Stop using the term 'Anti Vaxx'

a reply to: shaemac
Actually, you can.

This is a new type and works using the same mechanism to cause the same response from the immune system. You have to fit it somewhere and this is where it fits best.

By the way, they are being called vaccines all over the world.

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: ScepticScot
Not everyone who choses not to get vaccinated is anti vax .

However its a convenient shorthand for those who post lies, misinformation and completely made bollocks about vaccines.

Since there are plenty of those in this site I will continue to use the term, thanks all the same.

and the boot licking crowd isn't smart enough to understand Newton's third law. The harder you push, the more push back you will get. Eventually, someone needs to stop pushing. Once you realize who started it, you might realize who needs to stop.

I agree and when anti vaxers stop telling lies then there is no need to point them out.

That is what you mean right?

….


If we had real science driving real facts, and left out the "profit" part, we might have some real results to gain traction on this. But once it was politicized and used to get rid of Trump, we seem to have lost the plot.

How, exactly, were the vaccines used to get rid of Trump?

First, he created “Operation Warp Speed” to develop the vaccines. Whether you think that was good or bad, that is on him, not anyone else.

Second, the vaccines weren’t even released for general use until well after the election. Nobody knew before the election what the adverse effects might be or that Republicans would decide that vaccinations with the mRNA vaccines was a dastardly Democrat/CHICOM plot.

Politicization occurred after the election, not before.

a reply to: 1947boomer

I think he was referring to the virus, not the vaccine.

originally posted by: DISRAELI
a reply to: v1rtu0s0
To be fair, it isn't possible to talk about a group of people without using a label of some kind. Not even to agree with them. If you don't like that label, come up with and try to popularise another one.

A star for being inarguably correct.



I think targeting intellect, political, religious and social views etc. are where the names can get sketchy or fun, depending on how you view it.

I am really guilty of practicing it. Libtards is one of my favourite

I get called a Redneck

Then we come to ATS to debate, argue, and take the p!ss out of each other about it and try to call each other even better names.

Where names become concerning is when they are institutionalized and used for political reasons like swaying the general population’s world view by singling out a portion of the population as less than equal.

Anti-vax. Some that don’t have jab in em are.
Most of us aren’t.

But that’s what the tv and Politicians have told everyone we are.

So here we are on ATS taking the p!ss out of each other.

originally posted by: ScepticScot...and massively outweighed by the benefits of being vaccinated for the majority of people.

No. Recovery rate was 99.5% prior to the vaccines. Now it's 98%.

For those under 50, I seem to remember it rising to something like 99.98%. Benefits for the majority of people?

originally posted by: daskakik
a reply to: shaemac
Actually, you can.

This is a new type and works using the same mechanism to cause the same response from the immune system. You have to fit it somewhere and this is where it fits best.

By the way, they are being called vaccines all over the world.

Nope. This is not a vaccine, by the very definition of vaccine.

a reply to: shaemac

The definition of vaccine was changed.

The current lexicon of the word vaccine actually encompasses the use,efficacy and results of the current Covid-19 vaccine.

Get with the program.

I am by no means an anti-vaxxer.

I think that the flu vaccine helps many people and it has way less risk to it compared to the mRNA vaccines. I may be a person who cannot take the flu vaccine, but I am one of maybe a hundred people who have this cytokine storm problem from the flu vaccine. Since the intolerance runs in families, lots of those who are susceptible to the storm from the flu vaccine don't take the flu jab, so the actual numbers may be higher for that than one percent.

But this covid vaccine has much more side effects, they skipped a lot of longer term evaluation and the coverage does not last. Also, these vaccinated people can still get and transmit the virus and they believe they are out and about much. They do have a lower risk of not getting severe covid, but are also able to pass this virus to unvaccinated people who are still at risk of severe covid. Thank god that this virus can be controlled from going covid with many of the food and herb antiviral chemistries, chemistries that have been around and known to control viruses for centuries.

