2092 replies to this topic

[Gal220]

Vaccine enthusiast Paul Offit(part of the advisory comittee) at age 71, isn't inclined to get that 4th booster, maybe he got wind of trials Mind mentions above.

Dr Makary(John Hopkins) also drawing attention to it

 

https://twitter.com/...777967752445954

 

https://www.youtube....h?v=PLo2Wwa3NNA

[Mind]

I'm done with mRNA Covid vaccines. I had two, and now I question whether I made the right decision.

 

But now that the lethality and risk of lingering disability of covid has significantly declined I see no rationale for taking a vaccine that might provide some minimal effectiveness for a month or two against a less lethal virus at a still unknown risk of side effects.

 

People should ask themselves - why did this virus mandate the use of a very new unproven mRNA vaccine technology? There were obviously other approaches (J&J and recently Novavax amongst others). mRNA was not necessary to make an effective covid vaccine.

 

The history of mRNA vaccines is that they were originally created as anti-cancer therapeutics. But they had languished for decades without a really successful clinical trial and had various technical issues. It is my opinion that the major pharma players viewed the covid pandemic as a unique opportunity to do what would never be allowed in a normal situation - get a massive clinical trial (literally billions of test subjects) of a mRNA product that would finally blow through the regulatory agencies reluctance to approve this new technology. 

 

Let's hope it pays off. Let's hope that we don't find long term adverse effects of these mRNA vaccines. As a recipient of two shots I certainly have a personal interest in this being the case. If that's the way it plays out we should get a valuable new tool in fighting cancers and perhaps other difficult to treat diseases.

 

But if it turns out that there are significant long term adverse effects - I predict torches and pitchforks showing up at Dr. Fauci's front door along with not a few political leader's homes. We've just witnessed a multi-billion patient clinical trial. If things go sideways on this I can't imagine the potential blowback.

 

I am worried for my fellow life-extensionists, of course, but I think most of them are healthy enough to recover from any potential long-term side effects of the COVID injections.

 

I am more worried about mRNA technology's future. Here at LongeCity/Imminst we have been discussing (for almost two decades) the great potential of manipulating mRNA to help repair the damage of aging. The COVID injections, which were rushed into use based upon sloppy and flawed clinical trials (they even blew up the controls!), might delay the development of more useful and safe mRNA technologies.

 

Dr Malone highlights the lies that have been told about the COVID injections and how social media fact-checkers were WRONG at almost ever single turn over the last two years. Who are these fact-checkers? Will they faced criminal charges?

[Daniel Cooper]

My biggest issue with what occurred with these vaccines is this - Once covid was declared a pandemic it was obvious that a vaccine (or several vaccines) would be rushed into production with a very abbreviated approval process.

 

I have no issue per se with that decision - it made sense to try to get a working vaccine in hand given the potential death toll from a new and somewhat lethal virus.

 

BUT .... if you're going to approve a vaccine in under a year (the normal approval process for a new vaccine is more like 10 years), what makes more sense - using existing and well known vaccine technology, or to use a vaccine technology which has literally never achieved regulatory approval for any application previously?

 

On it's face I see no rationale for the course of action that ultimately prevailed. The only thing that makes sense to me is that a few big pharma players decided that things can happen in an emergency that can't happen in normal times and this was the perfect opportunity to move mRNA therapeutics from the lab to the field.

 

It may pay off. We may look back in a year or two and find that these vaccines had no greater adverse effects that you expect to see from more traditional vaccines. Let's hope. If that happens expect to see mRNA anti-cancer therapeutics start to enter the market in the upcoming years.

 

If however we find significant adverse effects, mRNA therapeutics may be dead for the foreseeable future and someone's going to have to do a lot of explaining as to why this path was chosen.

[geo12the]

My biggest issue with what occurred with these vaccines is this - Once covid was declared a pandemic it was obvious that a vaccine (or several vaccines) would be rushed into production with a very abbreviated approval process.

 

I have no issue per se with that decision - it made sense to try to get a working vaccine in hand given the potential death toll from a new and somewhat lethal virus.

 

BUT .... if you're going to approve a vaccine in under a year (the normal approval process for a new vaccine is more like 10 years), what makes more sense - using existing and well known vaccine technology, or to use a vaccine technology which has literally never achieved regulatory approval for any application previously?

 

On it's face I see no rationale for the course of action that ultimately prevailed. The only thing that makes sense to me is that a few big pharma players decided that things can happen in an emergency that can't happen in normal times and this was the perfect opportunity to move mRNA therapeutics from the lab to the field.

