Burial costs covered for Canadians killed by approved vaccines

[Gunny]

Sorry, "single digit benefit" with a distinct difference between those two numbers. For example there's a single digit difference between 1 and 9 but there's an 800% difference between the two numbers. Over 3 and under 1 is a not insignificant difference.



I was presented with a raw assertion that India is on the Ivermectin bandwagon and based on what I found it is no longer true if it ever was. I also quoted some studies which showed no statistical difference in treatment outcomes with Ivermectin and without. So my raw assertion stands along with the fact that there is a larger number of obese in this country who probably insist that drinking Diet Coke gives them a positive outcome. So, to get those people, and the mass population, to adopt Ivermectin over a two shot vaccine is a fools errand.



Show me some links to actual studies please. I've seen plenty of crap in video form on the internet.



How did you know that I simultaneously own and work for Pfizer, Moderna, and Janssen selling my wares to any unsuspecting independent thinker getting them on the vaccine bandwagon with the knowledge that I'm protected from lawsuits from aforementioned suckers!!!!!!!!!!! BwahhahahahahaajrWE;KJHFASD'LK.

Believe what you like. Each of your points can be, and have been, refuted or at the very least aren't as cut and dry as you want them to be. So go ahead and get on your bandwagon of getting everyone on a diet. Because that'll work.

Evil bastard. Didn't even let any of us in on the ground floor either

[fj1200]

Evil bastard. Didn't even let any of us in on the ground floor either

Pshaw. What kind of globalist shill do you think I am. back at ya.

[revelarts]

Sorry, "single digit benefit" with a distinct difference between those two numbers. For example there's a single digit difference between 1 and 9 but there's an 800% difference between the two numbers. Over 3 and under 1 is a not insignificant difference.

isn't the "difference" between 1 and 2.... 100%!!!!

So you want to look at the "difference" between 2 and 5 rather than as presented... 2 and 5... per 100,000?
In math class "the difference" may be part of an honest answer, but in real life the factor of 100,000 makes THE DIFFERENCE... and you know it FJ?

I was presented with a raw assertion that India is on the Ivermectin bandwagon and based on what I found it is no longer true if it ever was. I also quoted some studies which showed no statistical difference in treatment outcomes with Ivermectin and without. So my raw assertion stands along with the fact that there is a larger number of obese in this country who probably insist that drinking Diet Coke gives them a positive outcome. So, to get those people, and the mass population, to adopt Ivermectin over a two shot vaccine is a fools errand.

your assertion was false.
And if the gov't and companies MANDATED walking 30 minutes on the job/school everyday OR NO JOB, NO SCHOOL, NO entry in bakeries, bars, or fast food places I suspect more than few would do it.

Show me some links to actual studies please. I've seen plenty of crap in video form on the internet.

there are all the links to studies needed in the post,
If you'd actually taken time to look rather than assume there are none you would have seen them.
But here's one of the links embedded in the post before.
http://www.debatepolicy.com/showthre...323#post987323

How did you know that I simultaneously own and work for Pfizer, Moderna, and Janssen selling my wares to any unsuspecting independent thinker getting them on the vaccine bandwagon with the knowledge that I'm protected from lawsuits from aforementioned suckers!!!!!!!!!!! BwahhahahahahaajrWE;KJHFASD'LK.

Just as i suspected.

Believe what you like. Each of your points can be, and have been, refuted or at the very least aren't as cut and dry as you want them to be. So go ahead and get on your bandwagon of getting everyone on a diet. Because that'll work.

Each of the points have been denied.. but not refuted
several of my points have been ignored in your reply not refuted

All the "vaccines" are New and NO ONE has a CLUE of their long term side effects. this is a FACT.
unrefuted
All the "vaccines" are displaying horrible side effects in all age groups, many have been downplayed, dismissed and censored. this is a FACT.
unrefuted
The vaccine risk to benefits ratio for people under 40 is low to ZERO. this is a FACT.
Especially in the light of the unknown long term side effects and known(admitted) heart issues.
downplayed but unrefuted

the vaccines don't stop transmission,
unrefuted
they don't stop infection
unrefuted
and they are low benefit since MOST people, 98+%, recover anyway,
downplayed but unrefuted
and for the percentage of those it might help the help is LOW.
games played with stats

AND there are other safer treatments AND things like raising vitamin D levels and lowering body weight will lower chances of hospitalizations and death ...for the masses.... by a greater degree.
Info proving this is censored, downplayed, ignored and mocked ... but never fully debated or refuted.

