- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Oh No Vaccine Bros! The Misinformation Is Now Being Published In Mainstream Media!
Posted on 3/26/26 at 9:45 pm to the808bass
Posted on 3/26/26 at 9:45 pm to the808bass
My bad...
0
Posted on 3/26/26 at 9:46 pm to LuckyTiger
FFS, charge your damn battery, you animal.
Posted on 3/26/26 at 9:51 pm to the808bass
quote:
Good point. All the people on here on amiodarone and mefloquine have no idea.
Claritin (edit: meant singulair) has a black box warning. Cipro has a black box warning. Tons of meds have black box warnings.
This post was edited on 3/26/26 at 10:34 pm
Posted on 3/26/26 at 10:06 pm to DeathByTossDive225
quote:
Claritin has a black box warning.
Really?
quote:
Cipro has a black box warning.
All fluoroquinolones do.
quote:
Tons of meds have black box warnings.
And many of the drugs with black box warning had fewer AEs associated with them before receiving their black box warning than any of the Covid vaccines (which still don’t have black box warnings).
Posted on 3/26/26 at 10:14 pm to Tigahs24Seven
I think there was a “fog of war” when Covid first hit. There were crazy reports from all over the world that people were dying right and left.
I think this played into Trumps compassion for helping people.
Just my opinion.
I think this played into Trumps compassion for helping people.
Just my opinion.
Posted on 3/26/26 at 10:17 pm to Rekrul
Damn, I am so sorry for your loss.
My mom, dad, brother and sister took it. They’ve made it this far, but I can’t help but believe the vaccine put a ticking time bomb in their chest.
If it was ever in question that our government hates us and holds us dirty consumers in contempt… this experience should have ended all doubt!
Prayers to you.
My mom, dad, brother and sister took it. They’ve made it this far, but I can’t help but believe the vaccine put a ticking time bomb in their chest.
If it was ever in question that our government hates us and holds us dirty consumers in contempt… this experience should have ended all doubt!
Prayers to you.
This post was edited on 3/26/26 at 10:19 pm
Posted on 3/26/26 at 10:32 pm to the808bass
quote:
Really?
Was thinking of singulair not Claritin, my bad. And yes I agree the vaccine will get a black box warning.
Posted on 3/26/26 at 10:37 pm to TigerDoc
I post this link every now and then
I wish it had more traction but I boomarked it years ago from the British medical journal about Pfizer trial date for the vaccine
British medical journal Pfizer vax trial data and mismanagement
The lab director comes out and lists problems and issues she notified Pfizer about with how poorly the trial was being ran
9 of 153 trial sites inspected … 5.88%
Data clearly fudged and manipulated and likely falsified to get the results Pfizer wanted
It’s really scary how this all went down
All trial integrity and protocol was completely abandoned .
I wish it had more traction but I boomarked it years ago from the British medical journal about Pfizer trial date for the vaccine
British medical journal Pfizer vax trial data and mismanagement
quote:
But, for researchers who were testing Pfizer’s vaccine at several sites in Texas during that autumn, speed may have come at the cost of data integrity and patient safety. A regional director who was employed at the research organisation Ventavia Research Group has told The BMJ that the company falsified data, unblinded patients, employed inadequately trained vaccinators, and was slow to follow up on adverse events reported in Pfizer’s pivotal phase III trial. Staff who conducted quality control checks were overwhelmed by the volume of problems they were finding. After repeatedly notifying Ventavia of these problems, the regional director, Brook Jackson (video 1), emailed a complaint to the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Ventavia fired her later the same day. Jackson has provided The BMJ with dozens of internal company documents, photos, audio recordings, and emails.