 

It may pay off. We may look back in a year or two and find that these vaccines had no greater adverse effects that you expect to see from more traditional vaccines. Let's hope. If that happens expect to see mRNA anti-cancer therapeutics start to enter the market in the upcoming years.

 

If however we find significant adverse effects, mRNA therapeutics may be dead for the foreseeable future and someone's going to have to do a lot of explaining as to why this path was chosen.

 

I find watching the back and forth about the vaccines interesting. On the Longecity forum you've got folks who take many experimental and unproven things: C60 oil and peptides from Russia and other things. Most people here, myself included, take a libertarian view on this: People should be able to ingest whatever substances they they want. But then there is this uproar by many that the mRNA vaccines are experimental unproven etc. Much of that does not jibe with the libertarian spirit. Yes the mRNA technology is fairly new but actually has been tested quite a bit. As far as I can see all of the side effects of the mRNA vaccines-heart issues etc., overlap with the side effects of the J&J vaccine and from coming down with COVID itself. Yes the mRNA vaccines are cutting edge but cutting edge is good. Then for many here they only agree with what the people they follow say. Their gurus. Malone and all of the others that people cultishly follow yet disparage those who believe the more mainstream view.  Those people who are sheep to the gurus but think everyone else is a sheep. It's an interesting insight into human psychology. 

[Mind]

But then there is this uproar by many that the mRNA vaccines are experimental unproven etc. Much of that does not jibe with the libertarian spirit.

 

Where have you been for the last two years? The problem is that THIS injection has been FORCED upon most of the world. Social media and government bureaucrats flew into an enormous rage when some people said they would decline the shot. Governments of the world have tried to upend the entire functioning of human society to FORCE this injection into people. People were arrested. People were beaten in the streets. People lost their careers.....and government bureaucrats are still trying to FORCE everyone to take the injections - injections which are now proven to cause multiple significant deleterious side effects and death.

 

Remember when the "Cult of Covid" (an increasingly accurate term) grew insanely furious when thousands of women reported problems with their reproductive organs and menstrual cycles after getting the COVID injection. They were castigated. They were shunned. They had to suffer in silence. Study confirms what was obvious from day one of the injections - that the COVID injections disrupt women's reproductive organs/cycles. Potentially making them infertile?

[Daniel Cooper]

But then there is this uproar by many that the mRNA vaccines are experimental unproven etc. Much of that does not jibe with the libertarian spirit.

 
I tend towards libertarianism myself, but we must acknowledge that we do not live in a libertarian world. At the end  of the day, a limited number of vaccines would be given an abbreviated approval process and granted an Emergency Use Authorization. Those would be the vaccines that people would have access to in the real world.
 
Did it really make sense to have two out of the three use mRNA technology that had simply never been granted an approval before? Researched extensively? Yes. Achieved an FDA approval previously? No.
 

Yes the mRNA vaccines are cutting edge but cutting edge is good. Then for many here they only agree with what the people they follow say. Their gurus. Malone and all of the others that people cultishly follow yet disparage those who believe the more mainstream view.  Those people who are sheep to the gurus but think everyone else is a sheep. It's an interesting insight into human psychology.

 

 

Certainly cutting edge can be good. But the question is - do you really want to run a multi-billion patient clinical trial on something that has never received an FDA approval before. Because that's essentially what this EUA amounted to. Was mRNA technology used because it was the best game in town, or was it used because it was a unique opportunity to move mRNA therapeutics out of the lab and into the field? An opportunity that might not present itself again any time soon.

 

Was is prudent to use mRNA technology given the truncated approval process and the EUA, or would have using more traditional vaccine technology have made more sense?

 

BTW - the libertarian side of me says put everything on the table and let the people decide what is best for them. But, everything on the table would include all the test and clinical trial data. At one point the FDA responded to a judge's demand that Pfizer's data be release with a proposal that they would release the information over a 75 year period. So until the drug companies and the FDA get a lot more transparent than that I'm a little unimpressed at having libertarian arguments deployed against me. And of course, the libertarian argument would also include the right of the people not to be forced to take this vaccine at all.

 

 

Edited by Daniel Cooper, 25 July 2022 - 07:06 PM.

