Quote:

---

But I do know that this portion of the Bible is the first historical, recorded mention of PMS...

---

While I laughed, she was pregnant so hormonally deranged likely still applies but not PMS.

American Hardwood said:

---

Zobel said:

---

compared to other vaccines i think they are both safe and effective. free is the usual stupid government talking point, because nothing is free, but it probably doesn't rise to the level of a lie in that they were distributed free of charge.

---

Safe is the point of this thread.

Quote:

---

Abstract

The mRNA SARS-CoV-2 vaccines were brought to market in response to the public health crises of Covid-19. The utilization of mRNA vaccines in the context of infectious disease has no precedent. The many alterations in the vaccine mRNA hide the mRNA from cellular defenses and promote a longer biological half-life and high production of spike protein. However, the immune response to the vaccine is very different from that to a SARS-CoV-2 infection. In this paper, we present evidence that vaccination induces a profound impairment in type I interferon signaling, which has diverse adverse consequences to human health. Immune cells that have taken up the vaccine nanoparticles release into circulation large numbers of exosomes containing spike protein along with critical microRNAs that induce a signaling response in recipient cells at distant sites. We also identify potential profound disturbances in regulatory control of protein synthesis and cancer surveillance. These disturbances potentially have a causal link to neurodegenerative disease, myocarditis, immune thrombocytopenia, Bell's palsy, liver disease, impaired adaptive immunity, impaired DNA damage response and tumorigenesis. We show evidence from the VAERS database supporting our hypothesis. We believe a comprehensive risk/benefit assessment of the mRNA vaccines questions them as positive contributors to public health.

---

This is from the link on another thread on the front page as one data point.

Free. As you pointed out, is a perpetual lie by governments trying to score points with its citizens. You wanna give them a pass because of 'free' distribution? Fine; I'm not that generous. But everyone knows, or at least should know, we pay for them in one way or another.

Effective? Maybe for some at risk. Not for the young who had virtually no risk yet the lie is the demand that those at no risk get vaxxed on the premise it would protect them and protect others who might be at risk when it did no such thing as it does not prevent transmission.

---

The article quoted is from a very obscure journal, and the authors have known bias, in addition to a lack of qualifications in judging science in the areas noted. In the pantheon of highly reputable scientific, high quality articles regarding SARS CoV2 infection, this paper would be at the very bottom. This is the best reason why lay people should not quote scientific literature to justify lay opinions, because they are not qualified to make the distinctions between what is quality evidence and what exists at a level of minimal scientific credibility

Kvetch said:

---

shiftyandquick said:

---

I wish the two people I know under the age of 48 who died of COVID in College Station and did not get vaccinated were here to discuss this.

---

So is your plan to just emotionally blackmail people into agreeing with you, or do you actually want to engage with the real concerns that people have when assessing whether to take the vaccine? I'm guessing it's the former.

Also, plenty of vaccinated people have died. Your anecdote is completely irrelevant.

---

Karen's use 1-2 examples to back up their beliefs.

If the movie is "pure fiction", explain the white fibrous clots they featured. You think that was just made up for the movie? What's the explanation? Genuinely want to know.

This recent paper from Dr. Polykretis and myself gets the sharp rise in athlete deaths into PUBMED. Since vaccination, "1598 athletes suffered cardiac arrest, 1101 of which with deadly outcome. Over a prior 38-years (1966-2004), 1101 athletes < age of 35 died (~29/yr). https://t.co/lGWFctLx2L pic.twitter.com/SCieZTsoNZ

— Peter A. McCullough, MD, MPH™ (@P_McCulloughMD) January 3, 2023

Haha this is his source
https://goodsciencing.com/covid/athletes-suffer-cardiac-arrest-die-after-covid-shot/

The 1598 “athletes” who suffered cardiac arrest includes a 61 yo football coach and a 50 yo who was on vacation. For this comparison to be accurate you’d have to go back and record every single cardiac arrest of anyone remotely connected to sports from 1966 to 2004

— anthonyk photos (@anthonykdrives) January 3, 2023

also the figure you include from EuroMOMO literally has a disclaimer that this model is problematic and unreliable. They actually say it should be interpreted with extreme caution all of which you fail to mention? this is so misleading pic.twitter.com/m9Ikyhiw4h

— discourse & bravo (@bravo_discourse) January 3, 2023

Complete nonsense

I'm amazed people still care about the vax. Other than covid Nazis, a few used to post here, most have moved on. Stilll some lolfats talk about it and wear masks but they don't really count.

Help_needed said:

---

I'm amazed people still care about the vax. Other than covid Nazis, a few used to post here, most have moved on. Stilll some lolfats talk about it and wear masks but they don't really count.

