Proof anti vaccine arguments are better

Author: Wylted

Posts

Total: 34
Wylted
Wylted's avatar
Debates: 34
Posts: 5,754
3
4
11
Wylted's avatar
Wylted
3
4
11
I'm going to show you a post pretty reflective of what your average antivaxxer reads. The second post is what the average pro vaxxer reads to form their opinion.

He said any hematologist can see it within seconds under a microscope, and even more readily under an electron microscope. "The percentage of blood affected [or contaminated] by or with Graphene Oxide is the reciprocity of the End of Cycle calculation," he divulged.

In other words, an "inoculatee" [as he calls anyone jabbed with the Experimental Use Authorization Eugenics Depopulation Lethal Injection Bioweapon] having 20% Graphene Oxide deterioration in their blood will, barring any other input criteria, live for 8 years. [10 years less 20%].

Someone with 70% Graphene Oxide deterioration will not live more than 3 years. [10 years less 70%].

Dr. Jane Ruby recently was interviewed by Stew Peters on his podcast and showed examples of what the deteriorated blood looks like when exposed to Graphene Oxide.

Graphene Oxide, for those who are unaware, is the component of Messenger RNA spike proteins and prions, which is at war with the heart, lungs, brain and blood for oxygen.

Graphene Oxide is an oxygen sponge which deprives the body of necessary oxygen and causes many complications, including but not limited to anaphylactic shock, toxic blood clotting, fatal lung paralysis, mitochondrial cancer, and endothelial cancer."

Dr. Mylo Canderian's viewpoint is much the same as Klaus Schwab, Bill Gates, and the Big Pharma CEO's: LET THEM ALL DIE!

I asked Mylo what the effect of second and third shots and boosters do and how that changes the End of Cycle table.

Mylo replied: "It is all measurable through hematological testing. The more shots and boosters the imbeciles get, the worse their blood will look under a microscope, and the quicker they will turn to fertilizer."

Finally, I asked him how the plot to kill so many billions of people could be kept so secret by such a group of elites.

His answer was: "You don't know much about Freemasonry, do you, Steve?" And there you have it.


Wylted
Wylted's avatar
Debates: 34
Posts: 5,754
3
4
11
Wylted's avatar
Wylted
3
4
11
This next post is from the cdc 

Serious side effects that could cause a long-term health problem are extremely unlikely following any vaccination, including COVID-19 vaccination. Vaccine monitoring has historically shown that side effects generally happen within six weeks of receiving a vaccine dose. For this reason, the FDA required each of the authorized COVID-19 vaccines to be studied for at least two months (eight weeks) after the final dose. Millions of people have received COVID-19 vaccines, and no long-term side effects have been detected.
CDC continues to closely monitor the safety of COVID-19 vaccines. If scientists find a connection between a safety issue and a vaccine, FDA and the vaccine manufacturer will work toward an appropriate solution to address the specific safety concern (for example, a problem with a specific lot, a manufacturing issue, or the vaccine itself).
Wylted
Wylted's avatar
Debates: 34
Posts: 5,754
3
4
11
Wylted's avatar
Wylted
3
4
11
which article gives better premises, uses more scientific jargon and sounds more educational?

Let's ignore which one is correct. Wh u is the CDC less informative than the quack?

Shouldn't the organizations pushing for vaccines be providing arguments equally as good as their opponent's,  and if not why do they get upset if the anti vaxxers are listened to more?


Wylted
Wylted's avatar
Debates: 34
Posts: 5,754
3
4
11
Wylted's avatar
Wylted
3
4
11
I can show similar differences between other sites showing various official narratives and conspiracy y theories. 9/11 truths have better arguments than the press on what happened on 9/11. Jfk conspiracy theorists are more informed on the events that occurred during the assassination than people who believe the official narrative.

My bias is to believe the people who are more informed, and unfortunately it is quack doctors over the CDC or cnn pundits
Wylted
Wylted's avatar
Debates: 34
Posts: 5,754
3
4
11
Wylted's avatar
Wylted
3
4
11
just so you guys know it is not limited to just vaccines I will share a pro 9/11 and anti 9/11 post at random
Wylted
Wylted's avatar
Debates: 34
Posts: 5,754
3
4
11
Wylted's avatar
Wylted
3
4
11
Pro 9 11 story

The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) has released its long-awaited report on the collapse of World Trade 7 following the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. "Our take-home message today is that the reason for the collapse of World Trade Center 7 is no longer a mystery," NIST lead investigator Shyam Sunder told journalists at this morning's press conference in Gaithersburg, Md. "WTC 7 collapsed because of fires fueled by office furnishings. It did not collapse from explosives or from diesel fuel fires."
Conspiracy theorists have long pointed to the collapse of the 47-story structure as key evidence that the U.S. government orchestrated or abetted the 9/11 attacks. No planes struck the building, and the commonly available views of the exterior didn't show significant damage. Yet, at 5:20 pm, 7 hours after the collapse of the Twin Towers (WTC 1 and 2), WTC 7 rapidly fell in on itself. Since WTC 7 housed Secret Service and CIA offices, conspiracy theorists claimed that the building was destroyed in a controlled demolition in order to obliterate evidence of the U.S. government's complicity in the terrorist attacks. "It is impossible for a building to fall the way it fell without explosives being involved," stated actress and TV personality Rosie O'Donnell of ABC's The View in March 2007. "For the first time in history, steel was melted by fire. It is physically impossible," she said

