Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/

Covid vaccines - thread banned users in First Post

1384385387389390419

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 36,760 ✭✭✭✭odyssey06


    Number of mentions of vaccines or excess deaths = zero.

    Number of mentions of incontravertible evidence or findings = zero.

    The article refers back to 2017 research.

    What the article actually says:

    "Exposure to pollution, plastics, smoking, drugs and prescribed medication, as well as lifestyle, such as obesity and poor diet, have all been suggested to be contributory factors although effects are poorly understood and ill-defined... we genuinely don't know why."

    Other experts said the new study did not resolve their scepticism about the 2017 research.

    "To follow knowledge like a sinking star..." (Tennyson's Ulysses)



  • Subscribers, Paid Member Posts: 43,583 ✭✭✭✭sydthebeat


    Trust snowcat to extol an article which has no mention at all of vaccines to be incontrovertible proof that vaccines are bad.

    Talk about being completely brainwashed LOL.

    I could just as easily point to the increasing number of humans on the planet as the reason sperm counts are falling.

    Nature is a wonderful and terrible thing.

    Post edited by sydthebeat on


  • Posts: 25,874 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Huh. I thought that the vaccines were causing fertility problems cause they were effecting periods.

    Guess the storyline has changed again.


    Also lol "synthetic drugs" and "mRNA ones."

    Still afraid of using the V-word.


    I will also assume that @hometruths yet again cannot see this misinformation.



  • Registered Users, Subscribers, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,715 ✭✭✭hometruths


    Australian government has recommended against a fifth vaccine dose:

    Butler said the Australian Technical Advisory Group on Immunisations (ATAGI) had recommended against a fifth dose, or third booster, after evidence from Singapore's recent wave showed that severe illness and death were rare among the vaccinated and that a fifth shot had minimal impact on virus transmission.

    So if you're an Australian over 16 years of age and you do want to get a third booster, the experts say you cannot get one, because the evidence shows severe illness and death are rare.

    But if you're an Australian over 16 years of age and you do not want to get a first booster, because the evidence shows severe illness and death are rare, the experts say you must get one.

    And if you question the logic of this you're a spreader of dangerous misinformation.

    Seems legit.




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,507 ✭✭✭Fighting Tao


    Read the text you quoted again. The basic logic is there. You just don’t understand basic logic.



  • Advertisement
  • Posts: 25,874 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    And this supports your silly conspiracy theories how...?


    Again, you, like snowcat, are simply inventing shite not said in the articles because you're desperate and your twitter feeds are drying up.



  • Subscribers, Paid Member Posts: 43,583 ✭✭✭✭sydthebeat


    Haha


    you don't understand what you just posted

    🤣🤣

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Warned:

    Please explain or argue a point rather than posting ridicule

    Post edited by Big Bag of Chips on


  • Posts: 25,874 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Most likely because he didn't actually read in between seeing the facebook post and hitting crtl-c, crtl-v.



  • Registered Users, Subscribers, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,715 ✭✭✭hometruths


    No doubt that's a possibility, can you explain the logic? What did I misunderstand?



  • Posts: 25,874 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Does the fact that you've been caught out for not reading or understanding your links for the last 3-4 running not give you pause at all?



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Subscribers, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,715 ✭✭✭hometruths


    I've read the text again, and don't see the problem with my post. Are you willing, or able, to show how I have misunderstood basic logic?



  • Posts: 25,874 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    You read that article twice but missed this part:

    Butler urged those yet to get the recommended number of shots to do so, with 5.5 million Australians, roughly a fifth of the population, yet to receive a third dose despite being eligible.


    Butler also accepted ATAGI recommendations that Pfizer's (PFE.N) Omicron-specific vaccine be approved as a booster dose for adults; 4.7 million doses will arrive ahead of a rollout due to begin on Dec 12.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,456 ✭✭✭EyesClosed


    The part you quoted had the answer:

    "Singapore's recent wave showed that severe illness and death were rare among THE VACCINATED and that a fifth shot had minimal impact on virus transmission"

    So your argument is wrong. As the experts still recommend getting the original vaccine shots... How did you miss that?



  • Posts: 25,874 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    So here's how it goes:

    CTer: Linkdumps something found on twitter or facebook or whatever. With vague smartarse comments with little actual depth.

    Everyone else: Points out how the article doesn't support the claim being made.

    CTer: Demands people explain how it doesn't support the claim being made. <- We are here atm.

    Everyone: Explains how in detail.

    CTer: "I never claimed that."

    Everyone: Points out where he claimed it.

