Thousands of vaccinated people sick, dozens dead

[expos4ever]

Here is a rework of my previous limerick which I think had several errors of "rhythm":

In my bloodstream spike protein now prowls
"Beware!", a young poster he howls
"Dumb Nonsense!" I sings
Then my cell phone she rings
and sud'nly I emptied my bowels

 

[Aldebaran]

Here is a rework of my previous limerick which I think had several errors of "rhythm":

In my bloodstream spike protein now prowls
"Beware!", a young poster he howls
"Dumb Nonsense!" I sings
Then my cell phone she rings
and I reflexively emptied my bowels

The only error is that you're posting it in the wrong forum. Try this:
Entertainment

 

[Bradskii]

What you're asking for is akin to wanting to know how many cases of suicides were falsely called suicides, when in fact they were murders. We cannot know that because of the way the information is cataloged. It's cataloged as a final answer to the inquiry. But by studying the individual cases and testimonies of involved folks, you then know something is wrong with what we are told.

How does this work? You are asked for evidence, you say it can't be known and then you tell us how you actually know it: '...by studying the individual cases and testimonies of involved folks...'

OK. Show us the studies.

 

[Bradskii]

And regarding requests for information backing up any claim, simply posting a link, doing the forum equivalent of smugly folding one's arms and saying 'There ya go' doesn't cut it.

Information needs to be given in the post. So quote the guy, type in the figures, state the source, show the graph, reference the video. Make an argument for heaven's sake. And then link to whatever you need to show where your information comes from. So we can see it in full (and in context so we don't have to spend time picking cherries). It's your back-up. Not your argument.

Simply saying 'read this' is lazy. It's a get out. It's bad form. It's frustrating. It increases the length of threads uneccesarily. And it reflects badly on the person doing it.

And hey, we all sometimes fail to live up to our own standards. So call us out when we do. No link wars. No cut 'n' paste battles.

 

[Jaxxi]

So you take no meds when you're sick? I wish I had your constitution! Stay well ('cos you'll be in serious trouble if you get sick).

yeah I do when I get sick. Look, I don't want it right now. I didn't say never. I want to wait and see the long term effects. If all goes well I might get it but for now I am waiting.

 

[Tanj]

Meanwhile, in Israel...
https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...e1199c-a118-11eb-b314-2e993bd83e31_story.html

Restaurants are booming outside and in. Concerts, bars and hotels are open to those who can flash their vaccine certificates. Classrooms are back to pre-covid capacity.

The rate of new infections has plummeted — from a peak of almost 10,000 a day to about 140 — and the number of serious coronavirus cases in many hospitals is down to single digits

 

[Jaxxi]

Please stop with the dishonesty - you cannot possibly not know that the vaccine does not provide 100% protection. So your poor choices are very much my business.

You just SAID it does not offer 100% protection! You said it, so who is being dishonest? With all of these people getting Covid anyways after the vaccine, you have to wonder.

Please stop with the dishonesty - you cannot possibly not know that the vaccine does not provide 100% protection. So your poor choices are very much my business.

You said," You know full well the vaccine is not 100%. So you also know full well that if you and others refuse the vaccine, you (and they) are putting others at risk. So you certainly know that "my body my choice" is a distorted, misleading characterization."

So who is being dishonest? I am going off what YOU said and you are trying to make it look like Im being dishonest. These are the kinds of games that rub me wrong. Did you not say that? Did I read it wrong?

 

[Jaxxi]

At least you know how it works.

But it doesn't have the same ring about it now you've said that:

'I will fight to my dying breath for my rights (as long as I'm not legally bound to do otherwise by any rule or law determined by a recognised authority applicable in the relevant jurisdiction at the time )'.

You are reading into it wrong. Look I dont want it. I dont have to want it. Give it time. You will get over it

 

[Pommer]

You just SAID it does not offer 100% protection! You said it, so who is being dishonest? With all of these people getting Covid anyways after the vaccine, you have to wonder.

You said," You know full well the vaccine is not 100%. So you also know full well that if you and others refuse the vaccine, you (and they) are putting others at risk. So you certainly know that "my body my choice" is a distorted, misleading characterization."

So who is being dishonest? I am going off what YOU said and you are trying to make it look like Im being dishonest. These are the kinds of games that rub me wrong. Did you not say that? Did I read it wrong?

It cannot be both “my body, my choice” while claiming the vaccine is less efficacious than it actually is, (we know that it’s 90-95% effective at preventing infection from SARS-CoV-2 (as well as 99.xx% of keeping people out of hospital)).

If the vaccine “doesn’t work so good”, then it’s even more important to MASK UP.

 

[Bradskii]

yeah I do when I get sick. Look, I don't want it right now. I didn't say never. I want to wait and see the long term effects. If all goes well I might get it but for now I am waiting.

Gonna leave it to the rest of us to test it? OK...

 

[Bradskii]

You are reading into it wrong. Look I dont want it. I dont have to want it.

That's cool. The vaccine you don't want will go to someone who does want it.

