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]

1 hour ago, CdnFox said:

So for example when native women were severely pressured into being sterilized so they couldn't have more kids and later regretted it - the state is ok to do that? You're fine with that kind of thing?

🙄

1 hour ago, CdnFox said:

I"m sorry but  threatening to take away someone's livelihood and their home and their food and their family with it is NOT giving them 'choice'.  Lets not descent into ridiculousness here. People were made to do it who didn't want to.  Some of them died.  Some were badly hurt.

And hundreds of thousands of lives were saved along with preventing millions from becoming I'll.

Are you suggesting we suspend taking similar measures next time because of this one particular bit of hindsight and the very very small number of people who were injured and killed?

Instead how about if we have a plan in place for accommodating people who choose not to be vaccinated?  Right now it looks like we'll likely be forced to.

Edited February 1 by eyeball

[GroundskeeperWillie]

5 minutes ago, eyeball said:

🙄

And hundreds of thousands of lives were saved along with preventing millions from becoming I'll.

Are you suggesting we suspend taking similar measures next time because of this one particular bit of hindsight and the very very small number of people who were injured and killed?

Instead how about if we have a plan in place for accommodating people who choose not to be vaccinated?  Right now it looks like we'll likely be forced to.

I think his point is that people like you think just because the government did not physically force people to take the vaccines, that it means people weren't being coerced to take them.

And CdnFox is right.  Making people choose the vaccines or their livelihood is not a true choice.  If a third-world dictator said to his subjects, "you can either choose to support me, or you can choose death", do you really think he was giving his people a legitimate choice?

[eyeball]

1 hour ago, Nationalist said:

...we were told by those who went through the Spanish flu pandemic, to NOT lock down. Get outside.

We were also told that crazy right-wingers would lose their shit and places where they did would suffer more illness and death as a result.

See the US (Donald Trump Republicans) and Brazil (Jair Bolsonaro Liberal Party...say what? LMAO!) 

[CdnFox]

52 minutes ago, GroundskeeperWillie said:

I have read an article by the World health council.  It mentioned that there are viral plasmid DNAs in the vaccines that can integrate themselves into the recipient's genes. Also I have read the letter of Surgeon General of Florida (Dr.  Ladapo) to the heads of CDC and FDA.  In his letter, he made serious charges about the safety of the vaccines.  Apparently the CDC and FDA "responded" by giving him word-salads.

I can provide links to these studies if anybody is interested.  Just send me a message.  I am not sure if I am allowed to post the articles on here.

You're allowed to - they might well get challenged but sure this is a place where more info is considered generally better and we'll see if it stands up to scrutiny.

[GroundskeeperWillie]

Just now, CdnFox said:

You're allowed to - they might well get challenged but sure this is a place where more info is considered generally better and we'll see if it stands up to scrutiny.

Thank you, Cdn.  I will make a new thread soon.

[eyeball]

4 minutes ago, GroundskeeperWillie said:

Making people choose the vaccines or their livelihood is not a true choice.

It's not true force either.

2 minutes ago, GroundskeeperWillie said:

Thank you, Cdn.  I will make a new thread soon.

[Nationalist]

40 minutes ago, eyeball said:

I'm sorry but hindsight has already beat you to this.

Vaccine hesitancy, COVID conspiracies led to thousands of deaths, high cost for health care system, report finds

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/article-report-the-high-human-cost-of-misinformation/

https://www.kabc.com/2022/02/01/johns-hopkins-report-lockdowns-did-not-work/

So much for lockdowns.

https://www.brightworkresearch.com/how-the-covid-vaccines-do-nothing-to-limit-the-spread-of-covid/

So much for vaccines.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/health/medical/a-major-new-study-shows-that-masks-don-t-stop-the-spread-of-covid-will-the-mandaters-apologize/ar-AA172j6T

So much for masks.

Gee...hindsight is fun...don't ya think?

[GroundskeeperWillie]

2 minutes ago, eyeball said:

It's not true force either.

 

It's not force in the sense that it's not physical.  However, it is definitely a form of coercion.

You know that coercion is bad, right?

[eyeball]

2 minutes ago, GroundskeeperWillie said:

It's not force in the sense that it's not physical.  However, it is definitely a form of coercion.

You know that coercion is bad, right?

Yes I fume every time I'm coerced into stopping at a red light.

[Nationalist]

15 minutes ago, eyeball said:

We were also told that crazy right-wingers would lose their shit and places where they did would suffer more illness and death as a result.

See the US (Donald Trump Republicans) and Brazil (Jair Bolsonaro Liberal Party...say what? LMAO!) 

See Brandon and his abject failures.

Seems the open states like Florida did just fine.

[GroundskeeperWillie]

17 minutes ago, eyeball said:

Yes I fume every time I'm coerced into stopping at a red light.

Everybody agrees that we should stop at a red light, but not everybody thinks we should all get jabbed.

 

Please tell me you know the difference.

[CdnFox]

25 minutes ago, eyeball said:

Yes I fume every time I'm coerced into stopping at a red light.

And what part of your biology was permanently changed at the red light exactly?  

You're dancing around a truth here instead of dealing with it.  Coercion is force.  The issue here is it ok in some circumstances to force people to take risks to their life and even die without their free consent for the benefit of others?

