Covid vaccines - thread banned users in First Post

They are in the business to keep people alive because dead people are no longer customers. So it is odd.

No they're not, they're assumptoins based on known behaviours and similar behaviours with other vaccines and medicines hence scientists not creating a new branch of biology into investigating the behavior.

Now, as you seem to be willfully ignoring, time after time, in a controlled environment with testing, fewer vaccinated test positive then unvaccinated.

Every account? You seem to be prone to exaggeration. If I recall, those who I have called out have turned out to be exactly as I said. CT’ists are very predictable.

It's also been months since this data came out. So surely since then there must be other indications that the vaccine is causing more infections.

Or will he fall back to the conspiracy standard of claiming all evidence being covered up?

Do you have any other evidence that indicates the vaccine is causing more infections?

Or is it still only just that one figure you're interpreting?

Their exposure is indeterminate and likely the same or more , as we see by hospitalisations, unvaccinated make up proportionately more of those with COVID.

You are (now solely) focusing on numbers from a voluntary testing and report system outside of a control environment.

Again, your understanding of the numbers is the issue here, or we have discovered a new branch of medicine (we haven't).

Cool. Can you quote where they said that was the reason they stopped providing that data?

Or is that more of you assuming things and trying to present it as fact?

You do that a lot then run away when you're challenged on it. So I think that's what's happening here.

And no mate, I have no particular motivation to answer your question about it when you have completely ignored the questions I asked you about it first.

I have asked you to show where the people putting the data have suggested (directly and not your personal interpretation) that the vaccine might be increasing infections. You failed to do so.

I've asked you to provide other evidence and statements from the intervening months that show that the vaccines are causing more infections. You failed to do this.

Unfortunately it doesn't matter how open and transparent they make things because we have folks like you and your grifters who will dishonestly twist things to support an anti-vaxx agenda.

Look at that. Yet again the quote you provide doesn't actually say what you said.

No where does it say anything about them not publishing the data because "people are questioning the disclaimer."

That's something you made up.

What he describes is the exact tactic you are using here and in specific with those exact words.

It's an amazing display of lack of self awareness.

So you aren't claiming that the vaccines are increasing infections. Cool.

You agree that the people who published the data don't put that forward as a possibility.

You agree that there's been no other indication that the vaccines are doing that.

So we can safely exclude that as a possibility.

So perhaps the reason rest solely with you not being able or willing to understand the explanation offered by the people who provided you the data.

As dohnjoe points out this is a pure conspiracy theorist tactic.

We can't possibly explain it to you because you're not willing to accept any explanation that isn't an antivaxx one. You will simply keep denying things until you run away to the next point you don't understand.

It's in the weekly UK reports (which it's clear now that you haven't actually read, as you would know this otherwise), this I will leave you to research yourself, I'm not sure if they still publish it in the latest reports (as at 99.8% it doesn't make sense to keep on reporting). edit: They published a more detailed report on 9th Feb, the number is between 98% and 99% when analysed directly.

I also don't think you understand what contradictory means anymore, you must exhaust yourself.

It's not contradictory because it can be one of many explanations for the numbers in an uncontrolled environment with voluntary reporting, hence the focus in the latest reports of actual outcomes .

Again, I'm not sure I can make it any clearer without getting super patronising again.

Ok. If you say so man.

But the explanation for this can't be that the vaccines are causing it as you've admitted.

So what's your point?

But no it can't be that.

As you've admitted the reports made no mention of that being a possibility. And you've conceded that you cannot point to any other evidence beyond your personal untrained opinion of one set of data to indicate that might be a cause.

It's been months now since you found that data on whatever tweet you got it from.

So again we can exclude that as a possibility.

So again, what's your point?

Simple. The report you keep clinging to does not mention it as a possibility.

If it was a possibility they would have mentioned it.

I don't understand why they wouldn't mention it if it was a possibility. Maybe you can explain that to me.

They also don't mention the conspiracy claims that there's secret microchips in the vaccines thay have been causing rashes of magnetism "as an impossibity".

Why didn't they mention that as an impossibility? Does the fact they don't mean that such a thing is suddenly possible or plausible?

Likewise there's been absolutely no concern raised about the possibility by anyone other than committed conspiracy cranks who are very very dishonest. If it's a possibility, why has it not come up anywhere else?

I asked you to show a source that directly states that this is a concern and you as always ignored that question and avoided it. This usually means you can't provide it and are too dishonest and cowardly to admit it.

If that's not the case please provide a source that directly states that the data is explained by the vaccines causing more infections and that it is a concern.

I suspect you will ignore this request also for the same reasons.

monkey see monkey do !!

I see loads of memes of Bill Gates and the MonkeyPox .. .. considering MP was first discovered in 1958 .. Bill was only 3 years old when he started plotting this ... incredible

@hometruths do you share this belief?