FDA: Heart Attacks 71 times more often for Vaccine takers – We are killing 2 people for each one the vaccine saves? The stats… at FDA – YouTube will not delete! lol
The propagandists still haven’t deleted this due to the fact that it is a FDA uploaded video…. but expect the Deep State to take it out soon… who wants to bet…. I bet it will not last long as you know what is going on. You can share this and others will see it too on FB and the rest since it is FDA.
Just to clarify , Kirsch is not a FDA employee or member of the VRBPAC, the FDA told Reuters in an email. The U.S. entrepreneur had submitted a request to speak at the open public hearing section of the meeting, which is open to anyone, as detailed in the agency’s announcement
Aug. 26, 2021 -- Myocarditis, or inflammation of the heart muscle, appears to be more common after a COVID-19 infection than after vaccination, according to a new study published Wednesday in The New England Journal of Medicine.
Based in Israel, the study showed that Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine is linked to an increased risk of myocarditis, with about one to five cases per 100,000 people. But COVID-19 infection was linked to an increased risk of 11 cases per 100,000 people.
“Coronavirus is very dangerous, and it’s very dangerous to the human body in many ways,” Ben Reis, PhD, one of the study authors and director of the Predictive Medicine Group at the Boston Children’s Hospital Computational Health Informatics Program, told The New York Times.
“If the reason that someone so far has been hesitating to get the vaccine is fear of this very rare and usually not very serious adverse event called myocarditis, well, this study shows that that very same adverse event is actually associated with a higher risk if you’re not vaccinated and you get infected,” he said.
COVID-19 infection was associated with higher risks of serious cardiovascular problems, including heart attacks, irregular heartbeat, blood clots in the lungs or legs, kidney injury, and bleeding in the skull. For every 100,000 infections, there were an extra 25 heart attacks and 62 cases of blood clots in the lungs.
It might be the vaccine doesn’t cure the co-morbidities of many of the vaccinated. Many got the vaxx in fear that pre-existing diseases would make a covid infection more likely to be fatal.
Considering that 182 million Americans are fully vaccinated and 212 million Americans have had one dose, chances are, most of the folks dying from this point on (regardless of actual cause of death) can be illogically attributed to the vaccine.
This is much like blaming shoes for all American deaths because all Americans probably wear them.
Considering that 182 million Americans are fully vaccinated and 212 million Americans have had one dose, chances are, most of the folks dying from this point on (regardless of actual cause of death) can be illogically attributed to the vaccine.
This is much like blaming shoes for all American deaths because all Americans probably wear them.
So, in other words, there is no control group anymore.
Well, a few Wuhan lab folks have conveniently been disappeared. However, Fauci and Gates hide behind plausible deniability and will escape any copiability.
Nothing on the FDA website of course but I have no doubt it's happening because one of the vaccines causes your red blood cells to clump together. Don't remember which one but I posted a video by Dr. Ryan Cole while back about it.
FDA: Heart Attacks 71 times more often for Vaccine takers – We are killing 2 people for each one the vaccine saves? The stats… at FDA – YouTube will not delete! lol
The propagandists still haven’t deleted this due to the fact that it is a FDA uploaded video…. but expect the Deep State to take it out soon… who wants to bet…. I bet it will not last long as you know what is going on. You can share this and others will see it too on FB and the rest since it is FDA.
The purpose of the vaccine is to kill and injure as many people as possible while, straight-faced, telling people that it's safe, effective, and mandatory.
Think of that scene in Mars Attacks where the Martians are everywhere randomly killing humans, while blasting the message, "Don't run ... We are your friends."
Aug. 26, 2021 -- Myocarditis, or inflammation of the heart muscle, appears to be more common after a COVID-19 infection than after vaccination, according to a new study published Wednesday in The New England Journal of Medicine.
Because if you die less than fourteen days after the second shot, they classify your death as a COVID-19 death, not a COVID-19 Shot death.
FDA: Heart Attacks 71 times more often for Vaccine takers – We are killing 2 people for each one the vaccine saves? The stats… at FDA – YouTube will not delete! lol
The propagandists still haven’t deleted this due to the fact that it is a FDA uploaded video…. but expect the Deep State to take it out soon… who wants to bet…. I bet it will not last long as you know what is going on. You can share this and others will see it too on FB and the rest since it is FDA.
FDA: Heart Attacks 71 times more often for Vaccine takers – We are killing 2 people for each one the vaccine saves? The stats… at FDA – YouTube will not delete! lol
The propagandists still haven’t deleted this due to the fact that it is a FDA uploaded video…. but expect the Deep State to take it out soon… who wants to bet…. I bet it will not last long as you know what is going on. You can share this and others will see it too on FB and the rest since it is FDA.
Aug. 26, 2021 -- Myocarditis, or inflammation of the heart muscle, appears to be more common after a COVID-19 infection than after vaccination, according to a new study published Wednesday in The New England Journal of Medicine.
Because if you die less than fourteen days after the second shot, they classify your death as a COVID-19 death, not a COVID-19 Shot death.
Nothing on the FDA website of course but I have no doubt it's happening because one of the vaccines causes your red blood cells to clump together. Don't remember which one but I posted a video by Dr. Ryan Cole while back about it.
Well, there isn't anything on the FDA website and no FDA official announcement even resembling the OP most likely because it is just more fake hysteria.
Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc. Description: The argument offers an explanation, based on a temporal ordering of the events, that confuses co-occurrence with causality: A happened just before B, so A caused B. Comments: The Latin phrase "post hoc ergo propter hoc" means "after this, therefore because of this."
Interesting read on the vaccines and blood clots. There's something about the spike protein in both the vaccine or with a Covid-19 infection that can cause blood clots in some people, they still don't quite understand what is going on.
Then there’s the spike protein itself. One team of researchers wondered whether the antibodies that bind to PF4 in people with VITT are an unintended by-product of the body’s immune response to spike. But they found that the PF4 antibodies can’t bind to it, suggesting that they are not part of the immune response to the viral protein9.
