What sources back up the anti-vaccine movement?

[The Catboy]

https://theexpose.uk/2021/09/26/two...19-vaccines-weve-never-seen-anything-like-it/

These are unconfirmed claims and are effectively anecdotal. There’s also no peer-reviews, so it’s unverified and based on speculation of cause of death.

That's a good point, but the sources in the description contain the articles in question if you want to bypass the youtuber's take on it. Better than me pasting 20+ links here

I am going to be real with you, a common technique that I’ve seen is information overload. Taking a fuck ton of vaguely similar articles or articles that sound vaguely like the point they are going to make and using those. There’s also a lot of cases where people take the unverified or recently submitted studies and use those as “evidence.” So consider me skeptical when approaching this but I will take a look when I am more free. I am currently renovating a duplex right now so my time is limited

 

[plasturion]

These are unconfirmed claims and are effectively anecdotal. There’s also no peer-reviews, so it’s unverified and based on speculation of cause of death.

These are world-renowned pathologists who have been involved in determining causes of death for many years. In fact, this is not hard evidence that has been confirmed in other scientific circles, but if there are legitimate concerns, they need to be explained with appropriate counter-arguments, not swept under the rug "because so" by other supposed pseudo-authorities.
Here's another one:
https://riotimesonline.com/brazil-n...7M0soVznooA-1633724474-0-gqNtZGzNApCjcnBszQel

 

[appleburger]

These are unconfirmed claims and are effectively anecdotal. There’s also no peer-reviews, so it’s unverified and based on speculation of cause of death.

I am going to be real with you, a common technique that I’ve seen is information overload. Taking a fuck ton of vaguely similar articles or articles that sound vaguely like the point they are going to make and using those. There’s also a lot of cases where people take the unverified or recently submitted studies and use those as “evidence.” So consider me skeptical when approaching this but I will take a look when I am more free. I am currently renovating a duplex right now so my time is limited

That’s fair - perhaps just going over the famous paper yourself would be an interesting enough read. It’s surprising how “bad” a study can be just because of faulty conclusions from reasonable testing. The sample size is also pretty small, which is common, but it’s overall shockingly whacky, imo.

Those other two papers I mentioned don’t have any video associated with them, I just googled until I came across them, but they are referencing completely different vaccines that are no longer in use.

All three of those are peer reviewed, so that’s the best I have for now. Maybe if I go down the rabbit hole again I can return to this thread with a more cogent post to lay out what I find.

 

[WG481]

Let's look at some things.

For some of you, you simply cannot get the vaccine as your immune system differs from the average. However, if you support people who can get it, and are cleared for it in a medical sense not getting the vaccine, that's dumb.

There are currently 0 sources supporting anti-vaccination. Rather, there is misinformation campaigning.

As a person who has been vaccinated for time and all eternity, I have never had an issue with vaccines, being pumped with 'em every year. While some people may be allergic to an ingredient, that doesn't mean you should push for anti-vaccination.

Currently, vaccines are not a cure. Rather, they are an immune booster. They increase your immune system defense against the virus, giving you an easier recovery time, minimized chance of death, and the ability to travel abroad. (Perks)



Shut up. Please.

There is a whole lot of science backing vaccinations.

 

[The Catboy]

These are world-renowned pathologists who have been involved in determining causes of death for many years. In fact, this is not hard evidence that has been confirmed in other scientific circles, but if there are legitimate concerns, they need to be explained with appropriate counter-arguments, not swept under the rug "because so" by other supposed pseudo-authorities.
Here's another one:
https://riotimesonline.com/brazil-n...7M0soVznooA-1633724474-0-gqNtZGzNApCjcnBszQel

This is an argument from authority and even the articles posted don’t actually provide evidence these deaths were linked to the vaccine. There’s also no inclusion of medical history, which is always relevant when talking about the death possibly linked to medical treatment. Again, the information isn’t confirmed or verified and an argument of authority isn’t a source. Simply put, this still anecdotal and does not meet the request from the OP, which is asking for verified and peer-reviewed papers. If this does get peer-reviewed and proven right, then it’s worth being concerned about. It could also just be worth remembering that vaccine side-effects are documented and all medical practices have their risks, but in all cases, are still an extremely small fraction compared to what they are treating.

 

[WG481]

These are world-renowned pathologists who have been involved in determining causes of death for many years. In fact, this is not hard evidence that has been confirmed in other scientific circles, but if there are legitimate concerns, they need to be explained with appropriate counter-arguments, not swept under the rug "because so" by other supposed pseudo-authorities.
Here's another one:
https://riotimesonline.com/brazil-n...7M0soVznooA-1633724474-0-gqNtZGzNApCjcnBszQel

"Prof. Dr. Werner Bergholz is a former professor of electrical engineering with a focus on quality and risk management at the Jakobs University in Bremen. Before his appointment, Prof. Bergholz worked for 17 years in chip production management at Siemens."
...Did you read the article? Like, let's be serious here, the dude isn't a world renowned pathologist, he's a Siemens employee. Not even in bioengineering. Heck, for all we should care, those tiny pieces of metal, if they exist, could actually be naturally occurring. Did you know we consume and use iron and copper in our bodies (yet not enough to become magnetized)?