Today's report confirms that a fire was, indeed, the cause. "This is the first time that we are aware of, that a building taller than about 15 stories has collapsed primarily due to fires," Sunder told reporters at the press conference. "What we found was that uncontrolled building fires--similar to fires experienced in other tall buildings--caused an extraordinary event, the collapse of WTC7." The unprecedented nature of the event means that understanding the precise mechanism of the collapse is important not just to answer conspiracy theorists' questions, but to improve safety standards in the engineering of large buildings.

Wylted
Wylted's avatar
Debates: 34
Posts: 5,754
3
4
11
Wylted's avatar
Wylted
3
4
11
Anti 9/11 storry



World Trade Center 7 building did not collapse due to fire: Report

OTHERSWorld Trade Center 7 building did not collapse due to fire: Report
Ian Harvey May 20, 2020

Agroup of engineers and architects is demanding the American National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) retract and correct a 2008 report that concluded one of three World Trade Center buildings collapsed because fire weakened the steel supporting it in the 9/11 terrorist attacks.
The Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth (AE911T) has formally filed a Request for Correction with the NIST following a new and detailed four-year analysis by a team at the University of Alaska Fairbanks (UAF).
It says the World Trade Center (WTC) building 7 collapse was a “near-simultaneous failure of every column in the building” and dismissed the NIST finding that heat from the fire caused beams to “walk off” their moorings.
Sept. 11, 2001 is the tragedy of when two hijacked planes hit the WTC 1 and WTC 2 towers sending debris tumbling onto WTC 7. The NIST claimed that embers ignited a fire which then caused the 47-storey building to collapse on itself at 5:20 p.m., hours after the initial incident that morning.
“We have filed a request for correction because the NIST report is wrong,” says Ted Walter, spokesperson for AE911T, which is a group of 3,000 engineers, scientists and architects, including more than a dozen Canadians ones, that paid US$316,000 for the study.
“From an engineering perspective it is imperative to understand how and why this building came down under design load conditions,” said Walter.
The study says NIST made some fundamental errors in how engineers estimated the rigidity of the outside building frame and that the heat generated by the fire did not trigger “thermal movements” at a critical base plate support.
Further, the group, which includes families of those killed, asserts that the investigation is flawed and that the conclusions as to what happened must be based on “science and engineering” and accept that controlled demolition is a plausible cause.
For expediency and because it was not hit by a plane, the study looked only at WTC 7 not the other two but AE911T has long claimed all three were subject to something beyond heat induced failure.
“The report notes that the outside frame was more flexible than the inside framing which is where the elevator shafts were,” says McMaster University professor emeritus of civil engineering, Robert Korol, a fellow of the Canadian Society of Civil Engineering who is also one of two peers who reviewed the UAF study.
“Under the conditions described, the displacement of the outside steel would have been only one inch, not the 6.25 NIST claimed and not enough to cause failure.”
Further, he says, the debris from WTC 1 which fell 943 feet to WTC 7 did not attain sufficient mass to cause structural damage to the steel in that building.
The bottom line, he says, is that the NIST report is flawed and of no value to future engineering or architectural learning.
The Alaska report adds new momentum to long standing claims by the AE911T that all three of the buildings should not have collapsed in the spectacular and deadly manner they did. Further, and Korol underlines this, there was nothing in the offices beyond basic desks, chairs, computers and paper that would be of such a combustible nature so as to feed a fire and raise the temperature to above 1,400 degrees Celsius and melt the steel structure.
“We don’t even know if the steel was fireproofed,” says Korol.

Wylted
Wylted's avatar
Debates: 34
Posts: 5,754
3
4
11
Wylted's avatar
Wylted
3
4
11
The second one here is better explained gives more premises, sounds kinda educational as to what happened.

So why does the official narrative always sound like it was made to be digested by idiots, and the skeptical position is more thorough with better sounding arguments? 
oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,689
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
-->
@Wylted
which article gives better premises, uses more scientific jargon and sounds more educational?
Well, I haven't even gotten into your article but even just superficially it is laughably, comically, pathetically false.  Graphene oxide is listed by the FDA as not approved for human consumption because its made up of carbon molecules locked in lattices- 1 molecule thick- in other words, molecule wide razor blades of the strongest material known to man.  The FDA lists the first side effect of consuming Graphene Oxide as "PHYSICAL DESTRUCTION"  So, no, if scientists were injecting that shit into your body you'd be dead in minutes, not years.  Big, Fat, Obvious, bullshit that any high school graduate should dismiss on sight.

