Jump to content

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


Recommended Posts

37 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

But I think some people just know what we did was wrrong.  But they don't care that it was wrong, so they just want to ignore it and not talk about it again.

No one thinks that they were the bad guy in history. No one would have sided with the Nazis, islamic state, etc.

These guys did, and in true leftist fashion, they're dodging accountability like a Nazi mongoose.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, eyeball said:

You're still completely filled to the very brim with yourself aren't you? No need for hindsight to see that.

I never said that I'm a genius who cured covid, I'm just not an id10t who fell for all this crap. 

That's because I didn't take everything that Fauci and CTV said at face value when it was a combination of nonsensical, conflicting, disturbing and blatantly authoritarian. 

I pointed all of these things out to you hundreds of times and you refused to acknowledge any of it because you were so wrapped up in your devotion to CBC and Trudeau. 

Dude, it made no sense for Trudeau to be blasé about covid coming to Canada when Trump was already shutting down flights from China. It was id10tic to call Trump a racist for that, and to call Trudeau a hero for allowing covid to come in through the front door. Than after the above, we were all supposed to believe that Trudeau did everything perfectly when we can all see, plain as day, that Trudeau f'd up royally. If 'social distancing' is really a thing, then keeping sick people from walking through our int'l airports was important, and that's not up for debate. Sorry, stupid. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, eyeball said:

Oddly enough that never seems to prevent you people from claiming you were always right.

I was right, and we both know it.

You should be mad that you were lied to so often by our gov't and our MSM instead of taking this personally & somehow blaming me. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

I pointed all of these things out to you hundreds of times and you refused to acknowledge any of it because you were so wrapped up in your devotion to CBC and Trudeau.

No, it's because I thought you were nuts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

You should be mad that you were lied to so often by our gov't...

Apparently you've also missed all the times I've talked about transparency and siccing cameras and public process guardians and observers on our governments.

You're a true phenomenon in your own peculiar way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, eyeball said:

Apparently you've also missed all the times I've talked about transparency and siccing cameras and public process guardians and observers on our governments.

You're a true phenomenon in your own peculiar way.

It's weird that you acknowledge that you're aware of the fact that these people can't be trusted, but then you trusted them blindly in light of all the evidence presented to you.

I wasn't citing the QAnon Shaman as a source, I had Health Canada's own stats, which contradicted the gov't's narrative.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

It's weird that you acknowledge that you're aware of the fact that these people can't be trusted, but then you trusted them blindly in light of all the evidence presented to you.

No I didn't. I trusted medical experts and science. Thankfully Trudeau was smart enough to know COVID was way over his head and he stayed out of their way.

You decided the Trumps and Bolsonaros of the world knew better and the results of that speak for themselves. No hindsight required.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, eyeball said:

It's weird that you acknowledge that you're aware of the fact that these people can't be trusted

What's weird is that you insist on thinking I trust governments in spite of everything I've ever said about not trusting them.

This should have you questioning the way you think, especially after beaking off about how everyone else thinks.

Like I said you're quite the phenomenon. It makes you both the ball and the player in these discussion. Definitely more the former though.

We often comment that people don't care what we say in places like this. That said, if people in the future do study them to get a sense of where our heads were at it'll be the slavish partisan committment to their team that you display that astounds and bewilders them most.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, eyeball said:

No I didn't. I trusted medical experts and science.

OMFG. They were being blatantly id10tic about it all, but please tell me that you at least learned from that blind trust? 

Do you still believe it when the gov't says "EVRY Sientist in the werld says that....". 

We really need that :smashingfaceagainstbrickwall smiley here...

Quote

Thankfully Trudeau was smart enough to know COVID was way over his head and he stayed out of their way.

Oh, did he though?

He left people free to fly in from Wuhan and waltz through our int'l airports, restaurants, sporting events, etc, then locked all of US down. Shut our businesses. Etc. We couldn't even walk outside in gov't parks.

He gave away all of our PPE to China and got back shit.

He's the one who was too stupid to order any of the Yankee vaxes, then had to poach 1.9M of them from the 3rd world charity pool to get the vax campaign started. 

He was the one who inflicted vax mandates on everyone to take those vaxes, he imposed martial law, stole gas and diesel from peaceful protesters, froze people's bank accounts, etc. 

You think he was smart, eyeball? 🤣

Never change, buddy. You're just a barrel of laughs. 

Quote

You decided the Trumps and Bolsonaros of the world knew better and the results of that speak for themselves. No hindsight required.

Trump kept an open mind to everything.

It was an all hands on deck situation, and he listened to everybody. Waited for clinical trials. That was his job. He even pushed for the vax, and pimped the vax, but he never made it mandatory or even condoned making it mandatory

Trudeau was a bozo from start to finish. He never said or did anything that wasn't actually stupid. 

