Still not safe, Still not effective....

So I joined a couple years ago, never had much interest in posting since I have been unable to hobby due to health reasons. But I check in once in awhile and lurk. I've been drawn to this forum and it really surprises me. I thought most hobbyists tended to be reasonable people and more tolerant. If you are already participating in something that much of society does not approve of, I would think you would be much more accepting and objective about the views of others.

I am fascinated to find that this is not the case. There are many of you that have fallen into the behaviors that I believe are destroying the Conservative movement in general and the GOP in particular.

Your post is a good example. In other parts of this thread you have been criticized for misrepresentation of scientific data. You claimed to be qualified to make the statements you did, but the response to your claims seemed to pretty effectively challenge that. The point was also made that if your claims were true, that the conclusions you then made about the data were intentionally misleading.

You seem to have done the same thing again. You take two separate, unrelated events and then imply a link to the COVID vaccine. With no apparent evidence of any kind that this is the case. You don't even know if they got the vaccine! That seems to be very irresponsible and unethical.

Why would you do this? I am puzzled and concerned. You are not the only member that does these types of things. Is the charge that you want to break things more than they already are actually true? I cannot imagine that this will help. Or is it just that all of you like the attention from stirring things up? I think that is very dangerous. I keep being reminded of the saying to be careful what you ask for because you might get it.

I do not mean to single you out particularly. I don't want to go to war with a bunch of you who seem to encourage that behavior. You have just come to my attention because you are repeating behavior that you were just called out for in a pretty effective way. I really don't understand this. You cannot actually believe that your small group understands things that a whole bunch of other people do not.

I think this is probably a waste of time, but I would encourage you to stop making things worse. I can tell you from a very large network of acquaintances that I have that there are many lifelong Conservatives and Republicans out there that feel like you are giving us a very bad name. We think you are doing damage that we may not ever fully recover from. Originally Posted by gladi8r

Your post is spot on. I joined up looking for hooker reviews, and what did I find? The board's busiest and most active forums are the sandboxes, and this one is mainly populated by conspiracy-wrapped folks who, in the 1970s, would have been admitted to a psych ward.

Thankfully, there's a very small population of people here that would be affected by the rants and unscientific posts. I feel bad for any family members over whom they exert influence. No doubt there've been some repercussions that weren't necessary.

They call out for scientists and doctors to be prosecuted for encouraging folks to save their own lives, yet aren't held accountable for spewing absolute bullshit that has caused deaths.

Sad shit.

Multiple degrees. Theses. TMC. Sure I’m going to provide you with multiple papers, degrees, universities here and abroad to out myself in this venue.

Simple flawed NIH study conclusion to exemplify how biased the government and certain medical research and industry is.

Here is another link which more succinctly describes my viewpoint:
http://www.yahoo.com/news/covid-vacc...051100916.html Originally Posted by Michael8219

I read the paper in question, and the researchers on the other hand are biased IMHO. They quote an infection fatality ratio (IFR) published by Ioannidis from October 2020, being 0.23%, as gospel. While the IFR now is a lot lower than 0.23%, at the time it was a lot higher than Ioannidis' estimate. I believe esteemed contributor Waco Kid was using 0.5% at the time, while Adav8s28 and Bill Gates were around 1.0% to 1.2%. The real number in the USA in 2020 was probably in that range. The writers also dwell on the IFR of people under 70 (.05%) while ignoring double digit IFR's for the aged. They also place way too much emphasis on vaccines as a possible reason for the excess deaths not accounted for by COVID infections without much more than anecdotal evidence. Others like Paglino et al blame factors like "health care interruptions, socioeconomic disruptions", and most importantly, undercounting COVID deaths. The researchers don't even look at the number of deaths attributable to COVID, the disease, in their analysis.

I think I can debunk their work. Will be back after I've looked at some of their data.

Here’s the paper in question:

https://bmjpublichealth.bmj.com/cont...00282.full.pdf

Paglino et al:

https://www.pnas.org/doi/full/10.1073/pnas.2313661121 Originally Posted by Tiny

I did go back and pull the data from Our World in Data that the researchers used for Michael's BMJ paper, which was summarized in the Independent. It's here,

https://covid.ourworldindata.org/dat...ovid-data.xlsx

As noted above, it was curious that the writers ignored the number of deaths attributed to COVID, the disease, in their analysis.

The crux of the BMJ study is that excess mortality, from all causes including COVID, in 47 western countries was as follows,

2020 1,033,122 excess deaths
2021 1,256,942 excess deaths
2022 808,392 excess deaths

The writers believe that COVID vaccines may have been one of the chief reasons for the excess deaths.

I was too lazy to sum COVID deaths and Excess deaths from 47 countries, but did it for the USA, and here are the results,

COVID deaths in USA:

2020 342,920
2021 469,667
2022 267,389

Total excess deaths in USA, including COVID:

2020 454,610
2021 508,690
2022 278,850

Here are COVID deaths as a % of total excess deaths in USA:

2020 75%
2021 92%
2022 96%

In 2021 and 2022, 92% and 96% respectively of the excess deaths are accounted for by COVID, the disease. In 2020, the ratio was 75%, which is pretty significant. There were a lot more excess deaths than COVID deaths in 2020. But the vaccine sure as hell wasn't the culprit in 2020, because there was no vaccine.