---

It's. Not About the Totally FAKE shots that were not effective and didn't even work

What's important.now is to call out all the harm they did and are still doing, including causing the vaccine to cause people to be more susceptible to getting the virus along all kinds of cardiac issues

Zobel said:

---

Haha this is his source
https://goodsciencing.com/covid/athletes-suffer-cardiac-arrest-die-after-covid-shot/

The 1598 “athletes” who suffered cardiac arrest includes a 61 yo football coach and a 50 yo who was on vacation. For this comparison to be accurate you’d have to go back and record every single cardiac arrest of anyone remotely connected to sports from 1966 to 2004

— anthonyk photos (@anthonykdrives) January 3, 2023

also the figure you include from EuroMOMO literally has a disclaimer that this model is problematic and unreliable. They actually say it should be interpreted with extreme caution all of which you fail to mention? this is so misleading pic.twitter.com/m9Ikyhiw4h

— discourse & bravo (@bravo_discourse) January 3, 2023

Complete nonsense

---

People don't listen to this troll, he digs up some useless post to say every single piece of data against Covid is useless.

Anyone that knows who Dr Malone is knows he's an extremely reputable Dr who has done a lot of work on MRNA vaccines and he knows they don't work

I thought you had me on ignore? It's not even Malone.

The only people that should be held accountable are the idiots that wanted the mandate. most of those vaccine mandate idiots stopped posting here. Guess when the SC slapped it down they went to their room with their Fauci poster and cried themselves to sleep. Then they are probably so scared they are still there.

Help_needed said:

---

The only people that should be held accountable are the idiots that wanted the mandate. most of those vaccine mandate idiots stopped posting here. Guess when the SC slapped it down they went to their room with their Fauci poster and cried themselves to sleep. Then they are probably so scared they are still there.

---

Yep I agree .. these morons forced people to take these jabs based on the non sense Fauci was spewing and when the SC shot them down they went and hid under a rock hoping the people don't sue them I guess.

They are still hiding under those rocks !

After seeing this post, I went and watched the documentary on Rumble. I will be asking a local Funeral Director if he has been seeing these fibrous clots when trying to embalm a body.

That would be great. People are dismissing the entire film because they included a Florida State basketball player in their montage that collapsed before the pandemic. So, therefore, in their minds the entire film is garbage.

But what about the clots; are they real or not? No one is actually addressing this, which is the heart of the film.

Zobel said:

---

Only the first uses vaers.

---

You are wrong. You didn't read your own studies.

https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.121.056135

In fact all of them require self-reporting of myocarditis symptoms. Many young men who experience mild symptoms of myocarditis do not seek medical attention. We know that from VAERS. In fact, the CDC has previously claimed that VAERS underreports by a factor of 41.

really? the population cohort studies of people in British Columbia and Israel used VAERS for their data? and no, the male cases of 32 per million doses that I referred to is from Table 3 of the AHA paper and it does not come from VAERS.

its simple enough to poke holes in studies - all studies have flaws and limitations. if you're going to reject out of hand publications in nejm or from the AHA arbitrarily, you should at least show your work on CDC underreporting. let's see that study and how they came to that conclusion. was it for myocarditis?

Of course they are. Can you imagine being so completely wrong. There were posters on here saying it would prevent from getting it. When that was proven wrong they changed course but never came back to say they were wrong.

"one data point"

I'm not going to spend the time scouring up links to studies. This forum alone posts quite a few of them and there is almost always something on the front page. The point is, there are studies now suggesting that the vax is not entirely "safe". The lie is that we were told that it was ad nauseum when the mandates were being pushed. There was no scientific basis for anyone to be telling us that they were totally "safe" because all of the normal testing had been bypassed.

The world isn't full of simple binaries. That's part of the usual antivaxxer trope that went on pre COVID. Anything that wasn't perfectly safe is deemed unsafe, anything that doesn't work perfectly is deemed ineffective. By this criteria no medicine is safe or effective.

Speaking of lies, it is untrue that the normal testing was bypassed.

Poppycock. I never said it was either/or. There was a deliberate false message in the selling of the vax, the magnitude of which is what we are discovering now.

Talk about binary, you call me anti-vax because for you it is binary. You either go all in on being a vax lemming or you are an anti-vax conspiracy loon. I have been consistent all along, if you want to take the risk with the vax, it's your choice. I'm not looking to force anyone one way or another.

My beef is the lies we were told and are still being told and the coverup of the lies. The force brought against anyone critical of the vax (in the medical field especially) was astonishing and very disturbing.

You are playing the part of coverup troll quite nicely by steadfastly refusing to admit that there is any legitimacy in questioning the narrative that this vax was the savior of humanity. So much so that the idea that you are a paid shill becomes extremely viable.

