high level vaccine skeptics

[theLBC]

You do realize there is a widely available vaccine that does not use mRNA technology, right? It's moderately less effective, but still far better than showing up to the fight unarmed.



What difference would it make one way or the other? If your insinuation is correct, and the shot does nothing, then it does nothing. That still isn't a reason to remain unvaccinated, since the shot is effectively without significant cost (in terms of money or side effects). Even if it was pure placebo, which the data show it is absolutely not, there still is no benefit to remaining unvaccinated other than impressing your crazy crank conspiracy theory buddies. And you could still get vaccinated and lie to them and get that benefit, so I'm not even sure I consider that a benefit.

on the other hand, my marathon running brother "coincidentally" had a stroke 2 days after getting "vaccinated".

 

[Baron23]

Are you fucking retarded or just a Glowie

Ah, retard?…..no, he’s an M.D. real doctor.

What’s your medical education background?

Take the vaccine or don’t take the vaccine, I really don’t care. You do you and I’ll do me.

But many here who have been throwing personal shade at this Dr. wouldn’t get past the first semester of med school….but nonetheless want to call him a “retard”??

Just can’t even make this shit up.

 

[theLBC]

 

[DocRDS]

This debate has become so heated, that reason and logic is gone. I had people stalking me at one point and had to get law enforcement involved and file protection orders.

Take it from the movie Wargames

"The only winning move is not to play"

Everyone who disagree with you is a retard
Everyone who agrees with you is a genius.

I adhere to the old maxim "Everyone's a fucking idiot except me and thee, and sometimes I wonder about thee"

 

[Seymour Fish]

You have to look at the individual studies not a meta-analysis of a bunch of studies that have faults. There has not been enough strong data to recommend for it, hence why it’s not widely used in this country

I believe there may be benefit of ivermectin Rx to humans not random formulations for animals, which was the point of caution.

Facts remain that approximately 95+ % of those hospitalized with Covid, and nearly all doing very poorly, are unvaccinated. I’m not discounting peoples concerns with the vaccinations just presenting facts. This is nationwide and certainly here locally in the VAMC and also private non-profit level 1 trauma, tertiary care center with 850+ beds.

You, sir, are a shill. The data coming out of Israel gives the lie to your poorly disguised propaganda.

 

[Greasly]

We'll have a slightly better understanding in 2121. Very slight.

 

[10ring'r]

We'll have a slightly better understanding in 2121. Very slight.

This right here^^^. This is where the rubber will meet the road, if, we as a civilization, survive another 100 years. Mac

 

[db2000]

You, sir, are a shill. The data coming out of Israel gives the lie to your poorly disguised propaganda.

Your a fucking moron if you think any of the data from Israel or India is powered sufficiently and unbiased enough to translate to a generally population.
I wager you are incompetent to review and analyze the data personally but luckily others have done it for you. Of course you won’t believe them and that’s your prerogative. I’m not here to change your mind or anyone else’s. You’re entitled to your own opinion but not your own facts regarding statistical data. A study of 89 people is weak as fuck.

 

[theLBC]

disgusting if true...

 

[Bullfrog08]

Glad your tin hat wearing makes you think the sad statement about my wife's dad not doing well from covid is propaganda. Shows what a wonderful human being you must be...

Silly me.....didnt realize you were looking for a tear jar in a "vaccine skeptics" thread. Its propaganda.....and im not wonderful at all...not even on the side of nice! Let me get you a covid comfort blanket.

 

[mosin46]

one of the "doctors" on here spoke about breakthrough cases of infection post vaccination. how many break thru cases have you seen documented involving the salk vaccine,smallpox vaccine? not to mention the more recent shingles and pneuovax items?

 

[Downzero]

This might be the biggest load of horse shit I’ve ever read.

even if the shot does nothing, that not a reason to not get it.

I’m just going to let that statement sit there for a minute by itself and maybe you will figure out what’s wrong with it.

Their are plenty of negatives to the shot and to say otherwise is absolutely false.

