Mandatory Vaccines/Restrictions Poll

For discussions of culture, politics, economics, sociology, law, business and any other topic that falls under the social science remit.

Re: Mandatory Vaccines/Restrictions Poll

Postby Karpel Tunnel » Tue Dec 29, 2020 11:46 am

Gloominary wrote:
Karpel Tunnel wrote:
Gloominary wrote:Maybe. Or perhaps, as I suspect, you just outsource your knowledge more haphazardly, less consistently.
I'm not sure what you mean by "I'm an expert in what's right for me," but I think I disagree. If you suddenly had slurred speech and a limp, you wouldn't walk into the ER insisting on your diagnosis and how they are going to treat you.
You say "opinion," why not say "expertise?" That is a more accurate word, and reveals the absurdity of your statement.
Grassroots sources of into are better in some ways than top-down sources, we've already covered this.
Sometimes I go the doctor, sometimes I don't, sometimes I take their advice, sometimes I don't.
Under extraordinary circumstances, if I feel like I'm dying, I may place my life in their hands, I'm in no condition to take care myself if I'm dying, someone has to take care of me and it may as well be them.
So doctors having expertise in your life sounds better to you?
Karpel wrote some stuff here.....
https://www.ilovephilosophy.com/viewtop ... 4#p2796014

Just so everyone knows, I didn't write what you're responding to here, d00d did.
Oh, yes, absolutely. I just meant it as an extension of your response to him.
Karpel Tunnel
Philosopher
 
Posts: 3625
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2018 12:26 pm

Re: Mandatory Vaccines/Restrictions Poll

Postby d0rkyd00d » Tue Dec 29, 2020 8:09 pm

MagsJ wrote:
d0rkyd00d wrote:
MagsJ wrote:Would you continue to take meds that made you fat and drowsy?
Would you eat superfoods that made you unwell, just because they’re super?
Probably not. Also not sure this has to do with the price of tea in China.

You see no correlation whatsoever? Ok.. just thought I’d ask/put it out there.


Can you expand on the argument you're making here? I don't understand, is the implication that the field of biology and medicine recommends we continue to put things in our body that react poorly to our biochemistry?
"So long as the people do not care to exercise their freedom, those who wish to tyrannize will do so; for tyrants are active and ardent, and will devote themselves in the name of any number of gods, religious and otherwise, to put shackles upon sleeping men." -Voltaire

"If an opinion contrary to your own makes you angry, that is a sign that you are subconsciously aware of having no good reason for thinking as you do."
-Bertrand Russell
d0rkyd00d
Philosopher
 
Posts: 2987
Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2006 3:37 pm



Re: Mandatory Vaccines/Restrictions Poll

Postby unnatural » Wed Dec 30, 2020 12:20 am

WHy of course i will take the experimental vacinne rushed out to the public due to political expediency...if the ruling authorities decide for me that i should do something, it must be for my own best interest and nothing could possible go wrong, It's not like the government, pharmaceutical corporations and the carefully engineered media control system have ever steered the people wrong or ended up endangering the public in any way before. It's for our own good, why should i not trust them with my life.
User avatar
unnatural
 
Posts: 17
Joined: Wed Dec 30, 2020 12:08 am

Re: Mandatory Vaccines/Restrictions Poll

Postby iambiguous » Wed Dec 30, 2020 11:18 pm

One man's opinion:


https://www.nytimes.com/2020/12/30/opin ... e=Homepage

My hospital, along with hundreds of others across the country, recently began to administer the first Covid-19 vaccines. My social media feed is filled with pictures of friends and colleagues, sleeves rolled up, writing about how much this vaccination means to them. In an otherwise dark year, it’s a moment of hope.

And yet, not everyone is celebrating the historic vaccine rollout. I stopped following my uncle Robert F. Kennedy Jr. — a noted anti-vaccination activist — on social media in 2019, when he was posting misinformation about the dangers of the measles, mumps and rubella vaccine in the midst of an outbreak.

