Study Finds ‘COVID-19 Vaccination is Strongly Associated w/ a Serious Adverse Safety Signal of Myocarditis, Particularly in Children and Young Adults Resulting in Hospitalization and Death

[eyeball]

You can tell dinglenuts never actually read the study he cited or he wouldn't have swung it in the first place.

[Moonbox]

14 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

And i explained why you got that wrong, and you DO have to.  Nice and slow. They don't review the data they'd need to.

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.  🤡

24 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

As i've demonstrated over time males of certain age groups are more at risk from taking the shot.

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.    

[GroundskeeperWillie]

1 hour ago, eyeball said:

Nope and even if health authorities decided to call them treatments instead it still wouldn't have changed anything or given any reason to not avail yourself of them.   

If the covid shots aren't vaccines yet the authorities lied to you and told you they were, then you should really start to question their integrity.

1 hour ago, eyeball said:

There's nothing wrong with being skeptical of governments, there is however something wrong with subscribing to hooey, or that believing a couple of quotation marks changes anything.

Can you prove that it's hooey? Are you sure this isn't just an opinion?

[eyeball]

7 minutes ago, GroundskeeperWillie said:

If the covid shots aren't vaccines yet the authorities lied to you and told you they were, then you should really start to question their integrity.

There's the rub, if.

7 minutes ago, GroundskeeperWillie said:

Can you prove that it's hooey? Are you sure this isn't just an opinion?

It's up to you to prove the authorities lied. It wasn't just an opinion it was a consensus that was shared and is still held by a vast majority of medical experts around the world, including my trustworthy doctor's, who I've been listening to for years now.

[CdnFox]

58 minutes ago, eyeball said:

I note the authors didn't say we need to stop listening to woke left-lib Vax-Nazis.

I note that neither did I.   

I note that i DID ask "do we have the right to force other people to take risks including death on behalf of 3rd parties".

I note you can't answer that and instead are somehow making this about 'woke leftards' or something.  I guess you self identify that way or the like?

So why didn't you answer that instead?

 

Quote

Another swing and a miss kiddo.

Awww look at you   You're almost as smart as a parrot now     Keep working, we'll train you up yet!

Sadly the miss is yours tho. You tried to change the subject and you just coudln't.   Sorry little guy, maybe next time  

19 minutes ago, GroundskeeperWillie said:

If the covid shots aren't vaccines yet the authorities lied to you and told you they were, then you should really start to question their integrity.

Can you prove that it's hooey? Are you sure this isn't just an opinion?

It's hooey because he doesnt' agree with it.

 

[CdnFox]

58 minutes ago, Moonbox said:

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.  🤡

Not THEIR conclusions.  Your conclusions.  They weren't trying to prove what you are.  So they did THEIR job fine, i did MY job fine, you fell on your face and look stupid.  Which is pretty much the expected outcome.

Quote

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.   

oh look who's in full hissy-fit denial again   LOL   Of course i did.

this study shows that there's a very serious risk to males of certain age groups.

I've shown that those males will also get covid whether they're vaccinted or not - 80 percent of canadians have had it now and the vaccines don't stop it over time. So whether you take the vaccine or not you're still at the same risk of covid complications.'

I've shown that the research you've provided does not in any way indicate that taking the vaccine will reduce the risk over time to the covid complications.

I've proven my case just fine.  And now you're having your regular scheduled hissy fit about it.Want proof? If you WERENT having a hisssy fit about it - you'd take a crack at the questions i asked    That's what a normal person would do.  instead you're denying the science as hard as you can. Well done.

Edited February 6, 2024 by CdnFox

[CdnFox]

 

9 minutes ago, eyeball said:

 

It's up to you to prove the authorities lied.

 

No, eyeball - if YOUR claim is that it's hooey, then the onus is on YOU to prove it's hooey.  You know that.

[GroundskeeperWillie]

23 minutes ago, eyeball said:

There's the rub, if.

It's up to you to prove the authorities lied. It wasn't just an opinion it was a consensus that was shared and is still held by a vast majority of medical experts around the world, including my trustworthy doctor's, who I've been listening to for years now.

They changed the definition of vaccine so that the covid shots would now be called vaccine.  Under the old, more scientifically rigorous definition, covid shots would not have qualified as such.

 

Maybe to call them liar is too strong a word.  But they used dirty tricks such as changing the definition.  I find this very morally problematic and this is why I don't trust the authorities.