I can make the argument, but I can't understand it for you. Even if you were to assume the shot does nothing, that doesn't provide any evidence not to get it. Obviously the assumption is false--billions of people and studies across the entire world show otherwise. But if your worst fear was that the shot would do nothing to you, you could still choose to get vaccinated under the remote possibility that every credible expert on earth was right. And if the worst thing that could happen was nothing, there would be no costs.

Or, in simple logic, a decision is logical if Marginal Benefit > Marginal Cost. (MB>MC).

If MC=0, even if the probability is remote that it has some positive effect (not true, but assumed for this purpose), literally any positive effect, even if 1 in a 1000 or 1 in a million chance, makes the decision logical.

Others have explained this to you above, for example, that you could think that natural immunity will protect you. But the costs associated with sending your immune system into battle unarmed are costly, costly in terms of health care costs, costly in terms of human life, and costly in terms of spreading the virus to others. You know, like the 80 year old father who got infected by his 50 and 60 something children in my community. Both of them recovered. He's dead as a doornail. The probability of him being alive if he had been vaccinated is very high.

 

[Choid]

I can make the argument, but I can't understand it for you. Even if you were to assume the shot does nothing, that doesn't provide any evidence not to get it. Obviously the assumption is false--billions of people and studies across the entire world show otherwise. But if your worst fear was that the shot would do nothing to you, you could still choose to get vaccinated under the remote possibility that every credible expert on earth was right. And if the worst thing that could happen was nothing, there would be no costs.

Or, in simple logic, a decision is logical if Marginal Benefit > Marginal Cost. (MB>MC).

If MC=0, even if the probability is remote that it has some positive effect (not true, but assumed for this purpose), literally any positive effect, even if 1 in a 1000 or 1 in a million chance, makes the decision logical.

Others have explained this to you above, for example, that you could think that natural immunity will protect you. But the costs associated with sending your immune system into battle unarmed are costly, costly in terms of health care costs, costly in terms of human life, and costly in terms of spreading the virus to others. You know, like the 80 year old father who got infected by his 50 and 60 something children in my community. Both of them recovered. He's dead as a doornail. The probability of him being alive if he had been vaccinated is very high.

On the one hand, I think firing people for not being vaccinated is bad. On the other hand, I would absolutely not hire anybody who wasn't able to think along these lines, and if I had mistakenly done so, I would let them go.

 

[TxWelder35]

I can make the argument, but I can't understand it for you. Even if you were to assume the shot does nothing, that doesn't provide any evidence not to get it. Obviously the assumption is false--billions of people and studies across the entire world show otherwise. But if your worst fear was that the shot would do nothing to you, you could still choose to get vaccinated under the remote possibility that every credible expert on earth was right. And if the worst thing that could happen was nothing, there would be no costs.

Or, in simple logic, a decision is logical if Marginal Benefit > Marginal Cost. (MB>MC).

If MC=0, even if the probability is remote that it has some positive effect (not true, but assumed for this purpose), literally any positive effect, even if 1 in a 1000 or 1 in a million chance, makes the decision logical.

Others have explained this to you above, for example, that you could think that natural immunity will protect you. But the costs associated with sending your immune system into battle unarmed are costly, costly in terms of health care costs, costly in terms of human life, and costly in terms of spreading the virus to others. You know, like the 80 year old father who got infected by his 50 and 60 something children in my community. Both of them recovered. He's dead as a doornail. The probability of him being alive if he had been vaccinated is very high.

You are assuming the marginal cost is 0, which it is not. The amount of adverse reactions are not small, nor are they minor. We are really still in the first year of testing on these injections also, nobody knows the long term side effects, and the short term side effects are not promising. This vax is more dangerous than any other vax ever released for use.

most demographics would benefit more from some form of treatment of Ivm, vit d, zinc, hcq than getting the mRNA vax.

as a healthy fit young man, I have zero benefit of taking the mRNA vax, when even without treatment, I am likely to get over Covid with minor temporary sickness, with one of the treatment options above puts my risk at near zero.