When I take a look at his Facebook page now, I find a post about the Covid-19 vaccine that says, “We clearly have a systematic problem when government health regulators have utterly abdicated their responsibility to safeguard public health and refer safety concerns about shoddily tested, zero-liability vaccines to pharmaceutical companies.”

His concern — that the Covid vaccine is potentially unsafe, and hasn’t been properly tested — is widespread, and dangerously wrong. According to a report published by the Kaiser Family Foundation on Dec. 15, roughly a quarter of Americans say they “probably or definitely would not get a COVID-19 vaccine even if it were available for free and deemed safe by scientists.”

If this number holds, then Dr. Anthony Fauci’s estimate that at least 75 percent of Americans must be vaccinated for the country to achieve herd immunity, and effectively end person-to-person spread of the disease, could be unachievable.

I’m seeing the trend with my own patients. Two weeks ago, I convinced a 66-year-old woman to get her influenza vaccine for the first time in her life. But she said there is still no way she will take the Covid vaccine.

In May 2019, my sister Maeve Kennedy Townsend McKean; my mother, Kathleen Kennedy Townsend; and my uncle Joseph P. Kennedy II, wrote in Politico about their concerns regarding my uncle Bobby’s spread of distrust in vaccines.

At that time, there was a resurgence of measles, a highly infectious disease which the United States had declared eliminated in 2000. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the outbreak was largely “driven by misinformation about measles and the MMR vaccine, which has led to undervaccination in vulnerable communities.”

What’s more, a 2019 study found that the over half of Facebook advertisements spreading misinformation about vaccines were funded by two anti-vaccine groups, including the World Mercury Project, which was founded by my uncle Bobby. The organization has since changed its name to Children’s Health Defense, and Bobby is chairman. For its part, Facebook is no longer allowing anti-vaccination ads on its platform.

I recognize, with some trepidation, that people may wonder why I feel I need to speak out publicly about vaccines and against my uncle. The truth is, his name and platform mean that his views carry weight. After three hours, his Facebook post accusing government regulators of abdicating their responsibility to protect the public had 4,700 reactions, 2,300 shares and 641 comments.

As a doctor, and as a member of the Kennedy family, I feel I must use whatever small platform I have to state a few things unequivocally. I love my uncle Bobby. I admire him for many reasons, chief among them his decades-long fight for a cleaner environment. But when it comes to vaccines, he is wrong.

Though his Facebook post linked to a dubious source — a website aligned with the Children’s Health Defense organization that publishes conspiratorially tinged stories on “Big Pharma” and “Big Food” — the basic premise was correct: two U.S. health care workers did suffer allergic reactions, one anaphylactic, the other more mild, to the Covid vaccine.

The story’s headline ended with the question: “How many more are at risk?” An anaphylactic reaction to a vaccine is a serious matter, no question. But it does not necessarily signal that the wider public is at risk. The Pfizer vaccine was administered to more than 20,000 participants in clinical trials; 15,000 participants received the Moderna vaccine. Both trials concluded that the vaccines were safe.

As Dr. Fauci said in a CNBC interview on Dec. 16, responding to concerns about adverse vaccine reactions: “Once you decide to dispense the vaccine widely you’re talking about millions and tens of millions and ultimately hundreds of millions of doses. So, you may see reactions that you didn’t see in the clinical trials.”

As of today, more than 2.1 million people in the United States have been vaccinated and only 11 have reported a serious allergic reaction. In comparison, a recent study showed 11 percent of all Americans have a food allergy and one quarter of them have been given an epinephrine prescription.

This is normal, and no cause for alarm. Serious side effects of the Covid vaccine have been extraordinarily rare, but health care providers are aware of them, and are responding appropriately by monitoring vaccine recipients, especially those who have a history of allergies.

It’s hard to express how momentous it felt to receive the Covid vaccine. I think back to the patients whom I cared for during the height of the pandemic in New York City last spring, when my hospital system had among the highest number of intubated patients of any health care center in the country.