The problem is that lots of people are on meds that block the proper immune response for various conditions and the evolving western diet kind of excludes many of these antiviral chemistries now. A turkey with sage, rosemary, and thyme on it, basically poultry seasoning, does have some antiviral properties because of those spices....served at the height of virus season, it can help to inhibit the viruses. But now they are putting spices on it like a rotisserie chicken or deep frying it, and those spices that are used are not anti-viral. We are setting ourself up to be at risk with this new change in pallet in society.

Have half a grapefruit with a little sugar sprinkled on it for breakfast every other day, coincidentally this citrus fruit is most available in season when cold and virus season is at a high point. It is the pamello chemistry from it's hybridization that is most antiviral...not the orange part. I might try to buy a pomello, but they are kind of expensive at the coop, so I have been buying five pound bags of grapefruit. It will not stop you from getting SARS-CoV2, only reduce the ability of the virus to turn covid. Meijers here has a buy one get one bag free on grapefruit, five pounds of grapefruit is six ninety nine, so that makes it cost about seventy cents a pound that way. That sale starts sunday, We are going to go get some more, it does do good in the veggi part of the fridge, and I am going to give some to the kids, none of which take meds it will interfere with.

It would make more sense to call them the "Vaccination Control Group"

originally posted by: Gothmog

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Gothmog

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Gothmog

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Gothmog

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Gothmog

originally posted by: ScepticScot
Not everyone who choses not to get vaccinated is anti vax .

However its a convenient shorthand for those who post lies, misinformation and completely made bollocks about vaccines.

Since there are plenty of those in this site I will continue to use the term, thanks all the same.

Some folks are anti-vaxx in respect to the experimental Covid vax .
And some folks are anti- fact in respect to the experimental Covid vax .
The latter cannot make up their own minds so therefore they have to rely on government , the media , and their neighbors to tell them what to do .

Anti vaxers are anti fact. It's kind of their thing .

You can make up your own mind but you don't get to make up your own facts . Something anti vaxers seem to have an issue with.

One has to look at facts from both sides and make a decision .
Not just listen to the folks mentioned.

Help Deny Ignorance .
Become informed .

Listening to facts is good. The facts are extremely clear in favour of vaccination.

What anti vaxers are selling isn't facts.

Then you haven't spent enough time in research .

Believing fact free bitchute videos and anti vax bull# isn't research.

I expected a response as such .
One failing in a debate always resorts to the above tactics.
The WHO , the CDC , and many epidemiologists have published a list of potential side effects.
Even my GP has informed me .
If one had done their research , they would know this .

Denying ignorance.
Why ?
Why do folks resort to ignorance ?

Can you quote where I said there were zero potential side effects?

While the actual research shows the risk of serious side effects is very low and massively outweighed by the benefits of being vaccinated for the majority of people.

Deny ignorance indeed.

The post was not meant for that .
First , reread your post.
Then reread my post and learn the term research .
You spoke of bitchute .
Media is just an outlet .
It is the source of the article that counts.
Even the most ignorant amongst us can surprise with a bit of wisdom every now and then .

The actual research overwhelmingly shows the benefits of vaccination. Claiming otherwise is the lie.

originally posted by: VictorVonDoom

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: VictorVonDoom
a reply to: ketsuko

Well, goose, gander, and all that.

Drug pusher is an accurate description for those trying to force others to take the Covid vaccines. I'd like to see the term become more popular.

Can you show where I have ever attempted to force others to take a vaccine?

Let's make it easy, you cant because I haven't , so you are lying

You see now why my first post was accurate.

I haven't seen anyone who is against every vaccine in existence, either. But that doesn't stop people who are opposed to taking the Covid drugs being labeled as anti-vax. At best, the term is inaccurate.

As long as that term is being used, however, I see no reason not to use the term drug pusher for those who champion using coercion to force people to take the Covid drugs.

Goose, gander, anti-vaxxer, drug pusher.