But cancer researcher Rolf Marschalek at Goethe University Frankfurt in Germany and his colleagues have shown that the snippets of RNA that encode spike can be cut apart and stitched back together in different ways in human cells; some of these forms, called splice variants, can generate spike proteins that get into the blood and then bind to the surface of cells that line blood vessels10. There, they cause an inflammatory response that is also seen in some SARS-CoV-2 infections, which in severely affected people can lead to the formation of clots.
And the lower rate of clots in J&J’s vaccine compared with Oxford–AstraZeneca’s could be because the version of spike generated by the J&J vaccine was engineered to remove the sites that allow the RNA to be processed into splice variants, says Marschalek.
Quote
One possible factor affecting the safety of adenoviral vaccines is how they are administered. The COVID-19 vaccines are given as injections into muscle, but if the needle happens to puncture a vein, the vaccine could enter the bloodstream directly. Leo Nicolai, a cardiologist at Ludwig Maximilian University of Munich, Germany, and his colleagues found in a mouse study that platelets clump together with adenovirus and become activated when the Oxford–AstraZeneca vaccine is injected into blood vessels, but not when it is injected into muscle11.
It’s possible, says Nicolai, that on rare occasions, a vaccine is inadvertently injected into a vein — as was done in the earlier mouse studies that found that adenovirus could bind to platelets. If so, many cases of VITT might be avoided by asking vaccinators to first draw a small amount of fluid from the injection site with the syringe to check for blood before they actually push the plunger to administer the vaccine. This is already standard practice in some countries, and Denmark has added it to its official guidelines for COVID-19 vaccine administration.
Interesting read on the vaccines and blood clots. There's something about the spike protein in both the vaccine or with a Covid-19 infection that can cause blood clots in some people, they still don't quite understand what is going on.
Then there’s the spike protein itself. One team of researchers wondered whether the antibodies that bind to PF4 in people with VITT are an unintended by-product of the body’s immune response to spike. But they found that the PF4 antibodies can’t bind to it, suggesting that they are not part of the immune response to the viral protein9.
But cancer researcher Rolf Marschalek at Goethe University Frankfurt in Germany and his colleagues have shown that the snippets of RNA that encode spike can be cut apart and stitched back together in different ways in human cells; some of these forms, called splice variants, can generate spike proteins that get into the blood and then bind to the surface of cells that line blood vessels10. There, they cause an inflammatory response that is also seen in some SARS-CoV-2 infections, which in severely affected people can lead to the formation of clots.
And the lower rate of clots in J&J’s vaccine compared with Oxford–AstraZeneca’s could be because the version of spike generated by the J&J vaccine was engineered to remove the sites that allow the RNA to be processed into splice variants, says Marschalek.
Quote
One possible factor affecting the safety of adenoviral vaccines is how they are administered. The COVID-19 vaccines are given as injections into muscle, but if the needle happens to puncture a vein, the vaccine could enter the bloodstream directly. Leo Nicolai, a cardiologist at Ludwig Maximilian University of Munich, Germany, and his colleagues found in a mouse study that platelets clump together with adenovirus and become activated when the Oxford–AstraZeneca vaccine is injected into blood vessels, but not when it is injected into muscle11.
It’s possible, says Nicolai, that on rare occasions, a vaccine is inadvertently injected into a vein — as was done in the earlier mouse studies that found that adenovirus could bind to platelets. If so, many cases of VITT might be avoided by asking vaccinators to first draw a small amount of fluid from the injection site with the syringe to check for blood before they actually push the plunger to administer the vaccine. This is already standard practice in some countries, and Denmark has added it to its official guidelines for COVID-19 vaccine administration.
Well, since we have zero studies or data on how the mRNA stuff interacts with the DOAC meds we make everyone who gets stents take......
The purpose of the vaccine is to kill and injure as many people as possible...........
Think of that scene in Mars Attacks where the Martians are everywhere randomly killing humans.......
LOL, that's right, the vaccine is just like a Martian movie.
And if the purpose of it is to kill and injure as many people as possible, then it's not very effective, is it.
If everyone died right away, no amount of gaslighting by the MSM, the Government, and the medical establishment, would prevent the majority of people from abstaining from it.
You know, there are some serious and legitimate concerns about the vaccine. The Navy surgeon makes a good case against the vaccination of the military because according to her data, the risks from covid are less than the risks from the vaccine.
And this is because there were very few deaths from covid in the miliatry (20), so the risk is very low. It's a straight-up risk-return analysis based not on high risk from the vaccine, but low risk from covid.
Likewise, there are always serious concerns about the federal government and overreach. Especially with democrats at the helm, and in particular, the current administration.
But to say that the US government has sponsored and implemented a vaccination program designed to kill and injure as many people as possible is idiotic. And it just lends credence to the left's contention that anti-vaxxers are kooks. I've seen mention of the KOTY award on here many times, but I think it's time to break out the KOTC award.
Aug. 26, 2021 -- Myocarditis, or inflammation of the heart muscle, appears to be more common after a COVID-19 infection than after vaccination, according to a new study published Wednesday in The New England Journal of Medicine.
Because if you die less than fourteen days after the second shot, they classify your death as a COVID-19 death, not a COVID-19 Shot death.
I affiliate and know hundreds who've had the jab and all are fine.
I also know no one who's died from covid, and despite hundreds I know who've had it only 2 have gone to hospital for a night or two.
Since everything is BS now, I just go with what I see and witness.
The problem with that is what you see depends on where you see it.
A lot of these doctors pushing the fear are only seeing the really sick patients. Heck, for the first few months, almost everyone we intubated died because the ARDS protocols sucked with the inflammation.
But we were not seeing the 85+% of the patients that didn't even get admitted, and that's it of a very high risk population of old Vietnam vets with multiple co-morbidities
Interesting read on the vaccines and blood clots. There's something about the spike protein in both the vaccine or with a Covid-19 infection that can cause blood clots in some people, they still don't quite understand what is going on.
