Anti-vaxxers

jaxxx · 01-09-2020 2:16pm

Igotadose wrote: »

Nip this health hazard in the bud with a few arrests. Apparently one of the ringleaders is an antimask GP ffs. If not struck off he should be

I've heard it all now.. .. .. Why are people even protesting against masks? Wasn't there an organisedd protest last week and Jim Corr was involved in it or something? FFS wearing a mask is to protect others not just yourself.

01-09-2020 2:18pm

jaxxx wrote: »

I've heard it all now.. .. .. Why are people even protesting against masks? Wasn't there an organisedd protest last week and Jim Corr was involved in it or something? FFS wearing a mask is to protect others not just yourself.

Same protest and same gp is a good Twitter buddy of Corrs.

Igotadose · 01-09-2020 2:24pm

jaxxx wrote: »

I've heard it all now.. .. .. Why are people even protesting against masks? Wasn't there an organisedd protest last week and Jim Corr was involved in it or something? FFS wearing a mask is to protect others not just yourself.

Anti-vax and anti-mask are death cults. They have a lot in common.

hcf500 · 01-09-2020 10:16pm

So it seems that the government has offered settlements to all of the H1N1 legal cases against them, I guess that they don't want to drag many more through the courts as the last one cost the taxpayer over 6 million euro and that was just the plaintiffs legal expenses! Add to that the states legal costs, and full legal costs for Glaxosmithkline (also taxpayer funded) and that one case could reach 20 million euro outside of the actual settlement.

A lot of the settlements offered will probably be accepted as the cases could drag on for years if they go through them one by one in court.

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/state-seems-to-want-to-fight-all-the-narcolepsy-cases-whatever-the-cost-39436158.html

genius200iq · 02-09-2020 3:54am

Thalidomide, i'll take my chances with Covid-19, they can keep their vaccine.
These same left leaning folk who are pushing a mandatory vaccine are the same people behind the abortion referendum, well if there was one thing i learned from the abortion referendum its "My body, my choice", they can get stuffed if they think i'm getting this unproven vaccine, i'll take my chances with Covid-19.
Already the vaccine makers have got legal immunity from any side effects of their vaccine, thats a hard pass from me.
A virus that has a 99.994% survival rate, i ok without a vaccine, best of luck to those who take a unproven vaccine.

Igotadose · 02-09-2020 8:22am

genius200iq wrote: »

Thalidomide, i'll take my chances with Covid-19, they can keep their vaccine.

Was Thalidomide a vaccine?

These same left leaning folk who are pushing a mandatory vaccine are the same people behind the abortion referendum, well if there was one thing i learned from the abortion referendum its "My body, my choice", they can get stuffed if they think i'm getting this unproven vaccine, i'll take my chances with Covid-19.

And chance everyone around you, amiright?

Already the vaccine makers have got legal immunity from any side effects of their vaccine, thats a hard pass from me.
A virus that has a 99.994% survival rate, i ok without a vaccine, best of luck to those who take a unproven vaccine.

An absolute number doesn't work - Covid kills more elderly people for example. And best of luck to you and your relatives. You do know that survivors of Covid can suffer long-term damage?

CramCycle · 02-09-2020 8:31am

Igotadose wrote: »

Was Thalidomide a vaccine?

No but don't let truth get in the way of a good story. It was a chemical where the testing was only done on one isomer and the other isomer which wasn't filtered out in manufacturing had horrifying effects. Some will paint it as a Pharma conspiracy, in reality it was a simple but horrific mistake, that has shaped the way chemicals are tested going forward.

And chance everyone around you, amiright?

Who are these people pushing for a mandatory vaccine? I haven't seen it in a new and untested vaccine. I have heard of it being asked for in well established vaccines, which makes sense until the disease is eradicated.

An absolute number doesn't work - Covid kills more elderly people for example. And best of luck to you and your relatives. You do know that survivors of Covid can suffer long-term damage?

As a friend in the contact tracing said to me yesterday, its a lot busier but less stressful at the minute, thankfully the numbers of people you ring who are at deaths door or are already dead has diminished to almost zero. It is scary though, Ryanair staff crying down the phone as they have been warned if they mention the packed flights on social media they will lose their jobs, kids who have spent the last few weeks "working from home" in Ibiza and getting shipped back here. I've said it before and I'll say it again, there are a large contingent here who need something to soften their coughs. I wish they didn't but it may be the only way some of them learn the reality of the world.

arccosh · 02-09-2020 8:40am

be interesting the spin the anti vaxxers will have if/when a COVID vaccine comes out....

not an anti vaxxer, but I'd be very skeptical about taking a COVID one straight away... a lot will have this non binary view, but it plays directly into the anti vaxxer agenda.

