This thread was deleted by a volunteer moderator. I certainly don't want a thread this big deleted so I've restored. THat being said, this thread has served it's purpose. I've closed it to new posts.
We have a new 2024 vaccine thread here. New people don't need to try to wade through 20,000 posts to figure out what is going on.
In September, an Israeli health researcher and health journalist Dr. Yaffa Shir-Raz released shocking new information about her findings and exposed Israel’s cover-ups in reporting the adverse events related to Covid-19 vacci...
Dr. Yaffa took to Twitter to expose a leaked video where Prof. Mati Berkowitz, head of the research team appointed by the Israeli Ministry of Health (MoH) to examine the safety of the COVID-19 vaccine, was caught lying and manipulating an expert report on adverse events.
“Here we will have to really think medical-legal. Why medical-legal? Because for quite a few adverse events we said: ‘OK, it exists, and there is a report, but still get vaccinated’. I mean, we have to think about how to write it and how to present it correctly. So this will not yield lawsuits later: ‘Wait, wait, wait, you said everything will pass and you can get vaccinated. And now look what happened to me. The phenomenon continues’”.
Gonna be a real hard kick in the head to a character like you on November 8 when you see proof that massive numbers of Republican voters did NOT die after all.
Dr. Shoemaker, a licensed Ontario physician with 45 years of experience, has worked in emergency medicine, family practice, and on military bases. From 2020 through 2022, he worked in direct patient care at the West Ottawa Covid Care Clinic and was part of the Eastern Ontario Response Team to covid-19. He has learned of the side effects first-hand through experience and from the data.
“These are life-shortening injections. Everyone who gets shot after shot after shot of these covid-19 shots is shortening their life with each and every single injection. The covid shot does not stop you from getting covid; it actually makes you more likely to get covid by three to four times,” he told the crowd gathered outside the Astra Zeneca offices in Mississauga. “Stop them right now, I say to every premier in Canada, do what you can to discourage your people from getting these vaccinations.”
As study after study slowly makes its way past mainstream media censors – the latest published in The Lancet on October 15th,
Older people, those with multimorbidity, and those with specific underlying health conditions remain at increased risk of COVID-19 hospitalisation and death after the initial vaccine booster and should, therefore, be prioriti...
which shows that after the first vaccine booster, millions of older people across the U.K., those with high multimorbidity, and those with certain underlying health conditions remain at highest risk of covid-19-related hospitalization and death – proving that the gene therapy shot does not prevent infection, viral replication or transmission and does not protect those deemed to be at risk.
[...]
According to Dr. Shoemaker, “once you get your third, and certainly once you get your fourth shot, your immune system is so fried and damaged that you get covid more easily. So, in other words, after your first shot, you are on a slide into immune deficiency.” Any efficacy of these shots last approximately three months, but the side effects and immune-destroying capabilities last a lifetime.
which shows that after the first vaccine booster, millions of older people across the U.K., those with high multimorbidity, and those with certain underlying health conditions remain at highest risk of covid-19-related hospitalization and death – proving that the gene therapy shot does not prevent infection, viral replication or transmission and does not protect those deemed to be at risk.
[...]
According to Dr. Shoemaker, “once you get your third, and certainly once you get your fourth shot, your immune system is so fried and damaged that you get covid more easily. So, in other words, after your first shot, you are on a slide into immune deficiency.” Any efficacy of these shots last approximately three months, but the side effects and immune-destroying capabilities last a lifetime.
Ah the iconic argument where if something is not 100% effective, it is useless. You do not sound very smart.
A new paper says people who got them actually generated FEWER antibodies to Omicron than those who got the older shots as a booster - and FAR fewer than people who had a natural Omicron infection
which shows that after the first vaccine booster, millions of older people across the U.K., those with high multimorbidity, and those with certain underlying health conditions remain at highest risk of covid-19-related hospitalization and death – proving that the gene therapy shot does not prevent infection, viral replication or transmission and does not protect those deemed to be at risk.
A few things you missed from the study you linked to:
The risk of severe COVID-19 outcomes reduced after receiving the booster (rate change: 8·8 events per 1000 person-years to 7·6 events per 1000 person-years).
Since you’re an idiot that can’t understand numbers, let me make this easy for you: VACCINES REDUCE THE RISK OF SEVERE COVID OUTCOMES. The study you linked to establishes this as a fact. Arguing otherwise is as stupid as saying 1 + 1 = oranges.
Older people, those with multimorbidity, and those with specific underlying health conditions remain at increased risk of COVID-19 hospitalisation and death after the initial vaccine booster and should, therefore, be prioritised for additional boosters, including novel optimised versions, and the increasing array of COVID-19 therapeutics.
Since you support the findings of this study, then you should support their suggestion of additional boosters - especially for high-risk individuals. Note the study does NOT say that the vaccine is ineffective in high-risk populations, just that they remain at higher risk following booster dose than low-risk populations that have received a booster dose.
Why is every anti-vaccine troll somebody that barely passed science classes in high school?
which shows that after the first vaccine booster, millions of older people across the U.K., those with high multimorbidity, and those with certain underlying health conditions remain at highest risk of covid-19-related hospitalization and death – proving that the gene therapy shot does not prevent infection, viral replication or transmission and does not protect those deemed to be at risk.
A few things you missed from the study you linked to:
The risk of severe COVID-19 outcomes reduced after receiving the booster (rate change: 8·8 events per 1000 person-years to 7·6 events per 1000 person-years).
