/sci/ - Science & Math

>>15267730
>I said they are only like 2% effective and she took me for a retard
What on Earth makes you think that

>>15267730
Some of them are effective, some aren't.

>>15267730
>Are vaccines in general even effective?
Effective at messing the neuralogical development of children up? Yes.

That's why governments push them hard in the last few decades, to lower the collective IQ of everyone who takes them, since dumber people are more accepting of government control over their lives.

I've seen countless people getting vaccinated against polio every 3 months and still getting polio many times. It's completely normal and means it's working. Get your polio booster to protect your friends.

>>15267834
Yes, I'm sure that's why. I'm also sure you can show me some evidence.

>>15267730
She's right. You're a retard. So is this anon >>15268557

>>15268670
Honestly, after the COVID fiasco, I'm amazed anyone still takes vaccines seriously.
>Trust the science goy

>>15267730
Because you are retarded, vaccines are extremely effective. If you are hung up on the COVID-19 vaccine then you should know what happened with that was a bunch of academics and politicians were pushing a vaccine for a very specific strain of COVID-19 (an inherently unstable virus) which came and went as a permanent fix for any following strains of COVID-19, like it was smallpox, polio, pertussis or some other stable pathogen and not like the rapidly changing flu it is. You obviously know nothing about biology, what vaccines are, or antigen variation, so you should listen to your gf.

>>15269434
You’re an idiot.
>>15268557
So are you.

>>15269460
Vaxxtard spotted. Enjoy your vaccine-induced myocarditis.

>>15269472
Yeah, just two more weeks until I drop retard.

>>15269498
>I haven't died yet, so even though millions have already died it can't happen to me.
Wishful thinking.

>>15269498
Ironic. Two more weeks was the establishment narrative surrounding masks, if you remember.
>Two more weeks to flatten the curve
Your NPC response was both predictable and hilariously self-defeating. Have fun with the heart damage.

>>15269456
Listen to this anon op.

>>15269507
> so even though millions have already died it can't happen to me.
You people are actually delusional and worth engaging with.
>>15269509
> Have fun with the heart damage.
Lmao. I’ll be having fun with your sister faggot.

>>15269516
>You people are actually delusional and worth engaging with.
Ironic post.

>>15267834
>neuralogical

>>15269693
looks like the vaccines lower IQ also. There are countless studies on that that used Africans who were vaccinated as adults, and how the vaccines would lower their IQ's by a standard deviation.
Same thing is being noticed with the covid vaccines among adults.

>>15269434
>Honestly, after the COVID fiasco, I'm amazed anyone still takes vaccines seriously.
It redpilled quite a large pecentage of people. Trust in doctors and vaccines is at a historical all time low since the 1920s.

>>15267730
Let's say the hygiene hypothesis is correct and it is the primary reason why many diseases declined during the period where vaccines were being rolled out and public hygiene was being improved. The west is not going to be able to maintain those hygiene standards. Too many immigrants who don't care about hygiene in their communities combined with diversity hires taking over infrastructure that's critical to maintaining public hygiene means we're headed back to the pre-hygiene era.
Now, does that mean the vaccines are a good idea? Well, depends on if they worked in addition to hygiene improvements or it was entirely due to hygiene that those diseases declined. Either way, we're looking at more disease as the west becomes more third world.

>>15267730
No. Vaccines are literally just a toxic by-product of virology research that, instead of being thrown in the garbage, are being sold to governments that force people to take them. How fucking weird is that people in Africa are still dropping like flies DESPITE the ridiculous amounts of vaccines that are generously provided by Gates.

>>15269765
gates is generously culling the swine he will go down as the greatest human to ever live

>>15269765
They are dropping like flies because of the over-vaccination.
Same as people who wipe everything with alcohol and take antibiotics all the time, they are creating resistant supergerms in their bodies that will kill themselves.

>>15267730
There are three purposes for a vaccine program.
1) Behavior modification and selective intelligence reduction.
2) Population management. Whether it be via fertility, average lifespan, rate of chronic illnesses, etc. This can be tailored to a given race and region as needed.
3) Social stability. Inducing chronic diseases then making them a thing can create solidarity. Weakened people are more dependent, and therefore they're more fearful and easier to control. Their continued existence is tied to the system, they cannot leave, they can dream but they know they cannot ever live on their own. The economic aspect is another layer on top of it.

>>15269924
Fuuuuck, this reads like it it right out of a NWO, Great Reset, WEF manual for government.
Probably a powerpoint presentation at a DAVOS meeting also.

>>15269931
I wrote it 5 years ago. It's not hard to think like them.

>>15269934
>It's not hard to think like them.
Well, after you understand it that is.

>>15268670
It's very easy how vaccines work.
You take some dead cells which literally do nothing.
And call them "Active ingredient" of the vaccine.