I still feel though the "you won't die from it so why bother" agenda is a bit selfish and reckless all the same... yeah you more than likely won't but what about someone else? Also long term effects, as much as people like to say they'll be fine, you just don't know, nobody knows, hence why the leaning towards caution....

even if it doesn't turn deadly either short term or long term, imagine it had lasting effects like lymes disease? The health system will be under heavy pressure in a few years time, this time chronically.

Igotadose · 02-09-2020 8:43am

arccosh wrote: »

even if it doesn't turn deadly either short term or long term, imagine it had lasting effects like lymes disease? The health system will be under heavy pressure in a few years time, this time chronically.

You might want to raise that question in one of the Covid threads; short answer, there *ARE* long term effects. Lung damage, organ damage, neurological impacts. You don't want this virus.

02-09-2020 9:09am

Igotadose wrote: »

You might want to raise that question in one of the Covid threads; short answer, there *ARE* long term effects. Lung damage, organ damage, neurological impacts. You don't want this virus.

Not according to the open up everything and I won't wear a mask posters in those threads however. Anything pointing to long term effects is either propaganda or an outlier.

bocaman · 02-09-2020 9:12am

Anti-vaxxers are a bunch of selfish ignorant people who think only of themselves.

arccosh · 02-09-2020 9:13am

Igotadose wrote: »

You might want to raise that question in one of the Covid threads; short answer, there *ARE* long term effects. Lung damage, organ damage, neurological impacts. You don't want this virus.

fully agree..

I'm studying 3rd level at the moment, so have the fortunate access to the most up date research papers that are stuck behind paywalls for most.... some of the "long term" (8-12months) research so far doesn't sound great

Igotadose · 02-09-2020 9:25am

bocaman wrote: »

Anti-vaxxers are a bunch of selfish ignorant people who think only of themselves.

That's part of it. At the top, they're grisly grifters like Wakefield and Bigtree. Failed scientists and doctors convinced of their righteousness in ripping people off at the expense of lives..

The 'rank and file' are a small minority of agitators probably externally funded (Russia) and a vast bunch of selfish, fearful eejits.

Seth Brundle · 02-09-2020 9:30am

Igotadose wrote: »

The 'rank and file' are a small minority of agitators probably externally funded (Russia) and a vast bunch of selfish, fearful eejits.

I'd include the term "extremely gullible" in there also.

paul71 · 02-09-2020 10:41am

Anybody spot the Irony of a Jim Carry meme on this thread. Another Pro-death cultist.

McGinniesta · 02-09-2020 12:00pm

Vaccines are fine. The ones that work and have no long term health consequences.

However, what if anti vaxxers are correct, at least in part. How do we know that there are not potentially dangerous vaccines on the market and how would we know before taking them?

ancapailldorcha · 02-09-2020 12:00pm

McGinniesta wrote: »

Vaccines are fine. The ones that work and have no long term health consequences.

However, what if anti vaxxers are correct, at least in part. How do we know that there are not potentially dangerous vaccines on the market and how would we know before taking them?

What evidence do you have that vaccines are harmful?

McGinniesta · 02-09-2020 12:02pm

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

What evidence do you have that vaccines are harmful?

I don't. That's why I ask. My question was what if Anti vaxxers may be right at least partly?

ancapailldorcha · 02-09-2020 12:04pm

McGinniesta wrote: »

I don't. That's why I ask. My question was what if Anti vaxxers may be right at least partly?

Obviously they should be taken off the market in that scenario. Thalidomide was found to be dangerous so women no longer use it to treat morning sickness.

McGinniesta · 02-09-2020 12:09pm

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Obviously they should be taken off the market in that scenario. Thalidomide was found to be dangerous so women no longer use it to treat morning sickness.

So how can anyone say with 100% certainty that another example of this may not exist now or in the future.

I don't have a particular position on vaccines. I don't have kids but I don't see an issue with questioning things within reason.

However, I don't think any reasonable person would question valid vaccines and their usefulness.

ancapailldorcha · 02-09-2020 12:10pm

paul71 wrote: »

Anybody spot the Irony of a Jim Carry meme on this thread. Another Pro-death cultist.

