First a trickle....Now a flood

[Goddess]

Just now, dialamah said:

At much lower rates than unvaxed, a fact which you refuse to acknowledge.

False.

When are you going for the $1million?

[dialamah]

Just now, Goddess said:

And I'm not taking CBC headline or "Tam said so."

You wouldn't accept anything that calls into question your world of conspiracy so why would anyone bother.  If you really have an open mind and are looking for truth, use your own research skills to look at the other side.

[eyeball]

6 minutes ago, Goddess said:

Are they?

Double, Triple and Quadruple jabbed people are still getting, transmitting covid, in the hospital and dying.

At nowhere near the rate unvaccinated people are being hospitalized and dying.  Do you agree or disagree with the stats WCM put up in the Jabbed thread?  You still haven't commented on the basic arithmetic that keeps yielding the same conclusion over and over again, that 14 - 15% of you account for half the deaths from COVID.   

[Goddess]

9 minutes ago, dialamah said:

You wouldn't accept anything that calls into question your world of conspiracy so why would anyone bother.  If you really have an open mind and are looking for truth, use your own research skills to look at the other side.

 

You think I haven't looked at the "other side"????

Good gawd, sugar pop!  That's ALL we've all been exposed to.

It's not my fault your side lied.

Please review the information here on OAS and explain to me why you think 100 years of established epidemiological science is wrong.

[dialamah]

3 minutes ago, Goddess said:

You think I haven't looked at the "other side"????

Post what you found, then, punkin.

 

 

[Goddess]

5 minutes ago, eyeball said:

At nowhere near the rate unvaccinated people are being hospitalized and dying.  Do you agree or disagree with the stats WCM put up in the Jabbed thread?  You still haven't commented on the basic arithmetic that keeps yielding the same conclusion over and over again, that 14 - 15% of you account for half the deaths from COVID.   

I'm not going back to the exact numbers because I've seen the data from all over the world and it doesn't show what you think it does.

Just for example - if a chart shows 100 unvaxxed people in hospital, 100 quadruple vaxxed people in hospital, 100 triple vaxxed people in hospital and 100 double vaxxed people in hospital, this tells YOU that the vax is 95% effective, as touted?

That's 3X the number of vaccinated people in hospital.  Consistent with the percentage of vaccinated people.

So how are these jabs doing anything?

[Goddess]

17 minutes ago, dialamah said:

Post what you found, then, punkin.

 

 

You mean the lies? 

The lie about 95% effective?

The lie about 100% safe?

The lie that vaxxed people WOULD NOT get or transmit covid?

The lie that myocarditis is mild?

The lie that young people drop dead of heart attacks all the time and we just never noticed it before?

The lie that locking everyone down and closing businesses (only small businesses, not the big box stores) would work?

The lie that the covid virus is so smart, it knows whether you're sitting or standing in a restaurant?

The lie that children were superspreaders running around infecting adults?

The lie that children even need to be vaxxed at all?

The lie that vaccine injuries and deaths are just people trying to get attention and nothing but big fat liars?

The lie that only unvaccinated people spread covid?

The lie like the one about the boy who died of covid, announced as the "first child covid death in Alberta" but who actually died of terminal brain cancer?

The lie that if you got 2 jabs that's it, but now we're up to 5 and counting?

I beg to differ on who is the one following lies here.

Please review the information here on OAS and explain to me why 100 years of epidemiological science is wrong.

Had the purveyors of all these lies listened to science instead of drug companies who are known medical fraudsters, perhaps things would have gone quite differently.

Again, not my fault that through stupidity or laziness, you chose to follow the liars.

Edited November 6, 2022 by Goddess

[eyeball]

10 minutes ago, Goddess said:

When are you are going for the $1 million?You must have the studies and data.  You're 100% sure the jabbers are safe and effective.

I've clearly said vaccines are not 100% effective.  

Quote

You're 100% sure myocarditis in children is "no big deal".  You're 100% sure that everyone who claims a vaccine injury or death is a liar or attention-seeker.

Not at all. I'm just not convinced these are issues that seriously affect more than a very very small handful of unfortunate individuals. It happens. I think your expectation of 100% good to go data or effectiveness on every level and with every aspect of this is unrealistic in the extreme.  I also think you've subscribed to too much bullshit from sources that the vast majority of experts will have little if anything to do with.  That it escapes you why that level of consensus matters is your issue and the fact you attribute it to vast murderous medical conspiracies intertwined with vast global scale evil political and control schemes and plots...get a grip doesn't quite capture the sense I'm trying to convey.

Quote

 

Let's see it.

And I'm not talking CBC headline or "Tam said so."  Let's see your data.

 

No, it would only frighten you.

[Goddess]

4 minutes ago, eyeball said:

 

No, it would only frighten you.

Ya.  That's what I thought. You got nothin.