 

[RPN]

I can make the argument, but I can't understand it for you. Even if you were to assume the shot does nothing, that doesn't provide any evidence not to get it. Obviously the assumption is false--billions of people and studies across the entire world show otherwise. But if your worst fear was that the shot would do nothing to you, you could still choose to get vaccinated under the remote possibility that every credible expert on earth was right. And if the worst thing that could happen was nothing, there would be no costs.

Or, in simple logic, a decision is logical if Marginal Benefit > Marginal Cost. (MB>MC).

If MC=0, even if the probability is remote that it has some positive effect (not true, but assumed for this purpose), literally any positive effect, even if 1 in a 1000 or 1 in a million chance, makes the decision logical.

Others have explained this to you above, for example, that you could think that natural immunity will protect you. But the costs associated with sending your immune system into battle unarmed are costly, costly in terms of health care costs, costly in terms of human life, and costly in terms of spreading the virus to others. You know, like the 80 year old father who got infected by his 50 and 60 something children in my community. Both of them recovered. He's dead as a doornail. The probability of him being alive if he had been vaccinated is very high.

The flaw in your argument is that the assumption isn't that the shot does nothing - when the reality is that it can cause harm. If there was no risk, your comment might hold up, but my experience is of my Father and a close personal friend both having adverse reactions to the vaccine, both of them requiring hospitalization.
Quote from the doctor treating my friend - "your body is having an inappropriate reaction to the vaccine". Good to know it's her and not the vaccine, I guess.

All of life carries risks - I'll take the risk with acquiring natural immunity, thanks.

 

[pmclaine]

on the other hand, my marathon running brother "coincidentally" had a stroke 2 days after getting "vaccinated".

Last night co-worker was telling me a friend of his had a stroke week or so after getting shot.

Dude was hypertension guy and some other stuff leaning toward that outcome.....still most people would wonder.

Not these libs never considered that possibility.

In 40s, kids, gonna get a divorce so they dont lose all their assets paying for his care

 

[Inifinty]

Shots are still EUA.

There is currently NO FDA approved COVID-19 injection available anywhere in the United States

BioNTech received FDA approval for people ages 16 and above under the name Comirnaty, but there are no Comirnaty doses available in the United States

For the shills, go ahead and try to prove that wrong.

 

[theLBC]

Last night co-worker was telling me a friend of his had a stroke week or so after getting shot.

Dude was hypertension guy and some other stuff leaning toward that outcome.....still most people would wonder.

Not these libs never considered that possibility.

In 40s, kids, gonna get a divorce so they dont lose all their assets paying for his care

i think it is perfectly plausible that people having strokes or other reactions have some condition that makes them more susceptible...
at the same time, i don't think we can discount the possibility that the shots as exacerbating these conditions...

 

[TonyTheTiger]

You know, like the 80 year old father who got infected by his 50 and 60 something children in my community. Both of them recovered. He's dead as a doornail. The probability of him being alive if he had been vaccinated is very high.

At that age the next time you get sick with anything it could be the last time.
Not my words, they're my 93 year old Grandma's, who ironically enough is in a hospital bed for the third time in three months due to the mystical vaccine complications that apparently don't exist.

 

[Choid]

Shots are still EUA.

There is currently NO FDA approved COVID-19 injection available anywhere in the United States

BioNTech received FDA approval for people ages 16 and above under the name Comirnaty, but there are no Comirnaty doses available in the United States

For the shills, go ahead and try to prove that wrong.

The Pfizer vaccine was approved then rebranded. That means all of the original vaccine supply was approved, and the new supply will have a different name. In other words, it doesn't at all mean what you are suggesting. You are acting as though the FDA approved a brand name for use, rather than approving a chemical compound for use. I am pretty sure their process is to approve the latter, doubly so because they don't require new approvals for name changes.

