I am an anti vaxxer (1 Viewer)

[LawFitz]

Absolutely. I'm only stating my opinion. I'll let everyone else reading this thread make up their own mind about your guesses.

Making up random numbers then posting them as facts is not making me think that you are "just trying to look at all sides".

How about telling lies about others, Mr. High Horse? Please look upthread and find where I did the bolded. I ####### dare you, bro, because you won't be able. Stop lying about me if you expect anyone to take you seriously.

 

[Rich Conway]

How does reporting the cases come off as giddy? That isnt my intention, so I dont like hearing it's coming off that way.

There have been a number of posts you've made that absolutely come across as giddy.  I think you're a decent guy, Max, really.  I imagine you don't mean it like that, but it's something I've noticed more than once.

 

[tymarsas]

How about telling lies about others, Mr. High Horse? Please look upthread and find where I did the bolded. I ####### dare you, bro, because you won't be able. Stop lying about me if you expect anyone to take you seriously.

I've seen you post the "VAERS data is massively underreported" at least 20 times in different threads. As a fact.

 

[opensourcebeer]

So, please, by all means, let's see your methodology for adjusting the VAERS data into something usable. 

I'm not qualified to do this in anything resembling statistical and scientific best practices. 

All you want to do is dismiss the data summarily as unusable. 

All I've stated about the data is clearly present on the OpenVARS website.

 

[Max Power]

There have been a number of posts you've made that absolutely come across as giddy.  I think you're a decent guy, Max, really.  I imagine you don't mean it like that, but it's something I've noticed more than once.

I feel there are times I'm trying to highlight facts that go against the current thinking on covid or current facts being push.

Covid is altering life as we know it for everyone. It sucks. We aren't going to vaccinate our way out of this, yet that seems to be the current plan.

Biden and Fauci are daily telling people to get their boosters to combat Omicron which appears mild. Then the CDC puts out that 1/3 of known cases are in boosted individuals. Pfizer CEO then comes and says people should get double boosted.

Are we even going to pause to figure out the risk vs reward matrix for each of these following shots? Because the risk isn't zero.

To the point brought up, I'll try to be more cognizant about how I post

 

[Murph]

Been following this thread and felt compelled throw my two cents in. I am vaxxed and boosted but anti-mandate. @LawFitz I think you raise valid questions. And I think that we are not giving due consideration to potential harms. I am deeply concerned, for example, about the FDA's decision today to authorize Pfizer boosters in 16 and 17 year olds without consulting VRBPAC and that the CDC followed suit without consulting ACIP. And I think we all know it's to avoid scrutiny of the myocarditis data.

But please, take it from someone who has worked in this area. You aren't helping your cause. VAERS cannot be used to assess an exposure/outcome relationship for several reasons including lack of denominator data, unconfirmed outcomes, and lack of information about patient co-morbidities. It is a signal generation resource that can be used to spur further research including the Vaccine Safety Datalink, and PRISM/Sentinel. You are barking up the wrong tree here.

 

[GordonGekko]

I understand what you're saying. But that's going to weed out a lot of people, right?

This is a more than fair question.

My viewpoint is that there is a length of distance on the political spectrum where there are massive diminishing returns in attempting to appeal to the other side of the aisle.

I'm a big believer ( and most of my participation in the PSF is more geared this way) in appealing to moderates, undecideds and independents. And, if I'm being fair, with major cross sections of the Democratic Party shifting further and further left, some moderate Democrats actually operate as "Republican-Lite" in nature.

If you can win over moderates, undecideds and independents, then you can win elections, and if you can win enough elections, then you can actually shape functional public policy. I'm actually not a huge fan of many things that the GOP has done and has become. But they don't subscribe to identity politics and intersectionality and those are the two issues where it becomes the hill that I'm willing to die on. Feelings over pragmatism in public policy is a death sentence for our children.

If someone is constantly and naturally inconsistent in their value system, I just don't think it's worth the time to try to have them see your side of things or try to see their side of things. It's like negotiating with an emotional terrorist. But then again, I think outside of politics, those kind of folks would be better off excised from one's life. And if I'm being fair, the Texas GOPers who want to loophole Roe Vs Wade to stop abortions but also are ardent against vaccine mandates would also be included in my list.

