiable if at all possible anyway.

You see, if you do not have symptoms you are not sick. It is that simple. Asymptomatic carrier spread was debunked long time ago and is simply not happening.

Lack of symptoms and positive PCR test only means false positive or that you already had it at some stage and test is picking up remnants and fragments of dead corona viruses.

King Mob · 29-07-2021 12:46pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117677890#Comment_117677890

You haven't debunked anything.

You made claims that you couldn't back up and then ran away when your lies were called out.

I know there's no point asking you to provide evidence for your new silly claim about PCR tests. You aren't going to even acknowledge it.

The Nal · 29-07-2021 3:14pm

The loonies wont like this one

Blood clots far more common in people with covid than any vaccine. 😫

https://www.biopharma-reporter.com/Article/2021/07/28/AstraZeneca-and-mRNA-COVID-19-vaccines-show-similar-safety-profiles?utm_source=POLITICO.EU&utm_campaign=d637fc2232-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2021_07_29_06_09&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_10959edeb5-d637fc2232-189986641

PintOfView · 29-07-2021 7:44pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117677890#Comment_117677890

Your response tells me that you either didn't read the report on the Pfizer trial, or my response to you, or if you did then you didn't understand either! Another possibility is that you simply believe some website giving out bad information, and you don't trust yourself to be able to understand the actual facts!

Here is the summary again: 40,000 people enrolled on the Pfizer trial. These were split at random into two groups. One group of 20,000 was given the vaccine, the other group of 20,000 was given a placebo. Both groups were told to go home and carry on as normal.

After 100 days the results were gathered (remember the groups were random, so you'd expect roughly the same experience in both groups).

Placebo group: 162 got symptomatic Covid, 9 got severe Covid
Vaccinated group: 8 got symptomatic Covid, 1 got severe Covid

You don't need to be a statistician to understand that you would expect something like 160 people in the vaccinated group to get Covid, and 9 to get severe Covid. However, instead, only 8 got symptomatic Covid, and only 1 got severe Covid. Do you not think that's pretty clear? and it demonstrates the vaccine was very effective!

Does this not make sense to you? If not then how can you expect to look at any of the relevant information about Covid and draw any kind of sensible conclusions from it?

patnor1011 · 29-07-2021 7:57pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117679996#Comment_117679996

Why would I be interested in that trial? It happened some time ago when there was whole different virus variant and many other circumstances changed since. Current reality looks very different than this trial you seems to cling on despite that trial data are mostly irrelevant now.

PintOfView · 29-07-2021 8:15pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117680059#Comment_117680059

Your response looks to me like a total cop out, and is disappointing as I thought you might engage on a rational level!

However, going on your response, are you saying that the vaccine was 95% effective against the variant of the virus last autumn, but not against today's variant? And if that's what you're saying, what justification can you give for your views?

patnor1011 · 29-07-2021 8:36pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117680125#Comment_117680125

I do not know you so I do not really care about your feelings. Your response evoked similar reaction here yet I generally do not feel the need to start with this kind of nonsense.

You guys always try this crap of "I think that you think..." or "I think that what you are saying is..." followed by some elaborate construction which is mostly your own fantasy actually.

Am I saying that vaccine was 95% effective against the variant of the virus last autumn, but not against today's variant? No. It seems Israel Ministry of Health thinks that it happened in two out of three of what you simplified in "effective against" requirements or effects of vaccine.

First of you do need to specify what "effective against" you are talking about. Is it contracting virus? Becoming symptomatic? Requiring hospitalization? It is in fact all 3 of those which are being monitored or talked about.

Oh forgot to cater for "Link?" people who cant figure out how google works.

https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/israel-sees-drop-pfizer-vaccine-protection-against-infections-still-strong-2021-07-05/

astrofool · 29-07-2021 9:08pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117680212#Comment_117680212

What are you trying to say?

The Pfizer vaccine has been shown to be 96% effective against hospitalization from COVID (UK Gov) and 93% in Israel (which is about the same as for the alpha variant), from your own link: "Vaccine effectiveness in preventing both infection and symptomatic disease fell to 64% since June 6, the Health Ministry said. At the same time the vaccine was 93% effective in preventing hospitalizations and serious illness from the coronavirus.

grofus2 · 29-07-2021 9:52pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117026940#Comment_117026940

I thought was just me he did this with, or I was mistaken. Seems not on both counts.

King Mob · 29-07-2021 10:30pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117680444#Comment_117680444

Lol. Weird you're going back that far in the thread yet you are still ignoring dozens of questions.