To say that "Graphene Oxide (a 21st century human invention) is the component of Messenger RNA spike proteins and prion " is the silliest shit I've ever heard- you are claiming that scientists have created nano-cyborg viruses with carbon fiber armor plating.  Why would you believe that?  Why would you even repeat that?

And look, any time a thesis gives "freemasons" agency and motivation in the real world, it's time to hide your wallet.

Let's ignore which one is correct. Wh u is the CDC less informative than the quack?
It's not less informative because at least it tells the truth and no giant, ridiculous lies.   You have failed to click on the thousands of scientific articles supporting the CDC's assertions but having spent a lot of time on that site, I assure you those links are there and I shall fetch a few for your lazy ass.

Shouldn't the organizations pushing for vaccines be providing arguments equally as good as their opponent's, 
They do and a thousand times more sensible and comprehensive and tested and reviewed by serious people.

and if not why do they get upset if the anti vaxxers are listened to more?
Because anti-vaxxer are immune to science and reasoning.  They only believe what they are told to believe and this week, Tucker Carlson has told them that it is still a badge of loyalty to that dishonored former president to refuse the vaccine.  It is classic death cult shit but death cults usually implode once enough cult members start dying, we're just trying to figure out the turning point now.
Wylted
Wylted's avatar
Debates: 34
Posts: 5,754
3
4
11
Wylted's avatar
Wylted
3
4
11
-->
@oromagi
They do and a thousand times more sensible and comprehensive and tested and reviewed by serious people.

Not really. I watch CNN sometimes. The pro vaxxer argument is basically as follows

"Just do it bro, government approved authorities say so"

This is not even a discussion on who is right or wrong here, but the typical pro establishment argument is less thorough than the typical anti establishment one. 
Wylted
Wylted's avatar
Debates: 34
Posts: 5,754
3
4
11
Wylted's avatar
Wylted
3
4
11
Conspiracy theorists are not resistant to scientific arguments. You can read some stuff from a lot of these flat earthers that go into physics and it will be over your head. They've taken a lot of time to learn flat earth physics models. Meanwhile your typical round earth argument is

"Bro nasa went to space, the earth is round "



Wylted
Wylted's avatar
Debates: 34
Posts: 5,754
3
4
11
Wylted's avatar
Wylted
3
4
11
And why would I need to fetch links instead of them just explaining themselves in the main text and than referring to the citations in the main text like a normal paper is written.
Intelligence_06
Intelligence_06's avatar
Debates: 167
Posts: 3,837
5
8
11
Intelligence_06's avatar
Intelligence_06
5
8
11
-->
@Wylted
You’d better state all of your anti-vax arguments in this thread. Stop creating more threads about the same thing.
oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,689
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
-->
@Wylted
Want to see something neat?

Set your google search for any hits before July 1, 2021 and then search for your famous scientist Dr Mylo Canderian, PhD or Milo Iskanderianos..... Nothing.   This guy  didn't exist until he started spreading vax disinformation ten days ago.  Same thing for US Patents held by a guy who claims, on his empty LinkedIn page that he created a few weeks ago, to be a "patent specialist."   

More importantly, the US is a signatory to the 1972 Convention on the Prohibition of the Development, Production and Stockpiling of Bacteriological (Biological) and Toxin Weapons and on their Destruction, wherein the US promises not to experiment with or manufacture biological weapons of any kind.   Now, I know you will say that I'm naïve and that the US has all kind of covert bioweapons tech stored secretly at Area 51 or some such place but doesn't our common sense tell us that therefore, Dr. Mylo Canderian probably doesn't have any patents on Graphene Oxide hematological bioweapons as he claimed, because that would be an obvious violation of our treaty?

Therefore let's flush all of Dr Mylo Canderian's credentials down the toilet and assume we are getting our information from a mad liar.


oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,689
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
Okay, I got to the part about Cream of Hummingbird Soup and realized your source is trolling you.  I went back to asking who is Henry Makow.

Henry Makow, PhD (1949–) is what you get when you cross a men's rights activist with paranoid conspiracy theorist. Makow believes the world is controlled by nefarious Judeo-Masonic/Satanic/Commie forces, spearheaded by the Rockefeller Foundation. He also believes that the aforementioned concocted feminism, so that women wouldn't have children, as part of depopulation efforts. His writings can be found on notorious websites Whale.to, Jesus-is-savior.com, and Alex Jones' PrisonPlanet.