Then there’s the spike protein itself. One team of researchers wondered whether the antibodies that bind to PF4 in people with VITT are an unintended by-product of the body’s immune response to spike. But they found that the PF4 antibodies can’t bind to it, suggesting that they are not part of the immune response to the viral protein9.
But cancer researcher Rolf Marschalek at Goethe University Frankfurt in Germany and his colleagues have shown that the snippets of RNA that encode spike can be cut apart and stitched back together in different ways in human cells; some of these forms, called splice variants, can generate spike proteins that get into the blood and then bind to the surface of cells that line blood vessels10. There, they cause an inflammatory response that is also seen in some SARS-CoV-2 infections, which in severely affected people can lead to the formation of clots.
And the lower rate of clots in J&J’s vaccine compared with Oxford–AstraZeneca’s could be because the version of spike generated by the J&J vaccine was engineered to remove the sites that allow the RNA to be processed into splice variants, says Marschalek.
Quote
One possible factor affecting the safety of adenoviral vaccines is how they are administered. The COVID-19 vaccines are given as injections into muscle, but if the needle happens to puncture a vein, the vaccine could enter the bloodstream directly. Leo Nicolai, a cardiologist at Ludwig Maximilian University of Munich, Germany, and his colleagues found in a mouse study that platelets clump together with adenovirus and become activated when the Oxford–AstraZeneca vaccine is injected into blood vessels, but not when it is injected into muscle11.
It’s possible, says Nicolai, that on rare occasions, a vaccine is inadvertently injected into a vein — as was done in the earlier mouse studies that found that adenovirus could bind to platelets. If so, many cases of VITT might be avoided by asking vaccinators to first draw a small amount of fluid from the injection site with the syringe to check for blood before they actually push the plunger to administer the vaccine. This is already standard practice in some countries, and Denmark has added it to its official guidelines for COVID-19 vaccine administration.
I know someone who ended up with clots in the lungs after Rona, I guess it's not super uncommon. Another person locally died of clots in the lungs a few weeks after the vaccine, but also had undiagnosed leukimia so it's hard call on the cause.
Considering that 182 million Americans are fully vaccinated and 212 million Americans have had one dose, chances are, most of the folks dying from this point on (regardless of actual cause of death) can be illogically attributed to the vaccine.
This is much like blaming shoes for all American deaths because all Americans probably wear them.
This can be tested statistically very easily. If someone had access to reliable vaccination associated (even if only suspect) illness data they could easily test if there was any significance to the illnesses.
The government with a bottomless pit of fiat currency will not spend the effort or money to create a reliable database of vaccine illnesses.
Interesting read on the vaccines and blood clots. There's something about the spike protein in both the vaccine or with a Covid-19 infection that can cause blood clots in some people, they still don't quite understand what is going on.
Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc. Description: The argument offers an explanation, based on a temporal ordering of the events, that confuses co-occurrence with causality: A happened just before B, so A caused B. Comments: The Latin phrase "post hoc ergo propter hoc" means "after this, therefore because of this."
The huge issue is that, while there are obvious problems with the mRNA tech, giving everyone, even end of life hospice patients etc, the vaccine blurs the data.
I personally think it's on purpose.
But, right now, both sides of this are cherry picking data and selectively omitting data. I pretty much said fuuck it after the CDC made the Cleveland Clinic alter it's vaccine recommendation.
Interesting read on the vaccines and blood clots. There's something about the spike protein in both the vaccine or with a Covid-19 infection that can cause blood clots in some people, they still don't quite understand what is going on.
But to say that the US government has sponsored and implemented a vaccination program designed to kill and injure as many people as possible is idiotic. And it just lends credence to the left's contention that anti-vaxxers are kooks. I've seen mention of the KOTY award on here many times, but I think it's time to break out the KOTC award.
In ten years, you'll be marveling at how TRH had it right way back in 2021.
Interesting read on the vaccines and blood clots. There's something about the spike protein in both the vaccine or with a Covid-19 infection that can cause blood clots in some people, they still don't quite understand what is going on.
Friends mother died from a clot going to her brain after her first shot, two weeks after the jab....dead.
Man, do I hate hearing these stories.
What was sad is that these folks were freaking out scared over the virus. She lived with them, took their son out of school and he did online in order for him not to possibly bring it home to her. They were so excited when the vax came out, she was one of the first I knew to get it. Her other son is a doctor and had her flown to his hospital and he was hands on doing everything to save her life. Sad. Great family.
It’s pretty simple for me. It comes down to two factors. First, I know my risks with Covid and I find them perfectly acceptable. Therefore, even if I believed that the vaccine was one hundred percent safe, I wouldn’t feel particularly motivated to get the shot. But since I know that no vaccine is completely safe, I feel no need to take on the additional risk of a vaccine. Secondly, it is well established and even admitted by the CDC that the vaccine does nothing to moderate the spread of the disease. Therefore, I have no public responsibility to take the vaccine.
These points are entirely logical and unassailable. Therefore, I view any attempt to argue against them with suspicion. Any attempt to do so, is at very best misguided but quite possibly maliciously motivated. The more strident those who would seek to change my mind become, the less I trust them. The less I trust them, the more unlikely it is that I will ever get the shot.
It’s pretty simple for me. It comes down to two factors. First, I know my risks with Covid and I find them perfectly acceptable. Therefore, even if I believed that the vaccine was one hundred percent safe, I wouldn’t feel particularly motivated to get the shot. But since I know that no vaccine is completely safe, I feel no need to take on the additional risk of a vaccine. Secondly, it is well established and even admitted by the CDC that the vaccine does nothing to moderate the spread of the disease. Therefore, I have no public responsibility to take the vaccine.
These points are entirely logical and unassailable. Therefore, I view any attempt to argue against them with suspicion. Any attempt to do so, is at very best misguided but quite possibly maliciously motivated. The more strident those who would seek to change my mind become, the less I trust them. The less I trust them, the more unlikely it is that I will ever get the shot.
Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc. Description: The argument offers an explanation, based on a temporal ordering of the events, that confuses co-occurrence with causality: A happened just before B, so A caused B. Comments: The Latin phrase "post hoc ergo propter hoc" means "after this, therefore because of this."