[zorba990]

People should be able to ingest whatever substances they they want

Agreed. And they should also be free to NOT ingest things that don't want as well,
Fluoride ( https://althealthwor...r-water-supply/),
Glyphosate/Roundup (https://pubmed.ncbi....h.gov/27541149/)
Vegetable oils (https://www.doctorki...il-bad-for-you/)
GMO foods
Injected custom designed Spike protein factory instructions,
https://www.clarkcou...-spike-protein/
("The mRNA vaccines, he further explained, use a modified chemical called pseudouridine to encode the spike protein and unique nanoparticles to deliver it. It’s a system, he said, that was approved “without fully understanding the implications and without the FDA requiring a complete pre-clinical toxicology regulatory package, including long-term follow-up, as is done with any other unique chemical or adjuvant additive.”)

False information,
Etc.

Attacking the sources of information as 'false gurus' seems disingenuous. Refute the information if you want to change someone's mind.

Some fun research questions:
Are Covid spike proteins toxic?
Does the spike protein in the Vax differ from any other spike protein found in nature? Was it made to be longer lasting / degrade more slowly intentionally? Is that good idea?
Has any injection into the shoulder, in the history of mankind, stayed 100% in the shoulder like quick drying cement?
What is the role of the Lymphatic system in moving substances around the body?
Does the Lymphatic system extend to the brain?
I mean
At some point
The ridiculousness of the lies
I mean
C'mon ....

Edited by zorba990, 26 July 2022 - 01:36 AM.

[joesixpack]

 
I tend towards libertarianism myself, but we must acknowledge that we do not live in a libertarian world. At the end  of the day, a limited number of vaccines would be given an abbreviated approval process and granted an Emergency Use Authorization. Those would be the vaccines that people would have access to in the real world.
 
Did it really make sense to have two out of the three use mRNA technology that had simply never been granted an approval before? Researched extensively? Yes. Achieved an FDA approval previously? No.
 

 

 

Certainly cutting edge can be good. But the question is - do you really want to run a multi-billion patient clinical trial on something that has never received an FDA approval before. Because that's essentially what this EUA amounted to. Was mRNA technology used because it was the best game in town, or was it used because it was a unique opportunity to move mRNA therapeutics out of the lab and into the field? An opportunity that might not present itself again any time soon.

 

Was is prudent to use mRNA technology given the truncated approval process and the EUA, or would have using more traditional vaccine technology have made more sense?

 

BTW - the libertarian side of me says put everything on the table and let the people decide what is best for them. But, everything on the table would include all the test and clinical trial data. At one point the FDA responded to a judge's demand that Pfizer's data be release with a proposal that they would release the information over a 75 year period. So until the drug companies and the FDA get a lot more transparent than that I'm a little unimpressed at having libertarian arguments deployed against me. And of course, the libertarian argument would also include the right of the people not to be forced to take this vaccine at all.

I think that the earlier trials using conventional vaccine methods for SARS  in the early 2000's resulted in all the animals in the trials dying from ADES. So they threw all of the effort into mRNA, and declared victory, when everyone did not die in the trials. They seem to have skipped the animal trials. Well, it was an emergency.

[geo12the]

Where have you been for the last two years? The problem is that THIS injection has been FORCED upon most of the world. Social media and government bureaucrats flew into an enormous rage when some people said they would decline the shot. Governments of the world have tried to upend the entire functioning of human society to FORCE this injection into people. People were arrested. People were beaten in the streets. People lost their careers.....and government bureaucrats are still trying to FORCE everyone to take the injections - injections which are now proven to cause multiple significant deleterious side effects and death.

 

Remember when the "Cult of Covid" (an increasingly accurate term) grew insanely furious when thousands of women reported problems with their reproductive organs and menstrual cycles after getting the COVID injection. They were castigated. They were shunned. They had to suffer in silence. Study confirms what was obvious from day one of the injections - that the COVID injections disrupt women's reproductive organs/cycles. Potentially making them infertile?

 

 I know this will be difficult to fathom, but I have several relatives who are not vaxed! AND, they have not been arrested, beaten or lost their careers and have not been FORCED to get injected. Yes it's true. One of them has gotten COVID 4 times, another twice and still suffering weird effects from it.  

[Daniel Cooper]

 I know this will be difficult to fathom, but I have several relatives who are not vaxed! AND, they have not been arrested, beaten or lost their careers and have not been FORCED to get injected. Yes it's true. One of them has gotten COVID 4 times, another twice and still suffering weird effects from it.  

 

I know plenty of people that were faced with the prospect of "get vaxed" or "lose your job". 

 

In fact, had I not voluntarily elected to get the vaccine a few months earlier, I would have been in that position. Several people at my company ended up leaving over vaccines. 

 

"My body my choice" right? Except when you want me to get a vaccine to protect you of course.