However patnors hypocritical and dishonest whinging is completely false.

For example in that post be is complaining that he never said one thing. I then provided him a direct quote of where he said that thing. Since then her has essentially plugged his ears and will not respond to my posts.

You are doing the same, yet you also thing this helps your position rather than make you look cowardly and dishonest.

If you guys dot want to be misunderstood the best way to do this is not ignore points and questions. Don't be vague and make insinuations rather than direct and honest about your claims.and importantly try not to lie about things and then try to weasel out of those lies when caught out.

For example both of you guys have claimed that the VAERS and EU data show the vaccine has caused many deaths. Both of you ignored and left out the disclaimers on those sites that warn that conclusions like yours cannot be made with that data. And you both have ignored when these disclaimers have been pointed out.

Either

PintOfView · 30-07-2021 1:20am

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117680212#Comment_117680212

I think you've demonstrated pretty clearly in your last several posts that you are either not capable, or not willing, to have a point by point discussion, where you either demonstrate where the other person is wrong, or you concede that you were wrong.

I have shown you pretty clearly why the Pfizer vaccine reduced symptomatic Covid by 95% (that means that 95% of the people who would be expected to show Covid symptoms didn't show symptoms), with a similar reduction in cases of 'severe Covid'.

After having all this explained to you, and with the links to the relevant report in my first response to you, you are still arguing about whether it's "Is it contracting virus? Becoming symptomatic?". Can you not understand what it means that 'Symptomatic Covid' was reduced by 95% in the vaccinated group, vs the placebo group? or that only 9 people got Covid symptoms in the vaccinated group, vs 162 in the placebo group? (btw, here is the link to the report again https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7745181/)

You then deflect to an Israeli report on the effectiveness of the vaccine against the delta variant, which says ...

Vaccine effectiveness in preventing both infection and symptomatic disease fell to 64% since June 6, 
the Health Ministry said. At the same time the vaccine was 93% effective in preventing hospitalizations
and serious illness from the coronavirus.

How does that refute anything about the original Pfizer trial, and doesn't it demonstrate continued 93% effectiveness against delta?

Oh forgot to cater for "Link?" people who cant figure out how google works.

Also, what you you mean by "people who can't figure out how google works"? Would you prefer those who make unsubstantiated statements should go unchallenged, and be allowed to dump any nonsense and just say 'google it' and run away?

I am in no rush since current vaccines only marginally improve chance of reducing severity of a generally very mild disease.

The quote on the prev line is the post from you that I originally responded to, and it was followed by a dump of information from a Lancet report that you completely misinterpreted (or perhaps you were simply repeating a misinterpretation you read on some other website spreading misinformation)

I would challenge you to either substantiate your views, or else refrain from spreading unsubstantiated misinformation. Also, if you attempt to substantiate your information have the good grace to admit you are wrong when it's explained to you, multiple times, in clear terms, where you are wrong!

patnor1011 · 30-07-2021 8:16am

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117681009#Comment_117681009

You seems to be somehow fixated on pfizer trial. It is only one of the few vaccines currently used. I suggest that you open your eyes and see that what is happening now is actually very different than initial trial data. And on a way to become even more different as vaccines are just a mutation or two away from becoming obsolete.

Besides with so many cases reported all the while real numbers were few times higher we are very close to herd immunity if not already there.

King Mob · 30-07-2021 8:33am

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117681261#Comment_117681261

Again claims with no source or backing from a conspiracy theorist who has been caught out in dozens of lies and is constantly dishonest and evasive.

This post is yet another deflection because you don't want to concede a point despite Pintofview directly and comprehensively debunking your previous false claims.

Nozebleed · 30-07-2021 8:45am

Minnesota woman has both her legs AMPUTATED after contracting COVID-19 days after receiving vaccine | Daily Mail Online

what do you guys think? is this aside effect of the vaccine or is it just coincidence?

Timberrrrrrrr · 30-07-2021 8:59am

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117681338#Comment_117681338

Some people will have an adverse reaction to vaccines, people have died from polio, Measles, rubella, mumps and even flu vaccines. So yes...its a sad coincidence.

GerardKeating · 30-07-2021 9:01am

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117681338#Comment_117681338

Well, the vaccine does not offer full protection from COVID, untill at least two weeks after second dose, so contracting COVID "days after" the second dose does not contradict anything the Goverment/Medical experts/vaccine manufacturer state. And given it can take up to two weeks to get COVID after infection, she most likley had been infected BEFORE the second dose.

