They Promised “Safe and Effective”, We Got “Sudden and Unexpected”

a reply to: quintessentone

I take exception to your source, it's CT-based, 

Yawn...

Of course you do.

Your disclaimer afterward is irrelevant.

As I remember it, the vax was quite effective against the og strain and became less so at preventing each mutation(delta, omnicron, whatever version we currently are on). They are still "supposed" prevent serious illness if you get it but IDK. I thought the MRNA big thing was being able to modify it as needed, guess that was wrong. Anyways, got my original 3 shots in 21, all pfizer, then a pfizer booster in december. Personally, i dont know anyone who had any issues with the shot. As far as i know, i havent gotten the cov, but i also dont test and stopped wearing a mask once i got my original shot. I dont regret getting the vax, but i plan on treating it like the flu shot and just get 1 a year. At this point, i no longer care if someone does/doesnt want to take the shot, it doesnt seem to make much a difference and I do believe your body, your choice. That is how i feel when it comes to abortion and i would be a hypocrite if i didnt apply the same to getting the covid shot

a reply to: MatteBlak

I appreciate your post. But I do hesitate ot accept the idea that "... the vax was quite effective against the og strain and became less so at preventing each mutation(delta, omnicron, whatever version we currently are on)"

You see from the onset of this 21st century 'plague' the principle 'providers' of information were quite 'lock step' and frankly indiscriminate about the rejection of any data that did not affirm the message "safe and effective."

In fact, the "evidence" 'locked into the narrative" gave rise to authorities claiming 95% efficacy, a claim which if course, couldn't be maintained without the imposition of social engineering and, quite frankly, overt censorship designed to minimize any doubts in the public mind.

I'm no virologist, but I still have concerns that people have yet to discuss the actual virus itself. There's much to explore about this organism.

However the 'optics of success" was more important than reality. So all we were left with was dissent = anti-vaxx idiocy.

To be honest, the more they pushed using these tools the harder I felt it was necessary to inquire. To me the risks were no different than with any flu... and I have taken flu vaccines before without noteworthy ill-effects. But the "hard" sell raised some concerns, and when the records show no flu cases all year long... I felt the COVID data was likely suspect - from the source who would not accept inquiry or liability...

I think it might be that only certain physiological circumstances lead to bad outcomes, but I may be wrong.

a reply to: MatteBlak

i no longer care if someone does/doesnt want to take the shot, it doesnt seem to make much a difference and I do believe your body, your choice. That is how i feel when it comes to abortion and i would be a hypocrite if i didnt apply the same to getting the covid shot

I could not disagree with a statement any more than I do this one!

I'll blame my conservative values rather than your statement though...just to seem fair!

I in fact do care who does and doesn't want to "take the shot"...a lot of these folks are my family and friends...people I care about and don't want to see anything bad happen to them! If I knowingly stand by and watch people get a shot that I know is going to be detrimental to their health, or kill them...then I might as well be giving them that shot myself!

The whole "...your body, your choice..." comment and your opinion on abortion...well...that is absolutely nothing like getting vaccinated/boosted/gene therapy (whatever) at all and the comparison is sickening honestly!

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: underpass61
a reply to: quintessentone
Why do you keep lying? From day one they were saying you would be safe if you got vaccinated. The story only changed as the problems increased.

Lying would be giving incorrect facts, I don't do that. What I notice here with many vaccine hesitant people are twisting facts and reality. Or grasping onto slogans instead of doing research to find out what is true and what is not true.

For the majority of people, yes, it is effective - is it safe? yes, for most people.

I won't post statistics and data because it will only be ignored.

So, is it safe and effective for everyone, without specific medical comorbidity context, obviously not for some groups of people, but the transparency has been there all along.

Vaccine hesitancy is a pejorative.

You are accusing others here that they are twisting facts when in reality you are doing the same or denying facts. A few days ago you were claiming that herd immunity can be achieved through vaccination and we are close to herd immunity because of vaccination.

But this claim has been debunked several times.

Let's see the evidence

From my to thread: The Myth of Herd Immunity to SARS-CoV-2 l. Links in the opening page




January 27, 2022
Kevin Kavanagh, MD

Those Who Believe in Herd Immunity Cannot Do the Math.

COVID-19 mutations are evading our immunity and at the same time our immunity is waning. Herd immunity to disease and the eradication of SARS-CoV-2 is no longer possible.

The developer of the AstraZeneca shot says the Delta variant has made herd immunity impossible because vaccinated people can still transmit the virus

Prof Devi Sridhar is chair of global public health at the University of Edinburgh

Herd immunity now seems impossible. Welcome to the age of Covid reinfection

The virus is now embedded in our world. But there are steps we can take to keep it at bay while we continue to live our lives

So your claim has been refuted again and again.

In addition you are promoting the idea that vaccines are safe and effective i.e the official narrative. But there is no evidence for such claims other than official narratives.

You have been linking also irrelevant material such as links to liver disease that have nothing to do with vaccine injuries and deaths. You have clearly confused everything.

And of course you are engaging in vaccine apologetics and denialism of reality.

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: The GUT
Title alone wins internet for the week. Bravo.

I mean, get real if you already ain't children, because that's the whole truth distilled.

They never promised anything, they advised that the vaccine would help prevent severe illness, which it does, and for the most part with a proper understanding of how the vaccines work and your susceptibility to potential severe adverse reactions (which your doctor should be on top of) or your comorbidities, it's a risk vs. benefit scenario, and always has been since the onset of the rollout of vaccines. That would be after the vaccine studies and where all issues were reported and transparent.

