The other day we had a few people in the comments section overly excited about the retraction of a paper by the Heart Institute on the risks of myocarditis. There was a mistake in the paper but a more detailed look reveals similar risks nonetheless.
While we’re on the subject, The UK Government’s own data does not support the claims made for vaccine effectiveness/safety.
Adverse events reporting in Ontario continues to increase in all age brackets.
And for some reason showing your papers on patios and in restaurants in Quebec isn’t having the desired effect.
You’re at the point where your linking to Twitter posts for your ‘research’.
Speaking of disreputable nonsense getting debunked and dunked, the Arizona “audit” results came back and widened Biden’s victory. Good job. https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2021/09/the-arizona-election-audit-reveals-more-votes-for-biden-no-evidence-of-fraud.html
I guess you didn’t wait for the part about 50,000+ clearly illegal ballots in that count, and 300,000 ballots in that ballot count total in question for other reasons?
16,934 duplicate ballots
564 triple copy ballots
14 4 copy ballots.
17362, more than what Trump supposedly lost by.
oh and 40,000 overwritten log entries on those computer counting machines changing totals. I guess you didn’t listen to that part either.
And the small matter of Arizona Election Audit Summary Report says that their were 173,104 “Lost Votes” (ballots of legitimate voters that just vanished) and 96,389 “Ghost Votes” (ballots added without a matching voter.)
The Slate article addresses all of these nonsensical claims.
Right, I’ll bet they do.
Go run your own blog, xim/xer/xit
No need for the others, zit will do.
Nah. Replace the “z” with “sh”.
That would be a brownhead, not a whitehead.
Isn’t that racist?
“You’re at the point where your linking to Twitter posts for your ‘research’.”
Facepalm.
That tweet contains a direct link to a Public Health Ontario PDF document. It is right there in bright blue font, right in front of your eyes, shortbus.
“That tweet contains a direct link to a Public Health Ontario PDF document.”
Oh good, does this mean we’re all back in agreement that public health surveillance data from government departments is a valid source of information? Because it wasn’t too long ago that people here were casting doubt on any COVID-related data that came from federal or provincial/territorial/state sources.
That’s progress, I guess.
We think that they understate the problem. They are now admitting “yes, adverse clotting events that can be life threatening happen.”
We still think that they’re dishonest, but when public and professional pressure force them to admit what we’ve known for over a year, it’s a step in the right direction.
Will you agree that giving the vax will kill more teenage boys than Covid would?
Are we talking about blood clots (associated with the Oxford/AstraZeneca vaccine) or myocarditis (associated with mRNA vaccines)?
(facepalm)
Myocarditis is blot clots in and around the heart. It means that the heart is losing bloodflow and that that impairment will shorten the lives of those so afflicted.
so to answer your question, yes.
Please correct me if I’m wrong.
A quick calc that if 1 in 1000 juvenile males will get myocarditis (I’ve seen the rate disputed here, but not convincingly) then the Calgary school board will condemn 20 current students (between grades 6 and graduation) to die within the next 3-10 years if they insist on vaccination to attend school in person.
How many students dying for vaccine mandates are acceptable to you?
My son is a student.
“ Myocarditis is blot clots in and around the heart…Please correct me if I’m wrong.”
Myocarditis is inflammation of the myocardium caused by inflammatory immune cells entering the muscle tissue. A blood clot (thrombus) is a blockage of a blood vessel. Two distinct concepts. Each can contribute to the other under specific circumstances, but they remain distinct phenomena.
“A quick calc that if 1 in 1000 juvenile males will get myocarditis (I’ve seen the rate disputed here, but not convincingly) then the Calgary school board will condemn 20 current students (between grades 6 and graduation) to die within the next 3-10 years if they insist on vaccination to attend school in person…How many students dying for vaccine mandates are acceptable to you?”
Your quick calculation relies on incorrect myocarditis risk estimates as well as arbitrary and overinflated mortality risk numbers from the Hoffe video. But since neither of those things will deter you, then the answer is “none” (I don’t support vaccine mandates).