Latin does not make something profound or intelligent.
Truth is, cause very, very, very often does precede event. So who gives a sht if someone comes up with a Latin phrase to obscure this obvious truth.
It’s pretty simple for me. It comes down to two factors. First, I know my risks with Covid and I find them perfectly acceptable. Therefore, even if I believed that the vaccine was one hundred percent safe, I wouldn’t feel particularly motivated to get the shot. But since I know that no vaccine is completely safe, I feel no need to take on the additional risk of a vaccine. Secondly, it is well established and even admitted by the CDC that the vaccine does nothing to moderate the spread of the disease. Therefore, I have no public responsibility to take the vaccine.
These points are entirely logical and unassailable. Therefore, I view any attempt to argue against them with suspicion. Any attempt to do so, is at very best misguided but quite possibly maliciously motivated. The more strident those who would seek to change my mind become, the less I trust them. The less I trust them, the more unlikely it is that I will ever get the shot.
Any problem with those who've chosen otherwise based upon their own risk analysis? Serious question with no malice.
Originally Posted by JoeBob
It’s pretty simple for me. It comes down to two factors. First, I know my risks with Covid and I find them perfectly acceptable. Therefore, even if I believed that the vaccine was one hundred percent safe, I wouldn’t feel particularly motivated to get the shot. But since I know that no vaccine is completely safe, I feel no need to take on the additional risk of a vaccine. Secondly, it is well established and even admitted by the CDC that the vaccine does nothing to moderate the spread of the disease. Therefore, I have no public responsibility to take the vaccine.
These points are entirely logical and unassailable. Therefore, I view any attempt to argue against them with suspicion. Any attempt to do so, is at very best misguided but quite possibly maliciously motivated. The more strident those who would seek to change my mind become, the less I trust them. The less I trust them, the more unlikely it is that I will ever get the shot.
But to say that the US government has sponsored and implemented a vaccination program designed to kill and injure as many people as possible is idiotic. ...
Any problem with those who've chosen otherwise based upon their own risk analysis? Serious question with no malice.
Originally Posted by JoeBob
It’s pretty simple for me. It comes down to two factors. First, I know my risks with Covid and I find them perfectly acceptable. Therefore, even if I believed that the vaccine was one hundred percent safe, I wouldn’t feel particularly motivated to get the shot. But since I know that no vaccine is completely safe, I feel no need to take on the additional risk of a vaccine. Secondly, it is well established and even admitted by the CDC that the vaccine does nothing to moderate the spread of the disease. Therefore, I have no public responsibility to take the vaccine.
These points are entirely logical and unassailable. Therefore, I view any attempt to argue against them with suspicion. Any attempt to do so, is at very best misguided but quite possibly maliciously motivated. The more strident those who would seek to change my mind become, the less I trust them. The less I trust them, the more unlikely it is that I will ever get the shot.
Problem? No. Though I doubt many of them actually did a risk analysis, because if they did, 99% of people would decide as I have.
Any problem with those who've chosen otherwise based upon their own risk analysis? Serious question with no malice.
Originally Posted by JoeBob
It’s pretty simple for me. It comes down to two factors. First, I know my risks with Covid and I find them perfectly acceptable. Therefore, even if I believed that the vaccine was one hundred percent safe, I wouldn’t feel particularly motivated to get the shot. But since I know that no vaccine is completely safe, I feel no need to take on the additional risk of a vaccine. Secondly, it is well established and even admitted by the CDC that the vaccine does nothing to moderate the spread of the disease. Therefore, I have no public responsibility to take the vaccine.
These points are entirely logical and unassailable. Therefore, I view any attempt to argue against them with suspicion. Any attempt to do so, is at very best misguided but quite possibly maliciously motivated. The more strident those who would seek to change my mind become, the less I trust them. The less I trust them, the more unlikely it is that I will ever get the shot.
Problem? No. Though I doubt many of them actually did a risk analysis, because if they did, 99% of people would decide as I have.
Fair enough. Thanks for the response.
Regarding 99% agreement with your choice, would that be those who possessed the same information and had the same personal risk factors as yourself, or literally 99% of all persons? Fot instance 90+% of physicians, my 82 year old step-father, all 50 sitting governors, Mr and Mrs Trump. One percenters or just those of differing circumstances? No malice. I agree 100% with what you wrote previously. To each his own, there's nothing more important.
Any problem with those who've chosen otherwise based upon their own risk analysis? Serious question with no malice.
Originally Posted by JoeBob
It’s pretty simple for me. It comes down to two factors. First, I know my risks with Covid and I find them perfectly acceptable. Therefore, even if I believed that the vaccine was one hundred percent safe, I wouldn’t feel particularly motivated to get the shot. But since I know that no vaccine is completely safe, I feel no need to take on the additional risk of a vaccine. Secondly, it is well established and even admitted by the CDC that the vaccine does nothing to moderate the spread of the disease. Therefore, I have no public responsibility to take the vaccine.
These points are entirely logical and unassailable. Therefore, I view any attempt to argue against them with suspicion. Any attempt to do so, is at very best misguided but quite possibly maliciously motivated. The more strident those who would seek to change my mind become, the less I trust them. The less I trust them, the more unlikely it is that I will ever get the shot.
Problem? No. Though I doubt many of them actually did a risk analysis, because if they did, 99% of people would decide as I have.
FDA: Heart Attacks 71 times more often for Vaccine takers – We are killing 2 people for each one the vaccine saves? The stats… at FDA – YouTube will not delete! lol
The propagandists still haven’t deleted this due to the fact that it is a FDA uploaded video…. but expect the Deep State to take it out soon… who wants to bet…. I bet it will not last long as you know what is going on. You can share this and others will see it too on FB and the rest since it is FDA.
It seems obvious that the "71 times" quote is false simply based on the fact that there are about 1.5 million heart attacks a year in the USA. 71 times that would be 106 million heart attacks. The hospitals would already be overflowing with heart attack victims. Instead, here in Alaska anyway they are being overwhelmed with Covid cases.
