Carantoc said..

Pugwash said..
I wanted to be the orange and white one, forth from left. ...

Don't claim to be an expert, but looks to me like that one probably has rabies.

I'd recommend you get a rabies vaccination asap.

I don't understand. Does Pugwash want to be me? I am flattered! Not so flattered that kiteboy thinks about me when he is doodling with his wand....

No need for the rabies vaccination. I am solidifying my immune system by upping the level of brussel sprouts and kale. Sure, there is no science behind it, but I "know" that it will give me a stronger immune system, and as i feel strong, I will be immune from rabies. That's all that matters, that I think I am strong, because its only people that don't think they are strong that die.

Ian K said..
Crikey? If you jabbed 17million people on the oldish side with a placebo, you'd find 4 weeks down the track 35,000 of them were dead.

Anyway the problem of why vaccination stalls at 80% has finally been solved.
www.smh.com.au/national/i-disclosed-my-fear-of-needles-and-the-response-stunned-me-20210826-p58m0h.html

Now now, it may be 19 million doses, but not 19 million people given a large proportion of that are double shots.
I thought you were the one of the few on here that value accuracy.

And if you looked at the supporting documents, you'll see the deaths were attributed to the vaccine, not just people that died sometime after receiving it.

kiterboy said..

Ian K said..
Crikey? If you jabbed 17million people on the oldish side with a placebo, you'd find 4 weeks down the track 35,000 of them were dead.

Anyway the problem of why vaccination stalls at 80% has finally been solved.
www.smh.com.au/national/i-disclosed-my-fear-of-needles-and-the-response-stunned-me-20210826-p58m0h.html

Now now, it may be 19 million doses, but not 19 million people given a large proportion of that are double shots.
I thought you were the one of the few on here that value accuracy.

And if you looked at the supporting documents, you'll see the deaths were attributed to the vaccine, not just people that died sometime after receiving it.

No the double doses are separated by more than 4 weeks so are distinct events. I put it this way because the clot threat is considered to last 4 weeks.

kiterboy said..

Now now, it may be 19 million doses, but not 19 million people given a large proportion of that are double shots.
I thought you were the one of the few on here that value accuracy.

And if you looked at the supporting documents, you'll see the deaths were attributed to the vaccine, not just people that died sometime after receiving it.

What supporting documents? Your powerpoint slide?

This is the same drivel as Clive. And as a general rule for life, if you're on the same side of an argument as Clive Palmer, you're on the wrong side...

www.tga.gov.au/media-release/misleading-radio-messages-about-covid-19-vaccine-safety

CH3MTR4IL5 said..

kiterboy said..
COVID-19 RNA Based Vaccines and the Risk of Prion Disease

scivisionpub.com/pdfs/covid19-rna-based-vaccines-and-the-risk-of-prion-disease-1503.pdf

Jesus. There is probably some actual concerns that are worth debating around vaccination development but when you guys throw up this drivel it is an absolute self-goal. My uni lecturer would have punched me in the face if i put something like that forward for publication, particularly without bothering to spell-check it. I guess online-only publications that don't list their peer reviewers have a pretty low bar.

If you are actually interested in learning about these things and their validity, check out science-based medicine, it is a great explainer on evidence based assessment (here is their piece on this particular claim):
sciencebasedmedicine.org/can-mrna-based-covid-19-vaccines-cause-prion-disease/

If you want the quick run-down on why this isn't a thing here is a brief summary:
www.reuters.com/article/fact-check-no-evidence-that-pfizers-covi-idUSL1N2MZ382

(jokes, i know you don't care about reality but just for the sake of balancing this drivel and because others might be interested).

I understand your point of view, but unless you have a time machine and have visited the future, your submissions are just as up in the air as the ones you oppose.

airsail said..

kiterboy said..

FlySurfer said..
THE AUSTRALIAN GOVERNMENTS OWN DATA PROVES THEY LIED
www.bitchute.com/video/ZzL0lOQ00uKK/

Crikey!

No point even reading or watching anything from bitchute, full of clap trap and lies. This from Wiki

BitChute is a video hosting service launched by Ray Vahey in January 2017.[1] It is known for accommodating far-right individuals and conspiracy theorists, and for hosting hate speech.[a][b] Some creators who use BitChute have been banned from YouTube; some others crosspost content to both platforms or post more extreme content only to BitChute.

I have no doubt there are many loonies on there, same as on any platform.

I mean the fact that it states the information is coming directly from the government data, and has it there as well, and you refuse point blank to even look for a second...you're not really being open minded are you.

kiterboy said..

I understand your point of view, but unless you have a time machine and have visited the future, your submissions are just as up in the air as the ones you oppose.

That's what they call a 'false equivalency'. A biased one-sided article with no scientific rigor behind it is not the equivalent of a well-researched position. You don't need a time machine to understand science (although you probably do to make one) or to draw predictions from well-conducted scientific research.

I'm genuinely interested in this stuff and happy to look at new ideas or concerns. So when you post something, I have a look on PubMed to check for peer review, then when its not on there I hop over to Beall's list to check if its a predatory publisher, and then mediabiasfactcheck.com to get an idea for the source that is publishing.

Biased Wording/Headlines- Does the source use loaded words to convey emotion to sway the reader. Do headlines match the story? Factual/Sourcing- Does the source report factually and back up claims with well-sourced evidence. Story Choices: Does the source report news from both sides, or do they only publish one side.

Each to their own. I love that you're passionate about your beliefs, even if you're not passionate enough to test them.

Keen to see the "data from the government". I've had a look on the TGA site and can't find anything. Agree on Clyde.

FlySurfer said..
Kalonji...
clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04347382
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7347483/
www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.10.30.20217364v4

freakin' science, thats what i'm talking about!

check with your doc first if you are on blood clotting meds though.

Carantoc said..
The only conclusion I can draw from this that either the vaccine is an instrument of divine creation or kiterboy is talking bollocks.

Mmmm tricky one...

why can't it be both?

CH3MTR4IL5 said..

Carantoc said..
The only conclusion I can draw from this that either the vaccine is an instrument of divine creation or kiterboy is talking bollocks.

Mmmm tricky one...

why can't it be both?

Both dead and alive? At the same time?

Is that where anti-vaxxers get their data? Assume someone is both dead and alive and then ignore half the data?

..and again. Too much attacking each other/Heavy Weather revisited.

Seabreeze to be used for Pain Relief Only.

Topic locked.