Trudeau quotes:

  • We don't have to worry about covid in Canada, it won't affect us much
  • Don't wear masks, but we're gonna give all of ours to China because they need masks even though people DEFINITELY shouldn't wear masks to fight covid.
  • Ok, everyone needs to wear masks now or you can't go anywhere 
  • We're gonna sign up for the vax from China, we don't need the Yank vax
  • We need the yank vax now, so we're gonna have to steal from the darky, I mean uh... 3rd world charity pool
  • I can't forsee any scenario where we'd have vaccine mandates
  • a month later "We need vaccine mandates"
  • Hey India, you need to listen to your peaceful protesters.
  • a month later "Oh snap, there are peaceful protesters in Ottawa... Gotta hide for a week, and then call them all racists and misogynists"

Eyeball, you were 100% wrong about Trump, and like the true loser that you are you're still hanging your hat on a lame "Well it's better than Trump" excuse. FYI no, it wasn't like that at all, and you're just proving that you're still just as much of an id10t as ever, even with the benefit of hindsight. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, eyeball said:

Funny how you people never have any problem with saying 'it's in the past', when the topic is settling land claims or why the middle east is a mess.

Awwww little guy, are you feeling the need to lie again to cover up your failings :)  In fact what gets said is that you learn from the past but you deal with what you have to deal with today.  A wise man doesn't pretend that his great grandfather going to school 100 years ago changes his responsility to make good decisions today.  A wise man knows that he can't kill women and children today because 1948, you need to learn from the past and then focus on the future and how things can be better

Nobody is saying we should cling to what happened in covid, but we SHOULD learn from it and think about how to do better the next time. That is what a wise and just society would do.  "was what we did right and next time how should we do things"

But of course there will be SOME who KNOW what they supported was wrong and are too emotionally afraid to face it that they will instead demand we stop talking about it and then try some cheezy 'whataboutism' involving first nations and the middle east out of cowardice and shame. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, eyeball said:

No I didn't. I trusted medical experts and science.

Turned out to be wrong. Which was little surprise, they said that could the the case. But - you didn't trust the medical experts. You trusted their spokespeople and the politicians in the end.  i doubt you actually talked to any of the real scientists.  For example the real scientists did some studied and said mask were useless except in very specific enclosed spaces and then only for short periods before you were exposed anyway. But we all wore masks everywhere. The science said the younger people weren't at risk.  The science said that people who'd had it were just as immune as those who were vaxxed but we let a woman die in canada despite the medical findings to that effect because she hadn't been 'officially' vaxxed.

So what you really did was chose to lie to yourself in whatever fashion let you confirm your bias. 

Which is fine - you're welcome to do that for yourself. But  you wanted YOUR opinion to be forced on others. And that's a different story.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, eyeball said:

Apparently you've also missed all the times I've talked about transparency and siccing cameras and public process guardians and observers on our governments.

Not sure what you meant by "siccing cameras".  Do you mean mounting cameras everywhere in public spaces?  Cause that sounds really Orwellian.

Edited by GroundskeeperWillie
Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, GroundskeeperWillie said:

Not sure what you meant by "siccing cameras".  Do you mean mounting cameras everywhere in public spaces?  Cause that sounds really Orwellian.

He literally thinks that mp's politicians and others in key positions should be made to wear body cams to record everything they do during all waking hours.  For transparency.

I'm not even kidding.  That's the mentality you're dealing with.

However - funny thing, he absolutely will not comment on the fact that we CAUGHT justin trudeau a NUMBER of times doing corrupt things without cameras, and left wing supporters like Eyeball kept him in power ANYWAY! So i'm not sure what the cameras are supposed to do?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, CdnFox said:

i doubt you actually talked to any of the real scientists.

Why would I when I can delegate that to the same doctors, cardiologist and pharmacist I've entrusted the finer points of my health care to for years now?

I mean, if you'd rather consult people who prescribes spoons for curing tinnitus or gargling bleach for COVID go for it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, GroundskeeperWillie said:

Not sure what you meant by "siccing cameras".  Do you mean mounting cameras everywhere in public spaces?  Cause that sounds really Orwellian.

Nope, just the private spaces that Cabinet/Deputy Ministers and lobbyists conduct their shenanigans.  Its actually quite counter-Orwellian and while I admit it might simply lead to a new sort of dystopia I think it's definitely worth trying.

It should only take a few tweaks to the existing Lobbying Act, and speaking of Orwellian, maybe Stephen Harper's Transparency and Accountability Act can be salvaged so it can actually do what it says.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, CdnFox said:

He literally thinks that mp's politicians and others in key positions should be made to wear body cams to record everything they do during all waking hours.  For transparency

No not made to, they could volunteer however. See how far they're willing to go to out-compete each other for openness.

Process guardians should be enough but in my business where the government actually does use cameras to monitor me, they'll sic a human observer on me, at my expense, if there's gaps in the data that I can't explain.

