Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
1 hour ago, Sim said:

From the study:

Conclusions:Most cases of suspected COVID-19 vaccine myocarditis occurring in persons <21 years have a mild clinical course with rapid resolution of symptoms. Abnormal findings on cMRI were frequent. Future studies should evaluate risk factors, mechanisms, and long-term outcomes.

Posted

 

Quote

“There are active discussions here in the department at the policy level about booster shots and whether or not to make those mandatory — there have been no final decisions made about that,” Pentagon spokesman John Kirby told reporters. “Should there be an addition to that in terms of the mandatory vaccine requirement, we will clearly communicate that and be transparent about it, but there are discussions in the department about the efficacy of booster mandatory policy as well.”

 

Posted

The western world has gone full retard. I didn't see this posted and sorry if it's a repost. Australia emulating the CCP.

 

 

  • Confused 1
  • Sad 1
Posted
12 hours ago, pawnman said:

From the study:

Conclusions:Most cases of suspected COVID-19 vaccine myocarditis occurring in persons <21 years have a mild clinical course with rapid resolution of symptoms. Abnormal findings on cMRI were frequent. Future studies should evaluate risk factors, mechanisms, and long-term outcomes.

So long term outcomes gave not been studied?   Gottit

Posted
3 hours ago, bennynova said:

So long term outcomes gave not been studied?   Gottit

I'm not defending the article in any manner..... but, that is standard verbiage that most published research will include in some fashion.  It's often to satisfy the peer reviewers who point out potential deficiencies in the work.  It's not unique to this write-up.

  • Like 1
Posted
1 hour ago, stuckindayton said:

I'm not defending the article in any manner..... but, that is standard verbiage that most published research will include in some fashion.  It's often to satisfy the peer reviewers who point out potential deficiencies in the work.  It's not unique to this write-up.

I don't think thats quite on point. It's standard in research to recommend future research based off analysis of your study plus literature gaps. Author is literally stating "long term outcomes" warrants future nomination for research. Those nominations are important because they can be used to solicit funding etc.... 

"Six studies conducted on myocarditis recommend further analysis on the long term outcomes of myocarditis patients who recovered from COVID-19."

 

Posted

https://www.zerohedge.com/covid-19/sweden-germany-no-deaths-children-due-covid

Quote

Swedish data by Ludvigsson reported on the 1,951,905 children in Sweden (as of December 31, 2020) who were 1 to 16 years of age who attended school with largely no lockdowns or masks. They found zero (0) deaths.

 

Quote

recent German study (collating evidence from three sources 1) a national seroprevalence study (the SARSCoV-2 KIDS study), 2) the German statutory notification system and 3) a nationwide registry on children and adolescents hospitalized with either SARS-CoV-2 or Pediatric Inflammatory Multisystem Syndrome (PIMS-TS)) reported that there were zero (0) deaths in children 5 to 18 years old across the period of study.  

 

Posted
20 hours ago, pawnman said:

From the study:

Conclusions:Most cases of suspected COVID-19 vaccine myocarditis occurring in persons <21 years have a mild clinical course with rapid resolution of symptoms. Abnormal findings on cMRI were frequent. Future studies should evaluate risk factors, mechanisms, and long-term outcomes.

Ok. So why should a <21 get the shot then, if they don't want to?

Again, it does not meaningfully stop spread. So... Why mandate it?

Posted
4 minutes ago, Lord Ratner said:

Ok. So why should a <21 get the shot then, if they don't want to?

Again, it does not meaningfully stop spread. So... Why mandate it?

Where do you guys keep coming up with this idea that the vaccines don't reduce the spread of covid? 

https://www.healthline.com/health-news/vaccinated-people-can-transmit-the-coronavirus-but-its-still-more-likely-if-youre-unvaccinated

Sure, they're not 100%... but you're less likely to get infected if you have the vaccine. And you can only spread it if you are infected. 

  • Upvote 1
Posted
11 minutes ago, pawnman said:

Where do you guys keep coming up with this idea that the vaccines don't reduce the spread of covid? 

https://www.healthline.com/health-news/vaccinated-people-can-transmit-the-coronavirus-but-its-still-more-likely-if-youre-unvaccinated

Sure, they're not 100%... but you're less likely to get infected if you have the vaccine. And you can only spread it if you are infected. 

That link says households with vaccinated people spread C19 at 25%, and unvaccinated households at 38%.  That’s only a 13% difference.  Add to that observation there was no discussion of how severe symptoms were (if any at all), and it’s quite clear this is not a “pandemic of the unvaccinated.”  Frankly it’s not a pandemic at all, COVID is over as a threat.  Now we’re talking about mandatory boosters?  This is insane.  

Posted
11 minutes ago, tac airlifter said:

That link says households with vaccinated people spread C19 at 25%, and unvaccinated households at 38%.  That’s only a 13% difference.  Add to that observation there was no discussion of how severe symptoms were (if any at all), and it’s quite clear this is not a “pandemic of the unvaccinated.”  Frankly it’s not a pandemic at all, COVID is over as a threat.  Now we’re talking about mandatory boosters?  This is insane.  

In the same house. 

Meanwhile, unvaccinated people are 8 times as likely to get covid in the first place. 

