Current Events > Trump BEGS KIDS to NOT get VACCINATED and sounds the alarm on MRNA!!

(+) Yeah! (+)

joe40001 posted...

Why should I even waste my time providing you evidence when you have demonstrated you don't care about any data and willfully and rudely mischaracterize me, my arguments, and basically any bit of reality which you disagree with or goes over your head?

funny, this is the exact sentiment everyone else feels about you

---

joe40001 posted...

but then I remember what kind of bully who seems incapable of communicating in good faith or understanding logic so I decided fuck that.

So... Trump and the maga crowd?

---

joe40001 posted...

Put simply there have been very limited tests for people under 16, no tests I'm aware of for people under 12.

interesting, i don't seem to recall there saying there had been tests on children under 12

joe40001 posted...

And it is not even close to having undergone the whole safety check and approval process. (Like I said).

no, what you said is that it hadn't been tested. because saying "the vaccine has been clinically trialed in children and demonstrated it's safety and effective for children aged 12-17, though it still has not yet fully completed the conventional approval process for a drug" wouldn't be as strong an argument for your position.

joe40001 posted...

At some point it falls on you to educate yourself. And me trying to help you is like trying to help a boat already fully submerged in water to not sink to the bottom of stupidity ocean.

I think being spared the deluge of links to youtube psuedo-skeptics spouting covid misinformation is the very definiton of being saved from sinking in an ocean of stupidity

---

Frolex posted...

funny, this is the exact sentiment everyone else feels about you

Yeah, except all the people who pay attention to data and reality who know I've been consistently right. Except for how I've posted sources and read the data and you never met a fucking number that didn't confuse you.

Yeah, you'll see some trolls attack me. But nobody even notices you, there is no army of people who think you are smart, and honestly it's pretty sad you act otherwise. You are a voice among many who stumbles and lashes out at ideas you don't like, without an iota of concern for reality itself.

A 3 minute cartoon for children from the WHO is too intellectually challenging for your to engage in.

So why don't you just cry at somebody else who scares you with big bad things like peer reviewed articles, statistical analysis, and other words that got you held back in 3rd grade vocabulary.

You want to see the kind of people who agree with me? Why don't you ask motherfucking Reuters




---

wym hippo

---

Any time Trump talks

joe40001 posted...

*meltdown*

bro. you know there's an outdoors right?

---

metallica846 posted...

Get your kids over 12 vaccinated CE

They should know that even the WHO is not currently willing to make this recommendation. They should also know what data does and doesn't exist around the studies and safety checks for children. Then they should make the most scientifically informed decision on what is best and safest for their children.

This might be vaccination, it might not, and neither you nor I have researched and laid out the data in sufficient detail to compellingly insist what the best choice they should make as a parent is.

Basically, I wouldn't have responded to your comment at all if it had said:
"I think you should get your kids over 12 vaccinated CE"
or
"The data supports that vaccines are the safest thing you can do for your kids over 12 IMO"

But that you are acting like there is scientific consensus on this is at the very least premature, and at the most could be a dangerous misrepresentation.

And to be crystal clear I would not advise against people getting vaccinated.

Doing some initial research the fda seems to be pointing to 3.2.2 on this:
https://www.fda.gov/media/148542/download

The CDC which does recommend vaccination for 12+ still acknowledges the increase rates of Reports of Myocarditis and Pericarditis among young people who receive the vaccine. Nobody as I can tell is denying this, just saying that it's rate is relatively low and still comparatively not as bad even for the young as COVID itself.

Met, I will be honest, I generally respect your opinions and think you operate in good faith, I expect you think I'm somebody who is too eager to be contrarian and so I boost the signal of crazy and conspiracy more than I should, but you also seem willing to acknowledge that I am generally good faith and not stupid.

With that in mind I would recommend you doing a deep dive on all the research on the vaccines particularly when it comes to the youngest. As I understand it as a hypothesis, the risk comes in that the vaccine generates the spike protein, this protein is not the same as the virus, but some speculate that it can cause damage to itself if loose in the body (though it seems to deteriorate after 48 hours or so regardless).

This normally still wouldn't be a problem because part of how the vaccine works is that it is designed to keep the virus very localized to the injection site as I understand it, but as I understand it as a hypothesis particularly in the young, something about the immune response allows it to more easily travel throughout the rest of the body, and there is some initial evidence that even non-viral spike proteins can be harmful to health.

This is far far far from enough for me to make strong claims that it is unsafe, and if I had a child I would do insane diligence on this, but even as is I think parents should be totally aware of all the data on the ground.