Blood clots is one of the side effects of the COVID disease and the vaccine, but more common with the disease. One might make the case to do a COVID test as one is getting vaccinated, but that would slow down the whole vaccination processs, and this might do more harm than good.

King Mob · 30-07-2021 9:25am

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117681338#Comment_117681338

The Daily Mail is a sensationalist rag.

What they don't say is what GerardKeating just explained.

What do you think?

Nozebleed · 30-07-2021 9:54am

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117681473#Comment_117681473

first off i commend the daily mail on telling the woman's story. you can be sure there are many more cases around the world that have not been shared through mainstream media. which i find truely disturbing.

I don't fully agree with GerarKeatings post above, many people are defending the vaccine process irrespective of the consequences for people such as the woman in said article. the exact cause of the womans condition is inconclusive but its clear the vaccine played a detrimental role.

King Mob · 30-07-2021 10:45am

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117681596#Comment_117681596

Why is it clear?

The Nal · 30-07-2021 11:16am

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117681596#Comment_117681596

How is it clear?

"Medical experts are unsure whether the vaccine caused her complications"

PintOfView · 30-07-2021 12:05pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117681261#Comment_117681261

You have shown yet again that you are not capable of a point by point discussion, so I'm not going to spend any more time flogging this dead horse

30-07-2021 12:23pm

Unfortunately COVID causes serious systemic clotting issues and very dramatic and deadly problems in some people, which is far more likely to explain her unfortunate situation.

That’s why we’re vaccinating and that’s why we’re taking so much precaution. It’s a horrible illness when it goes very badly wrong for some people and it has killed & maimed.

The vaccine would have little or no effect for about 14 days, in terms of providing some immunity and 7 to 14 days after the second dose of two dose vaccines for full effect. They’ve also been given to hundreds of millions of people and they are being monitored with reporting of effects.

This isn’t a normal case.

The other issue is that some people just have bad run ins with septicaemia and so on in the oddest circumstances. I’m aware of a case of someone who got a minor cut while gardening, developed septicaemia and lost a limb.

People can get freaky reactions to viruses, bacteria, minor infections and even food, to cosmetics, plants, etc

Horrible and weird things like that happen in exceedingly rare circumstances.

If you were to freak out about them, you’d never do anything again.

I mean the reality is you could be cutting your toe nails and acquire some horrible dose of a bacterial infection. It’s extremely unlikely, but when you take a population of 7.9 billion people, many of whom are on or are in reach of social media or tabloids, you’ll find a case!

I mean people probably died in the last few days having choked on spaghetti or having terrible reactions to minor allergens, but life goes on and we don’t have people protesting, demanding a ban on spaghetti.

King Mob · 31-07-2021 1:05am

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117682400#Comment_117682400

Remember also thaat conspiracy theorists have been telling us that the 4.2 million people killed by covid (and who know how many permanently injured) isn't anything to be concerned about.

But *one* case where the vaccine *Might* be involved? Obviously it's apocalyptic.

patnor1011 · 31-07-2021 12:44pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117682400#Comment_117682400

Exactly, so many scary things can happen and are happening around us daily one would have to wonder why there is so much fuss about a some mediocre infection with over 99% survival rate...

31-07-2021 2:21pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117686449#Comment_117686449

If you’re talking about COVID, which you’re saying has a 99% survival rate, you’d want to consider that means. Also it has an estimated 6.44% fatality rate in Ireland of those infected, in pre vaccine (and higher internationally).

Of course the level of vulnerability goes up with age and with some underlying health issues, but it’s still a rather huge impact.

The reason we kept the death toll lower is because we took measures to prevent spread and the huge vaccine uptake should have a very significant impact on it too. We didn’t ever let the virus do it’s worst and run through a population. We flattened peaks and managed it.

It’s like saying that being killed by electric shock is a very rare event, therefore electricity is completely safe to handle and completely ignoring the century of innovation on electrical safety devices and designs that make it safe to interact with.

It’s a highly infectious virus, capable of infecting the entire population, and at the speed the delta variant is moving, almost simultaneously, if no measures we taken.

If it were population wide at 1% fatality that’s still around 49,000 deaths. Small % across a population is a big number of people.

Then, if you get into a situation like what happened at any of the peaks in the U.K., in Italy, in France, multiple US states etc, you end up with clogged ICUs, overflowing hospitals, the death rate rises because the services can’t cope and you’ve knock on consequences by basically having exhausted all the capacity of the health system with one highly contagious illness.

Humans don’t like scary realities. It’s far easier to bury your head in the sand and pretend the unpleasant scenario isn’t real or that it’s all some conspiracy.