So, this isn't just ordinary jew-hating hucksterism, it's also so obviously fake that its pretty much laughing at people who believe this shit.
Discipulus_Didicit
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 5,294
3
4
10
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Discipulus_Didicit
3
4
10
-->
@Wylted
flat earth physics models.
Is that a thing that exists? Last I checked none of them even had a rigorous map of what the Earth looks like with specific measurements, all of them just outline the rough idea "north pole in the middle and all the rest of the stuff is in a circle around it and Antarctica is on the outside"
oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,689
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
CDC Recommends Use of Johnson & Johnson’s Janssen COVID-19 Vaccine Resume
Updated July 13, 2021

What You Need to Know
  • CDC and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) recommend use of Johnson & Johnson’s Janssen (J&J/Janssen) COVID-19 Vaccine resume in the United States, after a temporary pause.
  • Reports of adverse events following the use of J&J/Janssen vaccine suggest an increased risk of a rare adverse event called thrombosis with thrombocytopenia syndrome (TTS). Nearly all reports of this serious condition, which involves blood clots with low platelets, have been in adult women younger than 50 years old.
  • A review of all available data at this time shows that the J&J/Janssen COVID-19 Vaccine’s known and potential benefits outweigh its known and potential risks.
  • However, women younger than 50 years old especially should be aware of the rare but increased risk of this adverse event and that there are other COVID-19 vaccine options available for which this risk has not been seen.
  • CDC and FDA will continue to monitor the safety of all COVID-19 vaccines.
  • Seek medical care right away if you develop any of the symptoms below after receiving the J&J/Janssen COVID-19 Vaccine.
  • If you have any questions or concerns, call your doctor, nurse, or clinic.

J&J/Janssen Vaccine Questions and Answers
What if I got or want to get the J&J/Janssen COVID-19 Vaccine?
Does CDC recommend vaccination with the J&J/Janssen COVID-19 Vaccine resume?
What do we know about the J&J/Janssen COVID-19 Vaccine and possible health problems?
Why did the pause end?
What do I need to know about possible safety issues with all COVID-19 vaccines?
Has this issue been seen with the other COVID-19 vaccines?
If I’m currently using hormonal birth control (hormonal contraception), should I use a different type of birth control method or consider a different vaccine?
If I’m pregnant or recently pregnant, should I get a different COVID-19 vaccine?

hand holding medical light icon
For Healthcare Workers
Review the revised Janssen COVID-19 Vaccine Fact Sheet for Healthcare Providers Administering Vaccine (Vaccination Providersexternal iconexternal icon), which has been revised to include a warning about the risk of thrombosis with thrombocytopenia syndrome (TTS) that has occurred in a small number of people who have received the Janssen COVID-19 Vaccine.
Read the official CDC health alert, Cases of Cerebral Venous Sinus Thrombosis with Thrombocytopenia after Receipt of the Johnson & Johnson COVID-19 Vaccine, which includes details about how to assess and care for a patient that presents with thrombosis or thrombocytopenia.

band aid light icon
For Vaccine Providers
You may resume use of the Janssen COVID-19 Vaccine.
Review the Janssen COVID-19 Vaccine Fact Sheet for Healthcare Providers Administering Vaccine (Vaccination Providers),external icon which has been revised to include a warning about the risk of thrombosis with thrombocytopenia syndrome (TTS) that has occurred in a small number of people who have received the Janssen COVID-19 Vaccine.


oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,689
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
Myocarditis and Pericarditis Following mRNA COVID-19 Vaccination
Updated June 23, 2021

What You Need to Know
  • More than 177 million people have received at least one dose of COVID-19 vaccine in the United States, and CDC continues to monitor the safety of COVID-19 vaccines for any health problems that happen after vaccination.
  • Since April 2021, there have been more than a thousand reports to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) of cases of inflammation of the heart—called myocarditis and pericarditis—happening after mRNA COVID-19 vaccination (i.e., Pfizer-BioNTech, Moderna) in the United States.
  • These reports are rare, given the hundreds of millions of vaccine doses administered, and have been reported after mRNA COVID-19 vaccination, particularly in adolescents and young adults. View the latest information.
  • CDC and its partners are actively monitoring these reports, by reviewing data and medical records, to learn more about what happened and to understand any relationship to COVID-19 vaccination.
  • Most patients who received care responded well to treatment and rest and quickly felt better.
  • Confirmed cases have occurred:
    • Mostly in male adolescents and young adults age 16 years or older
    • More often after getting the second dose than after the first dose of one of these two mRNA COVID-19 vaccines
    • Typically within several days after COVID-19 vaccination
  • Patients can usually return to their normal daily activities after their symptoms improve. They should speak with their doctor about return to exercise or sports.
  • CDC continues to recommend COVID-19 vaccination for everyone 12 years of age and older, given the risk of COVID-19 illness and related, possibly severe complications.
  • Getting vaccinated is the best way to help protect yourself and your family from COVID-19.
  • More information will be shared as it becomes available.

Myocarditis is inflammation of the heart muscle, and pericarditis is inflammation of the outer lining of the heart. In both cases, the body’s immune system causes inflammation in response to an infection or some other trigger. Learn more about myocarditis and pericarditisexternal icon.