Just talked to a client who kind of dropped off the radar for a few weeks. Last time we talked before this a month or so ago, he was talking about having gotten the vaccine. He dropped off the radar because he had a couple of strokes and he has been in the hospital. He got home on Monday and now he has Covid.
Just talked to a client who kind of dropped off the radar for a few weeks. Last time we talked before this a month or so ago, he was talking about having gotten the vaccine. He dropped off the radar because he had a couple of strokes and he has been in the hospital. He got home on Monday and now he has Covid.
FDA: Heart Attacks 71 times more often for Vaccine takers – We are killing 2 people for each one the vaccine saves? The stats… at FDA – YouTube will not delete! lol
The propagandists still haven’t deleted this due to the fact that it is a FDA uploaded video…. but expect the Deep State to take it out soon… who wants to bet…. I bet it will not last long as you know what is going on. You can share this and others will see it too on FB and the rest since it is FDA.
It seems obvious that the "71 times" quote is false simply based on the fact that there are about 1.5 million heart attacks a year in the USA. 71 times that would be 106 million heart attacks. The hospitals would already be overflowing with heart attack victims. Instead, here in Alaska anyway they are being overwhelmed with Covid cases.
But to say that the US government has sponsored and implemented a vaccination program designed to kill and injure as many people as possible is idiotic. And it just lends credence to the left's contention that anti-vaxxers are kooks. I've seen mention of the KOTY award on here many times, but I think it's time to break out the KOTC award.
In ten years, you'll be marveling at how TRH had it right way back in 2021.
No. If you've got it right I won't be marveling at anything, I'll be too busy roaming the countryside like Mad Max looking for food and fuel because everyone will be dead.
Any problem with those who've chosen otherwise based upon their own risk analysis? Serious question with no malice.
Originally Posted by JoeBob
It’s pretty simple for me. It comes down to two factors. First, I know my risks with Covid and I find them perfectly acceptable. Therefore, even if I believed that the vaccine was one hundred percent safe, I wouldn’t feel particularly motivated to get the shot. But since I know that no vaccine is completely safe, I feel no need to take on the additional risk of a vaccine. Secondly, it is well established and even admitted by the CDC that the vaccine does nothing to moderate the spread of the disease. Therefore, I have no public responsibility to take the vaccine.
These points are entirely logical and unassailable. Therefore, I view any attempt to argue against them with suspicion. Any attempt to do so, is at very best misguided but quite possibly maliciously motivated. The more strident those who would seek to change my mind become, the less I trust them. The less I trust them, the more unlikely it is that I will ever get the shot.
Problem? No. Though I doubt many of them actually did a risk analysis, because if they did, 99% of people would decide as I have.
Fair enough. Thanks for the response.
Regarding 99% agreement with your choice, would that be those who possessed the same information and had the same personal risk factors as yourself, or literally 99% of all persons? For instance 90+% of physicians, my 82 year old step-father, all 50 sitting governors, Mr and Mrs Trump. One percenters or just those of differing circumstances? No malice. I agree 100% with what you wrote previously. To each his own, there's nothing more important.
Secondly, it is well established and even admitted by the CDC that the vaccine does nothing to moderate the spread of the disease.
I heard a doctor on the radio last week claim that vaccinated break through cases on average were contagious for just 3 days, and that the unvaccinated once infected with covid were contagious for 7 to 10 days. Can anyone confirm?
...Secondly, it is well established and even admitted by the CDC that the vaccine does nothing to moderate the spread of the disease. Therefore, I have no public responsibility to take the vaccine.
The above statement is obviously false.
CDC: "Getting vaccinated is the best way to slow the spread of COVID-19"
Getting the vaccine is not a 100% guarantee that a person won't get sick or spread Covid, just as seat-belts aren't a 100% guarantee that the wearer won't suffer from a traffic accident, yet statistics clearly show the efficacy of vaccines and seat belts.
This was written long before Covid became so political, and it's just as true today: Besides individual protection, vaccination programs also rely on population or “herd” immunity: the immunization of large portions of the population to protect the unvaccinated, immunocompromised, and immunologically naïve by reducing the number of susceptible hosts
“We have our freedoms and we have to live by that and I agree with that also. But it is a great vaccine. It is a safe vaccine and it is something that works...Everybody, go get your shot,” Donald Trump
...Secondly, it is well established and even admitted by the CDC that the vaccine does nothing to moderate the spread of the disease. Therefore, I have no public responsibility to take the vaccine.
The above statement is obviously false.
CDC: "Getting vaccinated is the best way to slow the spread of COVID-19"
Getting the vaccine is not a 100% guarantee that a person won't get sick or spread Covid, just as seat-belts aren't a 100% guarantee that the wearer won't suffer from a traffic accident, yet statistics clearly show the efficacy of vaccines and seat belts.
This was written long before Covid became so political, and it's just as true today: Besides individual protection, vaccination programs also rely on population or “herd” immunity: the immunization of large portions of the population to protect the unvaccinated, immunocompromised, and immunologically naïve by reducing the number of susceptible hosts
“We have our freedoms and we have to live by that and I agree with that also. But it is a great vaccine. It is a safe vaccine and it is something that works...Everybody, go get your shot,” Donald Trump
Actually, Tucker said the same thing as JoeBob last night.
Any problem with those who've chosen otherwise based upon their own risk analysis? Serious question with no malice.
Originally Posted by JoeBob
It’s pretty simple for me. It comes down to two factors. First, I know my risks with Covid and I find them perfectly acceptable. Therefore, even if I believed that the vaccine was one hundred percent safe, I wouldn’t feel particularly motivated to get the shot. But since I know that no vaccine is completely safe, I feel no need to take on the additional risk of a vaccine. Secondly, it is well established and even admitted by the CDC that the vaccine does nothing to moderate the spread of the disease. Therefore, I have no public responsibility to take the vaccine.