The rest of us (90%+ in Ireland) will solve the problem, with hard work, taking sensible precautions and using advanced technology like the vaccines to enable us to, eventually, get back to normality again, having beaten it.

I’d rather put my faith in human ingenuity than just resigning myself to a fatalistic world view.

King Mob · 31-07-2021 2:42pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117686449#Comment_117686449

You've been asked repeatedly what the real reason it. You refuse to give a straight answer either because you don't have one or your answer is a ridicilous conspiracy theory.

Again, you've been caught out in lie after lie. You are running away from every point and you're going to start cowering away from Convolved's points now as well as they are too difficult for you to address honestly.

So no, we don't have to wonder. We know that you are just wrong when you're claiming it's not worth all the fuss.

Dohnjoe · 31-07-2021 3:01pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117686449#Comment_117686449

It's your subjective personal opinion that an avoidable infectious disease which has killed 4 million people in 15 months is just a "minor thing". Every single country in the world has decided to take it seriously.

So either you have a stupid uninformed opinion, or every government in the world does.

PintOfView · 31-07-2021 6:56pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117686449#Comment_117686449

What makes you willing to sacrifice 49,000 Irish people so casually (possibly higher, but let's use your estimate)? Have you any concern at all for those that would die if we followed your advice?

Dohnjoe · 31-07-2021 9:03pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117688168#Comment_117688168

~~Most~~All people I know were concerned about their parents or elderly relatives but according to basically every Covid denier and conspiracy theorist on this forum, "It's just some old people that were going to die anyway"

Edit: and as if to underscore this notion, came across the following article

https://www.sydney.edu.au/news-opinion/news/2021/07/30/what-psychology-says-about-covid-non-compliers.html

King Mob · 01-08-2021 12:21am

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117688696#Comment_117688696

And yet if even one old person dies because of the vaccine...

PintOfView · 01-08-2021 2:05pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117688696#Comment_117688696

There are many people in their 50's, 60's and 70's who have had cancer, but are free of it for several years, and are now enjoying a good quality of life. These are just some of the people covid deniers appear to be happy to just let die, along with many other vulnerable people that are living with medical conditions but are able to lead happy and productive lives thanks to modern medicine.

The web sites that the covid deniers get their 'information' from would be amusing if it wasn't so shocking that a percentage of gullible people actually believe them. As the article you linked to says ...

Non-compliers appear not to use official sources for COVID-19 information, nor do they tend to verify the legitimacy of information

That's one of the key problems, that they don't verify the legitimacy of what they read, or think for themselves. So they're at the mercy of people who have misinterpreted reality, or people who are deliberately distorting or sensationalising reality to get clicks and subscriptions.

The Nal · 04-08-2021 11:12am

Well then. The whole "Not FDA approved" arguement in the bin. What will the loons do now?

FDA aiming to give final approval to Pfizer vaccine by early next month -NY Times

https://www.reuters.com/business/healthcare-pharmaceuticals/fda-aiming-give-final-approval-pfizer-vaccine-by-early-next-month-ny-times-2021-08-03/

astrofool · 04-08-2021 12:17pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117703862#Comment_117703862

I think the next step is a "forensic" approval carried out by some sort of ninja squad.

The Nal · 04-08-2021 12:25pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117704271#Comment_117704271

Interesting to see if the "but but its an experimental vaccine not approved by the FDA" lot will take it now.

King Mob · 04-08-2021 1:02pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117704321#Comment_117704321

Well now the FDA is part of the conspiracy.

Previously the vaccines couldn't get FDA approve because... um... reasons?

astrofool · 29-09-2021 4:33pm

Youtube will be removing any vaccine misinformation videos:

YouTube to remove misinformation videos about all vaccines (breakingnews.ie)

Good to see this being stamped out following reddit's policy to remove it as well.

Timberrrrrrrr · 29-09-2021 5:44pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117954990#Comment_117954990

Should have been done twelve months ago.

Dohnjoe · 29-09-2021 7:05pm

United Airlines requires staff to be vaccinated or face being fired. Out of 67,000 staff, around 600 are refusing. People are literally going to lose their jobs because of their beliefs.

Dr. Greenthumb · 29-09-2021 7:33pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117955629#Comment_117955629

People can get exemptions as well because of their beliefs, United are not letting those people go. One set of beliefs are fine (religious) others are not (body autonomy). The second being more relevant in my opinion. The fact that they are going to fire people that have a concern over the vaccine but keep on people that can't take it due to a belief in an imaginary being is a bit ridiculous, no?

Covid vaccines - thread banned users in First Post

Comments