 

BTW - I also know one person that has been vaxed and boosted (once) that has got covid 3 times, though in fairness the first infection was before the first vaccine.

[geo12the]

I know plenty of people that were faced with the prospect of "get vaxed" or "lose your job". 

 

In fact, had I not voluntarily elected to get the vaccine a few months earlier, I would have been in that position. Several people at my company ended up leaving over vaccines. 

 

"My body my choice" right? Except when you want me to get a vaccine to protect you of course.

 

BTW - I also know one person that has been vaxed and boosted (once) that has got covid 3 times, though in fairness the first infection was before the first vaccine.

 

If you are a business and your employees are sick and getting other employees sick it will negatively effect your business.  If you are a school and the teacher gets all the students sick that will negatively effect the school. If you are a hospital and a doctor gets patients sick it will effect the hospital. Yes people have the choice to be vaxed or not, but businesses have a right to protect their business.   

Edited by geo12the, 26 July 2022 - 05:03 PM.

[Mind]

If you are a business and your employees are sick and getting other employees sick it will negatively effect your business.  If you are a school and the teacher gets all the students sick that will negatively effect the school. If you are a hospital and a doctor gets patients sick it will effect the hospital. Yes people have the choice to be vaxed or not, but businesses have a right to protect their business.   

 

So funny. The COVID injections (and masks, and lockdowns, and sterilizing everything, and plexiglass barriers, etc...) were supposed to protect businesses. It was all a complete failure. Everyone got sick anyway. Employers (and their lawyers) should stop pushing for useless and harmful pandemic measures, or soon they will be the subject of lawsuits and criminal prosecution.

 

Hospitals are first in line for the lawsuits. If the number of injected people who are suffering or dying from the shot continues to increase (no guarantee), some hospital administrators might be headed to the local prison as well.

 

Dr Birx knew from day one that the COVID injections would not stop the spread, yet she said NOTHING and let everyone believe that the injections would end the COVID situation. She should be prosecuted. At the very least, she should be fired from any role in government. Her pension should be taken away.

[Daniel Cooper]

If you are a business and your employees are sick and getting other employees sick it will negatively effect your business.  If you are a school and the teacher gets all the students sick that will negatively effect the school. If you are a hospital and a doctor gets patients sick it will effect the hospital. Yes people have the choice to be vaxed or not, but businesses have a right to protect their business.

 
Hang on a moment there, aren't you the same guy that said ....
 

I know this will be difficult to fathom, but I have several relatives who are not vaxed! AND, they have not been arrested, beaten or lost their careers and have not been FORCED to get injected. Yes it's true. One of them has gotten COVID 4 times, another twice and still suffering weird effects from it.

I'm simply pointing out that people were let go for refusing to get the vaccine as a retort to your unvaxed relatives who have not been "arrested, beaten or lost their careers". You seemed to be implying that pressure tactics were not used on people to "encourage" them to get the vaccine. Nothing could be further from the truth.

 

 

[geo12the]

 
Hang on a moment there, aren't you the same guy that said ....
 

I'm simply pointing out that people were let go for refusing to get the vaccine as a retort to your unvaxed relatives who have not been "arrested, beaten or lost their careers". You seemed to be implying that pressure tactics were not used on people to "encourage" them to get the vaccine. Nothing could be further from the truth.

 

New nasty diseases like COVID are not an easy thing, I don't have all the answers. But I know the vaccines saved countless lives, countless misery and suffering. Anyone who knows me knows I am extremely  pro giving businesses the freedom to do what they need to be successful and get out of their way. So I sympathize with their wanting their employees to be healthy. I know mandates are something businesses struggle with, someone in my family has a business and had to deal with this issue and it's not easy. They opted to have the person do bi-weekly tests. Being tested frequently is offered as an option by some employers. 

 

At the end of the day the mRNA  vaccines saved lives, regardless of what the guru followers here say. COVID is a nasty disease,  regardless of what the guru followers here say. AND there may be nastier bugs on the horizon. The human race has been lucky. There is a nasty new avian flu that is killing mammals-from foxes to seals and it sounds very fast acting with terrible neurological symptoms and highly lethal. Hopefully it doesn't jump to us. If it does I will be first on line for the mRNA vaccine. Those who listen to Mercola and the other gurus-good luck.  You can read more about the bird flu here or google it. I am surprised it's not bigger news.

[Daniel Cooper]

 

At the end of the day the mRNA  vaccines saved lives, regardless of what the guru followers here say. COVID is a nasty disease,  regardless of what the guru followers here say. AND there may be nastier bugs on the horizon.