Toodles, Eyeball.

[eyeball]

21 minutes ago, Goddess said:

I'm not going back to the exact numbers because I've seen the data from all over the world and it doesn't show what you think it does.

Just for example - if a chart shows 100 unvaxxed people in hospital, 100 quadruple vaxxed people in hospital, 100 triple vaxxed people in hospital and 100 double vaxxed people in hospital, this tells YOU that the vax is 95% effective, as touted?

No all I need to do is not ignore the fact, before I look at the chart, what percentage of the population these 4 columns represent is vaccinated and what percentage isn't.

When I do that it tells me that the 14 - 15% that is unvaccinated are responsible for half the deaths.  That tells me the effectiveness is good enough to make it 5 times better for me to be vaccinated than not.

When I realize I'm talking to someone who repeatedly ignores this I know I'm talking to someone who has deliberately released their grip on reality. 

[Goddess]

12 minutes ago, eyeball said:

why that level of consensus matters

Of course there's "consensus" when you blacklist, deplatform, demonize and silence those who have concerns or point out potential pitfalls.

[eyeball]

1 minute ago, Goddess said:

Of course there's "consensus" when you blacklist, deplatform, demonize and silence those who have concerns or point out potential pitfalls.

These are the extraordinary things that you need to provide extraordinary evidence for.

[Goddess]

1 minute ago, eyeball said:

someone who has deliberately released their grip on reality. 

Well, I don't think dictators campaign on promises of genocide, like you think they do. ?

Which is why I also don't think Big Pharma tells us the truth.  And Look!  They didn't!  They knowingly lied and are finally admitting it now.

 

[Goddess]

Just now, eyeball said:

These are the extraordinary things that you need to provide extraordinary evidence for.

Should the vaccine manufacturer's extraordinary claims also require extraordinary evidence?

Yet you accepted their extraordinary claims based on almost zero evidence.  You accepted "safe & effective" based on NO long-term studies, NO studies for transmission, NO studies on fertility, NO studies on pregnancy and breastfeeding.

Not only did you accept their extraordinary claims based on very little evidence, you demanded everyone do like you and vilified anyone who wanted extraordinary evidence for their extraordinary claims.

So your demand for extraordinary evidence seems very hypocritical.

So far, the scientists I follow have been right on everything.  Your's have been majorly wrong.

I've provided all the evidence here in this thread.

You won't read it, you won't provide any of this "extraordinary evidence" of the vaccines safety and effectiveness, but demand MORE of me?

Please read the information here on OAS and explain to me why 100 years of epidemiological science is wrong.

[dialamah]

From CDC.  Rates  of hospitalization of the unvaccinated compared to vaccinated:  1.7 times higher in children 5 to 11; 3.4x higher in 12 to 17 year age group; 3.5x higher in those 18 to 49; 7.4x higher in adults 50 to 65; 5.4x higher in adults 65 and older.

(Goddess will say: The CDC is lying because they are part of the worldwide conspiracy, and Bill Gates contributed to their funding, and he's a leader of the worldwide conspiracy).

From New England Journal of Medicine.  886,774 people infected with the Omicron variant and 201,154 infected with the Delta variant were compared against 1,572,621 non-infected people.  Conclusion: Primary immunization with two doses of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 or BNT162b2 vaccine provided limited protection against symptomatic disease caused by the omicron variant. A BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273 booster after either the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 or BNT162b2 primary course substantially increased protection, but that protection waned over time. (Funded by the U.K. Health Security Agency.) 

Notice "Protection", limited or not, which explains why the rate of hospitalizations/death is higher among unvaxed than vaxed.

(Goddess will say:  Limited protection!  See, the jab is no good!)

Department of Health Washington.  Rates of hospitalizations per 100,000, unvaxed to vaxed:

Age 12 to 34: 18 to 6; Age 35 to 64: 32 to 11; 65+ 190 to 65.

Clearly, the vaccine provides protection.

(Goddess will say: Department of Health Washington is biased and will lie;  people who are vaxed still end up in hospital;  old people have always gotten sicker/died at a higher rate than anyone else; they are overstating the numbers).

Etc.

 

Edited November 6, 2022 by dialamah

[Goddess]

1 hour ago, dialamah said:

From CDC.  Rates  of hospitalization of the unvaccinated compared to vaccinated:  1.7 times higher in children 5 to 11; 3.4x higher in 12 to 17 year age group; 3.5x higher in those 18 to 49; 7.4x higher in adults 50 to 65; 5.4x higher in adults 65 and older.

(Goddess will say: The CDC is lying because they are part of the worldwide conspiracy, and Bill Gates contributed to their funding, and he's a leader of the worldwide conspiracy).