 

And further, like CdnFox said, you called it "hooey".  You should back this up.

Edited February 6, 2024 by GroundskeeperWillie

[Moonbox]

4 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

Not THEIR conclusions.  Your conclusions.  They weren't trying to prove what you are.  So they did THEIR job fine, i did MY job fine, you fell on your face and look stupid.  Which is pretty much the expected outcome.

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.  

[CdnFox]

6 minutes ago, Moonbox said:

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.  

OHHH _ LOOK WHAT YOU DELIBERATELY LEFT OUT.....  – with one exception. Men under 40 who received a second dose of the Moderna vaccine had a higher risk of myocarditis following vaccination.

YOUR OWN LINK PROVED WHAT I SAID COMPLETELY.  

And further:

Among men under 40, there were an estimated four extra cases of myocarditis associated with the first dose of the Pfizer vaccine and 14 extra cases with the first dose of the Moderna vaccine for every 1 million men vaccinated. That risk rose with the second dose for all three vaccines studied and was highest for Moderna's, which had an additional 97 myocarditis cases per 1 million. For unvaccinated men under 40 with COVID-19, there were 16 additional myocarditis cases per million.

 

So you're a lying little snake - you found proof i was right entirely 100 percent and yet tried to pass it off as proof of your claim.

In men under 40 taking the vaccine is more dangerous. Period.

Now that you've been proven to be 100 percent full of shit by your own hand, did you want to take a crack at those questions?

[Moonbox]

34 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

OHHH _ LOOK WHAT YOU DELIBERATELY LEFT OUT.....  – with one exception. Men under 40 who received a second dose of the Moderna vaccine had a higher risk of myocarditis following vaccination.

...with one exception. 

If you're under 40, and a 0.0097% chance of myocarditis terrifies you, get the Pfizer vaccine instead 🤣.

34 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

YOUR OWN LINK PROVED WHAT I SAID COMPLETELY.  

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. 

Edited February 6, 2024 by Moonbox

[GroundskeeperWillie]

17 minutes ago, Moonbox said:

...with one exception. 

If you're under 40, and a 0.0097% chance of myocarditis terrifies you, get the Pfizer vaccine instead 🤣.

Or how about he gets neither?  I think 0 % chance of myocarditis is better, right?

17 minutes ago, Moonbox said:

...with one exception. 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

This implies that vaccines can lower the risk of myocarditis.

Didn't know your precious vaccines were such panacea.

Edited February 6, 2024 by GroundskeeperWillie

[CdnFox]

29 minutes ago, Moonbox said:

...with one exception. 

Yes - the very exception i've been talking about all along        

And no taking another one doesn't help.   

30 minutes ago, Moonbox said:

concludes that myocarditis risks are higher for the unvaccinated than the vaccinated

Quote

This implies that vaccines can lower the risk of myocarditis.

Except for the age/sex group i mentioned. the 'exception.  Being males under 40.

Which i've said all along.

So that's TWO sources which agree with me 100 percent.

And i see you're still petrified to answer the questions  

[Moonbox]

1 hour ago, CdnFox said:

Except for the age/sex group i mentioned. the 'exception.  Being males under 40.

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.  

1 hour ago, CdnFox said:

And i see you're still petrified to answer the questions

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.  🤡

[GroundskeeperWillie]

1 minute ago, Moonbox said:

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.  🤡

Can you explain this?  "myocarditis risks are higher for the unvaccinated than the vaccinated".

 

Do covid shots provide protection against myocarditis?

[CdnFox]

Just now, Moonbox said:

No, males under 40, getting their second dose of Moderna.  

Ahem.

"That risk rose with the second dose for all three vaccines studied and was highest for Moderna's"

So no. Not 'moderna'. They were the worst but it was in all three.

Quote

Every source I've cited here is still promoting the vaccine for all age groups

Your source specifically states

That risk rose with the second dose for all three vaccines studied and was highest for Moderna's, which had an additional 97 myocarditis cases per 1 million. For unvaccinated men under 40 with COVID-19, there were 16 additional myocarditis cases per million.

So no, not really.  Not for the 'eception' that they mention

And one would presume if the risk goes up after the second shot - what about the  booster? or additional boosters?