 

If certain Chinese GOF labs don't improve their quality control game maybe sooner than you think.

 

Look, I took two mRNA vaccines. But in retrospect, debuting this technology on a few billion clinical trial subjects well informed patients seems like a bad idea given that covid-19 vaccines were achievable without using something that had never really had a major trial before much less any approval as a therapeutic. I'm speaking purely from a risk/reward perspective because the risk was such an unknown. 

 

I'm not against coivd vaccines and do believe they saved lives. I just think it was pretty damned imprudent to use this new and significantly untested technology on such a massive scale as the initial application.

 

Maybe it pays off. Hopefully there will be no untoward long term side effect. I certainly hope not since I got two of the buggers stuck in me. But it's certainly not impossible that retrospective studies might find long terms issues. The likelihood of that happening one would think be significantly diminished had a more traditional vaccine approach been used. At least the issues with those technologies are pretty well known. It's the unknown unknowns that are troublesome wrt mRNA approaches.

 

Medicine has found problems with new drugs in the past. Drugs that were initially seen to be extremely safe. New classes of drugs that were supposed to be safer than the prior generation. Remember selective COX-2 inhibitors? Those things were going to give us all the upsides of traditional NSAIDs without all the GI issues. Except they ended up causing a 5x increase in myocardial infarction.  Totally unanticipated. Was only discovered when cardiologist started seeing people with a lot of fibrosis and noticing they were on the new COX-2 inhibitors. Maybe a hundred thousand people were taking those drugs when the issue was discovered. Oh shit.

 

If we find an unanticipated issue like that with mRNA vaccines, we're going to have an "oh shit we just gave that to 2 billion people" moment.  

 

Seems like a smaller initial trial might have been in order.

Edited by Daniel Cooper, 27 July 2022 - 05:55 PM.

[Mind]

I cannot be certain that the COVID injections have been a net positive - mostly because data in the US is pretty much garbage. The IFR is way over-estimated and thus the effectiveness of the injections is likely also way over-estimated.

 

Considering that the most injected countries in the world have seen COVID cases and deaths rise dramatically, there might have been less death if they had all developed natural immunity instead (proven through multiple data sets and peer-reviewed research to be stronger and much longer lasting than what the injections provide). South Korea - one of the most vaccinated (and most mask compliant) countries in the world is experiencing yet another big wave of COVID.

 

Also consider that several countries are now reporting that the injected people are now MORE likely to be hospitalized and die from COVID.

 

The injections were fraudulently sold as a "vaccine". The injections do not prevent infection or transmission and are most certainly not guaranteed to prevent hospitalization and death (most people in the world dying of COVID right now are injected). Someone else goes into more detail about the total failure of the injections.

[Qowpel]

Hello everyone. I ad no idea that this thread was going to blow up the way it did when I started it. Great discussion everyone

 

[Mind]

In cooperation with US health bureaucrats, Twitter (and probably Google, Facebook, Wikipedia, etc.) has been censoring legitimate scientific discourse and data regarding the COVID incident. The general population is not fully informed and probably misled about many aspects of the pandemic. This is awful and frightening.

 

Twitter fact checkers need to be outed for censoring real science. They are manipulating the public in ways that could be detrimental.

 

Fauci, Birx, and Collins deceived people in the U.S. and around the world. There needs to be punishment for this unethical behavior if trust is to be restored in "public health".

 

This is the type of information that is being censored and not being spread widely to the public - Uninjected people spread COVID less than those who took the COVID injection. Most people think the injections are some sort-of miracle cure that "saved lives". This is doubtful considering recent data.

[joesixpack]

I find watching the back and forth about the vaccines interesting. On the Longecity forum you've got folks who take many experimental and unproven things: C60 oil and peptides from Russia and other things. Most people here, myself included, take a libertarian view on this: People should be able to ingest whatever substances they they want. But then there is this uproar by many that the mRNA vaccines are experimental unproven etc. Much of that does not jibe with the libertarian spirit. Yes the mRNA technology is fairly new but actually has been tested quite a bit. As far as I can see all of the side effects of the mRNA vaccines-heart issues etc., overlap with the side effects of the J&J vaccine and from coming down with COVID itself. Yes the mRNA vaccines are cutting edge but cutting edge is good. Then for many here they only agree with what the people they follow say. Their gurus. Malone and all of the others that people cultishly follow yet disparage those who believe the more mainstream view.  Those people who are sheep to the gurus but think everyone else is a sheep. It's an interesting insight into human psychology. 