This is why blood is red. When red blood cells carry oxygen, the iron in them oxidizes and turns them red (also proof why blood is not blue, since it has always been exposed to oxygen.)

I also see no references, no links to factual information. On wikis I've searched this website for, the article is a stub, with no information on how or why it exists. It is also, in some cases, deprecated or unused as a reference. Frankly, it's all a bunch of malarkey.

 

[plasturion]

"Prof. Dr. Werner Bergholz is a former professor of electrical engineering with a focus on quality and risk management at the Jakobs University in Bremen. Before his appointment, Prof. Bergholz worked for 17 years in chip production management at Siemens."
...Did you read the article? Like, let's be serious here, the dude isn't a world renowned pathologist, he's a Siemens employee. Not even in bioengineering. Heck, for all we should care, those tiny pieces of metal, if they exist, could actually be naturally occurring. Did you know we consume and use iron and copper in our bodies (yet not enough to become magnetized)?

Yes this gentleman is a specialist in another field, but the other two are pathologists. Please watch the entire conference first and see what size these particles are and what shape they represent (starting at 1:27). Also, there are dozens of other doctors involved in evaluating this study. Also, please note the number of lymphocytes in the lung tissue. Medicine to date knows of no such case. It is possible that this is strongly associated with overproduction of the virus spike protein in tissues where it should not be.

If we are already talking about the correct reaction of the scientific community, then the manufacturers of vaccines should be transparent and say what these contaminants are. If it turns out that these contaminations are disorderly, they should explain them to the public and not use censorship, like youtube did.

If I go to the store and there is a batch of eggs with salmonella in them, let's say I will eat one and get sick. I report it to the health authorities... the batch is recalled. That's how it should work. Now I have the impression that I live in a time when I am forced to eat the rest despite everything, without any explanations. This so called fascism. Now, unfortunately, one narrative is imposed, if anyone is against it they are eliminated from public debate. Unless this changes, there is no point in trusting these ambiguous genetic preparations.

Considering that the technology used is from aborted fetuses, anyone who supports this should be prosecuted. This is how it should be in a civilized community.

 

[subcon959]

Considering that the technology used is from aborted fetuses, anyone who supports this should be prosecuted. This is how it should be in a civilized community.

I mean, even the Vatican gave the OK to the vaccines, so unless you consider yourself on a higher plane than the Pope himself I wouldn't worry about it.

Also, the cells grown today are pretty far down the line from the originals which are around 50 years old by now. It's not like they are hanging around women about to get abortions with little baggies.

 

[Lacius]

Considering that the technology used is from aborted fetuses, anyone who supports this should be prosecuted. This is how it should be in a civilized community.

Abortion is not illegal in the US. Using fetal stem cells in scientific research isn't illegal. These things shouldn't be illegal.

 

[UltraDolphinRevolution]

I am against stem cell research without being religious. Offspring should "feed" on their parents, not the other way around. It is like a tiger eating tiger babies.

 

[The Catboy]

Yes this gentleman is a specialist in another field, but the other two are pathologists. Please watch the entire conference first and see what size these particles are and what shape they represent (starting at 1:27). Also, there are dozens of other doctors involved in evaluating this study. Also, please note the number of lymphocytes in the lung tissue. Medicine to date knows of no such case. It is possible that this is strongly associated with overproduction of the virus spike protein in tissues where it should not be. I am not watching the conference because I actually read through the paper. The paper does not confirm that any of the death are directly connected to the Covid vaccine. The papers are mostly speculation on the cause of death and a request for further examinations. Taking these at face value without accepting that they need further research is just working oneself up.

If we are already talking about the correct reaction of the scientific community, then the manufacturers of vaccines should be transparent and say what these contaminants are. If it turns out that these contaminations are disorderly, they should explain them to the public and not use censorship, like youtube did.
Do you have any evidance to show that they haven't been transparent? As well, any proof that they are linked to Youtube's decision to remove unproven conspiracy videos?
If I go to the store and there is a batch of eggs with salmonella in them, let's say I will eat one and get sick. I report it to the health authorities... the batch is recalled. That's how it should work. Now I have the impression that I live in a time when I am forced to eat the rest despite everything, without any explanations. This so called fascism. Now, unfortunately, one narrative is imposed, if anyone is against it they are eliminated from public debate. Unless this changes, there is no point in trusting these ambiguous genetic preparations.
That's literally not what's happening and if it is, provide proof.
Considering that the technology used is from aborted fetuses, anyone who supports this should be prosecuted. This is how it should be in a civilized community.