There were times when I called my patients’ family members, and told them that their loved ones couldn’t talk because they needed an emergent breathing tube. I reached out over FaceTime to some of the same families when it was time to say goodbye to their loved ones.

We are now bracing ourselves as in New York our Covid-19 case numbers tick up once again. The pandemic is far from over. And yet, this vaccine is our best opportunity to save lives. There is no time to waste. Being a doctor does not make me a vaccine expert, but I know whom to trust: immunologists like Dr. Fauci and Dr. Kizzmekia Corbett, who have spent their whole lives studying vaccine development.

When the vaccine is offered to you, I urge you to take it. Do it for yourself, for your family and for your friends. Do it for your country.
He was like a man who wanted to change all; and could not; so burned with his impotence; and had only me, an infinitely small microcosm to convert or detest. John Fowles

Start here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=176529
Then here: viewtopic.php?f=15&t=185296
And here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=194382
User avatar
iambiguous
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 39808
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 8:03 pm
Location: baltimore maryland

Re: Mandatory Vaccines/Restrictions Poll

Postby Karpel Tunnel » Thu Dec 31, 2020 12:49 am

Edit: I'd just like to add: I read the official accounts of the vaccines. I read the debunking of the critics. IOW I read the arguments presented in the media justifying why one should ignore people worried about the vaccines or anti-vax. I read those. I am not sure what my fellow critics of vaccines do here, but, hey, doesn't it seem likely that we are aware of the MSM position. Like here Iamb presents, presumably as a counter to my post with links, as he says one man's opinion - though I think Kerry is a woman, hope I didn't muck that up. The article has nothing in the way of evidence, or the opinion piece has nothing in the way of evidence. Does he and the other's in the it's irrational to be concerned about these new vaccines camp really think we don't know there are many people, many of them experts, who think the vaccines are fine, or a rational risk or whatever.

Do the people in that camp spend any time looking at what the stronger critics are saying? By stronger I mean experts or people referring to expert sources.

I don't get the impression the dood guy does, nor PK. Iamb seems to read the posts here that are critical, which is something. He knew what many of those links linked to, enough to pull out an opinion about Kennedy. That's more than PK does or Mr. Reasonable. And sure, there are probably anti-vaccers who are not reading much or not looking at what the defenders say in response to critics.

But for someone who actually looks into a range of sources, checks the debunkers to see if they actually respond to the criticism and concerns and who does not form a hard and fast position but still thinks he has good reason to be very skeptical, it seems like the responses here from the defense team are shallow. They are not interested in actually reading the opposition and considering it. I wonder if any of them know about what is in the vaccine: or things like it is made in part from aborted fetus tissue that was turned, intentionally cancerous. That it contains nano-tech. That it contains chemicals that have not been used much and which have a great deal of evidence can lead to auto-immune reactions. There's much more in those vaccines also. And the parts that most
concern Kennedy, and me, are the new ones.

Anyway here's my reaction to that opinion piece and at the end I deal with her accusation that her uncles research is just based on fringe nutberger stuff.




iambiguous wrote:One man's opinion:
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/12/30/opin ... e=Homepage[/b]
The problem with her position is the what she references is that when her uncle presented evidence of potential problems with the vaccine', based on research, the regulators did not say, OK, we will look into this to see if the research has merit. They said, contact the vaccine maker. That is why her uncle said they were abdicating responsibility. The neice doesn't focus on that issue. If research presented to a regulator is weak, say, or not relevant, the regulator can say that. They can justify not taking action or investigating further. Or perhaps they find the research valid or strong or worth looking more into. To tell someone to contact the vaccine maker with the concerns shows a confusion about the role of regulator and a naivte (that seems to mild a word) about how corporations about to make billions of dollars are going to respond to someone without power expressing a concern.

Part of the reason his uncle is effective is because he documents his opinions well and it is easy to demonstrate that the regulators are biased, irresponsible and in a revolving door relationship with industy. Some people just believe whatever. That goes for pretty much any side of an issue. Kennedy's team does manage to find a lot of evidence that there are problems with vaccines and the research that goes into supporting them.