These points are entirely logical and unassailable. Therefore, I view any attempt to argue against them with suspicion. Any attempt to do so, is at very best misguided but quite possibly maliciously motivated. The more strident those who would seek to change my mind become, the less I trust them. The less I trust them, the more unlikely it is that I will ever get the shot.
Problem? No. Though I doubt many of them actually did a risk analysis, because if they did, 99% of people would decide as I have.
Fair enough. Thanks for the response.
Regarding 99% agreement with your choice, would that be those who possessed the same information and had the same personal risk factors as yourself, or literally 99% of all persons? For instance 90+% of physicians, my 82 year old step-father, all 50 sitting governors, Mr and Mrs Trump. One percenters or just those of differing circumstances? No malice. I agree 100% with what you wrote previously. To each his own, there's nothing more important.
So, what 99% (99% of what population) would, in your iopinion, agree with and act in accordance with your choice?
Any problem with those who've chosen otherwise based upon their own risk analysis? Serious question with no malice.
Originally Posted by JoeBob
It’s pretty simple for me. It comes down to two factors. First, I know my risks with Covid and I find them perfectly acceptable. Therefore, even if I believed that the vaccine was one hundred percent safe, I wouldn’t feel particularly motivated to get the shot. But since I know that no vaccine is completely safe, I feel no need to take on the additional risk of a vaccine. Secondly, it is well established and even admitted by the CDC that the vaccine does nothing to moderate the spread of the disease. Therefore, I have no public responsibility to take the vaccine.
These points are entirely logical and unassailable. Therefore, I view any attempt to argue against them with suspicion. Any attempt to do so, is at very best misguided but quite possibly maliciously motivated. The more strident those who would seek to change my mind become, the less I trust them. The less I trust them, the more unlikely it is that I will ever get the shot.
Problem? No. Though I doubt many of them actually did a risk analysis, because if they did, 99% of people would decide as I have.
Fair enough. Thanks for the response.
Regarding 99% agreement with your choice, would that be those who possessed the same information and had the same personal risk factors as yourself, or literally 99% of all persons? For instance 90+% of physicians, my 82 year old step-father, all 50 sitting governors, Mr and Mrs Trump. One percenters or just those of differing circumstances? No malice. I agree 100% with what you wrote previously. To each his own, there's nothing more important.
So, what 99% (99% of what population) would, in your iopinion, agree with and act in accordance with your choice?
I personally don’t think the risk of this disease is strong enough for anyone to get the vaccine, but I’m not their daddy. They can make their own choices and live with them. Now of course, they are potentially doing a great deal of damage to public health as a whole with their vaccine driven variants, but oh well, that is more of a government and public policy thing than an individual thing.
But if we hadn’t started with the ridiculous vaccine push, this thing would be over by now. We would be like Sweden.
But if we hadn’t started with the ridiculous vaccine push, this thing would be over by now. We would be like Sweden.
I've been saying that for months. It was, in fact, following the normal process of running its course through the population, and then disappearing, when the vaccines started, which then caused the resurgence. It can be seen on the charts quite clearly, and that worldwide. Wherever in the chart the vaxxes started, is where the resurgence started, after a normal decline, all at different points in time, depending on when that nation started rolling out the vaccines.
1 in 4 Males in the US die of some form of heart attack. Pick any 4 guys, and one will likely go out that way
I'd wanna know if this 71x heart attack risk is a killing heart attack, a relatively minor incidence of inflammation, or a fleeting arrhythmia?
With all of the hoard dying of C19, and 71 out of every 4 vaccinated males dying of heart attack, there simply must be a pile of bodies somewhere. Where are the bodies?
Someone's niece died after getting the vaccine
EE died of C19, and I'd assume from his posts online that he was not vaccinated
Both of these are tragedies, and not to be made light of. EE was a valued member here, and I'm certain that the niece (nurse) made the world around her better. Sad that they're gone
But I say with all due respect that everyone dies sometime. And I don't see piles of bodies in the street from either viral illness or vaccination. A little more than a year ago I polled members here to see who knew anyone who'd had C19. There were only a few positive reports. I'd guess that if you don't know someone who has had it, or had it yourself, today, that you live pretty isolated. At New Years, or so, they rolled out with vaccines. In the first months after it was pretty rare to find someone who'd actually gotten the vaccine. But like the virus, if you don't know some who are vaccinated today, you're pretty isolated.
Vaccinations of every sort have all had their known risks. How many hundreds or thousands of kids actually got polio from the vaccination?
I hear guys talk about how they don't want anything to do with a vaccine that alters RNA or DNA. But viruses also alter the same things that a vaccination might, and in the case of C19 the risks of the disease in the long term are still in the discovery stage.
I do believe that the virus is worse than the vax. For most...
I've had both, and yet to suffer any great ill from either.
Interesting read on the vaccines and blood clots. There's something about the spike protein in both the vaccine or with a Covid-19 infection that can cause blood clots in some people, they still don't quite understand what is going on.
Friends mother died from a clot going to her brain after her first shot, two weeks after the jab....dead.
My mother in law died the same way. Two years before Covid19 was a thing.
The vaccine related blood clotting issue is a recognized hazard associated with a rare blood disorder. As of August there were 26 known cases nationwide. They are a specific type of blood clot in a specific area of the brain. In the Western suburbs of Chicago is a large hospital operated solely for victims of stroke. It's been there for decades, and about half of the stroke victims got there due to blood clots in their brain.
Edit; There is no second jab with the vaccine associated with blood clots.
There is no "one terrible vaccine". There are three distinct vaccines. Different benefits. Different risks.
But if we hadn’t started with the ridiculous vaccine push, this thing would be over by now. We would be like Sweden.
I've been saying that for months.
You guys do realize that the vaccination rate in Sweden is significantly higher than in the US, right?
I’ve seen anywhere from 66 to 80 percent but it really isn’t apples to oranges. They had no lockdowns and few restrictions, so the virus had much more run its course there before they started vaccinations.
1 in 4 Males in the US die of some form of heart attack. Pick any 4 guys, and one will likely go out that way
I'd wanna know if this 71x heart attack risk is a killing heart attack, a relatively minor incidence of inflammation, or a fleeting arrhythmia?