The differences in 2021 and 2022 between total excess deaths and COVID deaths, when we did have the vaccine, were small.

Anyway you slice it or dice it, in the USA at least, I don't see how you can attribute many excess deaths to the vaccines.

The numbers are worthless to prove a point. They were altered and screwed with.... Fave it, they lied about funding it, they lied about it being natural, they lied about what they were telling you to do, they lied about ivermectin, they lied about the masks, they lied and they lied and they lied. BUT oh... no we should TOTALLY believe the statistics because they wouldn't lie about that too!

The numbers are worthless to prove a point. They were altered and screwed with.... Fave it, they lied about funding it, they lied about it being natural, they lied about what they were telling you to do, they lied about ivermectin, they lied about the masks, they lied and they lied and they lied. BUT oh... no we should TOTALLY believe the statistics because they wouldn't lie about that too! Originally Posted by texassapper

The numbers in Michael's BMJ paper were used to support the position that the COVID vaccines may have killed many people. I don't think they were altered or screwed with -- just misinterpreted. And you have a point. In some instances, it must have been hard to decide whether to attribute deaths to COVID or another disease or infirmity. I think that's part of why COVID deaths were undercounted in 2020. There were some people who died that year because of COVID infections, but their deaths were attributed to diabetes, heart disease, Alzheimer's and the like.

The numbers are worthless to prove a point. They were altered and screwed with.... Fave it, they lied about funding it, they lied about it being natural, they lied about what they were telling you to do, they lied about ivermectin, they lied about the masks, they lied and they lied and they lied. BUT oh... no we should TOTALLY believe the statistics because they wouldn't lie about that too! Originally Posted by texassapper

They did do a 180 on the wearing of masks. They did not lie about the Ivermectin. They did not lie about it being natural. It is not scientifically possible to convert the any of the corona viruses at the Wu-Han lab into SARS_CoV2 virus. The genome is too small by 100,000 plus nucleotides.

You misstated what Dr Birx said. She did say the vaccines were overplayed, but still suggested that be taken because prevent severe sickness, the need to be admitted into the hospital and prevent death.

You have also lied about the effectiveness of the vaccines. The original two shot M-Rna vaccines worked in the beginning on the original variant (That does not have a greek alphabet nickname) before it mutated into the other variarants which became the dominant strain. (Alpha, Beta, delta, omincron,etc).

The 1 million people that died from or with infection by SARS_CoV2 virus, most were unvaccinated. A fact that you can't spin or twist.

They did do a 180 on the wearing of masks. They did not lie about the Ivermectin. They did not lie about it being natural. It is not scientifically possible to convert the any of the corona viruses at the Wu-Han lab into SARS_CoV2 virus. The genome is too small by 100,000 plus nucleotides.

You misstated what Dr Birx said. She did say the vaccines were overplayed, but still suggested that be taken because prevent severe sickness, the need to be admitted into the hospital and prevent death.

You have also lied about the effectiveness of the vaccines. The original two shot M-Rna vaccines worked in the beginning on the original variant (That does not have a greek alphabet nickname) before it mutated into the other variarants which became the dominant strain. (Alpha, Beta, delta, omincron,etc).

The 1 million people that died from or with infection by SARS_CoV2 virus, most were unvaccinated. A fact that you can't spin or twist. Originally Posted by adav8s28

Early in this clip she said the Vaccines were overplayed but to say they are still effective in preventing serious illness or death is a bit of a joke because if a disease can cause death and you get it vaccinated or otherwise a person can still die and vaccinated people have.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8AYqTgtIgLA

The numbers are worthless to prove a point. They were altered and screwed with.... Fave it, they lied about funding it, they lied about it being natural, they lied about what they were telling you to do, they lied about ivermectin, they lied about the masks, they lied and they lied and they lied. BUT oh... no we should TOTALLY believe the statistics because they wouldn't lie about that too! Originally Posted by texassapper

How do you know they were altered? Please tell us. I want to know. Because some of the things you say are right. But you say many things like this without backing them up. Saying things like this make no sense and just make you look like you are always in denial.

They did do a 180 on the wearing of masks. Originally Posted by adav8s28

You and Texassapper got this right. They did lie about the effectiveness of the good quality masks (N95, KN95) early on. I believe it was because the supply was limited and they wanted the medical community to have them.

The 1 million people that died from or with infection by SARS_CoV2 virus, most were unvaccinated. A fact that you can't spin or twist. Originally Posted by adav8s28

It's amazing isn't it. Compare these two graphs,

https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/u...ination-status

https://usafacts.org/visualizations/...racker-states/

By December of 2021, 60% of the population had been fully vaccinated. And yet twenty times more unvaccinated people were dying than vaccinated! Incredible!

By April of 2023 though, the ratio is 2 deaths among the unvaccinated for every death among the vaccinated, with 69% fully vaccinated. Why? Well, by then most of the unvaccinated had immunity through infection. I'd a lot rather get my immunity from a prick in my arm, instead of getting laid up in bed with COVID. Or worse.