If the niece wants people to trust vaccines, he can complain about his uncle, or he could encourage the vaccine industry (which has done heinous things which cannot be said of his uncle) and the regulators to responsibly deal with public concerns.

I am sure the car industry found Ralph Nader's work really annoying and their PR teams worked on smearing him. But in the long run they had to deal with what information he produced, at least to some degree.

Of course shareholders and management teams will have long ago made their profits, perhaps having moved on to other industries long ago.

Not all my links went to Kennedy's site. Kennedy's site refers over and over to research having nothing to do with his team or website. The bulk of his neice's complaint is about the possible effects of his uncle questioning the safety of the vaccines. That's ends up being an implied fallacy: appeal to consequences. The consequences are a valid issue, but here they get mingled with the epistemological issue, and that's where the fallacy comes in.

I don't know if these vaccines are dangerous or if there is a conspiracy regarding them or even lack of care on the part of the manufactureres. Two of them have bad histories, including fudging research and hiding data, but that doesn't mean they are doing it now. I am sure staff has changed. The same people may not be there. The corporate culture might be better. But that history, plus the lack of a real independent and responsible oversight, and the fact that for some reason they decided to all go with a new technology when they had little time AND have expressed great confidence in the old technology that has been tested including long term, all concern me a lot. Now I am sure they would say they think this new tech is more effective. But then, based on what? It is way to early to tell. Further they are taking a large risk.

The neices's opinion weighs less than a feather.

Now let's get to the specific allegation that his sources are conspiracy fringe ones. In fact one the sources in research that Kennedy passed on the the FDA was
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4051498/

which comes from The National Center for Biotechnology Information advances science and health by providing access to biomedical and genomic information.

and it in turn is based on research from appropriate professionals in various medical fields.

Another bit of research he presented was this one....
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27804292/
Which is in pub med, obviously not some fringe conspiracy website and it recommends that use of this set of chemicals in a vaccine should only be done after users are screened. Users are not being screened for certain antibodies.

He writes a letter to the FDA citing research by professionals published in respected sources that raise issues of concern.

They tell him to contact the vaccine manufacturer with his concerns.

He writes an article saying the regulator is abdicating its responsibility.

That seems like a fairly reasonable assessment.

His niece, a young doctor in a profession that paints anti-vaxxers as necessarily kooks and worse, blames her uncle for the problem.

The problem, it seems to me, is that the regulator her tax dollar pay to make sure vaccines are safe decided not to act like a regulator.

Perhaps her uncle is an imperfect or even often incorrect critic of vaccines, but I see nothing here that should give the private citizen responsibility for the regulator's failure to do its job.

But it is cool having a family member chastize Kennedy. That's real research. I can see why kids see it as having more value than Kennedy's work. The social media approach. I sure there's a shorthand version on Twitter, could have saved the Times some paper.
Karpel Tunnel
Philosopher
 
Posts: 3625
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2018 12:26 pm

Re: Mandatory Vaccines/Restrictions Poll

Postby MagsJ » Sun Jan 03, 2021 3:46 am

d0rkyd00d wrote:
MagsJ wrote:
d0rkyd00d wrote:
MagsJ said: Would you continue to take meds that made you fat and drowsy?
Would you eat superfoods that made you unwell, just because they’re super?


Probably not. Also not sure this has to do with the price of tea in China.
You see no correlation whatsoever? Ok.. just thought I’d ask/put it out there.
Can you expand on the argument you're making here? I don't understand, is the implication that the field of biology and medicine recommends we continue to put things in our body that react poorly to our biochemistry?