This story seems to indicate that in Wisconsin, people that just got the 2 vaccines did better than the people that got 2 vaccines and a booster. Although they are trying to make a case for the booster, they fail.

 

https://www.jsonline...ed/10130803002/

[smithx]

Yet another study from another country showing that people with the COVID injection are more likely to get ill and require hospitalization.

 

Several world-renown virologists, immune system experts, and epidemiologists warned that this particular injection could end up harmful and counterproductive. For two years they have been the subject of relentless attacks, extreme hatred, and scorn. Their careers were threatened. Will any of the health bureaucrats ever apologize? Will the Google, Snopes, Twitter, Facebook, etc. ever face accountability?

 

Not sure where you are getting that interpretation.

 

Here's a translation of that page. It is recommending boosters, not saying that the vaccines are bad:

 

 

Booster and repeat shot needed in the elderly to bring protection up to standard

 

 

Publication date 05-07-2022 | 15:40

In the period 15 March up to and including 28 June 2022, there was hardly any visible protective effect of the COVID-19 basic vaccination series against hospital and ICU .intensive care-intake. This is because for the vast majority of individuals who have only received the basic series, it has now been nearly a year since they were vaccinated, and the protection provided by vaccinations (and from previous infections) against hospitalization diminishes over time. The estimated vaccine effectiveness provides a picture of the difference in the risk of hospitalization between groups of vaccinated and unvaccinated people. We have not included data about previous infections, which can also provide protection. As a result, estimates of vaccine effectiveness are becoming increasingly difficult to interpret. 

The booster vaccination and in particular the repeat shot have been given more recently. The vaccine effectiveness of the booster vaccination against hospitalization was estimated to be 63%. The repeat shot for people over 60 clearly provides extra protection against hospitalization. After the repeat shot, the vaccine effectiveness against hospitalization increases to 77%. The chance of hospitalization for people over 60 who had a repeat shot is 1.6 times smaller than for people over 60 who only received a booster. The repeat shot also offers good protection against ICintensive care-intake. While the vaccine effectiveness against IC admission after the booster shot is estimated at 74%, this increases to 80% after the repeat shot. 

Anyone who has been invited to the basic series, booster or repeat shot but has not yet received it can still get the shot. You can make an appointment via www.planjeprik.nl.

This report is based on data on hospital admissions from March 15 to June 28, 2022. At the beginning of this period, the majority of COVID-19 hospital admissions were caused by the omikron BA.2 variant. In the month of June, omikron BA.5 caused the most COVID-19 hospitalizations.

[Mind]

The data show that in absolute numbers, injected people are going to the hospital and dying more frequently than those who did not take the injections.

 

People can theorize about XX variant, various boosters, timing, levels of protection etc... but there is no getting around the data that the people who did not take the injections are doing better (in absolute numbers) than those who took the first course of injections. Something has happened to the injected people that make them more vulnerable.

 

There are now several countries where this is the case according to publicly available RAW data. In British Columbia as well. Rather disturbing that BC is now trying to hide their data from the public.

 

The CDC seems to be hiding data regarding their handling of vaccine safety information. Why does anyone trust the CDC after two and a half years of failed policies and lack of transparency.

 

The most injected countries in the world have all seen the largest waves of COVID lately. New Zealand, Australia, South Korea. These is all publicly available data on Worldometer. Australia beat people in the streets and arrested them for not getting injected and/or wearing masks. Now they have a huge wave of COVID. If the "vaccine" was really a vaccine, there would not be any COVID in Australia right now. The latest COVID data shows only one un-injected person has died lately. All of the other deaths are among the injected.

 

Not being reported by unethical US national media, several countries are now compensating those who were injured or killed by the injections. More lawsuits are flying and being settled every day.

 

Meanwhile in Florida, which was predicted to be a wasteland of death-by-COVID by US National media and leading incompetent health bureaucrats in the U.S. is faring the same as most other states and countries. The Florida Surgeon continues to be harassed, belittled, and threatened for successfully navigating the state through the COVID incident. He has correctly stated that vaccine mandates make zero sense with a "vaccine" that does not prevent transmission, infection, hospitalization, or death.

 

 

Edited by Mind, 01 August 2022 - 06:38 PM.

[Advocatus Diaboli]

Re post #441

 

"Something has happened to the injected people that make them more vulnerable."

 

Or, perhaps more older, and therefore more susceptible, people initially took the injections. While younger persons, and those with fewer comorbidities did not. Efficacy wanes, When protection wanes in the older populations, and some get COVID, the resulting adverse effects are likely to be reflective of their age and general health.