Should I Still Get Myself or My Child Vaccinated?
Yes. CDC continues to recommend COVID-19 vaccination for everyone 12 years of age and older, given the risk of COVID-19 illness and related, possibly severe complications, such as long-term health problems, hospitalization, and even death. If you or your child has already gotten the first dose of the Pfizer-BioNTech or Moderna vaccine, it’s important to get the second dose unless a vaccination provider or your doctor tells you not to get it.
The known and potential benefits of COVID-19 vaccination outweigh the known and potential risks, including the possible risk of myocarditis or pericarditis. Also, most patients with myocarditis and pericarditis who received care responded well to treatment and rest and quickly felt better.
If you have concerns about COVID-19 vaccination, talk with your or your child’s doctor, nurse, or clinic.
What Myocarditis/Pericarditis Symptoms Should I Be on the Lookout for after mRNA COVID-19 Vaccination?
Be on the lookout for any of the following symptoms:
  • Chest pain
  • Shortness of breath
  • Feelings of having a fast-beating, fluttering, or pounding heart
Seek medical care if you think you or your child have any of these symptoms within a week after COVID-19 vaccination.
If you have any health problems after vaccination, report them to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System

oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,689
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
Selected Adverse Events Reported after COVID-19 Vaccination
Updated July 21, 2021

Safety of COVID-19 Vaccines
Some people have no side effects. Many people have reported side effects that may affect their ability to do daily activities, but they should go away within a few days.
What You Need to Know
  • COVID-19 vaccines are safe and effective.
  • Millions of people in the United States have received COVID-19 vaccines under the most intense safety monitoring in U.S. history.
  • CDC recommends everyone 12 years and older get vaccinated as soon as possible to help protect against COVID-19 and the related, potentially severe complications that can occur.
  • CDC, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and other federal agencies are monitoring the safety of COVID-19 vaccines.
  • Adverse events described on this page have been reported to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS)external icon.
  • VAERS accepts reports of any adverse event following any vaccination.
  • Reports of adverse events to VAERS following vaccination, including deaths, do not necessarily mean that a vaccine caused a health problem.

Serious adverse events after COVID-19 vaccination are rare but may occur.

For public awareness and in the interest of transparency, CDC is providing timely updates on the following serious adverse events of interest:
  • Anaphylaxis after COVID-19 vaccination is rare and has occurred in approximately 2 to 5 people per million vaccinated in the United StatesSevere allergic reactions, including anaphylaxis, can occur after any vaccination. If this occurs, vaccination providers can effectively and immediately treat the reaction. Learn more about COVID-19 vaccines and allergic reactions, including anaphylaxis.
  • Thrombosis with thrombocytopenia syndrome (TTS) after Johnson & Johnson’s Janssen (J&J/Janssen) COVID-19 vaccination is rare. As of July 19, 2021, more than 13 million doses of the J&J/Janssen COVID-19 Vaccine have been given in the United States. CDC and FDA identified 39 confirmed reports of people who got the J&J/Janssen COVID-19 Vaccine and later developed TTS. Women younger than 50 years old especially should be aware of the rare but increased risk of this adverse event. There are other COVID-19 vaccine options available for which this risk has not been seen. Learn more about J&J/Janssen COVID-19 Vaccine and TTS.
    • To date, two confirmed cases of TTS following mRNA COVID-19 vaccination (Moderna) have been reported to VAERS after more than 324 million doses of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines administered in the United States. Based on available data, there is not an increased risk for TTS after mRNA COVID-19 vaccination.
  • CDC and FDA are monitoring reports of Guillain-Barré Syndrome (GBS) in people who have received the J&J/Janssen COVID-19 Vaccine. GBS is a rare disorder where the body’s immune system damages nerve cells, causing muscle weakness and sometimes paralysis. Most people fully recover from GBS, but some have permanent nerve damage. After 12.8 million J&J/Janssen COVID-19 Vaccine doses administered, there have been around 100 preliminary reports of GBS identified in VAERS as of July 12. These cases have largely been reported about 2 weeks after vaccination and mostly in men, many 50 years and older. CDC will continue to monitor for and evaluate reports of GBS occurring after COVID-19 vaccination and will share more information as it becomes available.
  • Myocarditis and pericarditis after COVID-19 vaccination are rare. As of July 19, 2021, VAERS has received 1,148  reports of myocarditis or pericarditis among people ages 30 and younger who received COVID-19 vaccine. Most cases have been reported after mRNA COVID-19 vaccination (Pfizer-BioNTech or Moderna), particularly in male adolescents and young adults. Through follow-up, including medical record reviews, CDC and FDA have confirmed 674 reports of myocarditis or pericarditis. CDC and its partners are investigating these reports to assess whether there is a relationship to COVID-19 vaccination. Learn more about COVID-19 vaccines and myocarditis.
  • Reports of death after COVID-19 vaccination are rare. More than 339 million doses of COVID-19 vaccines were administered in the United States from December 14, 2020, through July 19, 2021. During this time, VAERS received 6,207 reports of death (0.0018%) among people who received a COVID-19 vaccine. FDA requires healthcare providers to report any death after COVID-19 vaccination to VAERS, even if it’s unclear whether the vaccine was the cause. Reports of adverse events to VAERS following vaccination, including deaths, do not necessarily mean that a vaccine caused a health problem. A review of available clinical information, including death certificates, autopsy, and medical records, has not established a causal link to COVID-19 vaccines. However, recent reports indicate a plausible causal relationship between the J&J/Janssen COVID-19 Vaccine and TTS, a rare and serious adverse event—blood clots with low platelets—which has caused deaths.

oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,689
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
COVID-19 Vaccine Reporting Systems
Updated Feb. 27, 2021

COVID-19 vaccines are safe and effective. Millions of people in the United States have received COVID-19 vaccines, and these vaccines have undergone the most intensive safety monitoring in U.S. history. This monitoring includes using both established and new safety monitoring systems to make sure that COVID-19 vaccines are safe.
Results from these monitoring efforts are reassuring. While some people don’t have any side effects after getting a COVID-19 vaccine, many people will have mild side effects after COVID-19 vaccination, like pain or swelling at the injection site, a headache, chills, or fever. These reactions are normal and show the vaccine is working. A small number of people have had a severe allergic reaction (called “anaphylaxis”) after vaccination, but this is extremely rare and when it does happen, vaccination providers have medicines available that they can use to effectively and immediately treat the reaction. You will be asked to stay for 15–30 minutes after you get your vaccine so you can be observed and provided treatment in the rare case it is needed.
COVID-19 vaccines are effective at protecting you from getting sick. CDC recommends you get a COVID-19 vaccine as soon as possible.

Safety of COVID-19 Vaccines
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has granted Emergency Use Authorizations (EUA) for two COVID-19 vaccines which have been shown to be safe and effective as determined by data from the manufacturers and findings from large clinical trials. These data demonstrate that the known and potential benefits of this vaccine outweigh the known and potential harms of becoming infected with the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID 19).
Clinical Trials
Clinical trials are being conducted to evaluate additional COVID-19 vaccines in many thousands of study participants. These trials will generate scientific data and other information that will be used by FDA to determine vaccine safety and effectiveness. Clinical trials on all COVID-19 vaccine candidates are being conducted according to the rigorous standards set forth by FDA in their June 2020 guidance document, Development and Licensure of Vaccines to Prevent COVID-19external icon. If FDA determines that a vaccine meets its safety and effectiveness standards, it can make these vaccines available for use in the United States by approval or through an EUA.
After FDA determines that a COVID-19 vaccine candidate is safe and effective, the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP), a committee comprising medical and public health experts, reviews available data before making vaccine recommendations to CDC. Learn more about how CDC is making COVID-19 vaccine recommendations.
Vaccine Safety Monitoring
After a vaccine is authorized or approved for use, many vaccine safety monitoring systems watch for adverse events (possible side effects). This continued monitoring can pick up on adverse events that may not have been seen in clinical trials. If an unexpected adverse event is seen, experts quickly study it further to assess whether it is a true safety concern. Experts then decide whether changes are needed in U.S. vaccine recommendations. This monitoring is critical to help ensure that the benefits continue to outweigh the risks for people who receive vaccines.
FDA’s June 2020 guidance document also includes important recommendations for ongoing safety evaluation after any COVID-19 vaccine is made available in the United States.
CDC has expanded safety surveillance through new systems and additional information sources, as well as by scaling up existing safety monitoring systems.
Expanded Safety Monitoring Systems
The following systems and information sources add an additional layer of safety monitoring, giving CDC and FDA the ability to evaluate COVID-19 vaccine safety in real time and make sure COVID-19 vaccines are as safe as possible:
  • CDC: V-safe — A new smartphone-based, after-vaccination health checker for people who receive COVID-19 vaccines. V-safe uses text messaging and web surveys from CDC to check in with vaccine recipients following COVID-19 vaccination. V-safe also provides second vaccine dose reminders if needed, and telephone follow up to anyone who reports medically significant (important) adverse events.
  • CDC: National Healthcare Safety Network (NHSN) — An acute and long-term care facility monitoring system with reporting to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System or VAERS that will allow for determination of COVID-19 vaccine adverse event reporting rates.
  • FDA: Other large insurer/payer databases — A system of administrative and claims-based data for surveillance and research.
Existing Safety Monitoring Systems
As people get vaccinated, CDC, FDA, and other federal partners will use the following existing, robust systems and data sources to conduct ongoing safety monitoring:
General public
  • CDC and FDAVaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS)external icon — The national system that collects reports from healthcare professionals, vaccine manufacturers, and the public of adverse events that happen after vaccination; reports of adverse events that are unexpected, appear to happen more often than expected, or have unusual patterns are followed up with specific studies
  • CDC: Vaccine Safety Datalink (VSD) — A network of nine integrated healthcare organizations across the United States that conducts active surveillance and research; the system is also used to help determine whether possible side effects identified using VAERS are actually related to vaccination
  • CDC: Clinical Immunization Safety Assessment (CISA) Project — A collaboration between CDC and 7 medical research centers to provide expert consultation on individual cases and conduct clinical research studies about vaccine safety
  • FDA and the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services: Medicare data — A claims-based system for active surveillance and research
  • FDA: Biologics Effectiveness and Safety System (BEST)external icon — A system of electronic health record, administrative, and claims-based data for active surveillance and research
  • FDA: Sentinel Initiativeexternal icon — A system of electronic health record, administrative, and claims-based data for active surveillance and research
Members of the military
Veterans
  • Department of Veterans Affairs (VA): VA Adverse Drug Event Reporting System (VA ADERS)external icon — A national reporting system for adverse events following receipt of drugs and immunizations
  • VA Electronic Health Record and Active Surveillance System — A system of electronic health record and administrative data for active surveillance and research
Tribal nations
  • Indian Health Service (IHS): IHS VAERS dataexternal icon — Spontaneous adverse event reporting to VAERS for populations served by IHS and Tribal facilities


oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,689
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
What to Do If You Have an Allergic Reaction after Getting a COVID-19 Vaccine
Updated Mar. 4, 2021

If you get a COVID-19 vaccine and you think you might be having a severe allergic reaction after leaving the vaccination provider site, seek immediate medical care by calling 911.
If You Have a Severe Allergic Reaction to a COVID-19 Vaccine
If you had a severe allergic reaction—also known as anaphylaxis—after getting the first shot of a COVID-19 vaccine, CDC recommends that you not get a second shot of that vaccine. If the reaction was after an mRNA COVID-19 vaccine (either Pfizer-BioNTech or Moderna), you should not get a second shot of either of these vaccines. Learn which COVID-19 vaccines need a second shot.
An allergic reaction is considered severe when a person needs to be treated with epinephrine or EpiPen© or if they must go to the hospital. Learn about common side effects of COVID-19 vaccines and when to call a doctor.
If You Have a Non-severe Allergic Reaction to a COVID-19 Vaccine
If you had an immediate allergic reaction after getting a shot of a COVID-19 vaccine, you should not get a second shot of that vaccine, even if your allergic reaction was not severe enough to require emergency care. If the reaction was after an mRNA COVID-19 vaccine (either Pfizer-BioNTech or Moderna), you should not get a second shot of either of these vaccines. An immediate allergic reaction happens within 4 hours of getting vaccinated and may include symptoms such as hives, swelling, and wheezing (respiratory distress). Your doctor may refer you to a specialist in allergies and immunology to provide more care or advice.
If You Get a Rash Where You Got the Shot
CDC has learned of reports that some people have experienced a red, itchy, swollen, or painful rash where they got the shot. These rashes can start a few days to more than a week after the first shot and are sometimes quite large. These rashes are also known as “COVID arm.” If you experience “COVID arm” after getting the first shot, you should still get the second shot at the recommended interval if the vaccine you got needs a second shot. Tell your vaccination provider that you experienced a rash or “COVID arm” after the first shot. Your vaccination provider may recommend that you get the second shot in the opposite arm.
If the rash is itchy, you can take an antihistamine. If it is painful, you can take a pain medication like acetaminophen or a non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID).
Safeguards Are in Place
CDC has provided recommendations for COVID-19 vaccination providers about how to prepare for the possibility of a severe allergic reaction:
  • All people who get a COVID-19 vaccine should be monitored on site. People who have had severe allergic reactions or who have had any type of immediate allergic reaction to a vaccine or injectable therapy should be monitored for at least 30 minutes after getting the vaccine. All other people should be monitored for at least 15 minutes after getting the vaccine.
  • Vaccination providers should have appropriate personnel, medications, and equipment—such as epinephrine, antihistamines, blood pressure monitor, and timing devices to check your pulse—at all COVID-19 vaccination provider sites.
  • If you experience a severe allergic reaction after getting a COVID-19 vaccine, vaccination providers can provide care rapidly and call for emergency medical services. You should continue to be monitored in a medical facility for at least several hours.
Learn more about what to expect after getting vaccinated for COVID-19, including normal side effects and tips to reduce pain or discomfort.
CDC Is Monitoring Reports of Severe Allergic Reactions
If someone has a severe allergic reaction after getting vaccinated, their vaccination provider will send a report to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS).external icon VAERS is a national system that collects reports from healthcare professionals, vaccine manufacturers, and the public about adverse events that happen after vaccination. Reports of adverse events that are unexpected, appear to happen more often than expected, or have unusual patterns are followed up with specific studies.

oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,689
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
-->
@Wylted
I'm beginning to see how graphene oxide got associated with vaccines. There was some interesting research this spring that argued that if we knew what mucosal adjuvants extended immunity against the flu, then we could theoretically deliver a vaccine via the mucosal surfaces in the nose.  That is, if they had a better flu vaccine, they think they've conceived of a nasal spray delivery that would avoid shots and therefore avoid a huge amount of vaccine hesitancy.  In May, a group looked using GO nanoparticles (not sheets, as I supposed) as a superior delivery method for anti-viral drugs because of excellent binding ability while also distorting the spike proteins but also captured the virus in the air more effectively when used in personal virus protection like gloves and masks.  There was also some interesting research about using such particles to act as a kind on/off switch on some cancer cells.