Since you’re an idiot that can’t understand numbers, let me make this easy for you: VACCINES REDUCE THE RISK OF SEVERE COVID OUTCOMES. The study you linked to establishes this as a fact. Arguing otherwise is as stupid as saying 1 + 1 = oranges.
Older people, those with multimorbidity, and those with specific underlying health conditions remain at increased risk of COVID-19 hospitalisation and death after the initial vaccine booster and should, therefore, be prioritised for additional boosters, including novel optimised versions, and the increasing array of COVID-19 therapeutics.
Since you support the findings of this study, then you should support their suggestion of additional boosters - especially for high-risk individuals. Note the study does NOT say that the vaccine is ineffective in high-risk populations, just that they remain at higher risk following booster dose than low-risk populations that have received a booster dose.
Why is every anti-vaccine troll somebody that barely passed science classes in high school?
Ok, but your focus really is on older, more sickly individuals. That’s the takeaway. That’s an entirely different paradigm than a healthy, < 50 year old.
Interestingly, they are open to an “increasing array of therapeutics.” Ok, great, yes, we can manage the disease AND cultivate herd immunity with therapeutics. Only we’ve been able to do that since March of 2020 and some very good MDs have actually done that, to the chagrin of their medical boards, hospitals, and public health authorities. But we’ve actually had antiviral, anti-inflammatory, anti-thrombotic tools since the very beginning. And, no, I’m not talking about hydroxychloroquine.
Meanwhile, we have this bivalent booster that has no testing in humans, has no data showing it’s better than the original booster, and early data that suggest we are, in fact, observing immunological imprinting with all of this whack a mole. We have former FDA advisory personnel that are not on board with it, yet, there it is widely available for most and pushed by the President.
Meanwhile, you get useless articles like this one. What about unvaccinated? $hit, I had a headache & a runny nose. So, basically Omnicold. The fear-mongering never stops, so is it really that difficult to see why we have and are generating cynicism? Ooh, wow, thanks for nothing Forbes:
Oh good. The other argument: every medical institution and vaccine manufacturer in the Western World is engaged in a global conspiracy. Also highly intelligent thinking.
Meanwhile, you get useless articles like this one. What about unvaccinated? $hit, I had a headache & a runny nose. So, basically Omnicold. The fear-mongering never stops, so is it really that difficult to see why we have and are generating cynicism? Ooh, wow, thanks for nothing Forbes:
Oh good. The other argument: every medical institution and vaccine manufacturer in the Western World is engaged in a global conspiracy. Also highly intelligent thinking.
Safe and effective.
Safe for the corporations, who have legal immunity from governments.
Effective at murder and depopulation, the openly stated goals of the people who control the corporations and governments.
Meanwhile: You, "Harambe," you've got nothing, other than logical fallacies like ad hominem. World class medical authority says X, then you respond like it was me, just another anonymous internet name who said X, you can't refute X and don't even try, but out comes the gas lighting and appeals to authority.
Meanwhile, you get useless articles like this one. What about unvaccinated? $hit, I had a headache & a runny nose. So, basically Omnicold. The fear-mongering never stops, so is it really that difficult to see why we have and are generating cynicism? Ooh, wow, thanks for nothing Forbes:
Tell that to the 300k dead Americans (many from Omicron) who could have been saved by the vaccine. I bet they felt a bit more than "Omnicold."
Interesting, as per usual, that you selectively respond to the least important part of what I wrote.
Nothing else I wrote argues against vaccines and boosts in sickly, elderly individuals along with an “array of therapeutics,” which we’ve had all along. But you have zero data that can refute how I and one Paul Offit have characterized the new, bivalent booster.
So, is it any surprise the cynicism is warranted? That’s the point. What in that Forbes article was actually useful? Serious question. I can’t believe someone got paid to write that.
"FDA urged to publish follow-up studies on covid-19 vaccine safety signals"
"The FDA has been criticised for taking more than a year to follow up a potential increase in serious adverse events in elderly people receiving Pfizer’s covid-19 vaccine."
The FDA has been criticised for taking more than a year to follow up a potential increase in serious adverse events in elderly people receiving Pfizer’s covid-19 vaccine, Maryanne Demasi reports In July 2021 the US Food and D...
Nothing else I wrote argues against vaccines and boosts in sickly, elderly individuals along with an “array of therapeutics,” which we’ve had all along. But you have zero data that can refute how I and one Paul Offit have characterized the new, bivalent booster.
Offit's position, as I understand it, is that after the initial 2 dose vaccine course there is a only a marginal transient benefit from boosters in young healthy individuals. He's not arguing against vaccination, he's arguing against recommending boosters for the general population absent specific indicators. This includes the bivalent booster.
It's not clear that's the argument you've been making.
Nothing else I wrote argues against vaccines and boosts in sickly, elderly individuals along with an “array of therapeutics,” which we’ve had all along. But you have zero data that can refute how I and one Paul Offit have characterized the new, bivalent booster.
Offit's position, as I understand it, is that after the initial 2 dose vaccine course there is a only a marginal transient benefit from boosters in young healthy individuals. He's not arguing against vaccination, he's arguing against recommending boosters for the general population absent specific indicators. This includes the bivalent booster.
It's not clear that's the argument you've been making.
The actual argument is that there was no human data to warrant approval (just extrapolated mice data) and it is unnecessary and possibly harmful due to immune imprinting. There are literal MDs (not FLCCC MDs, although there’s nothing actually wrong with them) laughing about this very publicly.