Well, yes.. and not only medicines, but foods and so many other products.
but you see no correlation, so we can leave things there.
The possibility of anything we can imagine existing is endless and infinite.. - MagsJ
I haven't got the time to spend the time reading something that is telling me nothing, as I will never be able to get back that time, and I may need it for something at some point in time.. Huh! - MagsJ
You’re suggestions and I, just simply don’t mix.. like oil on water, or a really bad DJ - MagsJ
User avatar
MagsJ
The Londonist: a chic geek
 
Posts: 21523
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 2:59 pm
Location: Suryaloka / LDN Town

Re: Mandatory Vaccines/Restrictions Poll

Postby d0rkyd00d » Sun Jan 03, 2021 5:53 pm

MagsJ wrote:
MagsJ wrote:
d0rkyd00d wrote:
Can you expand on the argument you're making here? I don't understand, is the implication that the field of biology and medicine recommends we continue to put things in our body that react poorly to our biochemistry?

Well, yes.. and not only medicines, but foods and so many other products.
but you see no correlation, so we can leave things there.


I just don't think the answers lead to the conclusion you think it does.

I don't know many doctors that recommend their patients continue taking things their body reacts poorly to. I wouldn't continue eating something generally accepted as a "superfood" if my body was allergic to it. But I cannot imagine the consensus of the professional health and biology community to be, "YOU TAKE IT WHETHER YOU'RE ALLERGIC OR NOT GODDMANIT!."

I think what you're actually touching on is the point of how journalism has hijacked scientific studies to come up with click-bait headlines. How studies have found the food pyramid to be created by various lobbies to ensure we eat their products into early graves. I get all of those things, but I consider them separate from the actual pursuit of finding out how to lead a "healthier" life by whatever the most general applicable standards might be (with the obvious antithesis being death).

I readily admit there are still disinformation campaigns about health perpetuated by unsavory profiteers (but hey hey, that's capitalism for ya, right?), but there is also a lot more literature alerting us to the dangerous of corporate money in scientific journalism, if one is not too lazy to look. And I'd be weary to throw the baby out with the bathwater when it comes to the science of human health and well-being.
"So long as the people do not care to exercise their freedom, those who wish to tyrannize will do so; for tyrants are active and ardent, and will devote themselves in the name of any number of gods, religious and otherwise, to put shackles upon sleeping men." -Voltaire

"If an opinion contrary to your own makes you angry, that is a sign that you are subconsciously aware of having no good reason for thinking as you do."
-Bertrand Russell
d0rkyd00d
Philosopher
 
Posts: 2987
Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2006 3:37 pm

Re: Mandatory Vaccines/Restrictions Poll

Postby MagsJ » Mon Jan 04, 2021 2:33 pm

d0rkyd00d wrote:I just don't think the answers lead to the conclusion you think it does.

I don't know many doctors that recommend their patients continue taking things their body reacts poorly to. I wouldn't continue eating something generally accepted as a "superfood" if my body was allergic to it. But I cannot imagine the consensus of the professional health and biology community to be, "YOU TAKE IT WHETHER YOU'RE ALLERGIC OR NOT GODDMANIT!."

I think what you're actually touching on is the point of how journalism has hijacked scientific studies to come up with click-bait headlines. How studies have found the food pyramid to be created by various lobbies to ensure we eat their products into early graves. I get all of those things, but I consider them separate from the actual pursuit of finding out how to lead a "healthier" life by whatever the most general applicable standards might be (with the obvious antithesis being death).

I readily admit there are still disinformation campaigns about health perpetuated by unsavory profiteers (but hey hey, that's capitalism for ya, right?), but there is also a lot more literature alerting us to the dangerous of corporate money in scientific journalism, if one is not too lazy to look. And I'd be weary to throw the baby out with the bathwater when it comes to the science of human health and well-being.

Thanks for the reply..
The possibility of anything we can imagine existing is endless and infinite.. - MagsJ
I haven't got the time to spend the time reading something that is telling me nothing, as I will never be able to get back that time, and I may need it for something at some point in time.. Huh! - MagsJ
You’re suggestions and I, just simply don’t mix.. like oil on water, or a really bad DJ - MagsJ
User avatar
MagsJ
The Londonist: a chic geek
 
Posts: 21523
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 2:59 pm
Location: Suryaloka / LDN Town

Re: Mandatory Vaccines/Restrictions Poll

Postby obsrvr524 » Mon Jan 04, 2021 4:05 pm

d0rkyd00d wrote:that's capitalism for ya, right?