Do you have any proof that these vaccines contain aborted fetuses?

I am against stem cell research without being religious. Offspring should "feed" on their parents, not the other way around. It is like a tiger eating tiger babies.

Cool, why is this relevant to this thread or the requests being made?

 

[UltraDolphinRevolution]

Cool, why is this relevant to this thread or the requests being made?

It could be relevant since fetal cells were used to demonstrate how mRNA works. It could be a moral reason to deny mRNA vaccination. Just as some people might refuse to buy products that are related to child labor.

 

[The Catboy]

It could be relevant since fetal cells were used to demonstrate how mRNA works. It could be a moral reason to deny mRNA vaccination. Just as some people might refuse to buy products that are related to child labor.

Stem cells are used in the vast majority of medical research. That being said, I won’t entertain personal conjecture because it seems the only relevant reason for bringing this up is just as some dumb means of changing the subject. These still aren’t sources backing up the anti-vac movement.

 

[UltraDolphinRevolution]

These still aren’t sources backing up the anti-vac movement.

There cannot by definition. I already explained it many times.
I could open a thread in which I demand sources "backing up the vaccination movement".
If somebody was stupid enough to post links I could say "yeah, but 99% of people survive and the average age of death is similar to life expectancy". "Are there really no sources"? "WOOOW THERE ARE NO SOURCES"

You act like a clown.

That said I am not in the anti-vac camp. I just find both camps ridiculous.

 

[The Catboy]

There cannot by definition. I already explained it many times.
I could open a thread in which I demand sources "backing up the vaccination movement".
If somebody was stupid enough to post links I could say "yeah, but 99% of people survive and the average age of death is similar to life expectancy". "Are there really no sources"? "WOOOW THERE ARE NO SOURCES"

You act like a clown.

That said I am not in the anti-vac camp. I just find both camps ridiculous.

Personal opinions are not peer-reviewed sources and not on topic for this thread. I really don’t care what your thoughts on me or my thread is. You are welcome to reply but don’t expect your opinion to be treated as anything other than an opinion

 

[smf]

I posted an advisory statement from the government appointed Joint Committee on Vaccinations and Immunisations (UK) on the other thread regarding 12-15 year olds. They came to the conclusion that overall benefit was slightly greater than the risk of Covid itself (acknowledging it is a much less dangerous infection for children), but enough wasn't known about long term effects for them to advise a mandate (specifically regarding prolonged tissue damage to the heart). This obviously only applies to kids, but I'm not sure that it would be any different regarding the time required to obtain data for long term effects on adults. This is probably also why there was no mandate and it was just heavily recommended.

Long term effects of what?

There is less data for vaccine than for children, due to them starting trials on adults first.
Because there are less bad outcomes for children for covid infections, then there isn't much data there either.

It might be ok but you don't want to be a government that kills a load of children.

 

[KingVamp]

Caring about cells more than actual people.

 

[Lacius]

There cannot by definition. I already explained it many times.
I could open a thread in which I demand sources "backing up the vaccination movement".
If somebody was stupid enough to post links I could say "yeah, but 99% of people survive and the average age of death is similar to life expectancy". "Are there really no sources"? "WOOOW THERE ARE NO SOURCES"

You act like a clown.

That said I am not in the anti-vac camp. I just find both camps ridiculous.

There are reputable sources backing up the "vaccination movement," as you put it. The same cannot be said for the anti-vax movement.

 

[subcon959]

Long term effects of what?

Myocarditis. It's easier if I just repost it here https://www.gov.uk/government/publi...children-aged-12-to-15-years-3-september-2021

This is the relevant part:

There is increasingly robust evidence of an association between vaccination with mRNA COVID-19 vaccines and myocarditis. This is a very rare adverse event. Available data from the US and Canada indicate the reporting rate of myocarditis is higher following a second dose of mRNA vaccine, compared with the first dose. No association with prior SARS-CoV2 infection and myocarditis following vaccination has been identified.

The available data indicate that the clinical manifestations of myocarditis following vaccination are typically self-limiting and resolves within a short time. However, the clinical picture is atypical and the medium to long-term (months to years) prognosis, including the possibility of persistence of tissue damage resulting from inflammation, is currently uncertain as sufficient follow-up time has not yet occurred.

So basically, if the child has co-morbidity then vaccination is highly recommended, but in healthy children it's a bit less clear cut if it's worth the risk. Obviously this will change once more data is available.

 

[Lacius]

Myocarditis. It's easier if I just repost it here https://www.gov.uk/government/publi...children-aged-12-to-15-years-3-september-2021

This is the relevant part:



So basically, if the child has co-morbidity then vaccination is highly recommended, but in healthy children it's a bit less clear cut if it's worth the risk. Obviously this will change once more data is available.

The data is clear that vaccination is worth the risk in lower age groups. The issue is whether or not boosters are worth the risk.