I have two personal experiences with COVID experts that I trusted. The first one is one of the doctors who helped me through some very challenging health problems. He had a lot of experience in treating people who had severe COVID infections. He told me that the instances of severe COVID in people who were not vaccinated compared against those who did could not be ignored. Vaccinated people got it much less. The second person is a distant relative who is a very well known immunologist. He is retired now but still in demand for consulting work and to comment on vaccine issues for media. He admits the vaccines have problems. But he says that overall they have saved many many lives. And that the risks are way less than the risks of COVID even for healthy people.

But whatever. Some of you on here will laugh at that no matter what and accuse me again of being a Biden supporter and pretend Conservative Repulican. I don't care. Call me out. I don't know you and you don't know anyone I know or anything about me.

But I'm going to call you out sometimes too. And I still want to know why texassapper won't tell us how he knows the data was altereed and why Michael8219 won't answer the questions about why he misrepresents scientific data even though he says he is qualified to analyze it. Thank you.

I have two personal experiences with COVID experts that I trusted. The first one is one of the doctors who helped me through some very challenging health problems. He had a lot of experience in treating people who had severe COVID infections. He told me that the instances of severe COVID in people who were not vaccinated compared against those who did could not be ignored. Vaccinated people got it much less. The second person is a distant relative who is a very well known immunologist. He is retired now but still in demand for consulting work and to comment on vaccine issues for media. He admits the vaccines have problems. But he says that overall they have saved many many lives. And that the risks are way less than the risks of COVID even for healthy people.

But whatever. Some of you on here will laugh at that no matter what and accuse me again of being a Biden supporter and pretend Conservative Repulican. I don't care. Call me out. I don't know you and you don't know anyone I know or anything about me.

But I'm going to call you out sometimes too. And I still want to know why texassapper won't tell us how he knows the data was altereed and why Michael8219 won't answer the questions about why he misrepresents scientific data even though he says he is qualified to analyze it. Thank you. Originally Posted by gladi8r

So you went away convinced a Problematic Vaccine has saved many many lives? It's equivalent to a car salesman stating "the engine in this car has it's problems but it will go from 0-60 in 3.5 seconds and get 35 miles to the gallon". Would you believe that claim too?

How do you know they were altered? Please tell us. I want to know. Because some of the things you say are right. But you say many things like this without backing them up. Saying things like this make no sense and just make you look like you are always in denial. Originally Posted by gladi8r

Start reading Ethical Skeptic on X. Here's as good a place as any to start.

If you go back far enough he provided the downloads of the Data to look at for yourself. I don't do nearly as sophisticated analysis of the data provided, some of it is just raw counts, but he's right, the CDC has been obscuring Cancer deaths by mis-attributing the primary and secondary causes of death they also have a "backlog" of data to post... it was running ~4 months worth... Regardless it's clear that the govt health agencies are concealing data. Bounce that against the Insurance numbers for the increase in deaths and the anamoly becomes obvious...

Have fun reading. It's a tough slog because he doesn't go back and explain previous assumptions etc... and I've had to go to secondary sources to even understand some of the more obscure data analysis.

For an even more interesting read... check out his global warming hypothesis. He makes reference to Dzhanibekov effect... which I'm a space buff and had never heard of. It's some seriously far out stuff, but seems to be logical and the pic of the pyramids showing what he is referencing is interesting... something I'd just never noticed.

By December of 2021, 60% of the population had been fully vaccinated. And yet twenty times more unvaccinated people were dying than vaccinated! Incredible! Originally Posted by Tiny

In what time frame? Until one had received their 2nd dose they were considered unvaccinated. How many COVID deaths is this number?

We will never know... and it was obscured for a reason. And there's only one logical reason that such an obvious data point would be ignored... they didn't WANT the public to ever be able to know that number.

Why would such an OBVIOUSLY scientifically relevant data point be PURPOSELY NOT COLLECTED, when it would be so easy to collect it?

So you went away convinced a Problematic Vaccine has saved many many lives? It's equivalent to a car salesman stating "the engine in this car has it's problems but it will go from 0-60 in 3.5 seconds and get 35 miles to the gallon". Would you believe that claim too? Originally Posted by Levianon17

NO. It is not equivalent to that at all. But this is the kind of thing that you and your buddies say in response to things like that all the time. I got my information from TWO qualified medical specialists. One of them is a globally recognized immunologist. You're statement is foolish. Like most of the things said here.

Start reading Ethical Skeptic on X. Here's as good a place as any to start.
Originally Posted by texassapper

Okay I will check him out. But who is he? I would like some independant way to find out that he is qualified also. I can't find much so far. I have seen too many people on here and other places use people like this who look very impressive to back up their claims. But then I find out that those sources aren't really so good.

http://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/14/ny...us-deaths.html

From April, 2020 NYTimes article; updated September 2021 (why?). ”The city has added more than 3,700 additional people who were presumed to have died of the coronavirus but had never tested positive.”

How are COVID-19 deaths counted? It’s complicated:
http://www.aamc.org/news/how-are-covid-19-deaths-counted-it-s-complicated