This is another round of vaccine apologetics when at the same time you are denying that vaccines bound cause plenty of harm. You are also defending the pharmaceuticals and trying to promote the 'safe and effective' narrative when you have even confuse basic terms such as herd immunity, natural immunity, benefit to risk ratio from the vaccines, and pretty much every term involved.

You said that with a 'proper understanding of how vaccine work'....But you are clearly don't understand how the mRNA 'vaccines' work. How do you try to lecture others?

If the issues are reported and everything was transparent as you said then do you know the short, medium, and long term effects? The benefit to risk ratio for all age groups?

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: underpass61
a reply to: quintessentone
Why do you keep lying? From day one they were saying you would be safe if you got vaccinated. The story only changed as the problems increased.

Lying would be giving incorrect facts, I don't do that. What I notice here with many vaccine hesitant people are twisting facts and reality. Or grasping onto slogans instead of doing research to find out what is true and what is not true.

For the majority of people, yes, it is effective - is it safe? yes, for most people.

I won't post statistics and data because it will only be ignored.

So, is it safe and effective for everyone, without specific medical comorbidity context, obviously not for some groups of people, but the transparency has been there all along.

You have posted about liver disease which was irrelevant to any of the conversations.

Above you have used 'fact checkers' websites. And what do you think 'fact checkers' are?

Let me answer this again:
A range of uneducated gaslighters and propagandists with degrees in bs-logy and gender studies.. Disinformation officers which under normal circumstances wound have been prosecuted for spreading deliberate false information.

Who takes seriously a range of uneducated and unqualified individuals who are getting paid to gaslight others? In an open conversation without any censorship they will annihilated in the first few moments.

You are indeed grasping into slogans and pejoratives such as 'anti-vaxxers' and vaccine hesitancy.

originally posted by: jerryznv
I personally like this one:

There’s no scientific evidence that vaccines are responsible for strange blood clots observed by embalmers

One of the claims comes from an article titled “Embalmers finding ‘strange clots’ in jabbed people” and published by NewsWars, a website run by Alex Jones that has a history of spreading fake news and conspiracy theories.

This anomaly may be the result of the coronavirus itself, since infection can cause blood vessel inflammation, damage to very small vessels and clots.

No Scientific Evidence

Written by Naseem Ferdowsi

Her resume:

A masterful multitasker with skills in:

• Project management
• Web design
• Online communications
• News writing
• Content creation
• Content Management Systems
• Managing websites
• Managing junior team members
• Graphic design
• Video production
• Journalism
• Corporate communications
• Press release writing
• Analytical thinking
• Events
• Donor stewardship
• Fundraising and donor communications

Sounds legit! Right?

I mean see...it says this:

Generally, the vaccines available in the U.S. have been shown to sharply reduce the risk of hospitalization and death from COVID-19.

How can you argue with that?

'Fact checkers'

Professional gaslighters without a single qualification in science or medicine and without the most basic knowledge in of the matters involved.

A range of bs-logists with expertise in marketing, propaganda, video production for propagandistic reasons, content creation and content fabrication, and sometimes gender studies.

I am sure they can 'convince' anyone about how safe and effective vaccines are and try to gaslight all others who think the opposite.

a reply to: quintessentone

Since you made further claims in relation to the safety and effectiveness of these products do you know what are the short, medium, and long term effects? What about the benefit to risk ratio in all age groups?

I really wanted to see the medium and long term effects. You could know them if you had a time machine. If you don't have a time machine it implies that you don't know them and hence your claims about safety and effectiveness are unsubstantiated.

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: jerryznv
I personally like this one:

There’s no scientific evidence that vaccines are responsible for strange blood clots observed by embalmers

One of the claims comes from an article titled “Embalmers finding ‘strange clots’ in jabbed people” and published by NewsWars, a website run by Alex Jones that has a history of spreading fake news and conspiracy theories.

This anomaly may be the result of the coronavirus itself, since infection can cause blood vessel inflammation, damage to very small vessels and clots.

No Scientific Evidence

Written by Naseem Ferdowsi

Her resume:

A masterful multitasker with skills in:

• Project management
• Web design
• Online communications
• News writing
• Content creation
• Content Management Systems
• Managing websites
• Managing junior team members
• Graphic design
• Video production
• Journalism
• Corporate communications
• Press release writing
• Analytical thinking
• Events
• Donor stewardship
• Fundraising and donor communications

Sounds legit! Right?

I mean see...it says this:

Generally, the vaccines available in the U.S. have been shown to sharply reduce the risk of hospitalization and death from COVID-19.

How can you argue with that?

'Fact checkers'

Professional gaslighters without a single qualification in science or medicine and without the most basic knowledge in of the matters involved.

A range of bs-logists with expertise in marketing, propaganda, video production for propagandistic reasons, content creation and content fabrication, and sometimes gender studies.

I am sure they can 'convince' anyone about how safe and effective vaccines are and try to gaslight all others who think the opposite.

"FACT CHECKER" aka Fake Checker:

Big pharma funded shill with zero relevant credentials who copy pastes government propaganda to maintain the narrative.


Example: "There are 226 peer reviewed studies that show mRNA vaccines cause myocarditis but these are fake because they were done by anti vaxxers."

Regular Joe (sheep): "durrrrrr, yup."