Anti-vaxxers crumble as every prediction fails to come true

The title of the thread should be "Antivaxxers desperately double-down on their foolish spam claims". Coming up to 3 and a half years now and nothing has happened! All those lying claims about mass deaths as the population keels over? Nothing, nada, batshit.

 

Absolutely true.

Thanks I had never heard of this site. Nobody should defend asinine batshit conspiracy theories that claim millions would die with no basis for those claims except for ignorance and stupidity. The anti-vaxxers are doing a lot of harm. Most of them have no understanding of the history of vaccines, how they work, how the immune system works… The are just an echo chamber of people repeating crap they read on social media and biased websites that pretend they are honestly putting out the truth. People should voice concerns about the constant harm they do and it is nice to sites like this exist.

 

It's quite amazing how informed opinions based on testimony of health care workers, peer reviewed medical science papers, data, and estimates from models are attacked for seemingly no coherent reason.

https://www.theepochtimes.com/us/cd...:~:text=On its homepage,Heard member comments.

 

MEH! Says who!

With the 99.999% testimony ignored!

Fake review by cohorts with similar opinions doesn't count. The whole purpose of review is to isolate problems and move forward on them. Conspiracy theorists invariably ignore every single thing that disagrees with their own "peer-reviewed" hyperbole.

There's your problem, you're not qualified to understand any coherence issues and the "attack" is invariably with very easy to understand, dismantling of the lies that surround such batshit. Once again, conspiracy theorists disagree with anything that doesn't fit their conspiracy!

 

The pattern continues. Here is one for you - why are anti inflammatory medications not part of the protocol used to reduce lung inflammation resulting from covid infection?

 

What pattern continues? Your pattern of quoting entire posts and completely ignoring them I assume.

Off topic crap. Vitamin supplementation is used which convey natural anti inflammatory assistance.

 

We are seeing this sub-forum being swamped with "new" threads that have basically the same antivaxx crap. Meanwhile, the genocide and bio-weapon-batshittery never happens.

Whoops!

 

coronavirus-(covid-19)-news

I guess some people dont know where they are.

 

It doesn't say Covid-19 antivax spam.

Piffle.

What we are getting is the noisy crowing about legal issues. Similar noises were made about the 911-trufers who have won precisely zero. Antivaxx-bandwagon attorneys will suffer the same fate.

 

Apparently, 4 years down the road, we're in for a Tsunami.

The mind boggles at the crazy mental-gymnastics being used by antivax posters. Nobody is dying, none of the absurd claims about genocide are happening. Realistically, one could ask for a timeframe, but these people are making this crap up, so they'd just keep adding years. Remember the arrival of Nibiru

 

Nobody is dying. Where IS this "tsunami"?

The OP

I don't know what's worse, the fact it was done originally, or the barrel-scraping craziness that STILL claims this is happening!

 

There is no Tsunami. Between March 2020 and July 2023, over 85 million doses of the vaccines were given in England and Wales. This is a rough estimate of the available data and includes 1st, 2nd, and booster doses.

From: https://www.ons.gov.uk/aboutus/tran.../adverseeffectsofcovid19vaccination2021to2024

The articles states that deaths ‘involving’ a cause refers to deaths that had vaccines mentioned on the death certificate, whether it was an underlying cause or not. Deaths ‘due’ to a cause refer only to deaths that had vaccines as the underlying cause of death.

So basically out of approximately 85 million doses there were 55 deaths that vaccines were listed as the underlying cause of death. Hardly a Tsunami. There were 215,000 deaths from Covid in England and Wales during this time. Tens of thousands of lives were saved in England and Wales during this time due to the vaccines.

Isn’t it time for the anti-vaxxers to stop posting lies and horse manure about the vaccines.

 

Yep. But we have a bright yellow piece of disinformation just above that stinks to high heaven.

 

Isn't it time for a truthful evaluation of the mRNA vaccines to be conducted. Vaccine makers were made exempt from liability by the establishment of the VAERS system. But the VAERS data was and has been ignored since one month after vaccine rollout.

According to the United States pharmacovigilance database VAERS, there was enough of a safety signal emitted with respect to death reports to stop the roll-out of these products in January 2021. Yes, just one month after the roll-out began on December 17th, 2020. We had almost 90,000 reports in VAERS spread across many age groups, and almost 700 deaths in the context of just 3 products: the COVID Moderna, Pfizer and Janssen products.