Then you add:
>aluminium hydroxide/phosphate
>disodium phosphates
>phenyl
>peg
>sorbitol
>manitiol
>polysorbate-20/80
>saponins
>squalene
>mercury
>hydrochloric acid
>sodium hydroxide
All the above you call:
>inactive ingredient

Then you conduct a study with a """Placebo""" arm, which contains all "inactive ingredients" but not the "dead cells" aka Virus particles/bacteria toxoids/memeRNA.

And because both groups recieve the same ingredients, both will have approx the same amount of adverse events, because all adverse events come from the "inactive" ingredients.

And by law you are even allowed to call this shit a "placebo".
See the Ivestigational Medical Product dossier:
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32014R0536
"If the investigational medicinal product is a placebo, the information requirements shall be limited to quality
data. No additional documentation is required if the placebo has the same composition as the tested investigational medicinal product (with the exception of the active substance), is manufactured by the same manufacturer, and is not sterile"

So you give people a mild poisoning with possibly morbidity increasing effects, but with the excuse of "beeing the helpers for the virus particles".

picrel the example for the HPV vaccine with the fancy toxic adjuvant "Aluminium hydroxyphosphate sulfate".
So they inject you with aluminium and say its safe.
Even if every other exposer is deemed neurotoxic. But in vaccines its safe. Because chronicly ill and retarded children are a social burden, and remove financial mobility of burdened parents and also money.

>>15268670
>Yes, I'm sure that's why. I'm also sure you can show me some evidence.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31783216/

>aluminium
>neurotoxic
>in every animal experiment
>no human experiments ever conducted
>but when autopsie of neurodegenerative ridden people happens
>large amounts of aluminium found
>may it be alzheimers
>psychosis
>learning disability
>ADHD
>Autism

Inject neurotoxin -> create neurological problems.
Except if it is a vaccine, because then magically the neurotoxin is no neurotoxic anymore.

>>15270682
>>15270688
Oh my lord this is ancient "chemicals bad" boomer schizoposting.
Fun fact: There are vaccines with and without any given adjuvant you consider toxic
Fun fact 2: The rates of outcomes you're associating with said adjuvants do not differ between them
Fun fact 3: There are vaccines with no adjuvants and rates also do not differ
Fun fact 4: There are large numbers of antivaxxers and yet somehow rates still do not differ refusing all vaccinations when comparing cohorts
Yet I'm sure you'll graft more ad hoc excuses and completely ignore this inconvenient invalidation of your schizo theory anyway.

>>15270699
>There are vaccines with no adjuvants and rates also do not differ

Then name them.

>chemicals bad
No everything is chemicals.
Yet if you not control "adjuvants" or meme "excipients" and call a "excipient loaded" syringe a "placebo" you cannot made a safety assesment.

And to prove me wrong, you can do the following:
>inject the proportional equivalent of only the excipients (the placebo) that an infant recieves.
https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vpd/dtap-tdap-td/hcp/about-vaccine.html
>so for example a infant DTaP vaccine that normally contains 1.5mg of Aluminium phosphate for an infant that weighs 2-4kg he would get it adjusted for his body weight (lets say 80kg)
>"placebo" without any active ingredient
>just the aluminium hydroxide or phosphate

>hep vax for infants (2 month)
>picrel
>aluminium hydroxide is composed of aprox 1/3 parts of aluminium in weight and the rest is hydroxyl groups
>so if a dose of vaccine contains in total 0.25mg (milligram) of aluminium then there is ~0.75mg aluminium hydroxide
>for infants it would be 750µgAl(OH)3 per ~4 kg of body weight
>so an Adult at 80 kg would receive 15000 µg or 15mg of aluminium Hydroxide
>inject it, and the amount of recomended doses
>if you turn out fine
This would solve the question of vaccine safety for ever

>>15270714
>Then name them.
You can spend all that time carefully cherypicking evidence for your schizo theory, but you can't google for simple cohort comparisons? Wow. The honesty is strong with this one.

>>15270728
Not him, but you sound circumcised. In body and mind.

>>15270728
>but you can't google for simple cohort comparison

>google yourself
No.
You mad a claim, that neurotoxins are safe then provide the study you mentioned.
I don't know which one you mean. So put them forward, you made this claim, and din't provide a stuy. so please come forward and do so

>>15270747
Look just get the fucking Jab ok
Then we can all move on

>>15270758
Circumcise your throat.