 

[KZP]

The Pfizer vaccine was approved then rebranded. That means all of the original vaccine supply was approved, and the new supply will have a different name. In other words, it doesn't at all mean what you are suggesting. You are acting as though the FDA approved a brand name for use, rather than approving a chemical compound for use. I am pretty sure their process is to approve the latter, doubly so because they don't require new approvals for name changes.

The rebranding makes them legally different. No liability for taking the Pfizer branded vials.

 

[Downzero]

At that age the next time you get sick with anything it could be the last time.
Not my words, they're my 93 year old Grandma's, who ironically enough is in a hospital bed for the third time in three months due to the mystical vaccine complications that apparently don't exist.

Yep, but in his case, he got sick with a preventable illness, given to him by his son, which if he had been vaccinated from, would have been so unlikely as to not be realistic.

The man died of an infectious disease for which we have three vaccines available, because one or both of his children refused or simply failed to get vaccinated, and as a result, transmitted the infection to their vulnerable father, who is now dead as a door nail.

I can't imagine how it must feel to be one of his children, knowing that their own reckless behavior killed their father. That would be very hard for me to live with. Apparently in your world it's just okay because he was old.

 

[Downzero]

The rebranding makes them legally different. No liability for taking the Pfizer branded vials.

You should stick to your day job and go to law school and take the bar exam before you start giving legal advice on the internet.

 

[TonyTheTiger]

Yep, but in his case, he got sick with a preventable illness, given to him by his son, which if he had been vaccinated from, would have been so unlikely as to not be realistic.

The man died of an infectious disease for which we have three vaccines available, because one or both of his children refused or simply failed to get vaccinated, and as a result, transmitted the infection to their vulnerable father, who is now dead as a door nail.

I can't imagine how it must feel to be one of his children, knowing that their own reckless behavior killed their father. That would be very hard for me to live with. Apparently in your world it's just okay because he was old.

You mean in my Grandma's world? Yeah she's old too and isn't nearly as worked up about this as people half her age. No one lives forever.
Wouldn't that be something if the guy you're talking about died from vaccine complications? What if he got vaccinated then still caught it and died? We'll never know, and it doesn't matter because he made his choice and what happened to him after that shouldn't concern you at all.

 

[Inifinty]

You should stick to your day job and go to law school and take the bar exam before you start giving legal advice on the internet.

If you disagree, then the FDA disagrees with you

“The licensed vaccine has the same formulation as the EUA-authorized vaccine and the products can be used interchangeably to provide the vaccination series without presenting any safety or effectiveness concerns. The products are legally distinct with certain differences that do not impact safety or effectiveness.”

 

[KZP]

You should stick to your day job and go to law school and take the bar exam before you start giving legal advice on the internet.

Feel free to debunk it with commentary from Pfizer now accepting liability.

 

[notacos4u]

“Specifically, in the FDA’s review for approval, the agency analyzed effectiveness data from approximately 20,000 vaccine and 20,000 placebo recipients ages 16 and older who did not have evidence of the COVID-19 virus infection within a week of receiving the second dose. The safety of Comirnaty was evaluated in approximately 22,000 people who received the vaccine and 22,000 people who received a placebo 16 years of age and older.”

sounds like two different controls on two different sets of people using two different products.

“Comirnaty has the same formulation as the EUA vaccine and is administered as a series of two doses, three weeks apart.”
If it’s the same vaccine, why do they distinguish Comirnaty has the same formulation as the EUA vaccine, like they’re two separate vaccines? If it’s the same vaccine, just with a new “name”, naturally it would have the same formula.

Also, why would you market it under a “new” name, if the BioNTech name was associated with the miracle vaccine?? I believe Pfizer was the first ones to create a marvelous penis hardening drug, Viagra, and don’t ever recall it ever being rebranded by them, and why would they??

 

[Inifinty]

Feel free to debunk it with commentary from Pfizer now accepting liability.

But licensed adult vaccines, including the new Comirnaty, do not enjoy any liability shield. Just as with Ford’s exploding Pinto, or Monsanto’s herbicide Roundup, people injured by the Comirnaty vaccine could potentially sue for damages.