I see you consistently conflating capitalism with opportunism. Those are different things.

  • Capitalism is merely an issue of the right to own something - capital.
  • Opportunism is seeking to take every advantage - taking advantage.

When those who are allowed to own things are not stopped from taking advantage there is an issue of abuse. Capitalism isn't the abuse - opportunism is the abuse you object to (as do we all - except for the Nietzscheans and immoral socialists).
Member of The Coalition of Truth - member #1

              You have been observed.
    Though often tempted to encourage a dog to distinguish color I refuse to argue with him about it
obsrvr524
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1859
Joined: Thu Jul 11, 2019 9:03 am

Re: Mandatory Vaccines/Restrictions Poll

Postby d0rkyd00d » Mon Jan 04, 2021 4:17 pm

d0rkyd00d wrote:I readily admit there are still disinformation campaigns about health perpetuated by unsavory profiteers (but hey hey, that's free market capitalism for ya, right?), but there is also a lot more literature alerting us to the dangerous of corporate money in scientific journalism, if one is not too lazy to look. And I'd be weary to throw the baby out with the bathwater when it comes to the science of human health and well-being.


Sry, fixed.
"So long as the people do not care to exercise their freedom, those who wish to tyrannize will do so; for tyrants are active and ardent, and will devote themselves in the name of any number of gods, religious and otherwise, to put shackles upon sleeping men." -Voltaire

"If an opinion contrary to your own makes you angry, that is a sign that you are subconsciously aware of having no good reason for thinking as you do."
-Bertrand Russell
d0rkyd00d
Philosopher
 
Posts: 2987
Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2006 3:37 pm

Re: Mandatory Vaccines/Restrictions Poll

Postby Sculptor » Sun Jan 17, 2021 12:19 am

3.4 million vaccinations in the UK so far...

ZERO negative reactions.
Sculptor
 
Posts: 83
Joined: Thu Dec 17, 2020 10:52 pm

Re: Mandatory Vaccines/Restrictions Poll

Postby MagsJ » Sun Jan 17, 2021 12:25 am

Sculptor wrote:3.4 million vaccinations in the UK so far...

ZERO negative reactions.

There have been bad reactions.. why do you care though?
Take your vax, and get back to your life.

Those with certain allergies have been advised against having it,
so there’s probably less reactions occurring now, sure.
The possibility of anything we can imagine existing is endless and infinite.. - MagsJ
I haven't got the time to spend the time reading something that is telling me nothing, as I will never be able to get back that time, and I may need it for something at some point in time.. Huh! - MagsJ
You’re suggestions and I, just simply don’t mix.. like oil on water, or a really bad DJ - MagsJ
User avatar
MagsJ
The Londonist: a chic geek
 
Posts: 21523
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 2:59 pm
Location: Suryaloka / LDN Town

Re: Mandatory Vaccines/Restrictions Poll

Postby Sculptor » Sun Jan 17, 2021 11:33 pm

MagsJ wrote:
Sculptor wrote:3.4 million vaccinations in the UK so far...

ZERO negative reactions.

There have been bad reactions..

Evidence please!

why do you care though?
Take your vax, and get back to your life.

Those with certain allergies have been advised against having it,
so there’s probably less reactions occurring now, sure.


3.8 million now. How many negative reactions??
Let's see your evidence.
Sculptor
 
Posts: 83
Joined: Thu Dec 17, 2020 10:52 pm

Re: Mandatory Vaccines/Restrictions Poll

Postby MagsJ » Mon Jan 18, 2021 10:33 pm

Sculptor wrote:3.8 million now. How many negative reactions??
Let's see your evidence.

The first few days into the vaccinations, and headlines were made.. how can you have missed that?