Edited by C.H. Klotz, Various Authors; Malone, Dr. Robert; Dowd, Edward; Fareed, Dr. George; Kory, Dr. Pierre; McCullough, Dr. Peter; Ladapo, Dr. Joseph; Breggin, Dr. Peter; Dr. Naomi Wolf; McAdam, Colin; Dr. Pierre Kory; Sir Christopher Chope; Elizabeth Woodworth; Dr. Michael Nevradakis; Dr. Jessica Rose; Dr. Joseph Fraiman; Trish Wood; Dr. Ryan Cole; Dr. Aseem Malhotra; Senator Ron Johnson; Dr. Norman Fenton; Rodney Palmer; Dr. Paul Marik; Dr. Jay Bhattacharya; Lord Sumption; Professor Bruce Pardy; Drs. James & Maggie Thorp; Steve Kirsch; John Leake; Dr Mary O’Connor; Dr. Harvey Risch; Dr. Sam Dubé; Margaret Anna Alice; Dr. Michael Rectenwald; Professor Denis Rancourt; Brianne Dressen. Canary In a Covid World: How Propaganda and Censorship Changed Our World (p. 125). Canary House Publishing. Kindle Edition.

 

l used Tineye to trace that piece of garbage. It was posted on X by Steve Cortes. No wonder they didn’t post a link.

https://tineye.com/search/b2b4d7a708fb22d0b1ebdf1264ff9a74a7f8f0d6?sort=score&order=desc&page=1

 

How so ? Having to take more jabs to get to protected is not better than being protected with less jabs .. as with each Jab carries a significant and non trivial risk of harm .. 12 per 100,000 people having a SAR in the Phase III clinical Trials.

The disinformation is coming from those claiming insignificant risk of harm .. coming from the Gov't ..and our medical institutions .. who have been telling lies - spewing propaganda and disinformation. .. this is what folks are having trouble dealing with .. most not understanding what disinformation is. The Truth is not disinformation. That the first step .. disinformation is something that is false not True .. step 2.

 

A mega-spammed lie, proven as such, so many times. How so? Because you have disregarded every time where it has been pointed out to you.

Not disinformation. There is insignificant risk. ..

Nope.

You are not the spokesperson for "folks".

Including you.

Correct. The truth is that antivax propaganda IS the disinformation and those who spread it are part of the problem.

 

The data from the Phase III Clinical Trial of Moderna and Pfizer is not a lie .. to claim such is science denial .. Science we went through in detail .. the only thing proven many times was your failure to understand the science . Me being the Scientist in the room .. with the ability to understand statistics .. and scientific method .. You managing to engage only in fallacy and unsupported claim .. wailing about "anti vax Disinformation" but being a prime spewer of such.

Look .. falsehoods told by the Gov't and medical institutions does not decrease vaccine hesitancy. The Truth" is that the Gov't lied to you .. I know this is difficult for you to accept .. but that is the Truth.

The Gov't knew the new experimental mRNA treatment did not prevent Transmission shortly after it was released to the public. This according to the CDC on the basis of the Massachusetts outbreak .

CDC: 74% Of People Infected in Massachusetts COVID-19 Outbreak Were Vaccinated
CDC: 74% Of People Infected in Massachusetts COVID-19 Outbreak Were Vaccinated

"A new report issued by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) last Friday found that 74% of people who were infected in a COVID-19 outbreak in Massachusetts earlier this summer were fully vaccinated against the virus.

Among five people who were hospitalized in the outbreak, four were fully vaccinated. No deaths were reported in the outbreak."

------

Not only did the mRNA treatment fail to prevent transmission .. it did not prevent hospitalization either .. slightly increased by an insignificant amount in fact.

Your claim that the CDC is spamming "anti vax lies" is preposterous nonsense. This is science denial or you are not understanding the science.

 

As a scientist, you should be able to discern which article, not scientific study, the numbers you keeping fawning over came from. It wasn’t from any of the phase III trials. If you want to accept fake statistics offered by anti-vaxxers that’s your prerogative. However, it doesn’t make their reanalysis any less fudged.

 

The emphasis on the word "keep" as in spammed about a dozen times.

Correct and it has been explained in words any competent scientist would understand.

Indeed, but it's the regurgitation numerous times that shows the real problem.

Disinformation is probably a better word.

 

The CDC study was scientific .. as was the Phase III Clinical Trials .. the data and statistics which were not fake.. the SAR's tracked by the scientific study were quite real .. well defined .. and not fake.