The lab director comes out and lists problems and issues she notified Pfizer about with how poorly the trial was being ran
quote:
The full trial (registered under NCT04368728) enrolled around 44 000 participants across 153 sites that included numerous commercial companies and academic centres. She then listed a dozen concerns she had witnessed, including: Participants placed in a hallway after injection and not being monitored by clinical staff Lack of timely follow-up of patients who experienced adverse events Protocol deviations not being reported Vaccines not being stored at proper temperatures Mislabelled laboratory specimens, and Targeting of Ventavia staff for reporting these types of problems.
quote:
In Pfizer’s briefing document submitted to an FDA advisory committee meeting held on 10 December 2020 to discuss Pfizer’s application for emergency use authorisation of its covid-19 vaccine, the company made no mention of problems at the Ventavia site. The next day the FDA issued the authorisation of the vaccine.8 In August this year, after the full approval of Pfizer’s vaccine, the FDA published a summary of its inspections of the company’s pivotal trial. Nine of the trial’s 153 sites were inspected. Ventavia’s sites were not listed among the nine, and no inspections of sites where adults were recruited took place in the eight months after the December 2020 emergency authorisation. The FDA’s inspection officer noted: “The data integrity and verification portion of the BIMO [bioresearch monitoring] inspections were limited because the study was ongoing, and the data required for verification and comparison were not yet available to the IND [investigational new drug].”
9 of 153 trial sites inspected … 5.88%
Data clearly fudged and manipulated and likely falsified to get the results Pfizer wanted
It’s really scary how this all went down
All trial integrity and protocol was completely abandoned .
This post was edited on 3/26/26 at 10:40 pm
Posted on 3/26/26 at 11:04 pm to Lawyered
That raises some real questions about how parts of the trial were run. Personally, for a matter of deciding whether to take it or recommend it, I'm less inclined to jump from issues at a subset of sites to the whole dataset being unreliable.
For me to update in a big way, I’d need to see that kind of concern show up consistently across multiple lines of evidence, not just one report like that. There's about 5 years of subsequent data, much of it international and from sources other than the manufacturer. I think that context is important to consider.
For me to update in a big way, I’d need to see that kind of concern show up consistently across multiple lines of evidence, not just one report like that. There's about 5 years of subsequent data, much of it international and from sources other than the manufacturer. I think that context is important to consider.
Posted on 3/26/26 at 11:13 pm to Lawyered
Pfizer recruited thousands of their own employees to be in the vaccine trial.
That clearly is bad practice.
That clearly is bad practice.
Posted on 3/26/26 at 11:19 pm to TigerDoc
quote:
For me to update in a big way, I’d need to see that kind of concern show up consistently across multiple lines of evidence, not just one report like that. There's about 5 years of subsequent data, much of it international and from sources other than the manufacturer. I think that context is important to consider.
While yes I do agree there, there is now plenty of data
Back then , when the vaxxes were rubber stamped approved with muh 95 or 99 % effectiveness against the original strain, this data was who knows how falsified and misrepresented because of the billions of implications of profits.. that was quite a conflict of interest . It was so rushed and the process so flawed that I had major problems with how we abandoned trial integrity and respect for the process to pump out the jab . That never sat right with me
All for a virus that was evolving out of the vaccine before it ever hit the shelves, then delta then omicron and on and on. We have always been behind the virus
Posted on 3/26/26 at 11:24 pm to Lawyered
quote:
data was who knows how falsified
We have a pretty good idea.
Trial sites ignored patients with Covid-like symptoms. More people with Covid-like systems were never even tested for Covid than there were positive tests for Covid in both arms of the trial combined.
Posted on 3/26/26 at 11:29 pm to Lawyered
I probably agree with you considerably about the messaging. It was fast, too confident, and often didn’t leave much room for uncertainty or change, and that made it harder to trust over time. I probably weigh some of the underlying process a bit differently, but I completely get why the way it was communicated didn’t sit right with people.
Posted on 3/26/26 at 11:29 pm to TigerDoc
quote:
TigerDoc
You’re being real diplomatic and cautious in this thread, and I don’t blame you.
I suspect you will become even more diplomatic and cautious in the years ahead as more and more info seeps out. That’s better late than never, I suppose.
But here’s the deal, doctor…
You are a fraud.
Because you have quite a lengthy post history and a lot of it is you declaring your expert opinion on the vax. And I recommend any poster to read your posts pushing the vax in the years preceding, from 2021 all the way to last year, of you mocking people who questioned the vax, of acting like the science was settled, of you accusing many people who questioned the vax as conspiracy theorists, of your arrogance and dismissal of questions regarding serious healh questions possibly caused by the vax, how you pushed for as many people as possible to be vaxed, how you criticized those who didn’t get vaxed.