 

[ranunculus]

That's why I wouldn't mind waiting that long to get the shots. I'd rather wait six months to a year and see what the long-term effects are of getting the shots.

I get why that's reasonable to say. And I would be apprehensive at first as well. I would be worried about long term side effects of something that's new, some new technology that's not yet been out for very long. But here's what assuaged my worries a bit:
Has there ever been a horrible long-term side effect from any vaccine that wasn't apparent within 6 weeks after distributing it to millions of people?

The answer is no.
The yellow fever vaccine has been known to cause yellow fever in about 1 in 2.500.000.
The polio vaccine was immediately known to cause polio in about 1 in 2.500.000 people.
The smallpox vaccine could cause a mild form of smallpox in very rare cases. About 1 in 2.400.000 doses.
I'm not going to go through every vaccine but these effects were immediately known.
And now we've learned about blood clots in 1 in a couple million people for the J&J vaccine.

Meanwhile we know what the effects of the virus are, it's not just a respiratory disease that causes pneumonia and potentially kills you, it also causes inflammation of your blood vessels, meaning your own body attacks itself and so every organ can be affected. That's why there is evidence of heart, liver and lung damage for example in people who have had Covid. These will absolutely cause long-term problems.

If everyone had taken a wait and see attitude, many many more millions of people would be dead and many many more millions would not die but suffer long-term effects.
My source for this info is Dr. Paul Offit, who specializes in infectious diseases, vaccines, immunology, and virology.

 

[RDKirk]

It cannot be both “my body, my choice” while claiming the vaccine is less efficacious than it actually is, (because we know that it’s 90-95% effective at preventing infection from SARS-CoV-2 (as well as 99.xx% of keeping people out of hospital)).

If the vaccine “doesn’t work so good”, then it’s even more important to MASK UP.

Well, they also claim that masks don't work.

And that the danger of covid-19 is hyped.

And that covid-19 is a hoax anyway.

And if it's not a hoax, the Chinese did it.

 

[Pommer]

Well, they also claim that masks don't work.

And that the danger of covid-19 is hyped.

And that covid-19 is a hoax anyway.

And if it's not a hoax, the Chinese did it.

Doubleplus goodthought?

 

[Aldebaran]

Well, they also claim that masks don't work.

Who said that?
"A cloth mask or face covering does very little to prevent the emission or inhalation of small particles. As discussed in an earlier CIDRAP commentary and more recently by Morawska and Milton (2020) in an open letter to WHO signed by 239 scientists, inhalation of small infectious particles is not only biologically plausible, but the epidemiology supports it as an important mode of transmission for SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19."
COMMENTARY: Masks-for-all for COVID-19 not based on sound data

"The media will have you believe that EVERYONE should wear a mask at all times -- what exactly are they basing this recommendation on? The truth is, the evidence is shaky at best.

The preponderance of evidence suggests that wearing a mask outside of a healthcare facility offers little, if any, protection from COVID-19 infection."
https://www.medpagetoday.com/infectiousdisease/covid19/87120

 

[expos4ever]

Who said that?
"A cloth mask or face covering does very little to prevent the emission or inhalation of small particles. As discussed in an earlier CIDRAP commentary and more recently by Morawska and Milton (2020) in an open letter to WHO signed by 239 scientists, inhalation of small infectious particles is not only biologically plausible, but the epidemiology supports it as an important mode of transmission for SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19."
COMMENTARY: Masks-for-all for COVID-19 not based on sound data

Note the date of this report: April 1 2020.

I am confident that your not letting readers know that more than a year of gathering data has passed since publication of this report was, you know, not intentional.

 

[expos4ever]

The preponderance of evidence suggests that wearing a mask outside of a healthcare facility offers little, if any, protection from COVID-19 infection."
https://www.medpagetoday.com/infectiousdisease/covid19/87120

Wow, what a shock. This 2nd bit of "evidence" is nigh on a year out of date: published June 2020.

 

[Aldebaran]

Note the date of this report: April 1 2020.

I am confident that your not letting readers know that more than a year of gathering data has passed since publication of this report was, you know, not intentional.

The point being that experts thought they knew what they were talking about a year ago, and then they flip-flop and say they know what they're talking about now. The vaccines just came out, and we're supposed to believe what they tell us now, aren't we? A year from now, what's to prevent the same narrative of, "We know more now than we did a year ago, and that's why we're pulling the vaccines off the market"?

 

[Aldebaran]

Wow, what a shock. This 2nd bit of "evidence" is nigh on a year out of date: published June 2020.

Again, proving they can change their minds about things as time goes by. It would be nice if the vaccine Nazis would remember that.

 

[Jaxxi]

It cannot be both “my body, my choice” while claiming the vaccine is less efficacious than it actually is, (we know that it’s 90-95% effective at preventing infection from SARS-CoV-2 (as well as 99.xx% of keeping people out of hospital)).

If the vaccine “doesn’t work so good”, then it’s even more important to MASK UP.

I wear a mask everywhere I go and like Id said before, I am not saying I will never get it, I am saying its too soon. This is going into my body and once its done I cant undo it! So I want to wait. If all seems good 5 years down the road maybe then.