I prefer cat memes:

49405697_2471004162969578_3362973132368379904_n.jpg?_nc_cat=110&_nc_sid=8024bb&_nc_ohc=N-Igt29Apg8AX-bUShG&_nc_ht=scontent-lhr8-1.xx&oh=e02585d2bb57f3257a563274789f3211&oe=5F74666D

49405697_2471004162969578_3362973132368379904_n.jpg?_nc_cat=110&_nc_sid=8024bb&_nc_ohc=N-Igt29Apg8AX-bUShG&_nc_ht=scontent-lhr8-1.xx&oh=e02585d2bb57f3257a563274789f3211&oe=5F74666D

McGinniesta wrote: »

So how can anyone say with 100% certainty that another example of this may not exist now or in the future.

I don't have a particular position on vaccines. I don't have kids but I don't see an issue with questioning things within reason.

Who's saying anything with 100% certainty? I can't get on the Tube with 100% certainty that there won't be a disaster or cross with road with 100% certainty that some motorist won't hit me.

mountai · 02-09-2020 12:20pm

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

What evidence do you have that vaccines are harmful?

H1N1 Flu vaccine damaged many people . Millions paid out in compensation . Narcolepsy

Ever heard of it ??

ancapailldorcha · 02-09-2020 12:22pm

mountai wrote: »

H1N1 Flu vaccine damaged many people . Millions paid out in compensation . Narcolepsy
Ever heard of it ??

Prove it.

dalyboy · 02-09-2020 12:26pm

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Prove it.

Boom .....
https://www.cdc.gov/vaccinesafety/concerns/history/narcolepsy-flu.html

ancapailldorcha · 02-09-2020 12:28pm

dalyboy wrote: »

Boom .....
https://www.cdc.gov/vaccinesafety/concerns/history/narcolepsy-flu.html

How many children out of the total administered got narcolepsy?

Lady Spangles · 02-09-2020 12:32pm

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

How many children out of the total administered got narcolepsy?

1 in 55,000 according to this:

https://www.narcolepsy.org.uk/resources/pandemrix-narcolepsy

The study was conducted on 14-18 year olds. It was very rare.

ancapailldorcha · 02-09-2020 12:34pm

Lady Spangles wrote: »

1 in 55,000 according to this:

https://www.narcolepsy.org.uk/resources/pandemrix-narcolepsy

That's what I expected but since mountai's decided to trot out this disproven nonsense again I wanted to show that he didn't even bother to read the link he just dumped.

Lady Spangles · 02-09-2020 12:38pm

Considering around 54,999 14-18 year olds had the vaccine and did not develop narcolepsy, how did they even establish that link between the two? Statistically speaking, it looks like a freak event and not much of anything at all for the anti-vaxxers to go on.

mountai · 02-09-2020 12:38pm

dalyboy wrote: »

Boom .....
https://www.cdc.gov/vaccinesafety/concerns/history/narcolepsy-flu.html

I just wonder , if a child belonging to one of the " Medical Stormtroopers" suffered from this vaccine , would they be asking " How many other children suffered " . Dont think so .

ancapailldorcha · 02-09-2020 12:40pm

mountai wrote: »

I just wonder , if a child belonging to one of the " Medical Stormtroopers" suffered from this vaccine , would they be asking " How many other children suffered " . Dont think so .

You didn't read it, did you? That's why you've to resort to the usual pro-plaguer victimhood trope.

Seth Brundle · 02-09-2020 12:46pm

mountai wrote: »

H1N1 Flu vaccine damaged many people . Millions paid out in compensation . Narcolepsy
Ever heard of it ??

mountai wrote: »

I just wonder , if a child belonging to one of the " Medical Stormtroopers" suffered from this vaccine , would they be asking " How many other children suffered " . Dont think so .

What actual evidence is there that the vaccine causes narcolepsy to the point that it becomes a real risk?
The CDC report claims that studies show that it does not cause narcolepsy yet you seem quite sure of your "facts".

mountai · 02-09-2020 12:52pm

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

You didn't read it, did you? That's why you've to resort to the usual pro-plaguer victimhood trope.

Oh I read it ok . I also read about the Aoife Bennett case which cost the state approx 6 million . I suppose the other 100 cases that the state is trying to bully into settlements through a tribunal dont exist either . The problem with "Medical Stormtroopers" is , they cant see the wood for the trees .

ancapailldorcha · 02-09-2020 12:53pm

mountai wrote: »

Oh I read it ok . I also read about the Aoife Bennett case which cost the state approx 6 million . I suppose the other 100 cases that the state is trying to bully into settlements through a tribunal dont exist either . The problem with "Medical Stormtroopers" is , they cant see the wood for the trees .

Still no evidence.

VicMackey1 · 02-09-2020 12:53pm

Just because a specific trigger has not yet been found does not mean that it has been disproven. All the statistical data shows a very strong link between narcolepsy and the H1N1 vaccine. Very little research is been done at the moment on the vaccine link. Even an expert group set up by the HSE concluded that there was a 13 fold increase in narcolepsy after the H1N1 vaccine. From experience I would say that the vast majority of Irish consultants accept that the vaccine caused an increase in narcolepsy.

