re: Vaccine Narrative Collapses as Harvard Study Shows Jab More Dangerous than COVID

Posted by GetCocky11

Calgary, AB

Member since Oct 2012

53509 posts

Posted on 9/15/22 at 11:45 am to geauxjuice

quote:
taking a shot in the dark because im not clicking... does the website have a tagline at the top that says something like "#1 news source for PATRIOTS who are TIRED of FAKE NEWS"

When googling it, the tagline is "The only place for real and honest news in the state of Florida."

Posted by SlowFlowPro

With populists, expect populism

Member since Jan 2004

476619 posts

Posted on 9/15/22 at 11:45 am to conservativewifeymom

quote:
You've already read all 50 pages of the study?!?! Yeah, sure.

I've read about 25 so far.

And why did you respond with this when I asked you to cite where the study argues your OP

Posted by SuperSaint

Sorting Out OT BS Since '2007'

Member since Sep 2007

150321 posts

Posted on 9/15/22 at 11:46 am to conservativewifeymom

quote:
Shows Jab More

quote:
Jab

Posted by conservativewifeymom

Mid Atlantic

Member since Oct 2012

14115 posts

Posted on 9/15/22 at 11:46 am to Wabbit7

The very fact that you've taken leave of your thinking abilities is proof something's wrong.

Posted by reggierayreb

Member since Nov 2012

19700 posts

Posted on 9/15/22 at 11:46 am to conservativewifeymom

Ortho doctors advising patients getting Boots put on to take baby aspirin to help avoid clotting.

Yep. That’s happening all over.

Posted by SlowFlowPro

With populists, expect populism

Member since Jan 2004

476619 posts

Posted on 9/15/22 at 11:46 am to LegendInMyMind

quote:
Unpossible.

Only the most hardcore vax zealots thought 18-29 year olds were the population cohort at serious risk of CV19 complications

Posted by SpotCheckBilly

Member since May 2020

8512 posts

Posted on 9/15/22 at 11:47 am to Chad504boy

quote:
Mostly peaceful Vaccine

From a mostly truthful CDC.

Posted by LegendInMyMind

Member since Apr 2019

75116 posts

Posted on 9/15/22 at 11:47 am to SlowFlowPro

quote:
Only the most hardcore vax zealots thought 18-29 year olds were the population cohort at serious risk of CV19 complications

Unfortunately, those were the people directly influencing and making policy.

This post was edited on 9/15/22 at 11:48 am

Posted by PureBlood

The Motherland

Member since Oct 2021

5021 posts

Posted on 9/15/22 at 11:47 am to conservativewifeymom

You mudbloods were warned and yet you all drilled down harder on the tyranny and stupidity.

Posted by SelaTiger

Member since Aug 2016

21833 posts

Posted on 9/15/22 at 11:47 am to conservativewifeymom

It’s only more dangerous if you don’t get enough of the vaccine. I get one monthly so that I’m sure it stays effective.

This post was edited on 9/15/22 at 11:48 am

Posted by SlowFlowPro

With populists, expect populism

Member since Jan 2004

476619 posts

Posted on 9/15/22 at 11:48 am to LegendInMyMind

quote:
Unfortunately, those were the people directly influencing and making policy.

Fauci is literally more than 4x the lower age of that cohort

Most governmental policy is made by boomers or old Gen X

Posted by dgnx6

Member since Feb 2006

89763 posts

Posted on 9/15/22 at 11:49 am to GetCocky11

quote:
1) no formal risk-benefit assessment exists for this age group; 2) vaccine mandates may result in a net expected harm to individual young people; 3) mandates are not proportionate: expected harms are not outweighed by public health benefits given the modest and transient effectiveness of vaccines against transmission; 4) US mandates violate the reciprocity principle because rare serious vaccine-related harms will not be reliably compensated due to gaps in current vaccine injury schemes; and 5) mandates create wider social harms.

Posted by MikeyFL

Member since Sep 2010

10327 posts

Posted on 9/15/22 at 11:51 am to conservativewifeymom

quote:
Really?!?! You read all 50 pages of the study by Harvard and Johns Hopkins in, what, 5 minutes?!?! AND had time to adequately analyze it and draw conclusions that counter the conclusions of hundreds of experts? Sure....

Actually, I work as a scientific researcher and can rather quickly glean several key facts.

First, it's self-published.

Second, it hasn't gone through peer review.

Third, it doesn't have a scientific methodology. It's an argumentative essay that inductively tries to draw an argument through a tenuous, cherry-picked selection of existing data. It has all the argumentative strength of a first-year college essay. (This is ethically questionable for an article purporting to be science-driven.)

Fourth, the argumentative nature of the essay is likely influenced by the "Wellcome Foundation," which paid these researchers to self-publish the paper. (This is also ethically questionable.)

So, yes, I do this for a living, and articles like these are a dime a dozen, ranting on all sorts of topics. When I see one of these articles, I make a mental note to question the authors' veracity in the future because I know they can be easily bought off.

This post was edited on 9/15/22 at 11:57 am

Posted by Zappas Stache

Utility Muffin Research Kitchen

Member since Apr 2009

43121 posts

Posted on 9/15/22 at 11:52 am to conservativewifeymom

Preprints are becoming accepted in the scientific world as it gets the study out in the academic community sooner than when waiting for peer review. But preprints also are open to crackpot studies such as the one the OP posted.