Deep Divers, Tin Hatters, Skeptics, Ped Pillers, Truthers, Unite!

[RefluxSemantic]

Show hidden quotes

If you understood science, you would realize that what you just spewed in regard to vaccines was horseshit and is in direct contrast with reality. Vaccines = good . The fact that this is even still a discussion in 2021 is mind boggling.

I don't think anyone denies vaccines are good. But on the other hand you can't also deny that these vaccines are 1) experimental ( some of them are) 2) rushed 3) effectiveness is still unknown. Then you have AstraZeneca and J&J facing the hammer. If even 1 in 100 person develops serious side effect to vaccine that is literally similar to the virus. That doesn't mean these are bad or have to be, but if someone wants to exercise caution, so be it.

They are not experimental, and the effectiveness is not unknown(for Pfizer, which I took). AZ had relatively big issues, but 6 people out of 6.8 million died from J&J. You're literally 10,000 times more likely to die from a carcrash. They were rushed for obvious reasons, but that in and of itself isn't a negative. I don't blame people if they aren't rushing out the door to get it, I myself read several peer reviewed articles in scientific journals before choosing to get vaccinated. But thats a far cry from the bullshit that a certain someone is peddling in his thread.

mRNA vaccines are experimental as far as I am aware . Secondly it's simply not possible to predict the side effects you can have say 4 years or 10 years later. And this is a scientific fact. There effectiveness is unknown in the sense that its unclear how long the effects last. It could be as low as 6 months. It's true you are more likely to die in car crash but that doesn't stop you from driving the car does it? Rushing any medicines in and itself is a very negative thing, no matter the circumstances. There is precedence for this. Most medicines for diseases since 1900 haven't lasted more than 40 years in use. It's actually very hard to make a very effective and side effect free cure or vaccine for that matter.

Well it depends on your definition of experimental I guess, but by traditional definitions it isn't, having gone through vigorous testing and being in its final form, as far as we know at this point. What point are you trying to make, that there's potential for side effects in 10 years? Okay? You don't know how anything you do today will effect you, negatively or positively, in 10 years. It feels like you're just arguing for the sake of arguing.

Just a hypothetical, what happens if in 10 years the side effect is cancer and now you have billions with cancer?

Just a hypothetical, what happens if in 10 years the side effect of 5g is cancer and now you have billions with cancer? Just a hypothetical, what happens if in 10 years the side effect of having a computer with an Intel 11th gen processor is cancer and now you have billions with cancer? Just a hypothetical, but what happens if in 10 years the side effect of eating vegetables in 2021 is cancer and now you have billions with cancer?

2 can play the "lets create absurd and completely baseless hypotheticals" game

Another bad faith argument. Developing cancer from a vaccine is infinitely more likely and realistic than from 11th gen intel processor. Besides Processors are built on previous tech and we are using them for over 2 decades, so it is already proven. In case of vaccines each vaccine needs to be proven individually regardless of how its made. If we believe the theory that virus originated from labs then why it isn't possible that vaccine made in same labs can cause cancer?

Why is it infinitely more lkely? What do you base that on? So far the argument is entirely in good faith, because it uses the logic and arguments you have demonstrated to argue that all new things are bad because their long term effects haven't been tested.

There is precedence for medicines developing cancer and getting suspended. Do you really lack the common sense that you fail to see how ridiculous comparisons you are making?

There's precedence for radiation causing cancer too.

[princeofcarthage]

How is that any different than a vaccine to stop a global pandemic that has killed millions of people?

Because the vaccine is untested and it is completely different. How do you even compare a plastic/metal object meant to make life easier to a substance capable of making fundamental changes in human body?

[princeofcarthage]

Show hidden quotes

If you understood science, you would realize that what you just spewed in regard to vaccines was horseshit and is in direct contrast with reality. Vaccines = good . The fact that this is even still a discussion in 2021 is mind boggling.

