Moonbox

Now you're just outright lying! 🤣 As usual, you can't scurry away fast enough from the numbers that prove that not only your conclusion wrong, but also your limp and desperate re-imagined meaning of the quote you keep repeating.

So again, you're saying the numbers make you look like an clown, so you're going to continue to avoid talking about them. Got it. 👌 "But the risk of myocarditis associated with the vaccine was lower than the risk associated with COVID-19 infection before or after vaccination – with one exception. Men under 40 who received a second dose of the Moderna vaccine had a higher risk of myocarditis following vaccination." On the chart, circled in purple, is the ONE exception they talk about, and it's exactly what they say it is. No matter how much you wriggle and insist that phrases mean what you need them to so you can avoid looking like a bullshitting fool, the numbers will continue to prove that you are.

This is a beautiful point.

He won't. The contradictions inherent in so many of his positions are irrelevant to the screeching donkeys in his base. They have an air-tight, infallible defense against all of it:

So what you're saying here is that you won't discuss the numbers in the chart because they prove that you're wrong, so instead you're uselessly bloviating. Got it. 🙄👌

Look at the numbers on the chart. Your self-serving misinterpretations of language is based on what you need things to mean to not look dumb, but they don't change the numbers being cited. 🤡

It's not a problem for the US to resolve, but rather the poorly governed basket cases from which people are fleeing. The reason there are so many people willing to flee to the US is because they can. I'm about as anti-Trump as anyone, and think the GOP is a clownshow, but that doesn't mean border security isn't a real issue that needs fixing.

At a certain point, we have to accept that rehabilitation isn't happening. Fool me once, shame on you, fool me 21 times...ummm, what planet am I on?

No, it has not. "higher in young men in general" means that it's higher in young men than in the general population, not higher than unvaccinated people. Sure, here are the numbers broken down, from the study we're talking about: As you see, the risk is higher among unvaccinated people, in all age groups, except for the ONE exception of under 40 men who received 2 doses of Moderna. The answer to your dumb question is that the health experts recommended young men get vaccinated because the myriad of benefits overwhelmingly outweigh the risks, and even for the one microscopic risk you're peeing your pants about, some Tylenol was all that was required to treat it and you generally faced the same risk or worse from being unvaccinated and getting COVID. 🤡

But the risk of myocarditis associated with the vaccine was lower than the risk associated with COVID-19 infection before or after vaccination – with one exception. Men under 40 who received a second dose of the Moderna vaccine had a higher risk of myocarditis following vaccination. One exception means one exception, and this one is specifically stated. Obfuscation is your superpower. I can keep my posts trim and tight. The question is based on a false conclusion, so it doesn't merit an answer. Every publication we've referred to in this thread continues to advocate vaccination for all age groups, and continues to assess that the benefits outweigh the essentially microscopic risk of myocarditis.

Myocarditis risk is substantially increased during and after being infected with COVID, but the risk for those who've been vaccinated is roughly half that of the unvaccinated.

Yeah, silly me thinking that the guy posting conspiracy clown articles was reasonable enough to be asking for me to support my position. You sure got me there. 🥱

No, males under 40, getting their second dose of Moderna. Every source I've cited here is still promoting the vaccine for all age groups (other than kids under 5), and none of the sources you've posted have advised against them. What questions were those? Nobody reads the majority of the stuff you pound out on your keyboard, and certainly not when you start jackassing about hissy fits and muffins and whatnot. 🤡

You asked me to provide evidence of my claim but never intended to and refused to look at it, on the basis that I was stating an opinion vs a fact. This is the limpest and most useless thing you can say on an online debate forum, but in the little time you've been here, you've already been busy repeating it other threads. Now we have your measure. Thanks for the self-vetting. A real moderator would likely have problems with your compulsion for drive-by sniping, and your cringeworthy attempts at smug trolling. "Salted-tears, Moonbuckethead etc?" Physician, heal thyself.... As opposed to the angry, screeching donkeys who drown the forum with the all-day spam threads that you're constantly upvoting? Your assessment of behavior on this forum is based on whether you share the posters' worldviews, and little else. 🙃

I think you're falling back on kindergarten defense mechanisms. You asked for proof that it's conspiracy garbage, I provided evidence, you refuse to look at it or comment, and continue to demand evidence. That's a mighty fine self-reinforcing delusion mechanism you have there, sir. 🙃

...with one exception. If you're under 40, and a 0.0097% chance of myocarditis terrifies you, get the Pfizer vaccine instead 🤣. No, my own link continues to promote the vaccine for virtually all age groups and demographics, and concludes that myocarditis risks are higher for the unvaccinated than the vaccinated (with the sole exception of men under 40 who received a second does of the Moderna vaccine 🫡). What you've said, on the other hand, is just another bullshit conclusion you've synthesized out of thin air from sources that don't say anything remotely close to what you say they do...as usual.

and I acknowledge that a certain type of mind has trouble distinguishing between a good source and a bad one, and information vs misinformation. Your article was nonsense, and comes from a website that peddles in unhinged rants and conspiracy theories. The only thing you've spread awareness of is that you're susceptible to the above. You say that, as you continue to respond. Notably, you don't appear to have any comment on the Druthers piece I quoted. I suspect even you'd have trouble trying to defend that stupidity.

My conclusions are what they're saying, pulled directly from their quotes. I can provide more as well, from more direct quotes (as opposed to your dopey conjurations): "The analysis showed people infected with COVID-19 before receiving a vaccine were 11 times more at risk for developing myocarditis within 28 days of testing positive for the virus. But that risk was cut in half if a person was infected after receiving at least one dose of a COVID-19 vaccine." https://www.heart.org/en/news/2022/08/22/covid-19-infection-poses-higher-risk-for-myocarditis-than-vaccines#:~:text=COVID-19 infection poses higher risk for myocarditis than vaccines,-By American Heart&text=The overall risk of myocarditis,new study in England shows. Looks like you fell on your face and look stupid. Whoops.

The fact that I was calling it garbage was your first hint that it was opinion, one informed by nonsensical rants like: https://druthers.ca/public-notice-to-the-global-covenant-mayor-of-the-united-nations-un/ Do you have any comments on this piece? Am I guilty of High Treason for not rising up against Guelph's mayor and unincorporating my city? Does your argument go any further than, "That's, like, your opinion, man?"

No, they didn't post the data that you, brilliant and totally well-informed doctor/scientist that you are, decided was required for them to make their conclusions. 🤡 No you didn't, anywhere, ever. Not only did your research article not show that, you've never shown it anywhere else either. You've posted a study, and then drawn a dopey hot-take conclusion from it all of your own making.

Coming from our resident drive-by trolling expert? Rich puddin'. Who's talking about forum rules here, other than you? 🤡

Very good! Yes, but you obviously don't. There's nothing fallacious about calling a person who drives a bus a bus-driver, is there?

Because they are posting conspiracy garbage, like that the Global Deep State is controlling my mayor through secret international agreements in order to implement population control on my community, and that he's guilty of High Treason. 🤡

and yet the quote is still there with the link provided...which I apparently didn't provide? I don't have to. They took myocarditis cases and broke them down by whether there'd been: A ) A recent unvaccinated COVID cases B ) A recent second-dose vaccine administered The folks in column "B" would include the presumably small number who got COVID shortly after a booster vaccination. I can keep my posts succinct and on-topic. You can't. Who's having a hissy-fit here? 🤣

If you think I need to disprove that the Global Deep State is controlling my mayor through secret international agreements in order to implement population control on my community, and that he's guilty of High Treason, then you've proven that you're ridiculous and not worth seriously engaging with. 🙄