Just a big believer that the best path for Conservatives is to be consistent and create more high information voters. Even at the risk that those people end up voting against the Conservative viewpoint. Put up the information and let people decide for themselves. If people see your life and your behavior as an example, then they will be more willing to explore what you do, what you think, what you believe and mostly what you value, and consider opening themselves up to your viewpoints because they want that same success for themselves.

I cannot change a zealot. Also the world I want to live in is one where people can and do disagree with me. But I can use that time and energy better to operate as an example and I can advocate for my fellow Conservatives to operate as better examples. If that happens on a wide scale, that's more than a win, that's outright victory.

 

[jhib]

I reject the premise that you can account for correlation<>causation by simply guessing at a percentage, and I argue that it's completely inappropriate to analyze the raw data that way.

So how then should we account for this data? Vax Mob says dismiss it entirely. Your words above seem to lead to the same direction.

To avoid potential for #SeaLioning inference, I'll tell you now that I absolutely won't dismiss VAERS. I'll continue to assess and reference the data in a reasoned fashion. If you don't like it, feel free to place me on ignore, but whenever you or anyone attacks the database again is such a convenient and flippant manner, I will repost my A/B analysis again for everyone else to assess for themselves. Count on it.

We (you and I) shouldn't attempt to account for this data, as we don't have comparative data, time, resources, or statistical knowledge to even come close to making any kind of conclusion that should be taken seriously by anyone.  This is what many of us are saying in ways that you interpret as dismissive of the data and calling it worthless/meaningless. 

The CDC and FDA, however, do have the means to analyze the data.  That is why they openly ask for it in the first place, even when they know some people will misuse the data they collect.

This is not "attacking" the database in a "convenient and flippant manner" as you try to frame it.  This is respecting the database by recognizing the effort and ability needed to adequately interpret the numbers.

(As an aside, I have never put anyone on ignore and don't see the need to start.  I'm not afraid to read things I disagree with.)

 

[tymarsas]

This is a more than fair question.

My viewpoint is that there is a length of distance on the political spectrum where there are massive diminishing returns in attempting to appeal to the other side of the aisle.

I'm a big believer ( and most of my participation in the PSF is more geared this way) in appealing to moderates, undecideds and independents. And, if I'm being fair, with major cross sections of the Democratic Party shifting further and further left, some moderate Democrats actually operate as "Republican-Lite" in nature.

If you can win over moderates, undecideds and independents, then you can win elections, and if you can win enough elections, then you can actually shape functional public policy. I'm actually not a huge fan of many things that the GOP has done and has become. But they don't subscribe to identity politics and intersectionality and those are the two issues where it becomes the hill that I'm willing to die on. Feelings over pragmatism in public policy is a death sentence for our children

Honest question and obviously off-topic. Why are you trying to appeal to anyone? Are you a politician? Maybe I am missing the point here, but I'm just here to converse and read different opinions. I'm not here to change any minds or hearts, so I find it odd that you'd say you're trying to appeal to certain segments of the readership.

 

[ignatiusjreilly]

I said the mandate wont prevent deaths

Oh for ####'s sake. You said the mandate wouldn't prevent deaths. @dawgtrails said it would, because it would induce more people to get vaccinated and therefore fewer of them would die. You responded by saying that vaccinated people can still die, which pretty clearly implies that you believe getting more people vaccinated wouldn't prevent deaths. Anyway, I'm sick of wasting time parsing your words. Anyone who read the exchange could tell what you meant.

I gotta say, it's so weird that people (both on this board and in general) who seem to spend all their time talking down the vaccine, highlighting its shortcomings and celebrating those who remain unvaxxed are so heavily invested in avoiding what is ultimately a vague and meaningless label. I don't particularly care whether someone is called anti-vax; I care more about whether they're helping to get more of the population vaccinated or hurting that cause. Still, "I'm not anti-vax but ..." has replaced "I'm not racist but ..." as the ultimate self-negating sentence.