I don't think anyone denies vaccines are good. But on the other hand you can't also deny that these vaccines are 1) experimental ( some of them are) 2) rushed 3) effectiveness is still unknown. Then you have AstraZeneca and J&J facing the hammer. If even 1 in 100 person develops serious side effect to vaccine that is literally similar to the virus. That doesn't mean these are bad or have to be, but if someone wants to exercise caution, so be it.

They are not experimental, and the effectiveness is not unknown(for Pfizer, which I took). AZ had relatively big issues, but 6 people out of 6.8 million died from J&J. You're literally 10,000 times more likely to die from a carcrash. They were rushed for obvious reasons, but that in and of itself isn't a negative. I don't blame people if they aren't rushing out the door to get it, I myself read several peer reviewed articles in scientific journals before choosing to get vaccinated. But thats a far cry from the bullshit that a certain someone is peddling in his thread.

mRNA vaccines are experimental as far as I am aware . Secondly it's simply not possible to predict the side effects you can have say 4 years or 10 years later. And this is a scientific fact. There effectiveness is unknown in the sense that its unclear how long the effects last. It could be as low as 6 months. It's true you are more likely to die in car crash but that doesn't stop you from driving the car does it? Rushing any medicines in and itself is a very negative thing, no matter the circumstances. There is precedence for this. Most medicines for diseases since 1900 haven't lasted more than 40 years in use. It's actually very hard to make a very effective and side effect free cure or vaccine for that matter.

Well it depends on your definition of experimental I guess, but by traditional definitions it isn't, having gone through vigorous testing and being in its final form, as far as we know at this point. What point are you trying to make, that there's potential for side effects in 10 years? Okay? You don't know how anything you do today will effect you, negatively or positively, in 10 years. It feels like you're just arguing for the sake of arguing.

Just a hypothetical, what happens if in 10 years the side effect is cancer and now you have billions with cancer?

Just a hypothetical, what happens if in 10 years the side effect of 5g is cancer and now you have billions with cancer? Just a hypothetical, what happens if in 10 years the side effect of having a computer with an Intel 11th gen processor is cancer and now you have billions with cancer? Just a hypothetical, but what happens if in 10 years the side effect of eating vegetables in 2021 is cancer and now you have billions with cancer?

2 can play the "lets create absurd and completely baseless hypotheticals" game

Another bad faith argument. Developing cancer from a vaccine is infinitely more likely and realistic than from 11th gen intel processor. Besides Processors are built on previous tech and we are using them for over 2 decades, so it is already proven. In case of vaccines each vaccine needs to be proven individually regardless of how its made. If we believe the theory that virus originated from labs then why it isn't possible that vaccine made in same labs can cause cancer?

Why is it infinitely more lkely? What do you base that on? So far the argument is entirely in good faith, because it uses the logic and arguments you have demonstrated to argue that all new things are bad because their long term effects haven't been tested.

There is precedence for medicines developing cancer and getting suspended. Do you really lack the common sense that you fail to see how ridiculous comparisons you are making?

There's precedence for radiation causing cancer too.

Yeah, so? I am not asking you to take a dip in radiation pool. But there are different types of radiations and the one emitted by cellphones may not necessarily cause it. It may also depend on numerous other factor why 1 in 100 million developed cancer due to cellphone radiation. Also this argument should have taken place years ago. Now we have practical result from decades of usage.

[princeofcarthage]

And while we are at it why you only point to cellphones? Medical equipments which are actively responsible for saving millions of people should also be banned right, because there is 1 in a 100 million chance of someone developing cancer from radiations emitted by those?

[RefluxSemantic]

And while we are at it why you only point to cellphones? Medical equipments which are actively responsible for saving millions of people should also be banned right, because there is 1 in a 100 million chance of someone developing cancer from radiations emitted by those?

It almost sounds like you've realized that your point is ridiculous :)

[princeofcarthage]

No my point is this emergency use of vaccinations in not justified.