The CDC and Pfizer are not "Anti Vaxers" .. and given you do not know what a vaccine is .. you should probably not be using that term - mRNA not really qualifying as a vaccine .. and and folks not in favor of this treatment are perfectly fine with Vaccines in general.

Look .. Listen .. Learn .. If you wish to be in denial of the Science that is fine .. but, this will not change the fact that the Gov't lied about the Science .. the science used by the CDC to alter its position .. is not faked .. not fudged .. not "anti vaxer propaganda" .. and in fact you claiming the CDC as such is a form of anti vax propaganda. Promoting such falsehoods about our medical institutions will lead to vaccine hesitancy don't you agree ? so it seems you are projecting your anti vax behavior onto others ?

Now .. I now it is difficult to learn that the Gov't lied to you .. as did many medical institutions .. difficult to learn that President Joe Biden lied to you .. about a really important subject .. and the woke joke media followed right along .. the Dem Congress went ahead and made civil liberty busting legislation on the basis of lies and that is not a good thing ..

 

I have never met a scientist who steadfastly clings to a a paper that has been shown to be bogus. Given the depth it has been explained it would be difficult NOT to understand how badly this data has been deliberately distorted. Notwithstanding the fact that it has been spammed over about a dozen threads.

 

Have you lost the ability to read, I am talking about the Fraiman study. You know that though.

I was referring to Fraiman et all, not the CDC, nor Pfizer.

The Moderna vaccine teaches the cells to produce a protein that triggers an immune response which helps the body recognize and fight the covid virus if we are exposed to it in the future.

It appears you do not know what a vaccine is. I will dumb it down for you into one simple sentence. Vaccines help train your immune system to fight off certain diseases without you having to get the disease first.

I am not in denial of science. I have not made any such claims or promoted any falsehoods.

That makes no sense, just another word salad from somebody not even making any valid points.

I will again post what is wrong with Fraiman’s reanalysis of the Moderna/Pfizer phase III trials.

Fraiman et al took the results of the Phase III trials and defined his own SAE categories, didn't apply the number of adverse events properly, p-hacked data, and came up with his own special number just so pretend research scientists could try to state that the vaccines cause SAE's in 1 in 800 which is not true. Further research has clearly supported the concept that the vaccines are safe and adverse events like mycarditis are rare. Where are all the results that indicate that Fraiman's reanalysis was correct? Despite many studies, you still go back to one single reanalysis that gives the results you want, and you ignore the rest. And you call yourself a research scientist?

The Phase III clinical trial results can be found in the Moderna and Pfizer studies, not the p-hacked reanalysis published in the "Vaccine" journal.

From the Moderna Phase III trial:

• The frequency of unsolicited adverse events, unsolicited severe adverse events, and serious adverse events reported during the 28 days after injection was generally similar among participants in the two groups
• Three deaths occurred in the placebo group (one from intraabdominal perforation, one from cardiopulmonary arrest, and one from severe systemic inflammatory syndrome in a participant with chronic lymphocytic leukemia and diffuse bullous rash)
• Two deaths occurred in the vaccine group (one from cardiopulmonary arrest and one by suicide).
• The frequency of grade 3 adverse events in the placebo group (1.3%) was similar to that in the vaccine group (1.5%), as were the frequencies of medically attended adverse events (9.7% vs. 9.0%) and serious adverse events (0.6% in both groups).
• Hypersensitivity reactions were reported in 1.5% and 1.1% of participants in the vaccine and placebo groups, respectively
• Bell’s palsy occurred in the vaccine group (3 participants [<0.1%]) and the placebo group (1 participant [<0.1%]) during the observation period of the trial (more than 28 days after injection).
• Overall, 0.5% of participants in the placebo group and 0.3% in the mRNA-1273 group had adverse events that resulted in their not receiving the second dose, and less than 0.1% of participants in both groups discontinued participation in the trial because of adverse events after any dose.
• No evidence of vaccine-associated enhanced respiratory disease was noted, and fewer cases of severe Covid-19 or any Covid-19 were observed among participants who received mRNA-1273 than among those who received placebo.
• Adverse events that were deemed by the trial team to be related to the vaccine or placebo were reported among 4.5% of participants in the placebo group and 8.2% in the mRNA-1273 group. The most common treatment-related adverse events (those reported in at least 1% of participants) in the placebo group and the mRNA-1273 group were fatigue (1.2% and 1.5%) and headache (0.9% and 1.4%).
• In the overall population, the incidence of treatment-related severe adverse events was higher in the mRNA-1273 group (71 participants [0.5%]) than in the placebo group (28 participants [0.2%]). The relative incidence of these adverse events according to vaccine group was not affected by age.