As i said before, taken together the argument FOR vaccines is WEAK at best.
However the propaganda for them is EXTREMELY STRONG. (and the censorship/suppression of information is real)
Trying to access things objectively in this climate is not easy for anyone.

[revelarts]

“The death rate in a given country depends a lot on the age structure, who are the people infected, and how they are managed,” Ioannidis said.
“For people younger than 45,
the infection fatality rate is almost 0%.
For 45 to 70, it is probably about 0.05%-0.3%.
For those above 70, it escalates substantially.”
Stanford University's disease prevention chairman Dr. John Ioannidis


Vaccines Benefits vs Risk for those under 40 is basically ZERO.
that is a fact.


the case for vaccines as a "mass solution" is WEAK at best.
(for a massive 'final solution' that remains to be seen)

[fj1200]

isn't the "difference" between 1 and 2.... 100%!!!!

So you want to look at the "difference" between 2 and 5 rather than as presented... 2 and 5... per 100,000?
In math class "the difference" may be part of an honest answer, but in real life the factor of 100,000 makes THE DIFFERENCE... and you know it FJ?

And it's the difference at the margins that makes all the impact. Medical costs are higher, covid patients are hospitalized, non-covid procedures are delayed, etc. Once things start going sideways then it's the difference that causes the problems. Start multiplying 100,000 times the population, times a difference of potentially 4... Let me know how that comes out because we've seen how various surges impact hospitals, etc.

your assertion was false.
And if the gov't and companies MANDATED walking 30 minutes on the job/school everyday OR NO JOB, NO SCHOOL, NO entry in bakeries, bars, or fast food places I suspect more than few would do it.

Whatever dude. I'll put you down in the government mandate column.

there are all the links to studies needed in the post,
If you'd actually taken time to look rather than assume there are none you would have seen them.
But here's one of the links embedded in the post before.
http://www.debatepolicy.com/showthre...323#post987323

Great, we've all got studies. Some of yours and some of mine are probably valid.

Just as i suspected.

I've finally outed myself.

Each of the points have been denied.. but not refuted
several of my points have been ignored in your reply not refuted

All the "vaccines" are New and NO ONE has a CLUE of their long term side effects. this is a FACT.
unrefuted
All the "vaccines" are displaying horrible side effects in all age groups, many have been downplayed, dismissed and censored. this is a FACT.
unrefuted
The vaccine risk to benefits ratio for people under 40 is low to ZERO. this is a FACT.
Especially in the light of the unknown long term side effects and known(admitted) heart issues.
downplayed but unrefuted

the vaccines don't stop transmission,
unrefuted
they don't stop infection
unrefuted
and they are low benefit since MOST people, 98+%, recover anyway,
downplayed but unrefuted
and for the percentage of those it might help the help is LOW.
games played with stats

AND there are other safer treatments AND things like raising vitamin D levels and lowering body weight will lower chances of hospitalizations and death ...for the masses.... by a greater degree.
Info proving this is censored, downplayed, ignored and mocked ... but never fully debated or refuted.

As i said before, taken together the argument FOR vaccines is WEAK at best.
However the propaganda for them is EXTREMELY STRONG. (and the censorship/suppression of information is real)
Trying to access things objectively in this climate is not easy for anyone.

Beliefs aren't facts.

[revelarts]

Another website for you to dismiss Fj

https://www.realnotrare.com

[fj1200]

Another website for you to dismiss Fj

https://www.realnotrare.com

I suppose I can dismiss it because others dismiss 90+% of the rest of the internet. :shrug:

[fj1200]

Each of the points have been denied.. but not refuted
several of my points have been ignored in your reply not refuted

All the "vaccines" are New and NO ONE has a CLUE of their long term side effects. this is a FACT.
unrefuted

We have track records for other vaccines and track records of vaccines in general.

https://wexnermedical.osu.edu/blog/covid-19-vaccine-long-term-side-effects

All the "vaccines" are displaying horrible side effects in all age groups, many have been downplayed, dismissed and censored. this is a FACT.
unrefuted

Correlation, causation. blah blah blah. Let's have someone do a study.