[chris1089]

That new phone you bought, its not possible to tell if it has side effects after 4-10 years. So why did you buy it? Why are you taking that risk?

That's not a fair comparison since you don't put a phone in your body.

[RefluxSemantic]

That new phone you bought, its not possible to tell if it has side effects after 4-10 years. So why did you buy it? Why are you taking that risk?

That's not a fair comparison since you don't put a phone in your body.

I'm surprised by how you're not seeing how fair the comparison is.

There is something new that could potentially be harmful in the long term. There is zero reason to actually believe it is harmful though, because there is no known mechanism for how it would actually be harmful (not for the vaccine or for the phone or <insert some new thing here>). What's the difference? That you put the one thing inside your body and the other thing not? What if we're actually consuming microplastics from the phone's touchscreen and these will give us cancer in 20 years? It apperantly doesn't matter that that's an entirely unreasonable line of thought, because the idea that vaccines might have long term effects isn't really based on anything tangible either.

[gibson]

To add to what Jerom said, one would have to demonstrate that there was something about injection that was inherently more dangerous.

[princeofcarthage]

That new phone you bought, its not possible to tell if it has side effects after 4-10 years. So why did you buy it? Why are you taking that risk?

That's not a fair comparison since you don't put a phone in your body.

because the idea that vaccines might have long term effects isn't really based on anything tangible either.

Its based on history and precedence, corporate greed and lobbying, US government.

[gibson]

Show hidden quotes

That new phone you bought, its not possible to tell if it has side effects after 4-10 years. So why did you buy it? Why are you taking that risk?

That's not a fair comparison since you don't put a phone in your body.

because the idea that vaccines might have long term effects isn't really based on anything tangible either.

Its based on history and precedence, corporate greed and lobbying, US government.

Nothing you listed is tangible, it's all, at best, what ifs. And in fact things like corporate greed could just as easily cause a better vaccine. How much money is Johnson & Johnson losing if everyone stop using their vaccine?

[princeofcarthage]

Show hidden quotes

That new phone you bought, its not possible to tell if it has side effects after 4-10 years. So why did you buy it? Why are you taking that risk?

That's not a fair comparison since you don't put a phone in your body.

because the idea that vaccines might have long term effects isn't really based on anything tangible either.

Its based on history and precedence, corporate greed and lobbying, US government.

Nothing you listed is tangible, it's all, at best, what ifs. And in fact things like corporate greed could just as easily cause a better vaccine. How much money is Johnson & Johnson losing if everyone stop using their vaccine?

What if is simply a question, I and many are asking. The question arises from historical precedence, corporate and governmental distrust. When has greed ever given anything better. It is the race to put first vaccine on map and earn billions. In case of AZ and J&J its simply unfortunate that side effects were discovered early on.

[RefluxSemantic]

How is corporate greed even relevant? Your point is that its dangerous because we havent tested if there are long term side effects. Obviously the big corporations dont know that either, so how is this corporate greed?

[n0el]

Blood clot side effects of J&J are lower than birth control, it’s a big joke to take it off the market at this time when we crucially need to vaccinate people

[Snuden]

Show hidden quotes

That new phone you bought, its not possible to tell if it has side effects after 4-10 years. So why did you buy it? Why are you taking that risk?

That's not a fair comparison since you don't put a phone in your body.

because the idea that vaccines might have long term effects isn't really based on anything tangible either.

Its based on history and precedence, corporate greed and lobbying, US government.

Nothing you listed is tangible, it's all, at best, what ifs. And in fact things like corporate greed could just as easily cause a better vaccine. How much money is Johnson & Johnson losing if everyone stop using their vaccine?

What if is simply a question, I and many are asking. The question arises from historical precedence, corporate and governmental distrust. When has greed ever given anything better. It is the race to put first vaccine on map and earn billions. In case of AZ and J&J its simply unfortunate that side effects were discovered early on.