    CTer: Shifts goal posts and declares he was actually claiming something else. (Usually while misattributing arguments to others.)

    Everyone: Points out how that new argument isn't supported by the link (and is often refuted by it.)

    CTer: Either shifts goal posts again. Or ignores arguments and vanishes until the next link gets handed down via social media.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,507 ✭✭✭Fighting Tao


    You are not fooling anyone by playing dumb, but you are making yourself look foolish by not reading and understanding what you quote….again and again. Do you get pleasure from looking foolish?

    -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Moderator Warning:

    Attack the post, not the poster

    Post edited by Big Bag of Chips on


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 36,760 ✭✭✭✭odyssey06


    Of course you don't.

    You can't understand the original article, and can't understand people's explanations.

    But you're never the one with the 'understanding' problem. Never.

    This isn't the first time you've posted something like this, and been called out by multiple posters that you've completely misunderstood it.

    Are you willing, or able, to actually try and understand the explanations provided to you?

    The evidence suggests you aren't.

    Posters have already explained - to anyone willing and capable of understanding it - the flaws and misunderstanding in what you have claimed.

    "To follow knowledge like a sinking star..." (Tennyson's Ulysses)



  • Registered Users, Subscribers, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,715 ✭✭✭hometruths


    I did not miss it. I specifically said:

    But if you're an Australian over 16 years of age and you do not want to get a first booster

    You can only get a first booster after you have completed your primary course of vaccination. My hypothetical 16 year old is vaccinated.

    So third booster shots are not allowed on the grounds that severe illness and death are rare and a fifth shot has a minimal impact on transmission.

    i.e the Australian experts are of the opinion the risk/reward benefit does not favour the fifth shot.

    Yet if you have not yet had a first booster you are urged to do get it, i.e the Australian experts are of the opinion the risk/reward benefit does favour the third shot.

    To believe this a logical stance in the context of an 16 year old, you would have to argue that either severe illness and death are not rare in those 16 year olds who have had completed their primary course of vaccination but not had a booster.

    Or that the first booster has a greater impact on transmission than the third booster.

    Which is it?



  • Registered Users, Subscribers, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,715 ✭✭✭hometruths


    Only one poster has actually tried to explain the flaw in my logic, and his explanation was based on the misunderstanding that I was comparing vaccinated and unvaccinated. See above.

    Everybody else, as usual, has just simply said "You are too stupid to understand this"

    But that's not really an explanation.



  • Posts: 25,874 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Again, all of this is just waffle you are making up and is not at all said or supported by anything in the article.

    You're already attempting to shift the goalposts and change your argument because you've been caught out not reading something from twitter again.

    It's very very sad.



  • Posts: 25,874 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Lol Nope. Out and out lie and misattribution as per usual.

    No one's arguing that you're too stupid to understand. Everyone is pointing out that you are too dishonest and evasive to admit you understand.

    I pointed out that the article you posted contains this:

    Butler urged those yet to get the recommended number of shots to do so, with 5.5 million Australians, roughly a fifth of the population, yet to receive a third dose despite being eligible.


    Butler also accepted ATAGI recommendations that Pfizer's (PFE.N) Omicron-specific vaccine be approved as a booster dose for adults; 4.7 million doses will arrive ahead of a rollout due to begin on Dec 12.

    You ignored this because conspiracy theorists seem to think that if you pretend something doesn't exist, it doesn't exist for anyone else.



  • Advertisement
  • Posts: 25,874 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Also, please show where in the article that it states "fully vaccinated" means the initial vaccine doses only and not someone who has had both boosters.

    We are not going to accept your own personal interpretation that this is the case if it is not stated directly in the article. Your posting history shows that you often simply invent these kind of interpretations when it suits you.



  • Administrators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 15,930 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭Big Bag of Chips


    @King Mob you have been given more chances on this thread than most.

    We are not going to accept your own personal interpretation that this is the case if it is not stated directly in the article.

    You don't have to accept anything. Equally posters don't have to respond to your incessant repeated questioning of the same topics over and over. Your own posting history verges on haranguing. This has been addressed with you multiple times and you have been asked to amend your posting style. You are clearly not able to. You are also in breach of the charter. Please do not post in this thread again.

    All posters are reminded this is a discussion forum. Discuss the points. Disagree with points using your own arguments and evidence if you wish. But one liners dismissing other posters points, or ridiculing another poster will not be tolerated.