Also.. reactions can take either hours, days, weeks, or longer, to manifest., depending on genealogy etc.
The possibility of anything we can imagine existing is endless and infinite.. - MagsJ
I haven't got the time to spend the time reading something that is telling me nothing, as I will never be able to get back that time, and I may need it for something at some point in time.. Huh! - MagsJ
You’re suggestions and I, just simply don’t mix.. like oil on water, or a really bad DJ - MagsJ
User avatar
MagsJ
The Londonist: a chic geek
 
Posts: 21523
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 2:59 pm
Location: Suryaloka / LDN Town

Re: Mandatory Vaccines/Restrictions Poll

Postby obsrvr524 » Mon Jan 18, 2021 10:42 pm

Sculptor wrote:3.4 million vaccinations in the UK so far...

ZERO negative reactions.

You are the one who made the claim. Look for the evidence yourself. It is not the obligation of everyone else to show you things you don't want to look for just to prove you wrong every time you make an ignorant or stupid claim, mate.
Member of The Coalition of Truth - member #1

              You have been observed.
    Though often tempted to encourage a dog to distinguish color I refuse to argue with him about it
obsrvr524
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1859
Joined: Thu Jul 11, 2019 9:03 am

Re: Mandatory Vaccines/Restrictions Poll

Postby MagsJ » Mon Jan 18, 2021 11:01 pm

obsrvr524 wrote:
Sculptor wrote:3.4 million vaccinations in the UK so far...

ZERO negative reactions.

You are the one who made the claim. Look for the evidence yourself. It is not the obligation of everyone else to show you things you don't want to look for just to prove you wrong every time you make an ignorant or stupid claim, mate.

How could They have missed the headlines though? :-s
The possibility of anything we can imagine existing is endless and infinite.. - MagsJ
I haven't got the time to spend the time reading something that is telling me nothing, as I will never be able to get back that time, and I may need it for something at some point in time.. Huh! - MagsJ
You’re suggestions and I, just simply don’t mix.. like oil on water, or a really bad DJ - MagsJ
User avatar
MagsJ
The Londonist: a chic geek
 
Posts: 21523
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 2:59 pm
Location: Suryaloka / LDN Town

Re: Mandatory Vaccines/Restrictions Poll

Postby obsrvr524 » Mon Jan 18, 2021 11:13 pm

MagsJ wrote:
obsrvr524 wrote:
Sculptor wrote:3.4 million vaccinations in the UK so far...

ZERO negative reactions.

You are the one who made the claim. Look for the evidence yourself. It is not the obligation of everyone else to show you things you don't want to look for just to prove you wrong every time you make an ignorant or stupid claim, mate.

How could They have missed the headlines though? :-s

"Selective blindness" - "I don't see the evidence (because I refuse to open my eyes until I like what I hear)"
Member of The Coalition of Truth - member #1

              You have been observed.
    Though often tempted to encourage a dog to distinguish color I refuse to argue with him about it
obsrvr524
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1859
Joined: Thu Jul 11, 2019 9:03 am

Re: Mandatory Vaccines/Restrictions Poll

Postby MagsJ » Mon Jan 18, 2021 11:17 pm

_
Sheer madness.

Sculptor reminds me of Mowk.. :-k
The possibility of anything we can imagine existing is endless and infinite.. - MagsJ
I haven't got the time to spend the time reading something that is telling me nothing, as I will never be able to get back that time, and I may need it for something at some point in time.. Huh! - MagsJ
You’re suggestions and I, just simply don’t mix.. like oil on water, or a really bad DJ - MagsJ
User avatar
MagsJ
The Londonist: a chic geek
 
Posts: 21523
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 2:59 pm
Location: Suryaloka / LDN Town

Re: Mandatory Vaccines/Restrictions Poll

Postby Sculptor » Wed Jan 20, 2021 12:14 am

obsrvr524 wrote:
Sculptor wrote:3.4 million vaccinations in the UK so far...

ZERO negative reactions.