Even for adults this isn't equivalently safe to say a measles vaccine because these things have been fast tracked, there still is very good evidence that for adults in the short term it is quite safe. But the research on children is not complete and thorough yet.

The science is at a point where if there was not an emergency use authorization, none of these vaccines would have met the standard of tested safety to be available to the general public. And this goes even moreso for children. This isn't to say they are unsafe. But people need to make important decisions with all the data available.

It's better for a person to hypothetically know something is 95% likely to be completely safe than go in thinking it is 100% likely to be completely safe, even if their decision would be the same regardless.

Neither of us wants to recommend something where in 5 years we learn a kid of somebody on CE is suffering because of the advice we gave.

---

For the record the delta variant is extremely dangerous to young people.

---

metallica846 posted...

I was half joking, but I'd like to know where you're getting this new information on "roaming spike proteins" so I can read it too.

All I have seen recently is far right people posting a single video.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Du2wm5nhTXY

Was this something you've seen recently?

I have watched/listened to that video. It is not the best vessel for articulating the possible risks particularly because one of the guys is too volatile the whole time, it is better than most low tier far right drivel. Brett (the center guy) has been on Rogan a bunch and also on Real Time with Bill Maher, but he is somewhat prone to narrative hyperbole. To be fair to him I can't remember a time I've heard him say something false, but some things he's said aren't as true as they could be. He and the non-annoying guy have good credentials though the credentials for the mRNA guy seems somewhat overstated.

I don't think far right people are posting it because of it's relative intellectual rigor, I think they are doing it to piss of the libs. They would just as likely post something that has no basis in reality, they just happen to be lucky this time to land on something that has some scientific merit.

Basically a lot of the data points they mention are something worth reading, but I very much wouldn't agree with the overall narrative they push as gospel. If you want to listen to that, and then anytime they say something that seems fishy, research into it, you probably would get a clear picture that way, they don't seem to say anything false as far as I can tell but that isn't to say that everything they say is the best framing of the data.

The VAERS data is a good example. they seem to accurately report that it is much higher for this vaccine than other vaccines, even if you take in context that most people get vaccinated once as kids but everybody is being vaccinated at the same time for this vaccine, but the inference they put on top of it, and what the VAERS numbers likely reflect on actual case levels are speculative and not rooted in data. (Which they do acknowledge approximately)

The limited data that exists on vaccine risks has yet to really be packaged in a digestible clear form. That video, while it points you to relevant data points has problems with packaging, personality, and inferences.

Frankly, I feel like this in likelihood the hypothesizes:
The virus originated in the Wuhan Institute of Virology >
Ivermectin is a safe and at least moderately effective treatment/prophylactic for COVID >>
The spike protein itself can cause at least some mild damage to the body >>
The vaccines pose a significant risk to young people

If I'm doing really handwavy percentages it would be something like
90+%>
70+%>
20%>
2%

So when we are getting to the bottom one I'm really not on board aside from being like "rigorous people need to double check that this isn't true". Because I don't want to be the guy who says "yeah vaccinate your kids" if 1 in 100 kids gets heart problems in 5 years. And while something like that seems quite unlikely to me, I have not seen enough data to conclude something like that is sufficiently implausible to dismiss it.

---

metallica846 posted...

I was half joking, but I'd like to know where you're getting this new information on "roaming spike proteins" so I can read it too.

He can't, because there is no "new information". There's zero actual evidence connecting the covid vaccination to this issue of these supposed traveling spike proteins. It's the same dance anti-vaxxers have been doing for decades. They'll fear monger over shit like "muh heavy metals" in vaccines and blast out studies about mercury poisoning, but provide zero studies actually substantiating the amounts or formulations of heavy metals in vaccines pose a health risk to humans. They only care that there's a scary sounding name of something in the vaccine and that scary name shows up in other studies. That's joenumbers basic MO: state baseless theory, shit out a bunch of studies that don't actually substantiate that claim, and then say that makes his position "data-driven".

---

I just noticed that was only part of the 3 hours podcast, my response was indicating (link was in description of that video) that you could watch or listen to the whole thing and then search for the info on the relevant parts.

Rewatching that clip, I mean I'd be curious what your thoughts are, because nothing sticks out to me as obviously false, even though politifact says it's false (which they also did about lab leak)
https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2021/jun/16/youtube-videos/no-sign-covid-19-vaccines-spike-protein-toxic-or-c/

And the jist of politifact's argument is that it's false because there is insufficient information to say that it's true. Which obviously is kinda shady because there is also insufficient information to say it's not true.