  • Registered Users, Subscribers, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,715 ✭✭✭hometruths


    Katrin Jansen, the recently retired head of vaccine R&D at Pfizer, gave an interview to nature, to discuss the speed to market of the covid vaccines and how they ran "with this experimental platform — and compressed vaccine development timelines from ten years to just nine months."

    We are constantly told no short cuts were taken to achieve this compressed timeline, but nonetheless many find that claim to be surprising.

    Equally, many find it to be totally plausible, and are surprised at the pushback, including Jansen:

    “I find it astounding, after all that humankind went through, how many people still do not see the value of vaccines and don’t get immunized,”

    She goes on to explain how despite initially thinking developing a vaccine by the end of 2020 was "crazy", they got it done.

    "Money was not an issue" - this was obviously a huge factor, but she also acknowledges:

    We got creative — we couldn’t wait for data, we had to do so much ‘at risk’. We flew the aeroplane while we were still building it.

    Interesting analogy. Happily the aviation industry is unlikely to follow the pharmaceutical lead.

    Yet she remains astounded that people are hesitant. She must be pretty confident in the narrative.




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,141 ✭✭✭323


    Easy enough to find, for anyone who wants to look. Fore one. UK Government, Office of National Statistics.

    Almost stopped looking, too depressing. Last I seen was published 8th November, covers deaths registered up to 28th October 2022.

    All-Cause Excess Deaths are up 1,314% in the previous 6 months compared to 2020 & 731% compared to 2021

    image.png


    Sure the damage caused by these jabs its now being openly discussed in Westminster. One would think most of scandanavia recommending against these for anyone under 50 would raise concern here but I'm sure Mihole, Leo, Stephen and RTE will blame it all on Climate Change

    “Follow the trend lines, not the headlines,”



  • Subscribers, Paid Member Posts: 43,583 ✭✭✭✭sydthebeat


    Why are you afraid to post the source of that table?

    Is it because whoever created it has misused figures to create an agenda?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 36,760 ✭✭✭✭odyssey06


    How about backing up your claims of increased excess deaths in the UK, year on year - and unless the figures are age adjusted, you know they are not valid for comparison with 2015-2019.

    The spread of excess deaths across Europe does not track with the vaccinated % of populations. Go on, prove us wrong.

    The are recommending against vaccination because of the reduced severity of Omicron, and diminishing returns from additional doses, and a small increased risk in mild side effects. Nothing connected to your allegation. Linking the two together here is entirely without foundation.

    This is the UK excess deaths from 2020-2022 graphed.

    UK_ONS_October_28th.png


    https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/deaths/bulletins/deathsregisteredweeklyinenglandandwalesprovisional/weekending28october2022

    "To follow knowledge like a sinking star..." (Tennyson's Ulysses)



  • Registered Users, Subscribers, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,715 ✭✭✭hometruths


    The are recommending against vaccination because of the reduced severity of Omicron, and diminishing returns from additional doses, and a small increased risk in mild side effects.

    Just as the conspiracy theorists feared. The more you inject the less safe and less effective the vaccine becomes.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 36,760 ✭✭✭✭odyssey06


    Really, that's what the conspiracy theorists feared? That and that alone and nothing more?

    The actual reasons why hardly matches the actual claims of the conspiracy theorists does it?

    You have stated the minimal case 'less safe & 'less effective' - they were claiming an awful lot more than that, weren't they?

    And besides, doesn't it prove the grand conspiracy theory wrong? The authorities are tracking vaccine effectiveness, are tracking side effects, and this is the decision they have made. This is contrary to most of the conspiracy theory claims against the authorities on this thread.

    "To follow knowledge like a sinking star..." (Tennyson's Ulysses)



  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 24,146 Mod ✭✭✭✭robinph


    No, nothing about the safety of the vaccines.

    More like it not being worth the effort to vacconate people like it's not worth your time to bend down and pick up a 1c coin on the street. Doesn't mean that the vaccine is dangerous due to the recommendations changing, and it doesn't mean that the 1c coin is worth any less. Just it's not worth the hassle in both cases.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Subscribers, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,715 ✭✭✭hometruths


    And besides, doesn't it prove the grand conspiracy theory wrong? The authorities are tracking vaccine effectiveness, are tracking side effects, and this is the decision they have made. This is contrary to most of the conspiracy theory claims against the authorities on this thread.

    Correct, they are tracking vaccine effectiveness and side effects and have decided that the risk/benefit is not the same for all.

    They have decided the benefit side of the equation is strongly weighted in favour of the elderly/vulnerable and the risk side of the equation is strongly weighted against the young/healthy.

    Exactly what conspiracy theorists have been arguing for over a year.



Advertisement