 

[pinkham13]

If you played the word "vaxxer" in a game of scrabble you'd rack up 23 points! 

Too bad I'd disallow and bust you for slipping an extra X into the game.

Use the blank tile and link to a triple word score space for 69!

 

[NorvilleBarnes]

Question for those who support mandates. Do you have ANY limits? Are you fine with ongoing boosters being mandated? Are you fine with future government decisions about what gets injected into your body?

for those who support mandates, would you also support them for less deadly viruses in the future?

Anyone?

 

[pinkham13]

This article supports Fitzlaw’s viewpoint. Numerous studies confirm it. Even the FDA shows data that support his view in the linked article

https://www.wnd.com/2021/12/4968311/

Whats with the 55 year ban on info used to green light the shots anyway? Hiding data does not inspire confidence. 153,000 adverse reactions in the first two months of the Pfizer jabs is shocking.

 

[pinkham13]

Another study from CMS reports not only supports Fitzlaws viewpoint they think the numbers are much much higher.

https://vaersanalysis.info/2021/12/13/using-cms-whistleblower-data-to-approximate-the-under-reporting-factor-for-vaers/

 

[tymarsas]

This article supports Fitzlaw’s viewpoint. Numerous studies confirm it. Even the FDA shows data that support his view in the linked article

https://www.wnd.com/2021/12/4968311/

Whats with the 55 year ban on info used to green light the shots anyway? Hiding data does not inspire confidence. 153,000 adverse reactions in the first two months of the Pfizer jabs is shocking.

You should probably go back and read the reasons why these numbers are not accurate. I don't think they would be able to hide 400k deaths caused by the vaccine.

 

[pinkham13]

You should probably go back and read the reasons why these numbers are not accurate. I don't think they would be able to hide 400k deaths caused by the vaccine.

I don’t think the 158,000 adverse reaction in the first two months reported by the FDA is wrong. Why does the FDA want to hide the data used to green light these dangerous shots for 75 years??

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/critics-outraged-by-fda-request-to-hide-pfizer-vaccine-data-for-55-years/ar-AAQUufd

 

[tymarsas]

I don’t think the 158,000 adverse reaction in the first two months reported by the FDA is wrong. Why does the FDA want to hide the data used to green light these dangerous shots for 75 years??

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/critics-outraged-by-fda-request-to-hide-pfizer-vaccine-data-for-55-years/ar-AAQUufd

I don't think they are wrong either, but they are not adverse "reactions". They are adverse events that may or may not have been caused by the vaccine. Any adverse event that occur after receiving a vaccine are reported regardless of their cause. Many of those reports are not going to be related to the vaccine at all.

 

[pinkham13]

I don't think they are wrong either, but they are not adverse "reactions". They are adverse events that may or may not have been caused by the vaccine. Any adverse event that occur after receiving a vaccine are reported regardless of their cause. Many of those reports are not going to be related to the vaccine at all.

The CMS whistleblower data shows a lot of deaths too. CMS numbers are likely more reliable as health care workers are reporting their employers discourage VAERs reporting of vax adverse events.

https://vaersanalysis.info/2021/12/13/using-cms-whistleblower-data-to-approximate-the-under-reporting-factor-for-vaers/

 

[tymarsas]

The CMS whistleblower data shows a lot of deaths too. CMS numbers are likely more reliable as health care workers are reporting their employers discourage VAERs reporting of vax adverse events.

https://vaersanalysis.info/2021/12/13/using-cms-whistleblower-data-to-approximate-the-under-reporting-factor-for-vaers/

Adverse event does not mean it was caused by the vaccine. Do you think 400k people have died from this vaccine?

 

[pinkham13]

Adverse event does not mean it was caused by the vaccine. Do you think 400k people have died from this vaccine?

I think the CMS data shows that is likely true. The table shows that 800,000 Medicare patients died within two weeks of the jabs. The flu shot looks to be half that number so I am very concerned that people are dying from these warp speed injections . The children getting shots and the myocarditis that comes with it is deeply concerning.  https://tobyrogers.substack.com/p/ten-red-flags-in-the-fdas-risk-benefit

 

[AAABatteries]

Anyone?