Pfizer is therefore unlikely to allow any American to take a Comirnaty vaccine until it can somehow arrange immunity for this product.

2 Things Mainstream Media Didn’t Tell You About FDA’s Approval of Pfizer Vaccine

Buried in the fine print of Monday’s approval by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration of the Pfizer Comirnaty COVID vaccine are two critical facts that affect whether the vaccine can be mandated, and whether Pfizer can be held liable for injuries.

childrenshealthdefense.org

 

[Choid]

If you disagree, then the FDA disagrees with you

“The licensed vaccine has the same formulation as the EUA-authorized vaccine and the products can be used interchangeably to provide the vaccination series without presenting any safety or effectiveness concerns. The products are legally distinct with certain differences that do not impact safety or effectiveness.”

I will qualify that I am not a lawyer, but I am somebody who has read a lot of contracts. I do not think that statement implies what you think it does. That qualification is most likely to be there to make it known that pre approval vaccines (EUA) and post approval vaccines can be used together in a series with no ill effects. It does not clarify whether on hand vaccines become "approved" vaccines or remain EUA vaccines at the time of approval. It's certainly possible, but even then it doesn't suggest anything malicious as you are implying. It seems impossible that vaccines manufactured after the approval date would be classified EUA no matter which name, and the vaccines do have a pretty short shelf life IIRC. You are still making the distinction between Comrinaty and Pfizer when the FDA is making a time period distinction, pre and post approval.

 

[KZP]

I will qualify that I am not a lawyer, but I am somebody who has read a lot of contracts. I do not think that statement implies what you think it does. That qualification is most likely to be there to make it known that pre approval vaccines (EUA) and post approval vaccines can be used together in a series with no ill effects. It does not clarify whether on hand vaccines become "approved" vaccines or remain EUA vaccines at the time of approval. It's certainly possible, but even then it doesn't suggest anything malicious as you are implying. It seems impossible that vaccines manufactured after the approval date would be classified EUA no matter which name, and the vaccines do have a pretty short shelf life IIRC. You are still making the distinction between Comrinaty and Pfizer when the FDA is making a time period distinction, pre and post approval.

This is a slam dunk debunk. Just copy paste the Pfizer press release saying they will accept liability for any vial regardless of the branding.

 

[Inifinty]

Malfesense

 

[Darayavaus]

You, sir, are a shill. The data coming out of Israel gives the lie to your poorly disguised propaganda.

seriously. it gives a whole new meaning to the term "fake doctor's excuse"

 

[Choid]

This is a slam dunk debunk. Just copy paste the Pfizer press release saying they will accept liability for any vial regardless of the branding.

Comirnaty has “the same formulation” as the Pfizer vaccine, according to the FDA. Yet, you may still hear the phrase “Pfizer vaccine” floating around. That’s because the shot is still under an EUA for children between 12 and 15 years old. The FDA approval only covered people aged 16 and older. The nuance explains why the FDA says the licensed Comirnaty vaccine “can be used interchangeably” with the unlicensed Pfizer shot. The vaccine is still under an EUA for the administration of third doses for certain immunocompromised individuals as well. Both the Johnson & Johnson and Moderna COVID-19 vaccines still await full FDA approval but remain available for adults under an EUA.

Read more at: https://www.miamiherald.com/news/coronavirus/article253765538.html#storylink=cpy

NOW YOU KNOW.

 

[KZP]

Comirnaty has “the same formulation” as the Pfizer vaccine, according to the FDA. Yet, you may still hear the phrase “Pfizer vaccine” floating around. That’s because the shot is still under an EUA for children between 12 and 15 years old. The FDA approval only covered people aged 16 and older. The nuance explains why the FDA says the licensed Comirnaty vaccine “can be used interchangeably” with the unlicensed Pfizer shot. The vaccine is still under an EUA for the administration of third doses for certain immunocompromised individuals as well. Both the Johnson & Johnson and Moderna COVID-19 vaccines still await full FDA approval but remain available for adults under an EUA.