Those are the numbers from the actual Moderna trial. The total number of trial participants was 30,420, with 15,210 randomly assigned to either the Placebo or Vaccine group. The number of treatment related severe adverse events was not significantly different between the vaccine and placebo group.

You can find all the supplementary data at the following link: https://www.nejm.org/doi/suppl/10.1056/NEJMoa2035389/suppl_file/nejmoa2035389_appendix.pdf

From the Pfizer Phase III trial:

• Sixty-four vaccine recipients (0.3%) and 6 placebo recipients (<0.1%) reported lymphadenopathy.
• Few participants in either group had severe adverse events, serious adverse events, or adverse events leading to withdrawal from the trial.
• Four related serious adverse events were reported among BNT162b2 recipients (shoulder injury related to vaccine administration, right axillary lymphadenopathy, paroxysmal ventricular arrhythmia, and right leg paresthesia).
• Two BNT162b2 recipients died (one from arteriosclerosis, one from cardiac arrest)
• Four placebo recipients died (two from unknown causes, one from hemorrhagic stroke, and one from myocardial infarction).
• No deaths were considered by the investigators to be related to the vaccine or placebo.
• The favorable safety profile observed during phase 1 testing of BNT162b24,8 was confirmed in the phase 2/3 portion of the trial.
• As in phase 1, reactogenicity was generally mild or moderate, and reactions were less common and milder in older adults than in younger adults.
• Systemic reactogenicity was more common and severe after the second dose than after the first dose, although local reactogenicity was similar after the two doses.
• Overall, reactogenicity events were transient and resolved within a couple of days after onset. Lymphadenopathy, which generally resolved within 10 days, is likely to have resulted from a robust vaccine-elicited immune response.
• The incidence of serious adverse events was similar in the vaccine and placebo groups (0.6% and 0.5%, respectively).

You can find all the supplementary data for the Pfizer trial at the following link:

https://www.nejm.org/doi/suppl/10.1056/NEJMoa2034577/suppl_file/nejmoa2034577_appendix.pdf

For your information — in order to establish causality, you have to show three things. In terms of the vaccines, it would be (1)that the vaccine came before some named adverse event, (2)that any observed relationship between the vaccine and some named adverse event didn’t happen by chance alone, and (3)there is nothing else that accounts for the vaccine > adverse event.

The most Fraiman could do was to suggest there might be some kind of correlation between the vaccine and serious adverse events but he did NOT directly study causality. He actually relied on subjective opinions to support his statements. Therefore, the 1 in 800 number you keep spewing out ad bloody nauseum is meaningless misinformation.

 

The following is from Dr. Paul E Marik who is a world-renowned Pulmonary and Critical Care Specialist, founding member and Chairman of the Frontline COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance (FLCCC) and co-developer of the highly effective treatment protocols for the prevention, treatment and recovery from Covid including vaccine injury. Dr. Marik is the second most published critical care physician, having authored over 500 peer-reviewed journal articles, 80 book chapters and 4 critical care textbooks.

Edited by C.H. Klotz, Various Authors; Malone, Dr. Robert; Dowd, Edward; Fareed, Dr. George; Kory, Dr. Pierre; McCullough, Dr. Peter; Ladapo, Dr. Joseph; Breggin, Dr. Peter; Dr. Naomi Wolf; McAdam, Colin; Dr. Pierre Kory; Sir Christopher Chope; Elizabeth Woodworth; Dr. Michael Nevradakis; Dr. Jessica Rose; Dr. Joseph Fraiman; Trish Wood; Dr. Ryan Cole; Dr. Aseem Malhotra; Senator Ron Johnson; Dr. Norman Fenton; Rodney Palmer; Dr. Paul Marik; Dr. Jay Bhattacharya; Lord Sumption; Professor Bruce Pardy; Drs. James & Maggie Thorp; Steve Kirsch; John Leake; Dr Mary O’Connor; Dr. Harvey Risch; Dr. Sam Dubé; Margaret Anna Alice; Dr. Michael Rectenwald; Professor Denis Rancourt; Brianne Dressen. Canary In a Covid World: How Propaganda and Censorship Changed Our World (pp. 232-233). Canary House Publishing. Kindle Edition.