I'll take a stab at this.  Currently, I'm not in favor of a government mandate in the sense of forcing all citizens to get vaccinated.  I am fine with the government as an employer requiring it for employment and putting policy in place to require it of government contractors, etc.  I'm also fine with private companies and entities putting their own requirements in place.  I'd love to see more places use the carrot vs. the stick approach.  My company paid each employee a bonus to show proof of vaccination or to apply for an exemption.  Business could get creative - maybe my $5 footlong sub at Subway is $4 if I show my vaccination card.  I also think local government could do a better job of education and incentivizing residents to get vaccinated.

I've also said on a few occasions that I believe the vast majority of us would be in favor of mandates if the conditions were dire enough.  Some feel we are there already, some obviously feel we are not.  I'm sure there's some folks (maybe even you) who would say even if SuperKillerVirus-20 was killing 50% of the population that we shouldn't mandate vaccines - I just don't think there's a lot of those people.  So, it becomes an exercise in determining how bad our current situation is. 

 

[LawFitz]

I'll take a stab at this.  Currently, I'm not in favor of a government mandate in the sense of forcing all citizens to get vaccinated.  I am fine with the government as an employer requiring it for employment and putting policy in place to require it of government contractors, etc.  I'm also fine with private companies and entities putting their own requirements in place.  I'd love to see more places use the carrot vs. the stick approach.  My company paid each employee a bonus to show proof of vaccination or to apply for an exemption.  Business could get creative - maybe my $5 footlong sub at Subway is $4 if I show my vaccination card.  I also think local government could do a better job of education and incentivizing residents to get vaccinated.

I've also said on a few occasions that I believe the vast majority of us would be in favor of mandates if the conditions were dire enough.  Some feel we are there already, some obviously feel we are not.  I'm sure there's some folks (maybe even you) who would say even if SuperKillVirus-20 was killing 50% of the population that we shouldn't mandate vaccines - I just don't think there's a lot of people.  So, it becomes an exercise in determining how bad our current situation is. 

Thx for this reasoned post.

If we were dealing with a disease with a much higher mortality rate and an experimental vax that actually stopped (or even undeniably and materially slowed) transmission, then I'd most certainly reassess my cost-benefit analysis accordingly, as would most other vax hesitant people out there (I think).

 

[LawFitz]

I think the CMS data shows that is likely true. The table shows that 800,000 Medicare patients died within two weeks of the jabs. The flu shot looks to be half that number so I am very concerned that people are dying from these warp speed injections . The children getting shots and the myocarditis that comes with it is deeply concerning.  https://tobyrogers.substack.com/p/ten-red-flags-in-the-fdas-risk-benefit

So many smoking guns out there from a multitude of fronts, and yet the Covvax-obsessesion continues strong. I wonder if anyone's extreme pro-Covvax steadfastness has even moved slightly. 

 

[ignatiusjreilly]

Anyone?

Dude, I responded in detail to your question on page 2 of this thread. I would give you the benefit of the doubt and say that maybe you missed my post, except that you replied to me and we went back and forth on it a few times (I thought you were trying a little too hard for snarky one liners rather than actually engaging with what I said, but we did have an exchange.)

So why are you pretending that you asked such a stumper of a question that no one could possibly respond when you know full well that I did?

 

[NorvilleBarnes]

Dude, I responded in detail to your question on page 2 of this thread. I would give you the benefit of the doubt and say that maybe you missed my post, except that you replied to me and we went back and forth on it a few times (I thought you were trying a little too hard for snarky one liners rather than actually engaging with what I said, but we did have an exchange.)

First, thank you for responding. I should have asked "Anyone ELSE?" - my bad.

Second, my responses were neither snarky nor one liners. I honestly don't believe we're balancing liberty with public safety and I'm fine with disagreement.

if the vaccine were less effective or had a higher rate of side effects, then yes, I wouldn't want mandates. 

Personally I think this is kind of backwards and I also think we're there now. The vaccine is far less effective than originally reported and there are a higher rate - and a larger variety  - of side effects.