With all of the hoard dying of C19, and 71 out of every 4 vaccinated males dying of heart attack, there simply must be a pile of bodies somewhere. Where are the bodies?
Someone's niece died after getting the vaccine
EE died of C19, and I'd assume from his posts online that he was not vaccinated
Both of these are tragedies, and not to be made light of. EE was a valued member here, and I'm certain that the niece (nurse) made the world around her better. Sad that they're gone
But I say with all due respect that everyone dies sometime. And I don't see piles of bodies in the street from either viral illness or vaccination. A little more than a year ago I polled members here to see who knew anyone who'd had C19. There were only a few positive reports. I'd guess that if you don't know someone who has had it, or had it yourself, today, that you live pretty isolated. At New Years, or so, they rolled out with vaccines. In the first months after it was pretty rare to find someone who'd actually gotten the vaccine. But like the virus, if you don't know some who are vaccinated today, you're pretty isolated.
Vaccinations of every sort have all had their known risks. How many hundreds or thousands of kids actually got polio from the vaccination?
I hear guys talk about how they don't want anything to do with a vaccine that alters RNA or DNA. But viruses also alter the same things that a vaccination might, and in the case of C19 the risks of the disease in the long term are still in the discovery stage.
I do believe that the virus is worse than the vax. For most...
I've had both, and yet to suffer any great ill from either.
Often polio victims were children, but the most famous affected American was President Franklin D. Roosevelt, who got polio and was paralyzed from the waist down in 1921 when he was 39.
In 1951, Jonas Salk of the University of Pittsburgh’s medical school received a grant from the National Foundation for Infantile Paralysis to find a vaccine. During intense months of research, he took live polio virus and killed it with formaldehyde until it was not infectious but still provided virus-fighting antibodies.
When tests showed that the vaccine was safe, Salk told his wife, “I’ve got it,” Offit wrote.
Word of his success soon leaked out. Public pressure grew for the vaccine and for a large-scale trial.
In 1953, Salk tested it on himself, his wife and three children.
On April 26, 1954, Randy Kerr, a 6-year-old second-grader from Falls Church, Va., stood in the cafeteria of the Franklin Sherman Elementary School in McLean and became the first to be vaccinated in a massive field study.
Salk’s vaccine was given to 420,000 children. A placebo was given to 200,000. And 1.2 million were given nothing.
The study found that children who did not get the vaccine were three times more likely to be paralyzed with polio than those who received the vaccine.
A year later, on April 12, 1955, when officials announced the results at a news conference at the University of Michigan, there was jubilation. Reporters hollered: “It works! It works!” Offit wrote.
The news made front-page headlines across the country. “People wept,” Offit said. “There were parades in Jonas Salk’s honor. … That’s what contributed to the tragedy of Cutter more than anything else … the irony.”
That same day, licenses were hurriedly granted to several drug companies, including Cutter Laboratories, to make the vaccine.
But the officials granting the licenses were never told of Eddy’s findings, Offit wrote.
The year before, Eddy’s scrutiny of the Cutter vaccine had continued through the summer and fall.
It must have been a difficult time. She was 52. Her husband, Jerald Guy Wooley, 64, a fellow National Institutes of Health scientist, had died suddenly the previous April, leaving her with three daughters, two of them still at home in Bethesda, according to his obituary. Her mother moved in to help out.
Eddy was born in 1903 in Glen Dale, W.Va., a small town on the Ohio River, south of Wheeling, according to a 1985 biographical sketch by Elizabeth Moot O’Hern. Her father was a doctor.
She had started at NIH in 1937, had headed testing of vaccines for influenza, and in 1954 was asked to help test the Salk polio vaccine. The pressure was intense. “For weeks she and her staff worked around-the-clock, seven days a week,” O’Hern wrote.
“This was a product that had never been made before, and they were going to use it right away,” Eddy had said.
She began testing Cutter’s samples in August 1954 and continued through November, according to a later report in the Congressional Record. She found that three of the six samples paralyzed test monkeys.
“What do you think is wrong with these monkeys?” she asked a colleague, Offit recounted.
“They were given polio,” the colleague replied.
“No,” Eddy said. “They were given the … vaccine.”
Eddy’s discovery suggested that Cutter’s manufacturing process was flawed. Its vaccine should have contained only killed virus.
She reported her findings to William Workman, head of the NIH Laboratory of Biologics Control.
But amid the scientific and bureaucratic chaos, Workman never told the licensing committee, Offit wrote.
Starting on the evening of April 12, 1955, batches of the Salk vaccine made by five drug firms were shipped out in boxes marked “POLIO VACCINE: RUSH.”
About 165,000 doses of Cutter’s went out.
Within weeks, reports of mysterious polio infections started coming in.
On April 27, 7-year-old Susan Pierce, of Pocatello, Idaho, died of polio days after getting the Cutter vaccine. She had been placed in an iron lung just before she died. Her brother Kenneth had been vaccinated at the same time, but he was okay.
Other cases followed.
Alton Ochsner, a professor of surgery at Tulane Medical School and founder of the Ochsner Clinic in New Orleans, gave the vaccine to his grandson Eugene Davis, Offit wrote. The child died May 4.
Not only did some people injected with the tainted vaccine get sick, but some who got the vaccine went on to infect family members and neighbors.
On June 5, 1955, 33-year-old Annabelle Nelson of Montpelier, Idaho, died of polio after her two children had been given the vaccine in April, according to news reports at the time.
The government ordered the Cutter vaccine withdrawn on April 27. But damage had been done.
“By April 30, within forty-eight hours of the recall,” Offit wrote. “Cutter’s vaccine had paralyzed or killed twenty-five children: fourteen in California, seven in Idaho, two in Washington, one in Illinois, and one in Colorado.”
On May 6, all polio vaccinations were postponed. They were resumed on May 15 after the government had rechecked the vaccines for safety. But people were still frightened.
Offit recalled his mother asking their doctor: “What’s the story? Should we be getting this vaccine or not?"