Read more at: https://www.miamiherald.com/news/coronavirus/article253765538.html#storylink=cpy

NOW YOU KNOW.

I thought you would have figured this out by now. Holding them liable is virtually impossible.

No, you can't sue Pfizer or another manufacturer if you get a COVID-19 vaccine injury, but you can file for compensation

A person who experiences a serious injury after getting a COVID-19 vaccine could receive benefits under the Countermeasures Injury Compensation Program.

www.verifythis.com

On Feb. 4, 2020, former Health and Human Services Secretary Alex Azar invoked the Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act (PREP Act). The declaration grants companies like Pfizer, Moderna or Johnson & Johnson liability protection — meaning they cannot be sued for money damages in court — if a person experiences an adverse reaction to the COVID-19 vaccines, except for claims involving “willful misconduct.”

....“There's a cap of up to $50,000 a year for your lost wages and out-of-pocket medical expenses. You cannot recover your legal fees. And if there's a death associated with it that they can link to the vaccine, that death benefit is capped at $370,000-ish dollars,” said Tucker. ...

According to HRSA data, out of 2,186 CICP claims that have been filed since 2010, the program has paid compensation for 29, totaling more than $6 million. An additional 10 CICP claims were eligible for compensation after a review of the required medical records and documentation, but in these cases, the HRSA says there were no eligible reported medical expenses or lost employment income for the CICP to compensate.

 

[Choid]

I thought you would have figured this out by now. Holding them liable is virtually impossible.

No, you can't sue Pfizer or another manufacturer if you get a COVID-19 vaccine injury, but you can file for compensation

A person who experiences a serious injury after getting a COVID-19 vaccine could receive benefits under the Countermeasures Injury Compensation Program.

www.verifythis.com

On Feb. 4, 2020, former Health and Human Services Secretary Alex Azar invoked the Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act (PREP Act). The declaration grants companies like Pfizer, Moderna or Johnson & Johnson liability protection — meaning they cannot be sued for money damages in court — if a person experiences an adverse reaction to the COVID-19 vaccines, except for claims involving “willful misconduct.”

....“There's a cap of up to $50,000 a year for your lost wages and out-of-pocket medical expenses. You cannot recover your legal fees. And if there's a death associated with it that they can link to the vaccine, that death benefit is capped at $370,000-ish dollars,” said Tucker. ...

According to HRSA data, out of 2,186 CICP claims that have been filed since 2010, the program has paid compensation for 29, totaling more than $6 million. An additional 10 CICP claims were eligible for compensation after a review of the required medical records and documentation, but in these cases, the HRSA says there were no eligible reported medical expenses or lost employment income for the CICP to compensate.

That is a different issue than whether the current Pfizer vaccine is still under an EUA, which is the one I was responding to. And, quite frankly, I that agreement makes perfect sense in the situation.

 

[Downzero]

That is a different issue than whether the current Pfizer vaccine is still under an EUA, which is the one I was responding to. And, quite frankly, I that agreement makes perfect sense in the situation.

The headline also isn't supported by the text. Assuming the truth of the text, you can sue the manufacturer of a vaccine if you have proof of causation and damages, and you can prove "willful misconduct." The problem for the plaintiffs is probably more factual than theoretical.

 

[Schroedernd]

I have spent the last week in a frac van with 3 to 4 young men for at least 12 hours a day. They all are sneezing, have runny noses and such. Should I feel threatened? Should I be asking for their vax cards?

Sounds like your more likely to be hiv postitive from that love train...

 

[Gee Kay]

Shots are still EUA.