Zobel said:

---

really? the population cohort studies of people in British Columbia and Israel used VAERS for their data? and no, the male cases of 32 per million doses that I referred to is from Table 3 of the AHA paper and it does not come from VAERS.

its simple enough to poke holes in studies - all studies have flaws and limitations. if you're going to reject out of hand publications in nejm or from the AHA arbitrarily, you should at least show your work on CDC underreporting. let's see that study and how they came to that conclusion. was it for myocarditis?

---

What is your estimate for underreporting? Do you have one?

do your own work. i gave you four estimates, three of which were not based on vaers and therefore don't suffer from underreporting at all.

Zobel said:

---

The world isn't full of simple binaries. That's part of the usual antivaxxer trope that went on pre COVID. Anything that wasn't perfectly safe is deemed unsafe, anything that doesn't work perfectly is deemed ineffective. By this criteria no medicine is safe or effective.

Speaking of lies, it is untrue that the normal testing was bypassed.

---

We were told the vaccine was 99% effective. Speaking of lies, let's go over a few more we were told:

Cloth masks work.

Six feet social distancing is effective at reducing transmission.

It is transmitted by surface contact.

Covid has an IFR of 4% or 2%

Wearing masks outdoor is an effective means to prevent spread.

Covid doesn't discriminate.

If you were exposed to someone with Covid, 14 days is an appropriate length of quarantine.

Asymptomatic persons are a significant risk of transmission.

Children are at risk from Covid.

If you get the vaccine, you won't get Covid or transmit Covid.

The vaccine is 100% or 96% or 92% effective at preventing Covid.

Lockdowns are in effective means of stopping the spread of Covid.

It's going to be a winter of death for the unvaccinated.

There are more, but you get the point. Others can add to the list.

There were posters on here and people all over the US that said if you were anti mandate you were an anti vax. It's still there.

Look at how bought in people were to the vax and they still are. Look at the Jacksonville OL that just died. Look what he wrote. They are out there and if not for the SC we would have a vaccine mandate and the vaxsuckers would be cheering it on.

I am like you. Take it if you want. Don't take it if you don't want. It's pretty hard to even defend it at this point unless a person is old or a fatass. They probably should take it because they are probably already ****ed with heart disease so it might not have much of an impact on the tubs of goo who already show they don't care about health.

Zobel said:

---

do your own work. i gave you four estimates, three of which were not based on vaers and therefore don't suffer from underreporting at all.

---

But they do. None of them follow up with the vaccinated and assess whether they have myocarditis. They require people to self-report whether they have symptoms which, like VAERS, researchers acknowledge is subject to underreporting. The fact you can't or won't admit this simple fact speaks volumes.

For example, non of the bodies in this study had a chance to report their symptoms.
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00392-022-02129-5

Quote:

---

Speaking of lies, it is untrue that the normal testing was bypassed.

---

Moderna admitted that it was never tested for transmission of the disease, yet that is the entire basis we were told for vaccine mandates and passports.

you said it isn't entirely safe. that sounds like a binary - if not, my mistake.

i did not call you antivax. i'm saying that there is a form or structure of argument being used here that was commonly used by antivaxxers to argue against, for example, the measles vaccine.

Quote:

---

Talk about binary, you call me anti-vax because for you it is binary. You either go all in on being a vax lemming or you are an anti-vax conspiracy loon. I have been consistent all along, if you want to take the risk with the vax, it's your choice. I'm not looking to force anyone one way or another.

---

i didn't call you antivax, and i did not set up that binary. i think there are vax lemmings (i am not one) and i think there are antivax conspiracy loons (i don't think you are one). i agree with you here completely about forcing people to take vaccines.

Quote:

---

My beef is the lies we were told and are still being told and the coverup of the lies. The force brought against anyone critical of the vax (in the medical field especially) was astonishing and very disturbing.

---

this is where i don't quite agree. you see things and call them lies, i don't. you see force being brought against critcicism, and i don't think that is true. there was censorship, and i don't agree with that in principle. but by and large the people who were being told to shut up were, in general, doing really crappy research, making baseless and irresponsible claims, and then expecting the rest of the world to disprove their wild theories. guys like mccullough, for example. but there have been *tons* of dissenting papers, critical papers, papers that review results. like this one for example, that argues against booster requirements for young adults.

Quote:

---

You are playing the part of coverup troll quite nicely by steadfastly refusing to admit that there is any legitimacy in questioning the narrative that this vax was the savior of humanity. So much so that the idea that you are a paid shill becomes extremely viable.