From New England Journal of Medicine.  886,774 people infected with the Omicron variant and 201,154 infected with the Delta variant were compared against 1,572,621 non-infected people.  Conclusion: Primary immunization with two doses of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 or BNT162b2 vaccine provided limited protection against symptomatic disease caused by the omicron variant. A BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273 booster after either the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 or BNT162b2 primary course substantially increased protection, but that protection waned over time. (Funded by the U.K. Health Security Agency.) 

Notice "Protection", limited or not, which explains why the rate of hospitalizations/death is higher among unvaxed than vaxed.

(Goddess will say:  Limited protection!  See, the jab is no good!)

Department of Health Washington.  Rates of hospitalizations per 100,000, unvaxed to vaxed:

Age 12 to 34: 18 to 6; Age 35 to 64: 32 to 11; 65+ 190 to 65.

Clearly, the vaccine provides protection.

(Goddess will say: Department of Health Washington is biased and will lie;  people who are vaxed still end up in hospital;  old people have always gotten sicker/died at a higher rate than anyone else; they are overstating the numbers).

Etc.

 

Why do you think their data differs from the rest of the world's data?  

You are correct though - I don't fully trust the CDC.  Being caught in multiple lies, falsifying and hiding data, not performing even the basic safety checks on the vaccine rollout, receiving massive amounts of funding from Pfizer, promoting restrictions and mandates that have no scientific backing only politically expedient, among other things.  This is why I don't quote much from them.  

It's odd that their data contradicts completely the data from the rest of the world.

 

[dialamah]

1 minute ago, Goddess said:

Why do you think their data differs from the rest of the world's data?  

You are correct though - I don't fully trust the CDC.  Being caught in multiple lies, falsifying and hiding data, not performing even the basic safety checks on the vaccine rollout, receiving massive amounts of funding from Pfizer, promoting restrictions and mandates that have no scientific backing only politically expedient, among other things.  This is why I don't quote much from them.  

It's odd that their data contradicts completely the data from the rest of the world.

 

Whose data?  CDC?  Department of Health in Washington?  The UK study reported in New England Journal of Medicine that had over two million subjects?   

 

 

 

 

[dialamah]

Study from India supporting the efficacy of vaccine (covaxin specifically)

Study from France.  Overall, vaccine effectiveness against hospitalization was 94% (95%CI [93–95]) and exceeded 90% in each overseas territory, except Mayotte. 

Spain.  BNT162b2 showed high effectiveness in reducing SARS-CoV-2 infections in all age categories, reaching maximum VE ≥ 14 days after administering the second dose [18-64 years: VE = 92.9% (95%CI: 90.2-95.1); 65-79 years: VE = 85.8% (95%CI: 77.3-91.9), and ≥80 years: VE = 91.4% (95%CI: 87.9-94.1)]

Brazil, pregnant women only: Of the 19,838 tested pregnant women, 7424 (37.4%) tested positive for COVID-19 and 588 (7.9%) had severe disease. Only 83% of pregnant women who received the first dose of CoronaVac completed the vaccination scheme. A single dose of the CoronaVac vaccine was not effective at preventing symptomatic COVID-19. The effectiveness of two doses of CoronaVac was 41% (95% CI 27.1–52.2) against symptomatic COVID-19 and 85% (95% CI 59.5–94.8) against severe COVID-19.

Tell me again how the data I provided in my other post is different from the rest of the world.

 

 

[Goddess]

NIH Inspector General Finds More Than Half of Clinical Trials During Covid 'Did Not Comply' with Federal Requirements - Becker News

In light of the fact that the CDC is fully in bed with and large amounts of their funding come from Big Pharma (I realize you haven't researched this, but I have) and the above information and the fact that they have been wrong so many times during the covid fiasco.....

Why do you think the CDC recently rushed the jabbers into the childhood schedule, despite data that shows an 84% increase in myocarditis in children?  Why are so many other countries banning the jabs in children and those under age 50, while the CDC is promoting them?

Why are they not doing the basic PRR analyses of data for safety issues, as they are supposed to do, but tried to pass this duty off to the FDA when they were caught not doing their duty?

I think the bigger question is - why do you trust them?  Why do you trust their data?

Also from your link:

Quote

Although a correlation between neutralizing antibody levels and vaccine effectiveness against symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection has been observed at a population level,⁶ a similar correlation with effectiveness against severe disease is much less certain.

Quote

The large scale of testing and sequencing in the United Kingdom, as well as the use of a national vaccination register, has enabled rapid evaluation of vaccine effectiveness against symptomatic infection with the omicron variant. Nevertheless, the study has some limitations, and findings should be interpreted with caution. 

Did you click on the Disclosures at the bottom of the study?  Several of them are funded by Pfizer.  And more than a few of them are funded by Gates.  Gates, as I'm sure you know, has no medical background at all.

