3 ms·

Where does it say that? I've never seen it. And if it's required, does it have to be on this list? I don't see why it matters if vaccine is on some random list

Where does it say that? I've never seen it. And if it's required, does it have to be on this list? I don't see why it matters if vaccine is on some random list or not. How is it a lie if they have to report adverse effects and it's not on the list? There's plenty of things they have to report that aren't on any lists

spadez 5y ago
>"The Reportable Events Table (RET) reflects what is reportable by law" >Where does it say that? I've never seen it. https://www.fda.gov/vaccines-blood-biologics/safety-availability-biologics/covid-19-vaccine-safety-surveillance https://www.fda.gov/vaccines-blood-biologics/safety-availabi... >In the current pandemic, these reports are being used to monitor the occurrence of both known adverse events, as providers of COVID-19 vaccines are required to report serious adverse events to VAERS. By the way, this also blows your main argument out of the water.
- boredprograming 5y ago
  And I found it on the VAERS FAQ https://vaers.hhs.gov/faq.html https://vaers.hhs.gov/faq.html > Healthcare providers are required to report to VAERS the following adverse events after COVID-19 vaccination [under Emergency Use Authorization (EUA)], It's not on the pdf because it's either outdated or because COVID vaccines are on emergency authorization. There's not a giant conspiracy because something isn't on a random pdf, like I was saying
  - spadez 5y ago
    Ok, so your opinion is that the PDF might be outdated. Makes much more sense than your original reply to be honest..
    - boredprograming 5y ago
      Yes. I was wrong. But there's also not conspiracy which is what I was trying to rationalize. There's so much BS on the internet these days that are the modern day versions of astrology. Trying to find patterns in randomness to justify crazy beliefs. Most anti vax "information" is such
      - spadez 5y ago
        Making asserting statements when you don't have any evidence for such assertion is also BS, which sadly adds up to the already existing BS on the internet. So why not stop adding to it.
        hanselot 5y ago
        Because, the JIDF pays shills really well. 90% of this guy's posts are akin to, "Believe the television people". Nothing to see here, while he shifts goalposts, and distracts people from the actual discussion. How about we get to the heart of the matter, is this vaccine safe to use? The answer is, there are NO long term studies (obviously) and that this is pretty much a game of Russian Roullette. The media spent years gaslighting the public to associate anti-vax with idiot suburban moms and rednecks. Now they are cashing in on that label to brand all evidence to the contrary as anti-vax hysteria, when in fact, this "vaccine" is the first of its kind to leverage this new method of delivery, and there is no way to know whether it is safe to use. The VAERS data on its own is enough to warrant SERIOUS investigation, yet somehow, the unsafest vaccine in the history of the planet - at least by this metric - is heralded and protected, and any opposing views are silenced in true orwellian fashion. I however have come to believe that this is the first time the majority of the population are starting to see through the lies. You can see it in the way the threads now have active engagement, and people are willing to risk their safety (yes, literally we have to RISK our own livelihood to engage ANYWHERE online), to step up and voice their concerns. So, ultimately, lets not pretend that YOU have the answer to whether this "vaccine" (literally labeled as poison by the Australian government) is safe to use, or not, as in the absolute best case of your position, you would be able to say only: We don't know if its safe, there are 0 long term studies. All references to "You" in this comment are in reference to "boredprograming".

spadez 5y ago

>"The Reportable Events Table (RET) reflects what is reportable by law" >Where does it say that? I've never seen it. https://www.fda.gov/vaccines-blood-biologics/safety-availability-biologics/covid-19-vaccine-safety-surveillance https://www.fda.gov/vaccines-blood-biologics/safety-availabi... >In the current pandemic, these reports are being used to monitor the occurrence of both known adverse events, as providers of COVID-19 vaccines are required to report serious adverse events to VAERS. By the way, this also blows your main argument out of the water.

boredprograming 5y ago
And I found it on the VAERS FAQ https://vaers.hhs.gov/faq.html https://vaers.hhs.gov/faq.html > Healthcare providers are required to report to VAERS the following adverse events after COVID-19 vaccination [under Emergency Use Authorization (EUA)], It's not on the pdf because it's either outdated or because COVID vaccines are on emergency authorization. There's not a giant conspiracy because something isn't on a random pdf, like I was saying
- spadez 5y ago
  Ok, so your opinion is that the PDF might be outdated. Makes much more sense than your original reply to be honest..
  - boredprograming 5y ago
    Yes. I was wrong. But there's also not conspiracy which is what I was trying to rationalize. There's so much BS on the internet these days that are the modern day versions of astrology. Trying to find patterns in randomness to justify crazy beliefs. Most anti vax "information" is such
    - spadez 5y ago
      Making asserting statements when you don't have any evidence for such assertion is also BS, which sadly adds up to the already existing BS on the internet. So why not stop adding to it.
      - hanselot 5y ago
        Because, the JIDF pays shills really well. 90% of this guy's posts are akin to, "Believe the television people". Nothing to see here, while he shifts goalposts, and distracts people from the actual discussion. How about we get to the heart of the matter, is this vaccine safe to use? The answer is, there are NO long term studies (obviously) and that this is pretty much a game of Russian Roullette. The media spent years gaslighting the public to associate anti-vax with idiot suburban moms and rednecks. Now they are cashing in on that label to brand all evidence to the contrary as anti-vax hysteria, when in fact, this "vaccine" is the first of its kind to leverage this new method of delivery, and there is no way to know whether it is safe to use. The VAERS data on its own is enough to warrant SERIOUS investigation, yet somehow, the unsafest vaccine in the history of the planet - at least by this metric - is heralded and protected, and any opposing views are silenced in true orwellian fashion. I however have come to believe that this is the first time the majority of the population are starting to see through the lies. You can see it in the way the threads now have active engagement, and people are willing to risk their safety (yes, literally we have to RISK our own livelihood to engage ANYWHERE online), to step up and voice their concerns. So, ultimately, lets not pretend that YOU have the answer to whether this "vaccine" (literally labeled as poison by the Australian government) is safe to use, or not, as in the absolute best case of your position, you would be able to say only: We don't know if its safe, there are 0 long term studies. All references to "You" in this comment are in reference to "boredprograming".