I mean seriously - you usually come across looking pretty stupid but you have to be unusually ashamed of yourself this time.  It was already obvious you were wrong but to then post your own proof you were 100 percent wrong and i was very specifically right has got to really sting     But go ahead and deny it a few more times, i love your salty tears  

Quote

What questions were those? 

everybody else addressed those  questions   you're the only one who has a hissy fit and forgets what the conversation was about.

Everyone else could read and knew i was right from the get go without bothering to prove they were wrong like you did   Owtch.

So - the question remains - it is clear that we coerced and forced people of a certain sex and age group to take a risk that did not benefit them and even die in some cases not for their benefit but for others.  Is that ok? At what point is it ok to step on the rights of one indicidual to benefit the larger group without their consent?   I think of things like the japanese interment or sterilization of native women or the residential schools all of which had that argument behind it -  where do we draw the line? Or should there BE a line?

[Moonbox]

4 minutes ago, GroundskeeperWillie said:

Can you explain this?  "myocarditis risks are higher for the unvaccinated than the vaccinated".

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.  

[CdnFox]

8 minutes ago, GroundskeeperWillie said:

Can you explain this?  "myocarditis risks are higher for the unvaccinated than the vaccinated".

 

Do covid shots provide protection against myocarditis?

Some groups are at higher risk of myocaritis.  Overall the statement may be true but for healthy males under 40 the statement is not true.

Moonbox is like this. He will attempt to obfuscate and twist what he himself posted.  It very clearly shows the risk for males under 40 is higher, and that is in keeping with the original study's fidings as well.

[GroundskeeperWillie]

Just now, Moonbox said:

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.  

And why is that?

[CdnFox]

Just now, Moonbox said:

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.  

Except for the under 40 males. They're the exception. Which is what we've been talking about all along.

Men under 40 who received a second dose of the Moderna vaccine had a higher risk of myocarditis following vaccination.

That risk rose with the second dose for all three vaccines studied and was highest for Moderna's, which had an additional 97 myocarditis cases per 1 million. For unvaccinated men under 40 with COVID-19, there were 16 additional myocarditis cases per million.

1 minute ago, GroundskeeperWillie said:

And why is that?

Doesn't say - nor does it say what happens after 6 months when the vaccine has worn off and the person gets covid then.

So - the damage from the vaccine will still be there, AND their risk of additional damage does not seem to be mitigated over time  AND it's much higher for males under 40 to begin with AND with some vaccines day one it's already higher.

 

[Moonbox]

5 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

Except for the under 40 males. They're the exception. Which is what we've been talking about all along.

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.

10 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

Moonbox is like this. He will attempt to obfuscate and twist what he himself posted.

One exception means one exception, and this one is specifically stated.   Obfuscation is your superpower.  I can keep my posts trim and tight.   

14 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

So - the question remains - it is clear that we coerced and forced people of a certain sex and age group to take a risk that did not benefit them and even die in some cases not for their benefit but for others.  Is that ok?

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.  

[CdnFox]

5 minutes ago, Moonbox said:

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.

Yes - men under 40 had a higher risk.

Thanks for repeating that i was right. I knew that.

That risk rose with the second dose for all three vaccines studied and was highest for Moderna's, which had an additional 97 myocarditis cases per 1 million. For unvaccinated men under 40 with COVID-19, there were 16 additional myocarditis cases per million.Mo

So it went up for all three. 

Still can't answer the questions i see.  Is that because you're so butt hurt after proving yourself wrong?

Edited February 7, 2024 by CdnFox

[CdnFox]

12 minutes ago, Moonbox said:

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.  

Oh - and from the actual study:

Conclusions:

Overall, the risk of myocarditis is greater after SARS-CoV-2 infection than after COVID-19 vaccination and remains modest after sequential doses including a booster dose of BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine. However, the risk of myocarditis after vaccination is higher in younger men, particularly after a second dose of the mRNA-1273 vaccine.

Particularly after moderna - but higher in young men in general.

It confirms that in the body of the study.  In all three cases it's higher.

would you like to play again?  

Still can't answer the questions huh?

 

Edited February 7, 2024 by CdnFox

[GroundskeeperWillie]

11 minutes ago, Moonbox said:

 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.  

So you are saying it's fine for some people to be ill from vaccines as long as there aren't too many of them.

[eyeball]

7 hours ago, CdnFox said:

I note that neither did I.

LMAO! You're stoned out of your freaking mind on vaccine conspiracy gas! You're not fooling anybody.