 

[ZADO]

I don't think they are wrong either, but they are not adverse "reactions". They are adverse events that may or may not have been caused by the vaccine. Any adverse event that occur after receiving a vaccine are reported regardless of their cause. Many of those reports are not going to be related to the vaccine at all.

I`m old enough to remember when every death during Covid was a Covid related death ,no matter the circumstances .

Why did people so blindly believe that was possible ,yet have a difficult time believing the number of deaths brought on by the Vaccines ?

 

[tymarsas]

I`m old enough to remember when every death during Covid was a Covid related death ,no matter the circumstances .

Why did people so blindly believe that was possible ,yet have a difficult time believing the number of deaths brought on by the Vaccines ?

I dunno, why do you so blindly believe the bolded?

 

[Max Power]

Isn't a covid death still counted that way or have they changed it? 

 

[ZADO]

I dunno, why do you so blindly believe the bolded?

i dont and never did 

 

[tymarsas]

i dont and never did 

You don't believe "every death during Covid was a Covid related death ,no matter the circumstances"? Why did you say it? It is clearly a completely untrue statement.

 

[ZADO]

You don't believe "every death during Covid was a Covid related death ,no matter the circumstances"? Why did you say it? It is clearly a completely untrue statement.

because thats how deaths were being reported when the virus broke and for a year after,it was like nobody died from anything else but covid,you dont remember that in the news ?

 

[tymarsas]

because thats how deaths were being reported when the virus broke and for a year after,it was like nobody died from anything else but covid,you dont remember that in the news ?

https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7014e1.htm#T1_down

It looks like there were plenty of non-covid deaths in 2020.

 

[LawFitz]

I`m old enough to remember when every death during Covid was a Covid related death ,no matter the circumstances .

Why did people so blindly believe that was possible ,yet have a difficult time believing the number of deaths brought on by the Vaccines ?

Because 'correlation <> causation' only applies when it's convenient for them.

 

[sho nuff]

Because 'correlation <> causation' only applies when it's convenient for them.

Or because claiming all deaths were covid or covid related is a false premise from the start?

 

[LawFitz]

Or because claiming all deaths were covid or covid related is a false premise from the start?

Agreed. Glad you feel this way. But tell that to the loud and proud Vax Mob members who've constantly used the official Covid death stats to support their rabid insistence everyone get jabbed (even 5 yr old children), but at the same time won't attribute *any* of the ~20k VAERS death reports (following vaccination) to the Covvaxxes because 'Correlation <> Causation'!!

 

[sho nuff]

Agreed. Glad you feel this way. But tell that to the loud and proud Vax Mob members who've constantly used the official Covid death stats to support their rabid insistence everyone get jabbed (even 5 yr old children), but at the same time won't attribute *any* of the ~20k VAERS death reports (following vaccination) to the Covvaxxes because 'Correlation <> Causation'!!

2  things...

1st...Vax Mob? Huh?

2nd...I don't think you are getting what I am saying.  The official death stats are likely even low (given looking at excess deaths would put the count likely even higher).  The premise that just everything was called a covid death or categorized that way..is a false premise.  Thats the point.

As far as VAERS reports...people have explained that reporting multiple times over...not going to get into why taking those numbers as fact or proof of something is unwise.  Doesn't seem to matter how many times its explained.

 

[LawFitz]

2  things...

1st...Vax Mob? Huh?

2nd...I don't think you are getting what I am saying.  The official death stats are likely even low (given looking at excess deaths would put the count likely even higher).  The premise that just everything was called a covid death or categorized that way..is a false premise.  Thats the point.

As far as VAERS reports...people have explained that reporting multiple times over...not going to get into why taking those numbers as fact or proof of something is unwise.  Doesn't seem to matter how many times its explained.

Ah, the old 'Excess Deaths' argument. How many of those 'Excess Deaths' were statistical anomaly where deaths of the old and/or morbidly frail were pulled forward from 2022-25 to 2020-21? Not saying those last years don't matter, so don't get this twisted. But to (arguably) risk the young and healthy to protect the old and morbidly weak - who BTW could just get vaxxed themselves every 3-6 months for protection! - is dubious at best. And in the case of legally mandating that risk upon our children, it's ####### maddening. Seriously, you guys will literally drive people mad if you keep pushing and succeed in mandating kids in particular to get Covaxxed, while also denying the tens (hundreds?) of thousands of accounts of people who claim to be seriously harmed or killed. How you cannot see the logic FAIL there is beyond me.