So idk, pay attention to VAERS, I'm curious what the CDC's emergency meeting comes up with, and I hope we have really good rigorous science on this soon. Like I said, I don't think it's super likely, my percentages from before are more or less where I'm at, I want to be read much more data before I make stronger claims.

---

It's emergency use only. That means you're allowed to use it to end an emergency without full approval.

We've accomplished that by protecting the elderly, as well as anyone over 12 that wants one.

It's impossible to know whether or not there may be long term effects 6-18 months down the line, so why put that chance on our kids even if the chance of negative effects is small?

Iunno, all in all it's a touchy subject because we have the unknown factor of long term safety. I'm all for whatever saves the most lives without hindering anyone's quality of life but if the virus doesn't even phase kids it's hard to say numerically what option would be better right now.

Demon1050 posted...

It's emergency use only. That means you're allowed to use it to end an emergency without full approval.

We've accomplished that by protecting the elderly, as well as anyone over 12 that wants one.

It's impossible to know whether or not there may be long term effects 6-18 months down the line, so why put that chance on our kids even if the chance of negative effects is small?

Iunno, all in all it's a touchy subject because we have the unknown factor of long term safety. I'm all for whatever saves the most lives without hindering anyone's quality of life but if the virus doesn't even phase kids it's hard to say numerically what option would be better right now.

The easier answers are this:

If you were 100% certain you would not get COVID, the vaccine represents an unnecessary risk, but nobody is 100% certain, in fact cases are still somewhat common, and people being vaccinated does reduce the likelihood of people getting it and it spreading.

Also, there is no reason to think that under any context is the vaccine more harmful than getting COVID itself. The only thing anybody has argued could be dangerous from the COVID vaccine is the spike protein, which COVID itself obviously has.

But yeah, like you said, it might be prudent to consider when the EUA should end. And people need to be able to talk about the science and the data in public more.

I will say that it seems like the tide is turning somewhat, after the huge shift on lab leak it feels like less people want to be on the wrong side of history again.

---

yes, let's all listen to the man who is directly responsible for the devastation in the united states due to coronavirus about how to handle it going forward

lock this fucking loser up. hundreds upon hundreds of thousands of unnecessary deaths are on his hands!

joe40001 posted...

Why should I even waste my time providing you evidence when you have demonstrated you don't care about any data and willfully and rudely mischaracterize me, my arguments, and basically any bit of reality which you disagree with or goes over your head?

Ooger

We ALL know that you don't think critically.

You just pick both sides, then mash the keyboard with your sausage fingers for a few hours.

---

I see Joe sharted in this topic as well

---

ScazarMeltex posted...

Not interested in anything that the guy who bungled the pandemic response has to say on...well anything.

---

TostitosTheHero posted...

>"Don't forget to credit me for the vaccines"
>"Don't take the vaccines"

Has anyone tried to use this logic to convince Trumpers to take the vaccine? Just tell them it was his idea before Biden highjacked it.

---

How did I know joenumbers would be in this topic shitting it up?

---

Trump continuing to try and kill his own voters.

---

Imagine not having joenumbers on ignore.

metallica846 posted...

Where are these roaming spike protein truthers getting their data?

As I understand it, it's (FOIA) request for Pfizers vaccine in Japan.
https://trialsitenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/Pfizer-report_Japanese-government.pdf

Maybe somewhere else.

Most people I'm sure are just repeating what these 3 say in the 3 hour podcast, which I'm not satisfied is a good representation of reality.

We are at the point where I frankly don't think many people are even looking to see if the spike protein shows up in other parts of the body or not, so we don't have the data that I've seen to say that it does roam.

---

DarkRoast posted...

I see Joe sharted in this topic as well

Says the person who misunderstood/mischaracterized my argument for 10 pages, and now presumably has gone into hiding over the growing acceptance of gain of function research at the WIV being accepted as a reasonable possibility.

---

Why does Trump want credit for a vaccine that kills children?

joe40001 posted...

Says the person who misunderstood/mischaracterized my argument for 10 pages, and now presumably has gone into hiding over the growing acceptance of gain of function research at the WIV being accepted as a reasonable possibility.

Dr. DarkRoast is shaking in her boots after logic lover and truth finder Joe Numbers puts her in her place

---

hockeybub89 posted...

Why does Trump want credit for a vaccine that kills children?

