Covid vaccines - thread banned users in First Post

And they constantly change those stories, deliberately keeping them vague, dodging questions that expose them, deflecting constantly, avoiding giving links and sources - all of which demonstrate these people are not only lying, but are doing so knowingly.

While at the same time flanked by other people who are telling a slightly (or completely) different lie. All in unspoken agreement that they won't challenge each other, and will back each other's lies up, no matter how contradictory.

And all the while lecturing others on the "truth".

And trying to turn the forum into an echo chamber where their views can't be challenged normally, while labelling others who question them of being a part of a conspiracy against them.

Never ceases to amaze, it's incredible

It's conspiracy theorists who cry "suppression" whenever they're asked to actually discuss or explain their conspiracy theory.

Agreed, the irony and hypocrisy is off the scale.

I didn’t look at the chart and I’m taking your word for it. So think about it. Vast majority of population is vaccinated. Small minority is not. Therefore it makes sense that most people catching covid are in the large majority. Your post is not a gotcha, it’s showing your lack of comprehension of basic enough maths.

Recent CDC data showing unvaccinated up to 5 times more likely to catch Covid than boosted

Fact-check on people misinterpreting UK figures

And another

Most people are vaccinated, therefore more would get a PCR test.

Since so many anti-bassets like to think they are sticking it to the man, they are less likely to voluntarily go for a PCR test and rely on antigen tests instead.

The document basically says that he figures don’t show the real story because asymptomatic people can use an antigen rather than PCR test. It also says that the table can’t be used for gauging vaccine effectiveness.

I’m trying to figure out what point you are trying to make by posting the table and omitting significant text. I think you are ignoring the text deliberately and thought you would get away without posting it and try to pull the wool over peoples eyes. It kind of makes you look foolish.

Your views are entirely to do with your personal interpretation (or misinterpretation) of specific data from the UK, stats which are covered in disclaimers and explainers that you "don't get". On top of that, for some strange reason, you completely ignore information contradictory to your interpretations from another region, e.g. the US.

If asked about vaccine effectiveness against e.g. Delta, you have no issues that I've seen

Likewise if asked about vaccine effectiveness against hospitalization and death, you have no issues

So on aggregate, there's no issue with the vaccines.

But for some reason you insist on attacking (never supporting) them and the only angle of attack you seem to have found currently is specifically UK stats on vaccine effectiveness against Omicron infection, and only by "not getting" the disclaimers on the data.

Okay..

All just seems very similar to the same issues as we had with the VAERS data in here. The data is there, but some people decided they "didn't get" the disclaimers surrounding the data, allowing them to misinterpret it, which they did. By a stunning and remarkable coincidence these posters are always against the vaccines.

Entrenched non-negotiable "can't explain it to me, so it can't be real" view forming in 5.. 4.. 3.. 2..

You aren't addressing the points. You are just going down the same identical route as other posters on this forum with zany beliefs who accuse anyone of debating with them of being "trolls" or "shills", etc.

You have a hybrid case, you are double vaxxed, but have just had Covid. There are quite a few people in that situation (I know a few). You are probably good for the next while, but it's up to you to keep checking with proper medical advice. Remember, we don't have magic instant knowledge on everything and every combination, but at the moment it looks like your immunity will be relatively strong for the next few months.

A booster is obviously recommended for anyone not in that situation.

Also a side effect of covid. It’s great to see the EMA on top of issues reported. Therefore it is probably safe to say that they deem the vaccines very safe compared to catching covid and so still let them be used. The link also says that the vaccines are overwhelmingly safe. So what is your point?

No one ever said they’re 100% safe, however they carry much less risk than catching covid. I’d be quite sure that other posters have gone through this with you previously. Obviously it hasn’t sunk in.

Those collecting the data point out the limitations from case counts because they're afraid that idiots will misinterpret the data.

Idiots do so anyway.

The CSO did similar with their statistics covering the period of the pandemic rather than years as they usually do, the people who put together the reports are usually very clever and I think it's funny that they essentially troll the anti-vaxxers by making sure to include the disclaimers as clearly as possible so that the anti-vaxxers arguments turn into sand very quickly.

Do you not get embarrassed that someone knew someone like you would try and do this and pre-empted it? Does it not make you doubt yourself to a high degree? The fact you posted it as a gotcha that blew up in your face is pretty funny, time for a bit of introspection.

Yes there are safety concern about all medicines. No medicines are 100% safe. No one claims otherwise.

You guys are claiming that the vaccines are more dangerous that other medicines and other vaccines and that their true dangers are being covered up by a global conspiracy that you can't explain or show.

The authors knew that idiots would try and misinterpret the data and made sure that it was very clear what the data couldn't be used for (i.e. insinuating that there are more cases in the vaccinated). Someone who was putting together that study realised this and put it in very clear English.

The fact that you don't see that is mind boggling, I'm sure it must extend to other information you read as well, as I said above, a bit of introspection wouldn't hurt.

(the fact this needed explained twice is also worrying, even trolls would have tried to deflect to something else by now, I mean, did you really think that was the case given all we know about vaccines and the virus, was it really a point you were going to try and argue and believe you found an angle that no one else has stumbled upon yet, what, 3600+ posts in)

But the source of your data directly states that the data cannot be used to reach that conclusion.

Is the disclaimer wrong?

No, we never argued this.

We have stated repeated that all medicines have some risk.

We've repeatedly argued against your claims that the vaccines are more dangerous than other medicines or vaccines or that they are secretly more dangerous than officials are saying.

You have repeatedly lied and claimed that the vaccines are not safe and are not effective.

These things are simply not true.

Have you given up your claims about your fantasy brother now?