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2021/08/16/fact-check-covid-19-vaccines-work-protect-others/8106810002/

Posted
31 minutes ago, pawnman said:

Where do you guys keep coming up with this idea that the vaccines don't reduce the spread of covid? 

https://www.healthline.com/health-news/vaccinated-people-can-transmit-the-coronavirus-but-its-still-more-likely-if-youre-unvaccinated

Sure, they're not 100%... but you're less likely to get infected if you have the vaccine. And you can only spread it if you are infected. 

You know what is 100%? Unvaxed people are 100% protected from vax side effects.

  • Upvote 4
Posted

Well, I was coerced into receiving the JJ vaccine on Thursday around 2pm. I woke up 10 hours later and felt like absolute garbage, as bad as when I had covid two months ago - Fever, worst muscle soreness I've ever experienced (truthfully), headache, and joint pain. Lasted until a few hours ago. 

Can't wait to see what long term side effects will be revealed in the coming years... At least I'll have about a year head's up on most of the willing test volunteers. 

Of note, there were people in there who were a week from even being eligible for a booster asking if they could get it early. Astounding. 

Posted
Just now, VMFA187 said:

Well, I was coerced into receiving the JJ vaccine on Thursday around 2pm. I woke up 10 hours later and felt like absolute garbage, as bad as when I had covid two months ago - Fever, worst muscle soreness I've ever experienced (truthfully), headache, and joint pain. Lasted until a few hours ago. 

Can't wait to see what long term side effects will be revealed in the coming years... At least I'll have about a year head's up on most of the willing test volunteers. 

Of note, there were people in there who were a week from even being eligible for a booster asking if they could get it early. Astounding. 

It’s astounding someone has a different opinion than you?

  • Like 2
Posted
16 minutes ago, pawnman said:

In the same house. 

Meanwhile, unvaccinated people are 8 times as likely to get covid in the first place. 

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2021/08/16/fact-check-covid-19-vaccines-work-protect-others/8106810002/

Great, that should be a choice that they themselves are able to make for an illness that has a mortality rate that is incredibly low for a relatively healthy individual when the alternative is a vaccine that doesn't function like a vaccine, and has absolutely no long-term known side effects, and that skipped many of the normal vaccine testing requirements to receive authorization. 

Posted (edited)
2 minutes ago, MCO said:

It’s astounding someone has a different opinion than you?

That people are trying to get a booster before they are even eligible for it, yes. 

Edited by VMFA187
  • Like 1
Posted
21 minutes ago, VMFA187 said:

Well, I was coerced into receiving the JJ vaccine on Thursday around 2pm. I woke up 10 hours later and felt like absolute garbage, as bad as when I had covid two months ago - Fever, worst muscle soreness I've ever experienced (truthfully), headache, and joint pain. Lasted until a few hours ago. 

Can't wait to see what long term side effects will be revealed in the coming years... At least I'll have about a year head's up on most of the willing test volunteers. 

Of note, there were people in there who were a week from even being eligible for a booster asking if they could get it early. Astounding. 

Opted for the shot after all... welcome to the team. 

  • Downvote 3
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, VMFA187 said:

Well, I was coerced into receiving the JJ vaccine on Thursday around 2pm. I woke up 10 hours later and felt like absolute garbage, as bad as when I had covid two months ago - Fever, worst muscle soreness I've ever experienced (truthfully), headache, and joint pain. Lasted until a few hours ago. 

Can't wait to see what long term side effects will be revealed in the coming years... At least I'll have about a year head's up on most of the willing test volunteers. 

Of note, there were people in there who were a week from even being eligible for a booster asking if they could get it early. Astounding. 

Two same. I felt worse from the JJ vaccine (worst chills and shaking I have experienced with any illness) than from having COVID a few months before. Hard pass on booster.

Edited by Muscle2002
  • Upvote 1
Posted
2 hours ago, pawnman said:

Where do you guys keep coming up with this idea that the vaccines don't reduce the spread of covid? 

https://www.healthline.com/health-news/vaccinated-people-can-transmit-the-coronavirus-but-its-still-more-likely-if-youre-unvaccinated

Sure, they're not 100%... but you're less likely to get infected if you have the vaccine. And you can only spread it if you are infected. 

Per studies already cited in this thread, the effectiveness of stopping the spread tapers off after about 4 months, depending on the variant it goes as low as completely ineffective, or somewhere around 10% more effective.

 

If that's your standard for a mandate, then I think you're just the type of guy who loves being told what to do.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 2
Posted
2 hours ago, MCO said:

It’s astounding someone has a different opinion than you?

It's astounding people have been tricked into a risk management philosophy for COVID that they do not apply to any other aspects of their life. 

  • Upvote 2
Posted
2 hours ago, tac airlifter said:

That link says households with vaccinated people spread C19 at 25%, and unvaccinated households at 38%.  That’s only a 13% difference.  Add to that observation there was no discussion of how severe symptoms were (if any at all), and it’s quite clear this is not a “pandemic of the unvaccinated.”  Frankly it’s not a pandemic at all, COVID is over as a threat.  Now we’re talking about mandatory boosters?  This is insane.  

image.gif.9f02b42819c26e58a744ce8703e49a1b.gif
 

  • Like 1
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...