6 ms·

> I've done enough research to know what I'm talking about The standard practice is for those making the assertion to provide their references or data. Since y

> I've done enough research to know what I'm talking about The standard practice is for those making the assertion to provide their references or data. Since you've done the research, can you please link any published and peer reviewed research establishing that the health risks from the vaccine are within two orders of magnitude of the health risks from the virus? Including morbidity, mortality, etc. > The smartest people I know have reached the same conclusion. Can you please reference them as well so I can read their published content?

0-_-0 5y ago
Might be referring to this study: https://trialsitenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/Pfizer-report_Japanese-government.pdf https://trialsitenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/Pfizer-...
- eganist 5y ago
  I mean, reading the discussion/conclusion via google translate, this seems to be a study on metabolism of the vaccine? Open to being fact-checked, but this doesn't seem related. In any case, the only statement I found on health effects in the discussion/conclusion was "No toxic findings indicating liver damage were found in the rat repeated-dose toxicity test ( M2.6.6.3 )." but I don't speak Japanese and I'm sure using Google Translate is a very ineffective way of parsing research.
  - 0-_-0 5y ago
    What I belive this might show (still trying to figure this out) is how the lipid nanoparticles from the vaccine are distributed in the body. Page 7 shows particularly high concentration in the ovaries for example. I think the idea of the vaccine should be that the intramuscular injection stays in the muscle and the spike proteins don't get into your blood, but this was never actually directly verified. What this study shows is that the vaccine lipid coating (and thus likely the spike proteins) get into your blood, which when binding to the ACE2 receptor can cause different kinds of damage. E.g. binding to platelets is what can cause clotting. I'm not sure about any of this yet, just started looking into it a few hours ago.
    - eganist 5y ago
      Given the sheer volume of doses delivered and the capability to detect clotting risks (az, JJ), the fact that clotting risk did not go up with biontech and moderna might throw a wrench into that hunch. But even then, not seeing an indication of risk within two orders of magnitude of covid itself.
      - 0-_-0 5y ago
        I agree with that, I'm just slightly worried because I can imagine complications being underreported due to the politicisation of the issue. It might also move the risk/benefit of vaccinating children and people who already had COVID.
      - mike_hearn 5y ago
        the fact that clotting risk did not go up with biontech and moderna might throw a wrench into that hunch. There's no agreement on what's really happening. For example, clotting risk from the mRNA vaccines is supposedly the same as for the AstraZeneca vaccines, but governments across Europe already suspended the AZ vaccine due to clotting risks (supposedly). Therefore by implication, they would also consider the mRNA vaccines dangerous if their standards were consistent. Either the standards aren't consistent and the AZ blocks were political, or the claims that mRNA vaccines have similar clotting risks to AZ are wrong, but given the contradictory nature of many of the claims surrounding this topic - and given that you admitted you only just discovered some of the scientific discussion of the effects of mRNA vaccines - it may be worth dialing down your confidence slightly. https://www.marketwatch.com/story/blood-clots-as-prevalent-with-pfizer-and-moderna-vaccine-as-with-astrazenecas-report-2021-04-15 https://www.marketwatch.com/story/blood-clots-as-prevalent-w...
        tim333 5y ago
        I'm not convinced by "supposedly the same." Sure you can get blood clots after pfizer as well as after az but you can also get them after having a cup of tea as people get clots in general. I don't think there has been statistically significant data that pfizer etc cause extra clots, unlike az. (eg https://www.businessinsider.com/covid-vaccine-blood-clot-risk-pfizer-moderna-johnson-and-johnson-2021-4 https://www.businessinsider.com/covid-vaccine-blood-clot-ris...)
IG_Semmelweiss 5y ago
He is wrong to make such a claim without data. However, absense of evidence is not evidence of absense, either. The simple truth is that there hasnt been enough time to really understand the long term effects of covid, or the vaccine. Anyone claiming otherwise is simply lying.
- booblik 5y ago
  I understand the long terms effects of death.
- AshamedCaptain 5y ago
  And no one understands the effects the Russell teapot orbiting Earth right now has on the human body, either.
  - seoaeu 5y ago
    Oh, it would probably be lethal. But luckily Russell claims the teapot is in a stable solar orbit between Earth and Mars, so we should be fine for now.
  - IG_Semmelweiss 5y ago
    Unlike the Russell Teapot, the claim on whether vaccines are safe, or not, is verifiable. I am sure this is uncomfortable to many, but you are taking the position that many did take with tobacco, or asbestos. They were safe. Until they weren't. Human life is limited in length. The burden of proof rests on those tampering with the natural (ie the human body) over the un-natural. The counterfactual. Should we feed supermarket milk to babies ? At least in this case, milk is proven to be safe for humans long term. Would you give supermarket milk to babies ? If you did, the burden of proving this is safe rests on you, not on the person stating they want to continue to provide breast milk to the baby
    - AshamedCaptain 5y ago
      It seems that you are arguing that human life span being finite makes every medical assertion effectively testable, but it does not. You still don't have an infinite population and you still do not have an repeteable way to measure "life span". And the claim that there is a "natural" and "un natural" order of things is as unscientific as it gets. I am not going to expect anyone with a half brain to verify the health effects of mixing milk powder with and without a Bible below it, even though a large magnitude of people claim it has an effect. Nor I am going to ask for a full medical study to show that there is no difference.