The state's behavior surrounding the whole matter is absolutely sickening. Their tactics have been very underhand and certainly don't do anything to promote vaccination in a good light. Its just giving anti vaxxers more ammo.

ancapailldorcha · 02-09-2020 1:07pm

VicMackey1 wrote: »

Just because a specific trigger has not yet been found does not mean that it has been disproven. All the statistical data shows a very strong link between narcolepsy and the H1N1 vaccine. Very little research is been done at the moment on the vaccine link. Even an expert group set up by the HSE concluded that there was a 13 fold increase in narcolepsy after the H1N1 vaccine. From experience I would say that the vast majority of Irish consultants accept that the vaccine caused an increase in narcolepsy.

What statistical data, exactly? Unless cause is definitively established, it'll take a lot more than pro-plaguer drivel to convince me that the vaccine causes narcolepsy.

VicMackey1 wrote: »

The state's behavior surrounding the whole matter is absolutely sickening. Their tactics have been very underhand and certainly don't do anything to promote vaccination in a good light. Its just giving anti vaxxers more ammo.

If you're that concerned, contact your TD instead of spreading vaxxtard nonsense.

VicMackey1 · 02-09-2020 1:16pm

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

If you're that concerned, contact your TD instead of spreading vaxxtard nonsense.

Not vaxtard nonsense at all. A recent example of their pathetic behavior was the offer of settlements to the narcolepsy claimants. The settlements could only procede provided that all of the settlement offers were accepted before a certain date. So if only 1 claimant refused the offer it would cancel all other settlement offers to claimants. Also, it could not possibly work because settlements for children would have to go before the court for approval. So basically that settlement offer was made just so that it could be published in the newspapers to make them look pro active.

VicMackey1 · 02-09-2020 1:20pm

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

What statistical data, exactly? Unless cause is definitively established, it'll take a lot more than pro-plaguer drivel to convince me that the vaccine causes narcolepsy.

If it was all pro plaguer drivel, the state would not be paying out millions in compensation to claimants.

ancapailldorcha · 02-09-2020 1:21pm

VicMackey1 wrote: »

If it was all pro plaguer drivel, the state would not be paying out millions in compensation to claimants.

So you have no evidence then. Same as before.

CramCycle · 02-09-2020 1:26pm

Lets take the above at face value, that the vaccine causes Narcolepsy in 1:55,000 people in the 14 - 18yo age range.
Current population: 4.904million
Based on 2016 census: 12.1% of the population is between 14 and 25 (so we are exaggerating greatly the numbers here
That leaves us with an over estimated 593384 possible people
With a 1:55000 got the vaccine, getting Narcolepsy, is going to happen to 10.7 people.
If everyone on the Island, with no correction for age or demographics, it is 89.16 people get Narcolepsy.

H1N1 particularly affected the young, a mortality rate of between 0.001 and 0.007% so in Ireland that would have been between 49 and 343 deaths.

To put it more in perspective, its estimated that 1:2000 people here suffer Narcolepsy, that is 2452 people.

Just some figures to mull over.

Also the H1N1 vaccine was included in the seasonal flu vaccine in the following years, for those who didn't know.

Seth Brundle · 02-09-2020 1:28pm

VicMackey1 wrote: »

If it was all pro plaguer drivel, the state would not be paying out millions in compensation to claimants.

How much in legal fees would it have costed the taxpayer to contest all of the claims?

VicMackey1 · 02-09-2020 1:31pm

Seth Brundle wrote: »

How much in legal fees would it have costed the taxpayer to contest all of the claims?

Dont know but that is what is happening at the moment. All of the claims are being contested and there is no workable settlement offer.

VicMackey1 · 02-09-2020 1:38pm

CramCycle wrote: »

With a 1:55000 got the vaccine, getting Narcolepsy, is going to happen to 10.7 people.

But that's not what happened. Over 100, mostly children got narcolepsy which was a big increase. All of those have been medically proven narcolepsy. Cant fake a polysomnography!

VicMackey1 · 02-09-2020 1:40pm

*Mod Snip*

Regardless of what position you take, posts like that are not helpful

VicMackey1 · 02-09-2020 1:47pm

Conclusion from the Final Report of National Narcolepsy Study Steering Committee.