My math started with “if”. If 1 in 1000 is off by a factor of 10, then it’s 2 otherwise healthy boys that will be killed by the vax in Calgary alone. That should be self-explanatory.
Nice dodge on the key question: How many students dying for vaccine mandates are acceptable to you?
“Oh good….”
You too needed that explained? Another intellectual giant I see.
“….does this mean we’re all back in agreement that public health surveillance data from government departments is a valid source of information?”
No we’re not in an agreement. As a matter of fact there is no “we”. They have conceded some truth. Not all of it, but every now and then they concede some, quietly, only to then claim that they were saying it all along. China does that every now and then, Ontario did that now.
You can’t stop the signal Mal. Is all.
Deaths and miscarriages are under severe and unusual events.
Quite the number at 172 compared with 22 for heart inflammation.
Honestly it’s safe for pregnant women, bullshit.
Our ‘experts’ NEED to be held accountable for the unnecessary deaths and disabilities that they have caused.
Slate is a commie rag, and one can be sure that if they say anything, the exact opposite is true. They’re as bad as Salon or Daily Beast, maybe worse.
On topic: President of Brazil gave an excellent plug in his UN speech to the early treatment of Wuhan flu, and no jab mandate . He expressed disdain for countries that are suppressing info on early treatment.
Starts at the 10 minute mark:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vpoGERi0fI8
“Similar risks nonetheless.”
More like an order of magnitude in difference, but for the sake of the argument, fine, let’s agree that mRNA vaccinations are indeed associated with an increased risk of myocarditis, especially among young males.
So, what’s the risk of myocarditis associated with coronavirus infection itself? Good question, let’s check out the data:
– Barca et al., 2021: https://www.nejm.org/doi/10.1056/NEJMoa2110475
– Singer et al., 2021 (preprint): https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.07.23.21260998v1
– Boehmer et al., 2021: https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7035e5.htm
Nothing about micro-clots per Dr. Hoffe. Only full blown cases that are diagnosed within the timeframe of the study. Thanks for moving the goalposts, but that’s not what we were discussing.
Do you agree that people should be allowed to refuse “vaccination” until all testing is done on the treatments under discussion? What is your prediction for the imposed sterility rate of those under 20 years old who receive the full dose (2+) of “vaccines”? Are you happy with the removal of the word “immunity” from the definition of the words “vaccine” and “vaccination”?
Or is this another fly-by pooping because you can?
“Nothing about micro-clots per Dr. Hoffe.”
Oh, now I understand, this is about the Charles Hoffe video. Well, I don’t think it’s wise to base one’s views on a video from social media, without first vetting the data that Dr. Hoffe claims to have but has not yet published, especially when it goes against current data and evidence. At this point, it’s really just relying on this guy’s word. Since the AZ blood clot issue came to light, all COVID vaccines are under constant spotlight to look out for any further thrombotic adverse events. That no evidence has so far emerged from rigorous research studies should be taken as a cautious but positive sign.
“Thanks for moving the goalposts, but that’s not what we were discussing.”
Do you know what we’re discussing? Myocarditis and blood clots are two different things. This entire thread, starting with Francisco’s links, have been about the former.
“Do you agree that people should be allowed to refuse “vaccination” until all testing is done on the treatments under discussion?”
Yes. In the same way that abortion should be legal, accessible and safe, people should be able to make personal decisions about vaccinations as another form of medical procedure involving their own bodies.
“What is your prediction for the imposed sterility rate of those under 20 years old who receive the full dose (2+) of “vaccines”?”
As in the vaccines directly causing sterility as an adverse event? From what I’ve read, the current scientific consensus—based on empirical observation and an understanding of the pathways by which vaccines and infertility independently operate—is that COVID vaccines directly contribute to zero excess risk.
“Are you happy with the removal of the word “immunity” from the definition of the words “vaccine” and “vaccination”?”
If the word “immunity “ in the original definitions led one to believe that all “true” vaccines confer permanent, 100% protection against transmission of the target disease, then yes, I’m “happy” with its removal. No vaccine has ever met that definition.