0-_-0 5y ago

Might be referring to this study: https://trialsitenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/Pfizer-report_Japanese-government.pdf https://trialsitenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/Pfizer-...

eganist 5y ago
I mean, reading the discussion/conclusion via google translate, this seems to be a study on metabolism of the vaccine? Open to being fact-checked, but this doesn't seem related. In any case, the only statement I found on health effects in the discussion/conclusion was "No toxic findings indicating liver damage were found in the rat repeated-dose toxicity test ( M2.6.6.3 )." but I don't speak Japanese and I'm sure using Google Translate is a very ineffective way of parsing research.
- 0-_-0 5y ago
  What I belive this might show (still trying to figure this out) is how the lipid nanoparticles from the vaccine are distributed in the body. Page 7 shows particularly high concentration in the ovaries for example. I think the idea of the vaccine should be that the intramuscular injection stays in the muscle and the spike proteins don't get into your blood, but this was never actually directly verified. What this study shows is that the vaccine lipid coating (and thus likely the spike proteins) get into your blood, which when binding to the ACE2 receptor can cause different kinds of damage. E.g. binding to platelets is what can cause clotting. I'm not sure about any of this yet, just started looking into it a few hours ago.
  - eganist 5y ago
    Given the sheer volume of doses delivered and the capability to detect clotting risks (az, JJ), the fact that clotting risk did not go up with biontech and moderna might throw a wrench into that hunch. But even then, not seeing an indication of risk within two orders of magnitude of covid itself.
    - 0-_-0 5y ago
      I agree with that, I'm just slightly worried because I can imagine complications being underreported due to the politicisation of the issue. It might also move the risk/benefit of vaccinating children and people who already had COVID.
    - mike_hearn 5y ago
      the fact that clotting risk did not go up with biontech and moderna might throw a wrench into that hunch. There's no agreement on what's really happening. For example, clotting risk from the mRNA vaccines is supposedly the same as for the AstraZeneca vaccines, but governments across Europe already suspended the AZ vaccine due to clotting risks (supposedly). Therefore by implication, they would also consider the mRNA vaccines dangerous if their standards were consistent. Either the standards aren't consistent and the AZ blocks were political, or the claims that mRNA vaccines have similar clotting risks to AZ are wrong, but given the contradictory nature of many of the claims surrounding this topic - and given that you admitted you only just discovered some of the scientific discussion of the effects of mRNA vaccines - it may be worth dialing down your confidence slightly. https://www.marketwatch.com/story/blood-clots-as-prevalent-with-pfizer-and-moderna-vaccine-as-with-astrazenecas-report-2021-04-15 https://www.marketwatch.com/story/blood-clots-as-prevalent-w...
      - tim333 5y ago
        I'm not convinced by "supposedly the same." Sure you can get blood clots after pfizer as well as after az but you can also get them after having a cup of tea as people get clots in general. I don't think there has been statistically significant data that pfizer etc cause extra clots, unlike az. (eg https://www.businessinsider.com/covid-vaccine-blood-clot-risk-pfizer-moderna-johnson-and-johnson-2021-4 https://www.businessinsider.com/covid-vaccine-blood-clot-ris...)

IG_Semmelweiss 5y ago

He is wrong to make such a claim without data. However, absense of evidence is not evidence of absense, either. The simple truth is that there hasnt been enough time to really understand the long term effects of covid, or the vaccine. Anyone claiming otherwise is simply lying.

booblik 5y ago
I understand the long terms effects of death.
AshamedCaptain 5y ago
And no one understands the effects the Russell teapot orbiting Earth right now has on the human body, either.
- seoaeu 5y ago
  Oh, it would probably be lethal. But luckily Russell claims the teapot is in a stable solar orbit between Earth and Mars, so we should be fine for now.
- IG_Semmelweiss 5y ago
  Unlike the Russell Teapot, the claim on whether vaccines are safe, or not, is verifiable. I am sure this is uncomfortable to many, but you are taking the position that many did take with tobacco, or asbestos. They were safe. Until they weren't. Human life is limited in length. The burden of proof rests on those tampering with the natural (ie the human body) over the un-natural. The counterfactual. Should we feed supermarket milk to babies ? At least in this case, milk is proven to be safe for humans long term. Would you give supermarket milk to babies ? If you did, the burden of proving this is safe rests on you, not on the person stating they want to continue to provide breast milk to the baby
  - AshamedCaptain 5y ago
    It seems that you are arguing that human life span being finite makes every medical assertion effectively testable, but it does not. You still don't have an infinite population and you still do not have an repeteable way to measure "life span". And the claim that there is a "natural" and "un natural" order of things is as unscientific as it gets. I am not going to expect anyone with a half brain to verify the health effects of mixing milk powder with and without a Bible below it, even though a large magnitude of people claim it has an effect. Nor I am going to ask for a full medical study to show that there is no difference.