Eventually, he was vaccinated when he was about 6 years old.
Years later, in a suit brought against Cutter, the firm was found not negligent in making its vaccine because it had done its best making a new drug that was complicated to produce.
But it was found financially liable for the calamity it had caused during that spring of 1955.
The jury foreman said: “Cutter Laboratories [brought] to market a … vaccine which when given to plaintiffs caused them to come down with polio.”
Any problem with those who've chosen otherwise based upon their own risk analysis? Serious question with no malice.
Originally Posted by JoeBob
It’s pretty simple for me. It comes down to two factors. First, I know my risks with Covid and I find them perfectly acceptable. Therefore, even if I believed that the vaccine was one hundred percent safe, I wouldn’t feel particularly motivated to get the shot. But since I know that no vaccine is completely safe, I feel no need to take on the additional risk of a vaccine. Secondly, it is well established and even admitted by the CDC that the vaccine does nothing to moderate the spread of the disease. Therefore, I have no public responsibility to take the vaccine.
These points are entirely logical and unassailable. Therefore, I view any attempt to argue against them with suspicion. Any attempt to do so, is at very best misguided but quite possibly maliciously motivated. The more strident those who would seek to change my mind become, the less I trust them. The less I trust them, the more unlikely it is that I will ever get the shot.
Problem? No. Though I doubt many of them actually did a risk analysis, because if they did, 99% of people would decide as I have.
Fair enough. Thanks for the response.
Regarding 99% agreement with your choice, would that be those who possessed the same information and had the same personal risk factors as yourself, or literally 99% of all persons? For instance 90+% of physicians, my 82 year old step-father, all 50 sitting governors, Mr and Mrs Trump. One percenters or just those of differing circumstances? No malice. I agree 100% with what you wrote previously. To each his own, there's nothing more important.
So, what 99% (99% of what population) would, in your iopinion, agree with and act in accordance with your choice?
I personally don’t think the risk of this disease is strong enough for anyone to get the vaccine, but I’m not their daddy. They can make their own choices and live with them. Now of course, they are potentially doing a great deal of damage to public health as a whole with their vaccine driven variants, but oh well, that is more of a government and public policy thing than an individual thing.
But if we hadn’t started with the ridiculous vaccine push, this thing would be over by now. We would be like Sweden.
Thank you for your response. To summarize, it is absolutely unacceptable for anyone to tell you what medical treatment is best for you. Praised by many, myself included. Furthermore, anyone who decides differently than you about their own heath decisions are wrong in their choice. Got it. You have written it much better than most, yet say the same, my way is the only right way. No gotcha or anything other than clarification intended.
In our local hospital, since the jab options have been available, there's been one and only one Co19 patient who'd been jabbed admitted. I do not have heart patient information. Hope to avoid being admitted for anything.
Best to everyone. Stand up against vac' mandates, make your choice and go forward. Cumbaya.
Dr. Michiaki Takahashi, whose experience caring for his 3-year-old son after the boy contracted chickenpox led him to develop a vaccine for the virus that is now used all over the world, died on Monday in Osaka, Japan. He was 85.
The cause was heart failure, said his longtime secretary, Maki [bleep].
In 1964 Dr. Takahashi, who had spent several years studying the measles and polio viruses in Japan, was on a research fellowship at Baylor Medical College in Houston when his son, Teruyuki, came down with a severe case of chickenpox after playing with a friend who had the virus.
“My son developed a rash on his face that quickly spread across his body,” Dr. Takahashi recalled in a 2011 interview with The Financial Times. “His symptoms progressed quickly and severely. His temperature shot up and he began to have trouble breathing. He was in a terrible way, and all my wife and I could do was to watch him day and night. We didn’t sleep. He seemed so ill that I remember worrying about what would happen to him.”
“But gradually, the symptoms lessened and my son recovered,” he added. “I realized then that I should use my knowledge of viruses to develop a chickenpox vaccine.”
He returned to Japan in 1965and within five years had developed an early version of the vaccine. By 1972 he was experimenting with it in clinical trials. Within a few years, Japan and some other countries had begun widespread vaccination programs. Yet the Food and Drug Administration did not approve the United States’ first chickenpox vaccine until 1995.
The delay was caused by several factors, including concerns that the immunity created by the vaccine might not last long enough, that there could be unwanted side effects and, more generally, that chickenpox might not be a serious enough disease to warrant a vaccination program.
...In 1954, John F. Enders and Dr. Thomas C. Peebles collected blood samples from several ill students during a measles outbreak in Boston, Massachusetts. They wanted to isolate the measles virus in the student’s blood and create a measles vaccine. They succeeded in isolating measles in 13-year-old David Edmonston’s blood.
In 1963, John Enders and colleagues transformed their Edmonston-B strain of measles virus into a vaccine and licensed it in the United States. In 1968, an improved and even weaker measles vaccine, developed by Maurice Hilleman and colleagues, began to be distributed. This vaccine, called the Edmonston-Enders (formerly “Moraten”) strain has been the only measles vaccine used in the United States since 1968.
I’m not reading all of this but the better question is are we having more heart attacks? I did a lot of CPR on young presumably healthy individuals. Not defending the vaccine just want a little honesty.
Yes, I find that not reading most of your posts is the best way to go.
Then you'll never overcome your ignorance.
The only thing I'll be ignorant of is your take on the situation and that's a good thing. Tell me again how the US government sponsored and implemented a program designed to kill and injure as many US citizens as possible.
That's certifiable. And yes, I choose not to read most of the blather from one who's certifiable. So I pick and choose the most outrageous parts and comment on them.
"The vaccine is bad and kills people. But we need to be more like Sweden, where 10% more of the population is vaccinated."
But it's actually the secong cumming and the devils venom all wrapped up into one! LOL
Even bothering to read the predictions of the future by someone so damned blind by their ignorance about the past is a fools game. Kudos smokepole for calling a duck a duck, or quack if you prefer.
![[Linked Image from i.ibb.co]](https://i.ibb.co/L6jwgM4/COVID-NORWAY.jpg)