All that I got easily from glancing through your posts from last year back through the years.
Now, in your words, “I recommended that some people get vaxed based upon what I knew at the time.” Yea, I suppose that’s true in a sense. But you were a full throated vax pusher who wanted as many people as possible to get vaxed, young or old, unhealthy or healthy, and you routinely dismissed questions about vax safety and effectiveness.
Posted on 3/26/26 at 11:29 pm to Rekrul
Every single politician, bureaucrat and law enforcement officer who trampled people's constitutional rights over the Chinese Flu farce should be lined up against a wall and shot. Maybe the next group of would be totalitarians will think twice next time.
Posted on 3/26/26 at 11:32 pm to DeathByTossDive225
This is the most cuck thing I have ever read. You should burn your fricking phone
Posted on 3/26/26 at 11:36 pm to Feelthebarn
quote:
This is the most cuck thing I have ever read. You should burn your fricking phone
Triggered?
Posted on 3/26/26 at 11:39 pm to TigerDoc
And one more thing, doctor…
When you said you did it “based upon what I knew at the time.”…
You could have just said…
“We don’t know.”
Because that would have been the truth.
But you wanted as many people as possible…young and old, healthy and unhealthy…to be vaxed. So you didn’t say it. Or you just toted the pharmaceutical/government line. And you acted like you did know.
I actually sought the advice, when this was happening, of a close friend and MD, my old roommate and frat brother, a smart guy I expected to tell me the truth.
Me: “Do you have any concerns about this vax?”
Him: “Yes.”
Me: “So you wouldn’t take it?”
Him: “It depends. My choice, if someone is relatively young and healthy, no, I wouldn’t take it. Now, if someone is old or has serious health issues, then yea, I’d really consider it. Because here’s the thing: no one, and I mean no one, whether he’s a doctor or a nurse or a politician or a scientist, knows the full implications and effects of this vax. Anyone that says he does is a liar.”
When you said you did it “based upon what I knew at the time.”…
You could have just said…
“We don’t know.”
Because that would have been the truth.
But you wanted as many people as possible…young and old, healthy and unhealthy…to be vaxed. So you didn’t say it. Or you just toted the pharmaceutical/government line. And you acted like you did know.
I actually sought the advice, when this was happening, of a close friend and MD, my old roommate and frat brother, a smart guy I expected to tell me the truth.
Me: “Do you have any concerns about this vax?”
Him: “Yes.”
Me: “So you wouldn’t take it?”
Him: “It depends. My choice, if someone is relatively young and healthy, no, I wouldn’t take it. Now, if someone is old or has serious health issues, then yea, I’d really consider it. Because here’s the thing: no one, and I mean no one, whether he’s a doctor or a nurse or a politician or a scientist, knows the full implications and effects of this vax. Anyone that says he does is a liar.”
Posted on 3/26/26 at 11:42 pm to LuckyTiger
I get why it might come across that way looking back at older posts. That was a pretty intense period. There was a lot of uncertainty, and people (myself included) were reacting in real time. My tone wasn’t always as measured as it could’ve been.
At the same time, like I said previously, I was recommending vaccination based on what I understood from the data and what I was seeing clinically.
I don’t think that means I can’t try to think through it carefully now or answer questions in a more measured way. My posts in this thread are really just me trying to do that.
At the same time, like I said previously, I was recommending vaccination based on what I understood from the data and what I was seeing clinically.
I don’t think that means I can’t try to think through it carefully now or answer questions in a more measured way. My posts in this thread are really just me trying to do that.
Posted on 3/26/26 at 11:44 pm to BigJim
quote:
It's a rightwing paper.
Hardly. That’s like saying the WSJ is a right wing paper.
It’s a center right political establishment paper.
It loves the Conservative Party and likes most of the Labour Party. It dislikes the far left but it most despises the far right, Reform, and Nigel Farage.
And it’s not a fan of Trump.
Page 3 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News