 

[eyeball]

3 hours ago, GroundskeeperWillie said:

Everybody agrees that we should stop at a red light, but not everybody thinks we should all get jabbed.

 

Please tell me you know the difference.

Of course I do, we all agree to stop at red lights as a matter of public safety.

But no one is forcing us to drive or else.

[myata]

11 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

1. What other means ?  Did any jurisdiction try such means and have success ?

You can check that. Yes there were jurisdictions that did not recommend these treatments to children and young adults. The reason is obvious: medical ethics; professional standard; the oath, lastly: never harm the patient. When a treatment carries even a possibility of risk to a recipient who by all factual indications does not need it; it cannot be justified by any perceived greater good.

You can compare it with blood donation. The critical benefit is obvious, risks to the donor, virtually none still we're not trying to coerce people into donating blood. This is plain and simple bullshit and in addition, a violation of all kinds of professional ethics and standards, and it happened only because this is Canada. Yes we can. What?

[GroundskeeperWillie]

1 minute ago, eyeball said:

Of course I do, we all agree to stop at red lights as a matter of public safety.

But no one is forcing us to drive or else.

The government coerced the public to take the vaccines.

It doesn't matter that the government technically didn't hold people down physically to force the shots on them. Coercion occurred, and that is morally wrong.

 

[CdnFox]

5 minutes ago, eyeball said:

Of course I do, we all agree to stop at red lights as a matter of public safety.

But no one is forcing us to drive or else.

You're still dodging the issue and engaging in false equivalencies  

[eyeball]

3 hours ago, CdnFox said:

You're dancing around a truth here instead of dealing with it.  Coercion is force. 

Sure but it's not physical and it takes Two to Tango.

But no one's forcing you.

3 hours ago, CdnFox said:

The issue here is it ok in some circumstances to force people to take risks to their life and even die without their free consent for the benefit of others?

Of course not. It's a matter of choice. Of course choices do have consequences and people charged with ensuring public safety measures, like traffic lights for example, are expected to act on their authority to do so if a bunch of people insist on ignoring and flaunting their disregard for public safety.

Could they have done a better job in the face of the pandemic? Probably but especially if they didn't have to contend with a bunch of whacked out people forcing them to take more serious measures.

But even then, no one was strapped to a gurney against their will and If you didn't want vaccine you didn't have to take it. You were given a choice.

No one took away your opportunity to find another job.

16 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

You're still dodging the issue and engaging in false equivalencies  

You're trying to force a point by engaging in ridiculous equivalencies.

[GroundskeeperWillie]

4 minutes ago, eyeball said:

Sure but it's not physical and it takes Two to Tango.

But no one's forcing you.

You need to get this idea out of your head that just because nobody is physically held down to get the shots, it means nobody's been coerced.

I don't think you know that what coercion means.  Nor do you know that coercion is morally wrong just like force.

[eyeball]

23 minutes ago, GroundskeeperWillie said:

The government coerced the public to take the vaccines.

They only had to persuade most of us.

26 minutes ago, GroundskeeperWillie said:

It doesn't matter that the government technically didn't hold people down physically to force the shots on them. 

It does matter when you insist on framing things with that context.

27 minutes ago, GroundskeeperWillie said:

Coercion occurred, and that is morally wrong.

Sometimes there's no other choice.

[eyeball]

9 minutes ago, GroundskeeperWillie said:

You need to get this idea out of your head that just because nobody is physically held down to get the shots, it means nobody's been coerced.

No I don't. You OTOH need to accept the fact you still had to consent to being vaccinated.

Edited February 1 by eyeball

[GroundskeeperWillie]

6 minutes ago, eyeball said:

Sometimes there's no other choice.

I have to take away your freedom of speech, because there's no other choice.  Now prove me wrong.

5 minutes ago, eyeball said:

No I don't. You OTOH need to accept the fact you still had to consent to being vaccinated.

There is no consent.  The government essentially threatened people with their livelihood.  

[eyeball]

2 minutes ago, GroundskeeperWillie said:

I have to take away your freedom of speech, because there's no other choice.  Now prove me wrong.

How about if I just choose to ignore you? I just proved you wrong btw.

3 minutes ago, GroundskeeperWillie said:

There is no consent.  The government essentially threatened people with their livelihood. 

But not their life.

[Michael Hardner]

6 hours ago, myata said:

1. You can check that.   

2. it happened only because this is Canada.

3. Yes we can. 

1. 2. Burden of proof is with the claimant.

3. Obama?

[GroundskeeperWillie]

7 hours ago, eyeball said:

How about if I just choose to ignore you?[/quote]

You can, however the sad thing is that people cannot ignore the government.

7 hours ago, eyeball said:

I just proved you wrong btw.

In the dreamland you dwell in, yes.

7 hours ago, eyeball said:

But not their life.

Life is not the only thing that can be used to threaten someone with.

Edited February 1 by GroundskeeperWillie

[myata]

3 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

Burden of proof is with the claimant.

Common knowledge is not burden. Many European health authorities did not recommend them for children and young adults. This is Germany, for example:

Healthy people aged between 18 and 59 years (including pregnant people) are recommended a basic immunisation as well as a booster to build up a basic immunity.

"OMG can't wait to have my 6.5 month old vaccinated!". Is it criminal yet? (what is?)

Edited February 1 by myata