Through a retrospective population‐based cohort study, we demonstrated that the increased incidence of narcolepsy in children/adolescents in Ireland from 2009 was associated with vaccination with Pandemrix. All cases who were tested and results available at time of chart retrieval (n=17) occurred in those who are genetically susceptible. The association could not be assessed accurately in adults because of the small number of cases reported. Our results were very similar to the findings reported from Finland and other
Scandinavian countries.

Although we cannot exclude any selection or confounding bias which might have overestimated the risk of narcolepsy linked to Pandemrix vaccination, we believe that the association was so high that it is unlikely to be explained by any possible bias. Extensive case finding was undertaken in Ireland over the last 6 months and it unlikely that 33 – 55 cases in the unvaccinated cohort of 5‐19 year olds are awaiting presentation to primary care and or investigation in secondary care.

CramCycle · 02-09-2020 2:39pm

VicMackey1 wrote: »

But that's not what happened. Over 100, mostly children got narcolepsy which was a big increase. All of those have been medically proven narcolepsy. Cant fake a polysomnography!

I was going solely on what was posted above my post

paul71 · 02-09-2020 5:25pm

mountai wrote: »

I just wonder , if a child belonging to one of the " Medical Stormtroopers" suffered from this vaccine , would they be asking " How many other children suffered " . Dont think so .

So still no proof. There is a meme of cats licking something earlier. That was better research.

CramCycle · 03-09-2020 7:31am

Igotadose wrote: »

You might want to raise that question in one of the Covid threads; short answer, there *ARE* long term effects. Lung damage, organ damage, neurological impacts. You don't want this virus.

According to some its a binary die or do not, there is no inbetween.

VicMackey1 wrote: »

Conclusion from the Final Report of National Narcolepsy Study Steering Committee.

Through a retrospective population‐based cohort study, we demonstrated that the increased incidence of narcolepsy in children/adolescents in Ireland from 2009 was associated with vaccination with Pandemrix. All cases who were tested and results available at time of chart retrieval (n=17) occurred in those who are genetically susceptible. The association could not be assessed accurately in adults because of the small number of cases reported. Our results were very similar to the findings reported from Finland and other
Scandinavian countries.

Although we cannot exclude any selection or confounding bias which might have overestimated the risk of narcolepsy linked to Pandemrix vaccination, we believe that the association was so high that it is unlikely to be explained by any possible bias. Extensive case finding was undertaken in Ireland over the last 6 months and it unlikely that 33 – 55 cases in the unvaccinated cohort of 5‐19 year olds are awaiting presentation to primary care and or investigation in secondary care.

Can you send on a link ot the report, I found the site but the link I got for the report wouldn't work, cheers.

VicMackey1 · 03-09-2020 9:34am

CramCycle wrote: »

According to some its a binary die or do not, there is no inbetween.

Can you send on a link ot the report, I found the site but the link I got for the report wouldn't work, cheers.

This link should work

https://www.hpsc.ie/a-z/respiratory/influenza/seasonalinfluenza/publications/influenzavaccinationpublications/narcolepsyassociatedwithpandemicvaccination/File,13379,en.pdf

alaimacerc · 04-09-2020 6:57pm

CramCycle wrote: »

According to some its a binary die or do not, there is no inbetween.

According to whom, is I think perhaps salient. And on what evidence, even moreso.

There's any number of people who will declate CV-19 to be 99.<pick a residual> 'harmless', merrily including people who're still slowly recovering months later as 'unharmed'. Yet will give you 'vaccine harm' stats that'll include numbers of people who've had a slight rash for a couple of days.

CramCycle · 05-09-2020 9:48am

alaimacerc wrote: »

According to whom, is I think perhaps salient. And on what evidence, even moreso.

No evidence whatsoever. I think in many cases its wilful ignorance, or intentional assh*l*ry. If they ignore these, it is easier to justify their selfish behaviour. They have convinced themselves, even if they have heard different, that this is the only metric, as if it is a coin flip with a weighted coin, i.e. you might die but more often than not, you won't. These people ignore the stories of people struggling to do anything for months after, or those with permanent organ damage. There is another cohort with this belief but I do believe that they are unknowing as all they hear on the news they listen too is total number of deaths, positive cases and recovered cases, which probably creates this illusion in the back of their mind.

There's any number of people who will declate CV-19 to be 99.<pick a residual> 'harmless', merrily including people who're still slowly recovering months later as 'unharmed'. Yet will give you 'vaccine harm' stats that'll include numbers of people who've had a slight rash for a couple of days.

It's a bit head wrecking to be honest. They present them as if everyone who has a slight rash, numbness or a slight immune reaction as if they have developed a life changing illness. I wouldn't even call them an adverse reaction, they are what is expected to happen in many cases.

Anti-vaxxers

Comments