I’m kinda interested to know how your mental illness was developed. Did you wake up one morning and found yourself completely off the rails, or did it slowly creep in?

[princeofcarthage]

How is corporate greed even relevant? Your point is that its dangerous because we havent tested if there are long term side effects. Obviously the big corporations dont know that either, so how is this corporate greed?

I am not specifically arguing this is corporate greed, although when pfizer and moderna charge billions it seems so. However corporate greed, I.e race to put the first vaccine, or an affordable one in the market can result in lapses which can result in vaccine being dangerous.

[princeofcarthage]

Blood clot side effects of J&J are lower than birth control, it’s a big joke to take it off the market at this time when we crucially need to vaccinate people

But that's just it. We are not in crucial need to vaccinate people, at least not yet.

[n0el]

Blood clot side effects of J&J are lower than birth control, it’s a big joke to take it off the market at this time when we crucially need to vaccinate people

But that's just it. We are not in crucial need to vaccinate people, at least not yet.

except that we are? the longer we go without mass vaccination the more likely the virus mutates to beat the current vaccines and then we have to start over.

[RefluxSemantic]

How is corporate greed even relevant? Your point is that its dangerous because we havent tested if there are long term side effects. Obviously the big corporations dont know that either, so how is this corporate greed?

I am not specifically arguing this is corporate greed, although when pfizer and moderna charge billions it seems so. However corporate greed, I.e race to put the first vaccine, or an affordable one in the market can result in lapses which can result in vaccine being dangerous.

Okay so let's get back to the point. There's literally no reason to believe there are 'magical' (using this term because you don't want to discuss an actual mechanism through which this happens) long term side effects. Why would you mention it then?

[princeofcarthage]

How is corporate greed even relevant? Your point is that its dangerous because we havent tested if there are long term side effects. Obviously the big corporations dont know that either, so how is this corporate greed?

I am not specifically arguing this is corporate greed, although when pfizer and moderna charge billions it seems so. However corporate greed, I.e race to put the first vaccine, or an affordable one in the market can result in lapses which can result in vaccine being dangerous.

Okay so let's get back to the point. There's literally no reason to believe there are 'magical' (using this term because you don't want to discuss an actual mechanism through which this happens) long term side effects. Why would you mention it then?

Because I don't see believable justification as to why there is a need to rush something that is experimental, has potential dangerous side effects in future for which is there is precedence. Then there is also the question of corporate greed. China managed to beat the virus before vaccines were out, why can't you? I am simply pointing out how governments and institutions are jumping islands as per situation to hide their own incompetence and shortcomings.

[Snuden]

Haha... You are insane!

So YOU don't think a vaccine should be rolled out ASAP even though thousands of people are dying daily.
As to how China beat the virus... In China people do as the CCP tells them. Iirc, they pretty much locked down entire cities for MONTHS - quite early.

One of the reasons a big part of the world fail to do what China did, is because of Donning-Krugers like you.

[Dolan]

The virus has already mutated a few times and these mutations have become common in some places. But pharma companies claim their vaccines have some effect on those mutated forms too (not sure if there's any evidence for that).
Pharma companies are already shaping their sales pitch, claiming anti-covid vaccinations will have to be repeated every year to be effective. So we're probably gonna start over every year.

[gibson]

Blood clot side effects of J&J are lower than birth control, it’s a big joke to take it off the market at this time when we crucially need to vaccinate people

Yea, 6 out of 6.8 million people. That’s absurdly low.

[gibson]

The virus has already mutated a few times and these mutations have become common in some places. But pharma companies claim their vaccines have some effect on those mutated forms too (not sure if there's any evidence for that).
Pharma companies are already shaping their sales pitch, claiming anti-covid vaccinations will have to be repeated every year to be effective. So we're probably gonna start over every year.

Do you not understand how viral mutations work or are you trolling? If neither, than why are you acting like this is some big conspiracy theory for pharmaceutical companies to make money?

[Dolan]

That's not what I said, that's what you understood