As I said in my first post not everyone who chooses not to get vaccinated is an anti vaxer. If you push lies about vaccines then it's a perfectly good description.

originally posted by: Dalamax

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Gothmog

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Gothmog

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Gothmog

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Gothmog

originally posted by: ScepticScot
Not everyone who choses not to get vaccinated is anti vax .

However its a convenient shorthand for those who post lies, misinformation and completely made bollocks about vaccines.

Since there are plenty of those in this site I will continue to use the term, thanks all the same.

Some folks are anti-vaxx in respect to the experimental Covid vax .
And some folks are anti- fact in respect to the experimental Covid vax .
The latter cannot make up their own minds so therefore they have to rely on government , the media , and their neighbors to tell them what to do .

Anti vaxers are anti fact. It's kind of their thing .

You can make up your own mind but you don't get to make up your own facts . Something anti vaxers seem to have an issue with.

One has to look at facts from both sides and make a decision .
Not just listen to the folks mentioned.

Help Deny Ignorance .
Become informed .

Listening to facts is good. The facts are extremely clear in favour of vaccination.

What anti vaxers are selling isn't facts.

Then you haven't spent enough time in research .

Believing fact free bitchute videos and anti vax bull# isn't research.

I expected a response as such .
One failing in a debate always resorts to the above tactics.
The WHO , the CDC , and many epidemiologists have published a list of potential side effects.
Even my GP has informed me .
If one had done their research , they would know this .

Denying ignorance.
Why ?
Why do folks resort to ignorance ?

Can you quote where I said there were zero potential side effects?

While the actual research shows the risk of serious side effects is very low and massively outweighed by the benefits of being vaccinated for the majority of people.

Deny ignorance indeed.

The research you say?

But the evidence insists otherwise.

Biased research is biased.

The evidence shows the benefits of vaccination. The bias is from those who continually lie to claim otherwise.

originally posted by: baggy7981

originally posted by: ScepticScot...and massively outweighed by the benefits of being vaccinated for the majority of people.

No. Recovery rate was 99.5% prior to the vaccines. Now it's 98%.

For those under 50, I seem to remember it rising to something like 99.98%. Benefits for the majority of people?

The recovery rate hasn't got worse for those vaccinated. Quite the opposite

The recovery rate hasn't got worse for those vaccinated.

Except for those the vaccine killed, they did not recover so good. Recovery for those fully vaccinated who have died with covid19 didn't go so well either, I guess their death could have been worse if they were unvaccinated.

But hey at least they were not called antivaxxers

originally posted by: oddnutz

The recovery rate hasn't got worse for those vaccinated.

Except for those the vaccine killed, they did not recover so good. Recovery for those fully vaccinated who have died with covid19 didn't go so well either, I guess their death could have been worse if they were unvaccinated.

But hey at least they were not called antivaxxers

Yes a few people have died from the vaccines. A tiny fraction compared to the number of life's saved by them.

a reply to: ScepticScot
Have you heard about the study, which appears to say, that the risk of of a heart attack in the next 5 years goes from 11% to 25%?

"Covid: Report reveals increase in risk of heart attack following the mRNA COVID vaccine"

a reply to: ScepticScot
Dr John Campbell does a thorough breakdown of the study is this video.
"Heart risk after vaccines"

originally posted by: Itisnowagain
a reply to: ScepticScot
Have you heard about the study, which appears to say, that the risk of of a heart attack in the next 5 years goes from 11% to 25%?

"Covid: Report reveals increase in risk of heart attack following the mRNA COVID vaccine"

Not only heard about it but commented on another thread.

However bastions comment on this page seems to best sum it up.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

a reply to: ScepticScot
Is bastion more qualified to break down the study than Dr John Campbell?

Dr John Campbell goes through everything on the study...... including typos.
That's why I have provided the second vid for you.

originally posted by: Itisnowagain
a reply to: ScepticScot
Dr John Campbell does a thorough breakdown of the study is this video.
"Heart risk after vaccines"

Did you watch the video you linked?

He basically debunks the claim that a paper shows an increased risk of heart disease. He says he can't even find the paper.