There is currently NO FDA approved COVID-19 injection available anywhere in the United States

BioNTech received FDA approval for people ages 16 and above under the name Comirnaty, but there are no Comirnaty doses available in the United States

For the shills, go ahead and try to prove that wrong.

tga here lists it as comirnaty, it can list it as lollie pop aka candy in the US, i still wont take it
dickhead doctors inc the cancer council are telling my wife to take it due to her immune system being compromised when on chemo. funny that it also lists in their FOI PDF that they have no evidence of it supporting the immune system. cant wait to ask them while im holding the whole document in their face when we have the meeting with the oncologist.

https://www.tga.gov.au/sites/default/files/foi-2389-02.pdf

 

[TacticalPlinker]

https://x22report.com/aiovg_videos/...ill-be-tribunals-what-if-cures-already-exist/

 

[theLBC]

great track record....

 

[KZP]

Bob: How do you know the covid shots are safe?

Larry: Because there are no records of side effects

Bob: But that doesn't mean there -

Larry: I SAID THERE ARE NO RECORDS

 

[LawnMM]

Ah, retard?…..no, he’s an M.D. real doctor.

What’s your medical education background?

Take the vaccine or don’t take the vaccine, I really don’t care. You do you and I’ll do me.

But many here who have been throwing personal shade at this Dr. wouldn’t get past the first semester of med school….but nonetheless want to call him a “retard”??

Just can’t even make this shit up.

And you first semester geniuses kill a quarter million people EVERY year, year after year, with malpractice while you "practice" medicine.

 

[Downzero]

And you first semester geniuses kill a quarter million people EVERY year, year after year, with malpractice while you "practice" medicine.

COVID tripled that in short order and you still think it's a joke. Why should we take those 1/4 million seriously?

 

[Rthur]

COVID tripled that in short order and you still think it's a joke. Why should we take those 1/4 million seriously?

Would that be died of covid or with covid?

R

 

[LawnMM]

COVID tripled that in short order and you still think it's a joke. Why should we take those 1/4 million seriously?

Sure it did. Like all the people who died of Cancer of the lungs but tested positive and were listed as a Covid death so the hospital could collect the hazard fee for dealing with the hazardous Covid cadaver.

What the fuck ever. The virus isn't the joke, people like you spreading the fear and bullshit are.

 

[Downzero]

Sure it did. Like all the people who died of Cancer of the lungs but tested positive and were listed as a Covid death so the hospital could collect the hazard fee for dealing with the hazardous Covid cadaver.

What the fuck ever. The virus isn't the joke, people like you spreading the fear and bullshit are.

Those criticisms have been debunked by literally every media source in the world that covered the issue, last May. Even Forbes, hardly a liberal outlet, reported on it.

It is an absolute bs conspiracy theory myth that any hospital ever falsified anything to get paid more. And in Cook County, Illinois, the medical examiner did a full autopsy on every single COVID death in 2020, so it's not as if there's a lack of data on that issue.

As to the "died with covid" or "died from covid" nonsense, nobody dies from COVID. Their actual death is caused by hypoxia, or a blood clot incident to COVID, etc. COVID is not, itself, a cause of death. So that is a meaningless criticism latched onto by people who don't really understand the medical process and examination of death. It's almost like asking if someone died with a gunshot wound or from a gunshot wound, when the actual cause of death is bleeding (incident to being shot in the chest).

 

[Rthur]

Those criticisms have been debunked by literally every media source in the world that covered the issue, last May. Even Forbes, hardly a liberal outlet, reported on it.

It is an absolute bs conspiracy theory myth that any hospital ever falsified anything to get paid more. And in Cook County, Illinois, the medical examiner did a full autopsy on every single COVID death in 2020, so it's not as if there's a lack of data on that issue.

As to the "died with covid" or "died from covid" nonsense, nobody dies from COVID. Their actual death is caused by hypoxia, or a blood clot incident to COVID, etc. COVID is not, itself, a cause of death. So that is a meaningless criticism latched onto by people who don't really understand the medical process and examination of death. It's almost like asking if someone died with a gunshot wound or from a gunshot wound, when the actual cause of death is bleeding (incident to being shot in the chest).

First off the media has proven to be less than reliable concerning almost everything.
Cause of death, not hard to understand.
Are you a MD?
Deflection and condescending attitude, imagine my surprise.

