Why are we vaccinating children against COVID-19?

[renniks]

You're entitled to your own opinion. However, you're not entitled to your own facts.

The so called " facts" from the so called " experts" change all the time.
Facts are actually apparently quite fluid.

 

[ArmenianJohn]

Only I can make that call and I'm not buying what you are selling.
Lots and lots of individual testimony says otherwise.

What are just some of these "lots and lots of individual testimony"??? From who? From politically biased liars? The "lots and lots of individual testimony" doesn't exist.

 

[renniks]

What are just some of these "lots and lots of individual testimony"??? From who? From politically biased liars? The "lots and lots of individual testimony" doesn't exist.

Of course they do. I'm talking about the individual reports not anything political.

 

[renniks]

Of course they do. I'm talking about the individual reports not anything political.

So if you go into vaers and try to search good luck reading it all.

 

[ArmenianJohn]

Of course they do. I'm talking about the individual reports not anything political.

Right, which is why you have no source or proof of any such reports. You just make it up and say it and hope people blindly believe you. So, so many reports but you can't provide a single one, let alone a few. LOL

 

[FireDragon76]

https://www.nasdaq.com/articles/tod...-covid-takes-toll-on-u.s.-children-2021-10-06



"Her son is one of more than 840,000 children under the age of four to contract COVID-19 in the United States since the beginning of the pandemic, according to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

By late Tuesday night, he was intubated and heavily sedated, wrapped in his baby blanket with his favorite Paw Patrol stuffed animal at hand."

That's why we need vaccines for children. So horrors like that don't have to happen.

 

[KCfromNC]

The so called " facts" from the so called " experts" change all the time.
Facts are actually apparently quite fluid.

This is typically the kind of post I see when the "facts" don't actually support what the post wishes they did.

 

[renniks]

Right, which is why you have no source or proof of any such reports. You just make it up and say it and hope people blindly believe you. So, so many reports but you can't provide a single one, let alone a few. LOL

You don't know about VAERS?

 

[renniks]

This is typically the kind of post I see when the "facts" don't actually support what the post wishes they did.

The facts seem to support whatever control in being enforced at the time. Very convenient.

 

[KCfromNC]

The facts seem to support whatever control in being enforced at the time. Very convenient.

Doesn't seem that way to me. And since there's nothing more than a feeling provided to back the claim, I don't see much reason to give it much additional consideration.

 

[pitabread]

You don't know about VAERS?

We all know about VAERS. We also know there are limitations with VAERS data and treating the reports at face value:

When evaluating data from VAERS, it is important to note that for any reported event, no cause-and-effect relationship has been established. Reports of all possible associations between vaccines and adverse events (possible side effects) are filed in VAERS. Therefore, VAERS collects data on any adverse event following vaccination, be it coincidental or truly caused by a vaccine. The report of an adverse event to VAERS is not documentation that a vaccine caused the event.

VAERS - Guide to Interpreting VAERS Data
​

This also isn't to say that vaccines don't cause adverse reactions. Absolutely that is a possibility. The question is what kind of reactions and what frequency of occurrence. This is where things like clinical trials are more relevant than things like VAERS data.

 

[mama2one]

You don't know about VAERS?

yes, self-reporting, unverified
for example:



Our rating: False

The claim that a 2-year-old girl died after receiving the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine is FALSE, based on our research. The CDC said the report was removed from the VAERS database for being "completely made up." VAERS allows anyone to submit an unverified report, and the data can contain inaccurate information. Clinical trials of the Pfizer vaccine in that age group had not started at the time the report claimed the vaccine was administered to the child

 

[loveofourlord]

We all know about VAERS. We also know there are limitations with VAERS data and treating the reports at face value:

When evaluating data from VAERS, it is important to note that for any reported event, no cause-and-effect relationship has been established. Reports of all possible associations between vaccines and adverse events (possible side effects) are filed in VAERS. Therefore, VAERS collects data on any adverse event following vaccination, be it coincidental or truly caused by a vaccine. The report of an adverse event to VAERS is not documentation that a vaccine caused the event.

VAERS - Guide to Interpreting VAERS Data
​

This also isn't to say that vaccines don't cause adverse reactions. Absolutely that is a possibility. The question is what kind of reactions and what frequency of occurrence. This is where things like clinical trials are more relevant than things like VAERS data.

People don't get it, were not saying the all the deaths are false, just they need to be verified to mean anything.

 

[renniks]

We all know about VAERS. We also know there are limitations with VAERS data and treating the reports at face value:

When evaluating data from VAERS, it is important to note that for any reported event, no cause-and-effect relationship has been established. Reports of all possible associations between vaccines and adverse events (possible side effects) are filed in VAERS. Therefore, VAERS collects data on any adverse event following vaccination, be it coincidental or truly caused by a vaccine. The report of an adverse event to VAERS is not documentation that a vaccine caused the event.

VAERS - Guide to Interpreting VAERS Data
​

This also isn't to say that vaccines don't cause adverse reactions. Absolutely that is a possibility. The question is what kind of reactions and what frequency of occurrence. This is where things like clinical trials are more relevant than things like VAERS data.

I trust people's testimony more than clinical trials.

 

[pitabread]

I trust people's testimony more than clinical trials.

Seems you're seeking confirmation bias as opposed to objective information.

 

[ArmenianJohn]

You don't know about VAERS?

I know about it - what does that have to do with anything? Are you saying the "individual reports" you've been talking about all this time are exactly what I said - unverified reports from random people? What does that prove? LOL it's like you want more and more anecdote and less science.

 

[ArmenianJohn]

I trust people's testimony more than clinical trials.

And there it is - anecdote to be trusted over science. But that's nothing new, that seems to be what the political right's preference is.

 

[Sunshinee777]

Because Bill Gates, Fauchi and friends are obsessed about the idea that -everyone- need to get jabbed.
Red flags all over the place if you ask from me...
There has never been as forceful push of any drugs before like this.
It says on pfizer documents that mrna jab should not be used in humans. And testing mrna jabs in children should not be done. It’s all there. But not in the msm obviously.

 

[ArmenianJohn]

Because Bill Gates, Fauchi and friends are obsessed about the idea that -everyone- need to get jabbed.
Red flags all over the place if you ask from me...
There has never been as forceful push of any drugs before like this.
It says on pfizer documents that mrna jab should not be used in humans. And testing mrna jabs in children should not be done. It’s all there. But not in the msm obviously.

Well if someone rejects Romans 13 in God's Word which tells us Christians to subject ourselves to the earthly governmental authorities then I suppose what those who are official government advisors say are going to be "red flags".

As for me, I believe in God's Word and what He tells me in His Word and I trust the government is His minister for me to good, and that for me to reject their authority is to bring damnation on myself, so I trust in the Lord and what He tells me.

 

[renniks]

Seems you're seeking confirmation bias as opposed to objective information.

I doubt there's any such thing as objective information.