You are the one who made the claim. Look for the evidence yourself. It is not the obligation of everyone else to show you things you don't want to look for just to prove you wrong every time you make an ignorant or stupid claim, mate.


What claim?

I understand that there are is some circumstantial evidence of problems in a tiny number of people.
13 people in Isreal have temporary facial paralisis with one of the RNA vaccines. COmpare that with the 2 million vaccinated in Isreal and the 2 million dead.
DO THE FUCKING MATHS.
Sculptor
 
Posts: 83
Joined: Thu Dec 17, 2020 10:52 pm

Re: Mandatory Vaccines/Restrictions Poll

Postby Sculptor » Wed Jan 20, 2021 12:16 am

If there is so much evidence where the fuck is it.

You're all sounding like the bigfatorange loser.
Sculptor
 
Posts: 83
Joined: Thu Dec 17, 2020 10:52 pm

Re: Mandatory Vaccines/Restrictions Poll

Postby phoneutria » Wed Jan 20, 2021 12:34 am

"Doctors in Norway are investigating the deaths of 23 elderly patients who had received the Pfizer/BioNTech coronavirus vaccine, looking into the possibility that adverse reactions to the shot "may have contributed to a fatal outcome in some frail patients."

https://www.cnn.com/2021/01/18/health/c ... index.html

sorry about the cnn link
but i don't think they'd be the ones
to lie about that

anyway
the short term effects are
are not the greater concern
we'll have to wait a few years
to see what happens
User avatar
phoneutria
purveyor of enchantment, advocate of pulchritude AND venomously disarming
 
Posts: 4141
Joined: Fri May 23, 2014 5:37 am

Re: Mandatory Vaccines/Restrictions Poll

Postby Meno_ » Wed Jan 20, 2021 2:03 am

Anyone had the vaccine yet? I just had it. Going on 1 week, Moderna, mo side effects except some soreness at the site. Due in February for 2nd injection.
Meno_
breathless
 
Posts: 8090
Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2015 2:39 am
Location: Mysterium Tremendum

Re: Mandatory Vaccines/Restrictions Poll

Postby WendyDarling » Wed Jan 20, 2021 3:47 am

Moderna "Does Not Know How Many Doses Went Into Arms" In California Adverse Vax-Reaction Cluster

Moderna acknowledges receiving a report from the California Department of Public Health (CDPH) that several individuals at one vaccination center in San Diego were treated for possible allergic reactions after vaccination from one lot of Moderna’s COVID-19 Vaccine. The Company is fully cooperating with CDPH in investigating these reported adverse events. Consistent with the statement from CDPH, at this point

Moderna is unaware of comparable clusters of adverse events from other vaccination centers which may have administered vaccines from the same lot, or from other Moderna lots. Moderna confirmed that a total of 1,272,200 doses were produced in batch number 041L20A, with nearly a million doses (964,900) already distributed to approximately 1,700 vaccination sites in 37 states. According to CDPH, that includes more than 330,000 doses from this lot distributed to 287 providers across the state of California. A total of 307,300 doses remain in storage and not yet distributed.

On order of State epidemiologist Dr. Erica S. Pan and the California Department of Public Health, the vaccines should be shelved until a proper investigation can be conducted. The lot in question is Moderna Lot 041L20A.


https://www.zerohedge.com/covid-19/california-halts-vaccinations-moderna-batch-linked-unusually-high-number-adverse-reactions
Member of The Coalition of Truth - member #2/2

"facts change all the time and not only that, they don't mean anything...."-Peter Kropotkin :evilfun:
"I can hope they have some degree of self-awareness but the facts suggest that
they don't..... "- Peter Kropotkin
. :evilfun:
"you don't know the value of facts and you don't know the value of the ‘TRUTH”... " -Peter Kropotkin :lol:
User avatar
WendyDarling
Heroine
 
Posts: 8311
Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2010 8:52 am
Location: Hades

PreviousNext

Return to Society, Government, and Economics



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users