And Neil Ferguson contributed to this study, as well.  I suggest you search for my posts on Neil Ferguson.  He's the last person who should be involved in any kind of study. I think one of my posts regarding him was in this thread.  He was given the boot in the UK when his myriads of predictions were so wrong it bordered on ludicrous and then got caught visiting his mistress for sexy time when he was supposed to be in the lockdown, as he insisted everyone else do.

This is why I pay more attention to independent, non-Big Pharma funded studies.

 

Edited November 6, 2022 by Goddess

[Goddess]

12 minutes ago, dialamah said:

Tell me again how the data I provided in my other post is different from the rest of the world.

Studies that are not funded by Pfizer somehow reach very different conclusions.

[dialamah]

Where it all started:

On January 5, 2021, Major League Baseball (MLB) legend and Hall of Famer, Hank Aaron, publicly received his first dose of the Moderna vaccine series at Morehouse School of Medicine in Atlanta, Georgia, USA. Two weeks later, he passed away at the age of 86 years due to natural causes. Following his death, a prominent antivaccine activist and founder of a known antivaccine group posted information on the popular microblogging site Twitter, which claimed an unfounded link between Aaron’s death and the COVID-19 vaccine [1]. This claim was erroneously based on reports of elderly deaths following COVID-19 vaccination reported into the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS). VAERS, established in 1990, is a public US database and passive reporting system comanaged by the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the Food and Drug Administration, where individuals can submit vaccine adverse event reports without clinical verification. Data provided by VAERS has been increasingly used by antivaccine advocates to spread misinformation [2]. This database has also seen increased reports since COVID-19 vaccines received emergency use authorization from the Food and Drug Administration [2].

Why they believe:

... we examine predictors of belief in the most common statements about the virus that contain misinformation.

Summary:  Older, and conservative; those who are more marginalized, reflected by lower levels of psychological well-being, education, and income;  lower performance on numeracy tasks - which includes analytical and critical thinking.

That's it for me, Goddess, you continue on with your fear porn.

(Edited to add:  LMAO - Fox News - at least as reliable as CNN.)

Edited November 6, 2022 by dialamah

[Goddess]

2 minutes ago, dialamah said:

(Edited to add:  LMAO - Fox News - at least as reliable as CNN.)

Are you denying that those people said those things????

Really????

[Goddess]

5 minutes ago, dialamah said:

That's it for me, Goddess, you continue on with your fear porn.

OK.

Good luck with boosters 4-10.

Trudeau just bought $95 million in doses for you for 2023, too.  So good luck also with boosters 11-through the rest of your life!  ?  

[Goddess]

There was a recent study from Israel (also Pfizer funded) that concluded women were NOT experiencing menstrual issues from the vaccine.  Women were apparently lying about their issues, was the implication there.

Then it was revealed that the study included MEN, thus the low amount of menstrual issues.

This is why I don't put much stock in Pfizer-funded studies.

I always click on the Disclosures or Conflicts of Interest first.

Thanks for posting those, though.  I'm not sure you read them all through much.  Lots of caveats.  And 2 of them said that in spite of their study findings, the results were not being reflected in real life.

Personally, I think it's time to stop with the efficacy studies and start studying why people are dropping dead of heart attacks all over the place.

When will the CDC start looking into that, do you think?

 

Edited November 6, 2022 by Goddess

[eyeball]

45 minutes ago, Goddess said:

Should the vaccine manufacturer's extraordinary claims also require extraordinary evidence?

Everyone's claims of this nature do.

Quote

Yet you accepted their extraordinary claims based on almost zero evidence.  You accepted "safe & effective" based on NO long-term studies, NO studies for transmission, NO studies on fertility, NO studies on pregnancy and breastfeeding.

Not only did you accept their extraordinary claims based on very little evidence, you demanded everyone do like you and vilified anyone who wanted extraordinary evidence for their extraordinary claims.

No I accepted that it was safe and effective based on the conclusions and opinions being expressed by the vast majority of experts weighing in on extraordinary issues under extraordinary circumstances.  Recall, amongst other things, that excavators were required to keep up with the dead they were piling up so fast . 

Quote

So your demand for extraordinary evidence seems very hypocritical.

I'm demanding extraordinary evidence of your extraordinary claim that there is a vast evil global conspiracy that's used or engineered the epidemic to be the galvanizing event by which it enslaves and controls the world.

Quote

So far, the scientists I follow have been right on everything.  Your's have been majorly wrong.

I've provided all the evidence here in this thread.

You won't read it, you won't provide any of this "extraordinary evidence" of the vaccines safety and effectiveness, but demand MORE of me?

Please read the information here on OAS and explain to me why 100 years of epidemiological science is wrong.

As I've explained before that unlike you I'm a layman at virology and immunology, so I'll just have to wait until the analyses and reviews of your scientists conclusions sway the opinions and conclusions of the vast VAST majority of experts and scientists on the planet.