And all of the above doesn't even bring in the concepts of alternative effective treatment and prophylactic options (how about some proper diet and exercise, to name just the most basic), which are summarily dismissed and ignored by your side; or the undeniable evidence now that the Covaxxes DON'T stop transmission - and arguably don't even *slow* it. Or how about the compelling arguments that leaky vaccines utilized in the midst of a pandemic promote viral mutations?!?

None of the above seems to matter, regardless of how many times it's explained. Keep digging in, but I am pretty confident I speak for a lot of people when I say - stay the #### off my lawn when you do so!

 

[tymarsas]

I've been against vaccine mandates and passports from the start, so technically I am an anti vaxxer. But I also don't believe and spread misinformation, so I am considered part of the vax mob and a sheep by some in here. I am not really sure what side I'm suppose to support.

 

[LawFitz]

I've been against vaccine mandates and passports from the start, so technically I am an anti vaxxer. But I also don't believe and spread misinformation, so I am considered part of the vax mob and a sheep by some in here. I am not really sure what side I'm suppose to support.

I only ask for two things - and have all along...

1. Free-flow of dialogue and information - even 'misinformation.' Let the people decide what makes sense among the various debate points.

2. No mandates of any kind for Covaxxes.

If you agree with the two above, then you are most definitely NOT part of the Vax Mob.

 

[tymarsas]

I only ask for two things - and have all along...

1. Free-flow of dialogue and information - even 'misinformation.' Let the people decide what makes sense among the various debate points.

2. No mandates of any kind for Covaxxes.

If you agree with the two above, then you are most definitely NOT part of the Vax Mob.

Maybe stop calling people sheep or vaxmob. Maybe listen to their arguments. You keep using the same disproven arguments over and over again. Or you attribute the most extreme view to everyone that doesn't think like you. Or you just flat out say untrue things like the vaccines don't work.

 

[LawFitz]

Maybe stop calling people sheep or vaxmob. Maybe listen to their arguments. You keep using the same disproven arguments over and over again. Or you attribute the most extreme view to everyone that doesn't think like you. Or you just flat out say untrue things like the vaccines don't work.

Maybe stop acting like a mob. Maybe listen to all arguments. Maybe stop trying to suppress dialogue. Maybe stop speaking in generalizations and speaking lies about others' viewpoints. Maybe look in the mirror every once in a while, friend.

 

[tymarsas]

Maybe stop acting like a mob. Maybe listen to all arguments. Maybe stop trying to suppress dialogue. Maybe stop speaking in generalizations and speaking lies about others' viewpoints. Maybe look in the mirror every once in a while, friend.

NM. This is getting irrelevant. Sorry for starting this conversation.

 

[LawFitz]

Please quote me where I did those things.

Look upthread to your very last post.

ETA: Actually, look even further back to the first post at the top of this page! You really do need a mirror check, dude.

 

[LawFitz]

NM. This is getting irrelevant. Sorry for starting this conversation.

Apology accepted.

 

[Witz]

Maybe stop acting like a mob. Maybe listen to all arguments. Maybe stop trying to suppress dialogue. Maybe stop speaking in generalizations and speaking lies about others' viewpoints. Maybe look in the mirror every once in a while, friend.

This post is the exact type of posting that J is talking about. 

Be better. 

 

[pinkham13]

This post is the exact type of posting that J is talking about. 

Be better. 

How safe of a space do adults really need from words? Any hoo back on topic. The Japanese aren’t sugarcoating how bad these shots are https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2021/12/covid_vaccines_pose_7_times_higher_death_risk_than_covid_for_young_people_japanese_experts_warn_.html

 

[LawFitz]

This post is the exact type of posting that J is talking about. 

Be better. 