So there is some actual science looking at GO applications in virology but, so far, the research is mostly in the computer modeling stage with a few experiments on active viral cells.  Still, there are no such vaccines in actual development, much less approval, much less actually injected into human arms.
Wylted
Wylted's avatar
Debates: 34
Posts: 5,754
3
4
11
Wylted's avatar
Wylted
3
4
11
-->
@oromagi
The point of this thread is not that anti vaccine arguments are better. The point is that if you are searching anti vaccine stuff, you are reading more thorough looking stuff. Why is that being ignored. I brought up the average pro and anti 9/11 argument as well so this didn't get derailed. 

We can try a 4th conspiracy I did not mention yet. 

Letdown hollow earth theory so you can see the difference of quality between what the pro establishment view argues for and what the anti establishment does.
Wylted
Wylted's avatar
Debates: 34
Posts: 5,754
3
4
11
Wylted's avatar
Wylted
3
4
11
Pro establishment center of earth theory

At the center of the Earth is the core, which has two parts. The solid, inner core of iron has a radius of about 760 miles (about 1,220 km), according to NASA. It is surrounded by a liquid, outer core composed of a nickel-iron alloy. The outer core is about 1,355 miles (2,180 km) thick. The inner core spins at a different speed than the rest of the planet. This is thought to cause Earth's magnetic field. When charged particles from the solar wind collide with air molecules above Earth's magnetic poles, it causes the air molecules to glow, causing the auroras — the northern and southern lights.

Basically just bare assertions and poor argumentatiin
Wylted
Wylted's avatar
Debates: 34
Posts: 5,754
3
4
11
Wylted's avatar
Wylted
3
4
11
Fuck I can't copy and paste the other theory it can be read right here though https://books.google.com/books?id=p4o9AQAAIAAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false
Wylted
Wylted's avatar
Debates: 34
Posts: 5,754
3
4
11
Wylted's avatar
Wylted
3
4
11
Look at germ theory advocates vs ones who believe it is bunk. The arguments given by people who think it's bunk seem more thorough, scientific sounding and with actual premises as opposed to the bare assertions you get from others that just assert something is a fact 
Wylted
Wylted's avatar
Debates: 34
Posts: 5,754
3
4
11
Wylted's avatar
Wylted
3
4
11
-->
@oromagi
I am not cherry picking this stuff. This is what the average conspiracy theorists vs the average person who just passively watches the news for information sees.
whiteflame
whiteflame's avatar
Debates: 27
Posts: 3,006
4
6
10
whiteflame's avatar
whiteflame
4
6
10
-->
@Wylted
The point of this thread is not that anti vaccine arguments are better. The point is that if you are searching anti vaccine stuff, you are reading more thorough looking stuff. Why is that being ignored.
A. What you’ve done here is selected two very unlike article postings and compared them. That’s cherry-picking. You don’t know what “the average person” would see if they were searching for this information. You only know what you found based on a selective set of search terms. There are plenty of examples of extremely thorough and rigorous breakdowns of vaccine effectiveness that come up under searches for that information. Pointing to one where the conclusions were summarized is not representative.

B. I’m not clear about what makes the first source better (that’s the title of this thread) or even more thorough. It provides more information on something audiences may not be aware of, but that doesn’t make it more thorough. Throwing additional and entirely irrelevant information at your readers doesn’t make an argument more thorough, particularly if it’s doing no more than asserting the essential link that makes this argument work: that this stuff is in vaccines. At best, what you could argue is that this article looks more thorough because it gives this additional information. At worst, it functions as deliberate obfuscation, providing legitimate facts to cover for an argument that is obviously missing pieces. Having more background doesn’t make your argument more thorough if you’re still missing essential pieces.
Wylted
Wylted's avatar
Debates: 34
Posts: 5,754
3
4
11
Wylted's avatar
Wylted
3
4
11
-->
@whiteflame
just watch the news. It is nothing but pro vax information.  

You actually have to seek out antivax information and when you do it usually has better breakdowns. 


Why is CNN or Fox or New York times not doing the detailed breakdowns that the anti vaxxers are doing. 

I seen somebody recently write a 30 page report on dead internet theory. You just Don't see the same level of detail in the newspaper for anything they push
Wylted
Wylted's avatar
Debates: 34
Posts: 5,754
3
4
11
Wylted's avatar
Wylted
3
4
11
-->
@whiteflame
so why are the points usually summarized with pro vax arguments and spelled out with anti vax arguments.