R

 

[devildog93]

I can make the argument, but I can't understand it for you. Even if you were to assume the shot does nothing, that doesn't provide any evidence not to get it. Obviously the assumption is false--billions of people and studies across the entire world show otherwise. But if your worst fear was that the shot would do nothing to you, you could still choose to get vaccinated under the remote possibility that every credible expert on earth was right. And if the worst thing that could happen was nothing, there would be no costs.

Or, in simple logic, a decision is logical if Marginal Benefit > Marginal Cost. (MB>MC).

If MC=0, even if the probability is remote that it has some positive effect (not true, but assumed for this purpose), literally any positive effect, even if 1 in a 1000 or 1 in a million chance, makes the decision logical.

Others have explained this to you above, for example, that you could think that natural immunity will protect you. But the costs associated with sending your immune system into battle unarmed are costly, costly in terms of health care costs, costly in terms of human life, and costly in terms of spreading the virus to others. You know, like the 80 year old father who got infected by his 50 and 60 something children in my community. Both of them recovered. He's dead as a doornail. The probability of him being alive if he had been vaccinated is very high.

How freaking crazy must you be to say that just because the shot might not do anything does not justify our not taking it? You may have an IQ of 150, but certainly don't have the wisdom to pair with it. There are a lot if reasons, and I think you are playing dumb and ignoring them.
1- Rushed testing/inadequate safety studies

2- Reaction to having the boot put to our necks. Take it or else.
3- No liability for the drug companies.
4- Falsification of data and outright lying by chief medical officers. This vaccine will 100% keep you from getting and transferring the virus. That goalpost has moved several times.
5- Silencing of dissenting views by credible sources. Most of the dissenting views are far higher in expertise than the people we are being told to listen to. Fauci versus Mallone for example.
Big tech and the msm are 1984ing the shit out of this.
6- A monetary incentive tied to the medical and pharmaceutical industry to keep treating this like polio when it isn't in the same realm of severity.
7- The excuse of covid to suspend innate or constitutional rights, chief in my mind being in charge and the only decision maker of what I put in my body.

 

[Downzero]

First off the media has proven to be less than reliable concerning almost everything.
Cause of death, not hard to understand.
Are you a MD?
Deflection and condescending attitude, imagine my surprise.

R

"The media" is hardly one entity. Is literally every entity on earth peddling nonsense, even the ones that clearly don't serve a leftist agenda? If all journalism is bogus, what are the legitimate sources of information, in your judgment?

 

[Downzero]

How freaking crazy must you be to say that just because the shot might not do anything does not justify our not taking it? You may have an IQ of 150, but certainly don't have the wisdom to pair with it. There are a lot if reasons, and I think you are playing dumb and ignoring them.
1- Rushed testing/inadequate safety studies

2- Reaction to having the boot put to our necks. Take it or else.
3- No liability for the drug companies.
4- Falsification of data and outright lying by chief medical officers. This vaccine will 100% keep you from getting and transferring the virus. That goalpost has moved several times.
5- Silencing of dissenting views by credible sources. Most of the dissenting views are far higher in expertise than the people we are being told to listen to. Fauci versus Mallone for example.
Big tech and the msm are 1984ing the shit out of this.
6- A monetary incentive tied to the medical and pharmaceutical industry to keep treating this like polio when it isn't in the same realm of severity.
7- The excuse of covid to suspend innate or constitutional rights, chief in my mind being in charge and the only decision maker of what I put in my body.

1. What's the standard that was violated?
2. That certainly wasn't the case when this began, that was the government's response after there was reluctance to take the vaccine. In March you couldn't find a sane person in America rejecting the idea of the vaccine.
3. Not true, debunked above.
4. Where's the evidence?
5. Again, where's the evidence? Never seen any level of expert in anything saying anything negative about the vaccine.
6. No, this is far worse than that today.
7. No court has agreed with any plaintiff on that point, but I'm curious to read the opinions.