Dude, read the post that was in response to. Mine was a mirror post to display to that poster how he is coming across towards me and others. Where is your 'be better' for that poster? Be consistent with your didactic comments at minimum, if you expect me to give them any serious consideration.

You and others do this regularly in your exchanges with me. You make derisive and inflammatory posts towards me, often attacking my character by twisting my words and sometimes even through outright lies. And then when I give it right back to you - very commonly in a deliberately-obvious reflective manner to convey to you how those tactics look and feel coming right back at you - you then shift to a high horse and accuse me of doing what your side is doing. While objectively annoying, these exchanges to serve a great purpose - they clearly illustrate your side's desperate tactics whenever you get frustrated with actually debating the points I make about the subjects at hand.

I'm sure reading that doesn't feel good. But really be honest and ask yourself if what I am describing might be true. Go back to most (all?) heated exchanges I've had in the Covid threads and see if my above descriptions hold. I think you'd be surprised by what you find if you take an truly objective look back.

 

[tymarsas]

Dude, read the post that was in response to. Mine was a mirror post to display to that poster how he is coming across towards me and others. Where is your 'be better' for that poster? Be consistent with your didactic comments at minimum, if you expect me to give them any serious consideration.

You and others do this regularly in your exchanges with me. You make derisive and inflammatory posts towards me, often attacking my character by twisting my words and sometimes even through outright lies. And then when I give it right back to you - very commonly in a deliberately-obvious reflective manner to convey to you how those tactics look and feel coming right back at you - you then shift to a high horse and accuse me of doing what your side is doing. While objectively annoying, these exchanges to serve a great purpose - they clearly illustrate your side's desperate tactics whenever you get frustrated with actually debating the points I make about the subjects at hand.

I'm sure reading that doesn't feel good. But really be honest and ask yourself if what I am describing might be true. Go back to most (all?) heated exchanges I've had in the Covid threads and see if my above descriptions hold. I think you'd be surprised by what you find if you take an truly objective look back.

And I was merely trying to point out why your arguments don't come across as honest debate. I admit that I didn't do it in the best manner.

You say you are open minded, but you use the same disproven argument over and over. For instance, in this case you used the argument that somehow we drastically over counted the covid deaths. While I can concede there was likely mistakes made in classifying covid deaths. They weren't drastically over counted. We surely weren't attributing all deaths to covid as was claimed.

Correlation = causation is not relevant to the discussion of covid deaths because those were actually recorded as deaths caused by covid as determined by doctors.

This is in contrast to the VAERS numbers which are specifically not listed as caused by vaccines. They are deaths that happened sometime after the vaccine.

If you want to believe there was as many deaths caused by the vaccine as have been caused by covid, be my guest. But quit pretending like recorded covid deaths are somehow equal to VAERS data.

 

[The Dude]

IMO, unless you have a spiritual or physical concern with getting the vaccine - you should get it.  It's the patriotic thing to do - helps the economy and looks out for your neighbors.

 

[pinkham13]

And I was merely trying to point out why your arguments don't come across as honest debate. I admit that I didn't do it in the best manner.

You say you are open minded, but you use the same disproven argument over and over. For instance, in this case you used the argument that somehow we drastically over counted the covid deaths. While I can concede there was likely mistakes made in classifying covid deaths. They weren't drastically over counted. We surely weren't attributing all deaths to covid as was claimed.

Correlation = causation is not relevant to the discussion of covid deaths because those were actually recorded as deaths caused by covid as determined by doctors.

This is in contrast to the VAERS numbers which are specifically not listed as caused by vaccines. They are deaths that happened sometime after the vaccine.

If you want to believe there was as many deaths caused by the vaccine as have been caused by covid, be my guest. But quit pretending like recorded covid deaths are somehow equal to VAERS data.

You haven’t disproven anything the CMS data show 800,000 deaths in two weeks after the shot. The flu shot was half that number but some got both at the same time. If you think alll 800,000 are not related it doesn’t mean they’re not. The Japanese said 7 times as many are dying from the shots as Covid.https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2021/12/covid_vaccines_pose_7_times_higher_death_risk_than_covid_for_young_people_japanese_experts_warn_.html