 

You have offered an assumptive conclusion without providing supporting evidence. Were they actually made more vulnerable by the injections, or were they just experiencing outcomes that would have occurred naturally had they not been injected?

[Gal220]

Re post #441

 

"Something has happened to the injected people that make them more vulnerable."

 

Or, perhaps more older, and therefore more susceptible, people initially took the injections. While younger persons, and those with fewer comorbidities did not. Efficacy wanes, When protection wanes in the older populations, and some get COVID, the resulting adverse effects are likely to be reflective of their age and general health.

 

You have offered an assumptive conclusion without providing supporting evidence. Were they actually made more vulnerable by the injections, or were they just experiencing outcomes that would have occurred naturally had they not been injected?

 

There are studies directly comparing the unvaccinated and vaccinated.  

 

https://twitter.com/...994176106201089

https://twitter.com/...726021636734976

 

"According to their own data (NSW, Australia), in the last seven weeks, you are 37 times more likely to be hospitalised with COVID if you are vaccinated than if you are not."

 

 

The NEJM, who has been quite the cheerleader for the vxx, also published data showing the vaccinated are infected longer.

https://thenationalp...period-of-time/

 

 

Some users tracking the data

https://twitter.com/clarecraigpath

https://twitter.com/OS51388957

https://twitter.com/ethicalskeptic

[Advocatus Diaboli]

See  post #445

Edited by Advocatus Diaboli, 02 August 2022 - 03:37 AM.

[Advocatus Diaboli]

Re: post 443

 

I'm not disputing the data (yet). I'm merely pointing out that a causal connection between the COVID shots and "venerability" hasn't been established, as was suggested in post #441. Correlation does not imply causation. The data are what they are, but it's all too easy to fall into the "post hoc, ergo propter hoc" mindset ( ) during interpretation.

 

In your first link, the video shows a graph which depicts a dose-dependent relationship between the number of doses (shots) and hospitalizations--with an increasing number of shots, there is a greater number of hospitalizations. My question would be: Is it more likely, or less likely, that older populations, and those with comorbidities, to have taken the greater number of shots? Age/comorbidity data lacking.

 

In your second link, there is citation to an abstract which, in part, asserts: "The study showed that immune function among vaccinated individuals 8 months after the administration of two doses of COVID-19 vaccine was lower than that among the unvaccinated individuals." And: "These findings were more pronounced in older adults and individuals with pre-existing conditions." In reading the complete study I found no evidence that baseline measurements of immune function were conducted for either the vaccinated or the unvaccinated. Therefore, it is unknown if there was any significant decrease (the important metric) in immune function within the groups even though there was a differential between the groups (vaccinated and the unvaccinated). Since no baseline was established for all we know the immune function among the vaccinated may have increased (but still low in comparison) and conversely may have decreased among the unvaccinated (but still being higher than the vaccinated).

 

In your third link, age and comorbidities are not mentioned. The article states: "When the data was separated into the categories “unvaccinated,” “vaccinated,” and “boosted,” individuals who did not receive a COVID-19 vaccine were contagious for a shorter period of time." It would be important to know the age breakdown--were the unvaccinated younger and, presumably, with more robust immune systems? Unknown.

 

 

Edited by Advocatus Diaboli, 02 August 2022 - 03:35 AM.

[joesixpack]

Re: post 443

 

I'm not disputing the data (yet). I'm merely pointing out that a causal connection between the COVID shots and "venerability" hasn't been established, as was suggested in post #441. Correlation does not imply causation. The data are what they are, but it's all too easy to fall into the "post hoc, ergo propter hoc" mindset ( ) during interpretation.

 

In your first link, the video shows a graph which depicts a dose-dependent relationship between the number of doses (shots) and hospitalizations--with an increasing number of shots, there is a greater number of hospitalizations. My question would be: Is it more likely, or less likely, that older populations, and those with comorbidities, to have taken the greater number of shots? Age/comorbidity data lacking.

 

In your second link, there is citation to an abstract which, in part, asserts: "The study showed that immune function among vaccinated individuals 8 months after the administration of two doses of COVID-19 vaccine was lower than that among the unvaccinated individuals." And: "These findings were more pronounced in older adults and individuals with pre-existing conditions." In reading the complete study I found no evidence that baseline measurements of immune function were conducted for either the vaccinated or the unvaccinated. Therefore, it is unknown if there was any significant decrease (the important metric) in immune function within the groups even though there was a differential between the groups (vaccinated and the unvaccinated). Since no baseline was established for all we know the immune function among the vaccinated may have increased (but still low in comparison) and conversely may have decreased among the unvaccinated (but still being higher than the vaccinated).