The vaccine risk to benefits ratio for people under 40 is low to ZERO. this is a FACT.
Especially in the light of the unknown long term side effects and known(admitted) heart issues.
downplayed but unrefuted

Table 2: Age-specific case rates by vaccination status, Jan. 15, 2021 – Oct. 1, 2021AgeGroupNumber ofUnvaccinated Peoplewith Positive COVID19 ELRsRate per100,000inUnvaccinatedPeopleNumber of FullyVaccinated Peoplewith Positive COVID19 ELRsRate per100,000 in FullyVaccinatedPeople
Impact
12-17years171,418 11,342.25 1,748 175.90 65 times higherin unvaccinated
18-29years338,288 12,700.31 7,236 311.63 41 times higherin unvaccinated
30-39years263,206 13,725.76 8,315 369.27 37 times higherin unvaccinated

https://www.dshs.texas.gov/immunize/covid19/data/cases-and-deaths-by-vaccination-status-11082021.pdf

link to table on page 3. It came from TX; it must be good.

the vaccines don't stop transmission,
unrefuted

I'm not sure of anyone who says it stops transmission 100%. I am living proof. The question is outcome. See study above.

they don't stop infection
unrefuted

I'm not sure of anyone who says it stops infection 100%. I am living proof. The question is outcome. See study above.

and they are low benefit since MOST people, 98+%, recover anyway,
downplayed but unrefuted

Explain that to the people who didn't recover.

and for the percentage of those it might help the help is LOW.
games played with stats

A doubling, trebling, or quadrupling of the statistics may seem low if it's in the single digits but when you double something at the extreme it can make something even more critical. That's not a "game."

AND there are other safer treatments AND things like raising vitamin D levels and lowering body weight will lower chances of hospitalizations and death ...for the masses.... by a greater degree.
Info proving this is censored, downplayed, ignored and mocked ... but never fully debated or refuted.

The masses? That'll never happen.

As i said before, taken together the argument FOR vaccines is WEAK at best.
However the propaganda for them is EXTREMELY STRONG. (and the censorship/suppression of information is real)
Trying to access things objectively in this climate is not easy for anyone.

You have your beliefs. I have mine.

[BoogyMan]

I will take that question. I am fully vaxxed and I question the effectiveness of the vaccine. I am an engineer, I deal specifically with data. Data speaks volumes and anomalies in data should stand out be evaluated.

In statistical process management and control you evaluate anomalous outcomes but not all outcomes mean you modify your processes. In the case of these vaccines, which only meet the definition of the term tangentially, nobody is even willing to honestly look at the outcomes because the government is squashing any effort to consider any kind of review.

The modern left has control of the government and the media. Any question is immediately met with “the vaccines are safe and effective” as if any review is anathema and will poison the well from which we all drink. I have never seen a propaganda effort like this, ever.

Twitter and Facebook immediately tag anyone asking a question or posting even a positive story with a propaganda tag about the safety and efficacy of the vaccine. Something is afoot and the censorship and limitation of free discourse never comes from a good place.

Since there is a lack of ability to question outcomes nobody really knows WHAT the outcomes are at this point.

Well, I guess we can both have our own intuitive reviews but I'll go with my intuition until whatever shows me otherwise based on my subjective opinion on the quality of what I've seen. But without getting on the merry-go-round again I feel the need to ask; Do you think the vaccines are a net positive, net negative, or inconsequential in treating COVID?

[fj1200]

I will take that question. I am fully vaxxed and I question the effectiveness of the vaccine. I am an engineer, I deal specifically with data. Data speaks volumes and anomalies in data should stand out be evaluated.

In statistical process management and control you evaluate anomalous outcomes but not all outcomes mean you modify your processes. In the case of these vaccines, which only meet the definition of the term tangentially, nobody is even willing to honestly look at the outcomes because the government is squashing any effort to consider any kind of review.

The modern left has control of the government and the media. Any question is immediately met with “the vaccines are safe and effective” as if any review is anathema and will poison the well from which we all drink. I have never seen a propaganda effort like this, ever.

Twitter and Facebook immediately tag anyone asking a question or posting even a positive story with a propaganda tag about the safety and efficacy of the vaccine. Something is afoot and the censorship and limitation of free discourse never comes from a good place.

Since there is a lack of ability to question outcomes nobody really knows WHAT the outcomes are at this point.

I'm definitely not one to argue the specifics of statistics but I think what we have shows that they have been effective. Not that being vaccinated kept me from getting it but I think people who do get it fair better than not. I won't argue that they government and big media goes to far in advocating, or suppressing, but I will argue that there are those way to the other end of the spectrum that do essentially the same thing. Where's the reality? Somewhere in the middle as with many things but our tribalistic ways these days do not allow meaningful discussion.

So I'm on the net positive side of things and one of the links I saw in one of these threads mentioned that epidemiologists predicted, with viruses generally, that they mutate into less severe and more easily transmittable variants. I think that is playing out and hopefully will continue to and I'm hoping, predicting, that come summer time it will become common policy to just deal with covid as with any other virus that plagues us. I think the vaccine will end up being a useful bridge from the severe to the less severe.