It always bears repeating with you; never say something can't be done to someone who's doing it. Nothing makes it more transparently clear that you don't have a clue what it is you're talking about.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, CdnFox said:

Turned out to be wrong. Which was little surprise, they said that could the the case. But - you didn't trust the medical experts. You trusted their spokespeople and the politicians in the end.  i doubt you actually talked to any of the real scientists.  For example the real scientists did some studied and said mask were useless except in very specific enclosed spaces and then only for short periods before you were exposed anyway. But we all wore masks everywhere. The science said the younger people weren't at risk.  The science said that people who'd had it were just as immune as those who were vaxxed but we let a woman die in canada despite the medical findings to that effect because she hadn't been 'officially' vaxxed.

So what you really did was chose to lie to yourself in whatever fashion let you confirm your bias. 

Which is fine - you're welcome to do that for yourself. But  you wanted YOUR opinion to be forced on others. And that's a different story.


I don’t like to rely on what one scientist claims. Numbers matter which is why anecdotal reports about what happened to somebody’s friend or relative are useless even if they come from a scientist. Scientists are also prone to irrational beliefs especially when a field of research has been distorted by politics. Large reviews of appropriately gathered data matter. Double blind prospective trials matter too when they can be employed. Of course, in any epidemic, especially with a novel infectious agent, the recommendations will change as knowledge of the virus changes. With Covid we are still looking at a rapidly evolving field of knowledge where errors are constantly being corrected. That’s how science works. 

Edited by SpankyMcFarland
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, eyeball said:

Why would I when I can delegate that to the same doctors, cardiologist and pharmacist I've entrusted the finer points of my health care to for years now?

I mean, if you'd rather consult people who prescribes spoons for curing tinnitus or gargling bleach for COVID go for it. 

They haven't talked to them either.  And - may i remind you that any doctor who spoke out with concerns was punished and often dismissed.

So how exactly can you trust them if they're being threatened and forced by the gov't to say what they say?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, SpankyMcFarland said:


I don’t like to rely on what one scientist claims. Numbers matter which is why anecdotal reports about what happened to somebody’s friend or relative are useless even if they come from a scientist. Scientists are also prone to irrational beliefs especially when a field of research has been distorted by politics. Large reviews of appropriately gathered data matter. Double blind prospective trials matter too when they can be employed. Of course, in any epidemic, especially with a novel infectious agent, the recommendations will change as knowledge of the virus changes. With Covid we are still looking at a rapidly evolving field of knowledge where errors are constantly being corrected. That’s how science works. 

If as you say the medical professionals cannot be relied on in such crisis for political and practical reasons, then those who claim we should are wrong.

Which is kind of the point - people should have been all lowed to review the data and make their own decisions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, SpankyMcFarland said:


I don’t like to rely on what one scientist claims. Numbers matter which is why anecdotal reports about what happened to somebody’s friend or relative are useless even if they come from a scientist. Scientists are also prone to irrational beliefs especially when a field of research has been distorted by politics. Large reviews of appropriately gathered data matter. Double blind prospective trials matter too when they can be employed. Of course, in any epidemic, especially with a novel infectious agent, the recommendations will change as knowledge of the virus changes. With Covid we are still looking at a rapidly evolving field of knowledge where errors are constantly being corrected. That’s how science works. 

Spanky, over 85% of the covid deaths in the first part of 2022, up 'til the end of Sept when the gov't stopped giving out the "deaths by vax status" stats,  were among the 2x-4x vaxed. It's a bit higher than the % of Cdns vaxed. 

The only way our gov't can make the stats look lopsided in favour of the vax is to pretend that the vaxed just had way more cases of covid. But if they do that, then we just have to wonder why they get covid so much more often. 

2022 had 19,000 covid deaths, and if 85.7% of them were among the multi-vaxed, which they almost certainly were, that means that 16,000 m-vaxed Canadians died of covi in 2022. That's more people than died in 2020 when there was no vax and covid actually was a 'novel virus'. 

It's time to stop pretending that the vax was in any way, shape or form a success. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/3/2024 at 2:54 PM, CdnFox said:

It was constant. "safe and effective" was a mantra. And even if there were any suggestion of risk it was brutally downplayed.  "What?  risks?!?!? One in a billion at best!"   you would always here "very very rare not worth considering" etc etc. 

It still is.  Ignoring all of the other dangers, side-effects and symptoms, COVID-19 infection is even more strongly associated with myocarditis than getting vaccinated, and at nearly double the rate.  

"Myocarditis risk depends on the age and sex of the vaccine recipient. It is most common in younger males—adolescents or young adults. The highest risk group is males between 12 and 17 years of age. And in that highest risk group, the myocarditis risk after the second dose, which is the highest, is 35.9 per 100,000 people. In comparison, the risk post-infection in that same group is 64.9 per 100,000."

https://medicine.yale.edu/news-article/qanda-what-causes-rare-instances-of-myocarditis-after-mrna-covid-19-vaccines/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,751
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    Betsy Smith
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • wwef235 earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • phoenyx75 went up a rank
      Apprentice
    • User went up a rank
      Mentor
    • NakedHunterBiden earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Videospirit earned a badge
      One Month Later
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...