 

In your third link, age and comorbidities are not mentioned. The article states: "When the data was separated into the categories “unvaccinated,” “vaccinated,” and “boosted,” individuals who did not receive a COVID-19 vaccine were contagious for a shorter period of time." It would be important to know the age breakdown--were the unvaccinated younger and, presumably, with more robust immune systems? Unknown.

 

HI, I am evidence. I am older, 72, no co-morbidities, no chronic illness, never had any major respiratory issues. I wore N-95 masks, observed social distancing, went no where, did nothing during covid.

 

Last summer, less than 5 months after getting the second vaccine, I was diagnosed with bacterial pneumonia, out of nowhere. My immune system was compromised. The only change in my situation was the vaccine. It damaged my immune system.

 

You can ignore this, and claim it is anecdotal evidence. But, for me it was real, and I have no doubt the vaccine caused it. I have not been boosted (now a year and 5 months since diagnosis) and have not had anything since.

[Gal220]

Re: post 443

 

I'm not disputing the data (yet). I'm merely pointing out that a causal connection between the COVID shots and "venerability" hasn't been established, as was suggested in post #441. Correlation does not imply causation. The data are what they are, but it's all too easy to fall into the "post hoc, ergo propter hoc" mindset ( ) during interpretation.

 

Tucker discusses a few of the studies in this clip

https://twitter.com/...487091901087744

 

The last 30 seconds is not what you want to hear if vxx. 

 

Maybe it is confounded by the unvxx 80 year olds being healthier, but still, its hard to ignore the spike in adverse events for 2021 in VAERs and Eudra Vigilance

https://docs.google....31d3c1088_27_68

[Mind]

Re post #441

 

"Something has happened to the injected people that make them more vulnerable."

 

Or, perhaps more older, and therefore more susceptible, people initially took the injections. While younger persons, and those with fewer comorbidities did not. Efficacy wanes, When protection wanes in the older populations, and some get COVID, the resulting adverse effects are likely to be reflective of their age and general health.

 

You have offered an assumptive conclusion without providing supporting evidence. Were they actually made more vulnerable by the injections, or were they just experiencing outcomes that would have occurred naturally had they not been injected?

 

This is a good point - essentially self-selection bias. However, if the more vulnerable populations are being hospitalized and dying, the injections are not doing their job very well. Those are the people we hope would be helped the most.

[smithx]

"According to their own data (NSW, Australia), in the last seven weeks, you are 37 times more likely to be hospitalised with COVID if you are vaccinated than if you are not."

 

It's very risky to draw conclusions from partial data.

 

In this case, one possible interpretation is:

 

- In the past, lots of unvaccinated people got covid and a much larger percentage of them were hospitalized

- Unvaccinated people may have been infected multiple times and therefore have recent and perhaps stronger immunity (although also a much higher risk of having already had complications or dying than vaccinated people had)

- Vaccinated people may not have had a vaccine recently and therefore have lower immunity.

- people who chose to get vaccinated may have been older and had other risk factors.

 

Taken together, its likely that if you looked at all the data, as has been found by large meta-analyses, what would be seen is:

 

- Death rates, hospitalizations, and long-covid are much more prevalent in unvaccinated people overall

- Adjusted for age, health status, and time since vaccination or recovery from infection, vaccinated people have much better overall health outcomes

[Mind]

 

 

 

 

Taken together, its likely that if you looked at all the data, as has been found by large meta-analyses, what would be seen is:

 

- Death rates, hospitalizations, and long-covid are much more prevalent in unvaccinated people overall

- Adjusted for age, health status, and time since vaccination or recovery from infection, vaccinated people have much better overall health outcomes

 

 

 

Also a risky conclusion. We don't have that data.

 

What we do know for an absolute fact is that by absolute numbers, A LOT people who took the COVID injections are dying and being hospitalized over recent weeks and months, based upon data from multiple countries. It is also a fact that the most injected countries are experiencing the biggest waves of COVID cases and deaths right now.

 

We can debate until we are blue in the face....well maybe if we had fine-grained data about injections, age, health-status, prior infections, blah, blah, blah. We only have the data at hand and it is flashing big red warning signals.

 

All cause mortality (post COVID injections) has risen dramatically some areas of the world, including among healthy young populations. Another warning sign that should not be brushed off....but is, for some inane reason (politics? money?)