Covid vaccines - thread banned users in First Post

It's not.

You guys have tried to claim this before and you failed to show its true.

So again what point were you trying to make with you analogy?

Yes, that's what was claimed before and it was what you guys failed to show.

That was also based on conspiracy theorists misrepresenting things and extrapolating from out of context quotes to claim things said stuff they didn't.

It's a pattern with you guys.

So we're back to you guys claiming that the vaccines don't work and that they are causing more people to get infected.

Round and round we go.

Maybe next time you swing around to you claims of "spin" you could actually explain it that time.

The UK has almost total population covered by either vaccine or previously had the disease (it was 99.8% at around Christmas this year as reported in their weekly public reports). When the scientists published those numbers, this was explained in the document, along with the vaccinated being more likely to get tested than the unvaccinated, accounting for the discrepancy. In addition to this, the vaccinated had less severity of symptoms vs. the unvaccinated due to vaccines being more effective against variants (due to targeting the spike protein) than previous infection with another variant.

This was included with the very public data.

I'm surprised you didn't read it.

Already replied and explained, the data release at the time when it first occurred also explained it.

It did take you a while to have the courage to post it, but it was as suspected.

It was also posted and explained on the COVID forum at the time.

Personally I think it's funny that he's still pulling the "I'm not an antivaxxer" schtick, but happens to have that table saved somewhere...

You are disagreeing with the scientists who gathered the data there.

The data also show increased cases among the unvaccinated until there was total population coverage either by infection or vaccination, the numbers of unvaccinated are so small at this point that it is easy for the data to be skewed and be unreliable.

The data also shows severely decreased symptoms for vaccinated vs. unvaccinated regardless of cases.

You are an antivaxxer. You are a conspiracy theorist.

You are spreading anti-vaxx talking points and conspiracy theories.

That's why you have been relegated to posting this crap here.

Where in the report does it say that the vaccines might be increasing infections.

Quote where it says this.

If you can't then it's the same as your previous point. You're misrepresenting and claiming that it says things it doesn't. You are basically making **** up.

You are not labelled, you are an anti-vaxxer. You have an agenda. That agenda is to determine that vaccines are not effective, which you've openly admitted to in earlier threads, you've also acknowledged you can't post this (shite) in normal threads because you'll get banned. So you do it on this shitbox forum.

Your particular technique is to take specific information and "not get it" despite black/white explanations. This is identical to how e.g. 9/11 truthers, moon landing hoaxers, flat-earthers work and function. Often these people will exhaust their talking points, only to come back and rehash the same talking points later, which is also precisely what you are doing.

It's one of the most disingenuous forms of debate, and as mentioned you are only doing it here because you know this is the only forum that won't ban your ass for that behaviour

Do they say that one of the factors that might explain the data is that the vaccine is causing an increase of infections?

Disclaimers are there for reasons my dude. They are there partly to stop conspiracy theorists like yourself from misusing data and studies to claim they support things they don't. You don't get to ignore disclaimers simply because you want to.

So why do you believe these experts are making "Non-scientific claims"?

I would also add that the example I gave was for a controlled environment and in a controlled environment with frequent testing of the groups, those who are unvaccinated are still more likely to be infected.

In an uncontrolled environment where testing is voluntary, self-reported for antigen and only the vulnerable groups are still testing, the figures shown are entirely expected.

This was why I made the distinction in the explanation, but it seems to have also been missed on an anti-vax crusade.

Again, you're posting as if you have intimate knowledge that's not possible for you to have if you were only here a few days.

If you had actually been here before, you would know that conspiracy theorists have been caught many, many times registering new usernames and pretending to be entirely different people.

It's a very common and dishonest tactic they engage in for some reason.

It can probably go on a separate thread, but organic pesticides and herbicides are just as much chemicals as non-organic "manufactured" product, often using molecules of similar chemistry to achieve their result (and sometimes manufactured in similar ways). it's great to see organic farming, but it still doesn't have the volume to feed everyone and has other issues that make it less "green" than marketed (and it's been great to see technology used in the last few years to better target and reduce the requirement for pesticides and herbicides on a modern farm).

I grow truly organic (no herbicides or pesticides used) vegetables and fruit in my garden, but I'm not kidding myself that it's really that much better than what is grown on my relations farm and understanding a bit of the chemistry involved due to another family member making organic based products for dealing with pests and fungii (and seeing the MSDS sheets thereof).

So you admit to just trolling here because you don’t believe there is a conspiracy about the vaccine safety.

So what was your previous/other username. Be honest, as it saves hassle of having the same discussions over and over.

To date there have been no conspiracy theories describes in this thread. It has just been a moan fest by CT’ists about nonsense such as rfid chips in vaccines, magnetic vaccines, mask wearing, etc. So please do the honour of posting the first conspiracy theory.

Yes, they are very upset. The thread is getting dragged off to every topic apart from covid vaccine safety. They have completely run out of covid vaccine safety lies to tell. I’m surprised they haven’t mentioned Manchester City’s 2012 league win yet.

This is ridiculous. First list what you think a chemical is, then list any organic pesticide or herbicide and we can work through the chemical reactions involved that allow it to work.

I also never said traditional farming methods were as green, I said that organic farming is not as green as it claims to be (the input per produce is higher in terms of labour for one, that labour will involve machinery unless being done at the micro-farming level).

And again you're conflating GMO with herbicide and pesticide usage, GMO don't need as much applied, if your goal is mass production with as little inputs as possible, GMO is the answer, if you want non-GMO produce, then you need to add more fertilisers and spray it more often, or you can go the organic route and produce a fraction of the produce at a far greater labour, input and land cost.

Be sure to stick to your guns and ignore any future medical advice and refuse all medical treatment, because science.

Ok, so there is no safety issue or conspiracy theory with the covid vaccines, so why are you dragging the conspiracy theory topic on? Why are you actually posting in support of conspiracy theories? It’s quite odd.