Dr. DarkRoast is shaking in her boots after logic lover and truth finder Joe Numbers puts her in her place

Next time it can be avoided by listening better to the argument you are disagreeing with so as to not spend ten pages arguing only to at the end acknowledge "oh yeah, that's not the argument I thought you were making... yeah, viruses can mutate in GoF research"

---

metallica846 posted...

Where are these roaming spike protein truthers getting their data?

This too, I guess:
https://academic.oup.com/cid/advance-article/doi/10.1093/cid/ciab465/6279075

I'm sharing it not because I believe it points in the direction people say it points, but because you asked.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2021/06/08/fact-check-proteins-covid-19-vaccines-arent-dangerous-toxins/7505236002/

This seems alright at summing up the evidence people point to and how it doesn't seem to say what some people argue it says.

---

I trust the scientific advice from a guy who clearly failed his classes for sure.

---

Sayoria posted...

I trust the scientific advice from a guy who clearly failed his classes for sure.

If I could ask Trump 1 question, it would be "You claim to be smart, what is 7*18?" I legitimately don't think he'd be able to answer.

---

For Joe

---

DarkRoast posted...

For Joe

I consistently have qualifiers in my claims "lab leak is plausible", "gain of function research seems to have likely happened at that lab", it's the people who disagree with such claims that are being absolutist.

For all your whining I haven't said anything false and have been ahead of the curve on several things.

I'm also one of the few people who ever says "I could be wrong" about nearly anything, whereas the people who disagree with me never say such a thing. DarkRoast was wrong and yet they spent 10 pages of a topic lecturing me why what I was saying was like saying JFK was shot by space lasers.

I'm quite comfortable with my consistent record on my arguments. It's much better than being a hivemind negative nancy such as yourself.

Does it bother you at all that 1 month ago you would have said lab leak was a tinfoil hat conspiracy?

---

joe40001 posted...

Does it bother you at all that 1 month ago you would have said lab leak was a tinfoil hat conspiracy?

It still might be tinfoil hat conspiracy. You're very adamant about a specific possibility for it only being a possibility. It either will be right or wrong.

And again, the people that agreed with you last year were far more ridiculous than you are presenting them as. Either you don't remember what people were saying or you're trying to simultaneously validate your crazy peers while distancing yourself from them.

---

hockeybub89 posted...

It still might be tinfoil hat conspiracy. You're very adamant about a specific possibility for it only being a possibility. It either will be right or wrong.

The moment something has substantial evidence it is not a "tinfoil hat conspiracy" and this has had substantial evidence for months, as recently covered on NPR/VanityFair

You just refuse to take accountability for your ignorant premature dismissal of it.

---

joe40001 posted...

The moment something has substantial evidence it is not a "tinfoil hat conspiracy" and this has had substantial evidence for months, as recently covered on NPR/VanityFair

Imagine how much better healthcare would be if doctors stopped getting doctorates and started reading Internet articles and submitting math corrections to news sites.

---

joe40001 posted...

You just refuse to take accountability for your ignorant premature dismissal of it.

There is one correct answer. I can't feel silly for being wrong until something I mocked is proven right. If we prove who truly killed JFK tomorrow, no one will give a fuck in 10 years how many many conspiracy theories had good arguments. We'll have the truth.

---

hockeybub89 posted...

Imagine how much better healthcare would be if doctors stopped getting doctorates and started reading Internet articles and submitting math corrections to news sites.

I'm not sure what this is, but it definitely isn't an argument.

I'll do the legwork for you:
hockeybub's dumbass claim: People with credentials from institutions are always more right than people who read things online.

The obvious counter argument:
They give degrees in hyper-specific useless humanities/interpretive dance/etc. You can learn quantum physics on the internet.

Only an idiot would think knowledge is derived from solely from getting a piece of paper from increasingly predatory and defunct institutions.

ALSO: Peer reviewed journals and other highly detailed data and journalism is available online.

ALSO ALSO: DarkRoast spent 10 pages being wrong while debating me, so you know Doctors can be wrong.

ALSO ALSO ALSO: One of the key breakthroughs in lab leak was done by a civilian unemployed Indian biology teacher.

So yeah, fuck your ignorant ass appeals to authority. Learn to take accountability for your wrongness.

---

joe40001 posted...

ALSO: Peer reviewed journals and other highly detailed data and journalism is available online.

What peer reviewed data proves the lab leak joseph?

---

Frolex posted...

What peer reviewed data proves the lab leak joseph?

None.

There's a few that indirectly address concepts like gain of function, but many of those are actually unpublished draft articles from dubious sources.


---