---

i think your stance here is pretty ridiculous. i don't know why you take an automatic adversarial stance because we agree. you cast me as this villain - but not once in our conversation have i insulted you or covered anything up. even here you put words in my mouth and argue a strawman (where have i ever even talked about "legitimacy of questioning a narrative"??). do you really think i'm being paid for this? stop for a moment here and really consider the absurdity of that.

here's what i'd invite you to do. instead of setting this conversation up as some sort of good vs evil struggle, consider that i'm an Aggie, a conservative, a lifelong republican, who voted for President Trump. rather than position yourself as my opponent because of things you think i believe or you think we disagree, why don't we instead reason together to see if by discussion we can both improve our understanding? like i said before, i am happy to read any and all information, and glad to amend my position when it needs to be improved. is that a fair approach?

NicosMachine said:

---

Zobel said:

---

do your own work. i gave you four estimates, three of which were not based on vaers and therefore don't suffer from underreporting at all.

---

But they do. None of them follow up with the vaccinated and assess whether they have myocarditis. They require people to self-report whether they have symptoms which, like VAERS, researchers acknowledge is subject to underreporting. The fact you can't or won't admit this simple fact speaks volumes.

For example, non of the bodies in this study had a chance to report their symptoms.
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00392-022-02129-5

---

population cohort studies of people in hospitals are subject to ascertainment bias but not underreporting.

you are mixing different case criteria. the case criteria for the cohort studies are folks who are in hospitals diagnosed with certain things.

if your case is subclinical or undiagnosed myocarditis the only way you're going to get anything like a useful estimate is through random surveillance. if you have a study for that, i think it would be very interesting. if you don't, you're just throwing crap against the wall.

American Hardwood said:

---

Quote:

---

Speaking of lies, it is untrue that the normal testing was bypassed.

---

Moderna admitted that it was never tested for transmission of the disease, yet that is the entire basis we were told for vaccine mandates and passports.

---

normal testing of vaccines doesn't include transmission of disease. moderna didn't "admit" this, it was never part of the objectives of the trial. here's the clinical trial registration, for example.
https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04470427

here's a couple of clinical trial for a flu vaccines, for example. no transmission check.
https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00979602
https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00566345
https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01964989

the fact that politicians and whoever else used reduction in transmission as their reasoning doesn't mean normal testing was bypassed. it means those politicians are either stupid, incompetent, or deliberately using a bad or unsupported argument.

for the record, the vaccines do reduce transmission. not perfectly, and it wanes, and it's less effective against variants.
https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.abl4292
https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2116597

They think it's a gotcha, really it's just a tell.

How would a RCT even know if a trial participant transmitted covid to a stranger at a supermarket? Transmission efficacy can only be studied with population data.

My opinion is that the world has always been a dishonest place…but there was a window in western civilization and america where most of the population valued truth and honesty, and therefore our society was less dishonest than any other for a time

Many vaccines were developed in this time and for good reasons by good people.

Even then, political power derives exclusively from dishonesty, so no leader can ever be trusted.

But when the culture was generally honest, and political power limited and distributed widely, things were ok

However, that honest culture has largely been eroded, and corrupt political power expanded and concentrated, so we now live in an extremely corrupt, dishonest world and the checks on that are emaciated.

This virus and the vaccines were among the first to generate in such a new, crooked world, without any whistleblowers, checks, or balances, and so their origins lie largely in corruption. there are few if any honest voices to be heard clearly on the subject.

People are realizing this, and thats why so many refuse to take vaccines, or information at face value.

cbr said:

---

People are realizing this, and thats why so many refuse to take vaccines, or information at face value.

---

I can understand this, but many of these same people have no problems parroting misinterpretations of studies (often from random twitter or substack feeds) that they are either too lazy or too incompetent to interpret for themselves as long as the sound bite reinforces what they want to hear.

corndog04 said:

---

cbr said:

---

People are realizing this, and thats why so many refuse to take vaccines, or information at face value.

---

I can understand this, but many of these same people have no problems parroting misinterpretations of studies (often from random twitter or substack feeds) that they are either too lazy or too incompetent to interpret for themselves as long as the sound bite reinforces what they want to hear.

---

well, honestly, as far as what to believe, given the nearly universal disregard of truth out there, why bother trying? you can't vet any source, or believe anything anyone says.

as far as idiots parroting opinions, that is just human nature, magnified by modern information centralization.... and herded by the narrow interests of those that control that media.

i'm not sure i agree. right now on the internet you can find darn near any opinion you want. we have something very close to an open information society. this can be overwhelming but the answer isn't to slip into a kind of informational solipsism.

you can still know things, and learn things, and have confidence in things...it just takes work. you don't need to be 100% certain of something to have some confidence in it.

a really useful practice is to develop and calibrate your confidence. you can do an exercise with a tool like this:
http://confidence.success-equation.com/

when someone says to me, does the risk of vaccines for young people outweigh the benefit, i would say my confidence of that is around 60%. for the average adult I say it's around 90%. for the elderly its probably 99%. for three or more shots for kids i say it doesn't with 60% confidence. it's much more productive than the black and white approach.