>>15270758
>just vaccinate and congratulate

Dear human consumers and workers,

remember to get vaccinated against [insert name of vaccine-preventable disease] this year.
Especially during the winter times [insert name of vaccine-preventable disease] is extremely virulent.
And in the spring when you really think it is now over with getting sick, you should reconsider your health decisions and get a vaccine for [insert name of vaccine-preventable disease] which is really at its peak in spring.
And in the summer, when the insects and ticks are around, your life can be on the line if you don't get vaccinated against [insert name of vaccine-preventable disease] which is contracted by the bite/sting of [insert invertebrate carrier of vaccine-preventable disease].
And in the Autumn, when the [insert invertebrate carrier of vaccine-preventable disease] are dying and it gets colder, people tend to go inside where they and there from cold weakened immune system accumulate, their viral loads accumulate and [insert name of vaccine-preventable disease] is on the rise again.

So just because its Autumn, it doesn't mean it is now time for vaccine hesitancy.
And when Hanukkah is close, [insert name of vaccine-preventable disease] tend to rise as well, so before the holidays, you should schedule an appointment with your doctor and and get a vaccine against [insert name of vaccine-preventable disease].

>>15270714
Anyhow making fun of your convenient inability to research whenever contradicted aside, this is the kind of thing I mean by comparative cohort analysis. This example examines rates of autism and MMR vaccination against cohorts who were never vaccinated.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9464417/
No signal differentiable from noise in any large cohort comparison. That means "No it doesn't give children autism".

Null for thiomersal (your "mercury" reference) https://www.researchgate.net/publication/8369458_Thimerosal_Exposure_in_Infants_and_Developmental_Disorders_A_Retrospective_Cohort_Study_in_the_United_Kingdom_Does_Not_Support_a_Causal_Association
- In fact the association goes the other way, with statistically negative associations with specific neurodevleopmental disorders including ADHD
- Also, in comparing with non-vaccinated
Null for vaccines and autism in general https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24814559/
- "in general" is important as this kills claims of vaccine-aluminum association even if inept retards (scientist or otherwise) pushing the claim never bothered to realize that

Prenatal vaccinations
Null for Tetanus, Diphtheria, and Tdap vaccination and ADHD https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32378703/
Same null for autism https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30104424/
Vaccination in general with Tdap and HZ is, also, considerably associated with reduced dementia risk https://www.researchgate.net/publication/356996921_Comparison_of_rates_of_dementia_among_older_adult_recipients_of_two_one_or_no_vaccinations

The only thing I could not find is something going as far back as "childhood vaccination and dementia", but considering keeping up with vaccinations have the OPPOSITE effect in the elderly I can't imagine how you'd square that circle.
Same is true for flu shots https://content.iospress.com/articles/journal-of-alzheimers-disease/jad220361

>>15270784
>https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9464417/

Shitton of exclusion criteria.
Is not a study but a "cherrypick" meta-analysis

>>15270784
>https://www.researchgate.net/publication/8369458_Thimerosal_Exposure_in_Infants_and_Developmental_Disorders_A_Retrospective_Cohort_Study_in_the_United_Kingdom_Does_Not_Support_a_Causal_Association

Also nice exclusion criteria:
"Children with Read and OXMIS codes relating to a variety ofprenatal, perinatal, and postnatal conditions that occurred before 6 months of age were excluded as were children who were re-corded as having an outcome event in the first 6 months of life"
>6 months of age

But exposure started at:
"Hg exposure for each child was defined according to the num-ber of DTP/DT doses received at 3 months (93 days) and 4 months"

So if an exposed child, had instant effect, it got excluded.
Nice.


>https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24814559/

Studies of interest N=1112
After exclusion criteria established: N=10

Also admission to lack of data to form an actuall opinion on safety:
"Studies were included that
looked at either MMR vaccination, cumulative mercury (Hg) or
cumulative thimerosal dosage from vaccinations to ensure all proposed causes of ASD or regression were investigated. Outcome
measures included development of any condition on the autistic
spectrum as well as those specifically looking at regressive phenotype. Papers that recruited their cohort of participants solely from
the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) in the United
States were not included due to its many limitations and high risk
of bias including unverified reports, underreporting, inconsistent
data quality, absence of an unvaccinated control group and many
reports being filed in connection with litigation"

>https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32378703/
Looks only at preggos vaccinated with mercury.
Excluded if children were deformed or otherwise retarded.

>>15270808
>>Claims exclusion criteria is biased
>>Cites explanation of exclusion demonstrating it isn't biased
>>Concludes bias
Wow. Grade A honesty there.
>Excluded if children were deformed or otherwise retarded.
Yes. Because they already had those conditions before vaccination. Nice try, no cigar.

Anyhow have a nice report on the urban myth of associations between neurological disorders and vaccinations https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4718347/

By the way, don't forget you also have to "debunk" the subsequent deluge of citations supporting the evidence for every study you've just summarily dismissed without cause.

>>15270830
>>Excluded if children were deformed or otherwise retarded.
>Yes. Because they already had those conditions before vaccination. Nice try, no cigar.

No child is vaccinated you retard.
This study is a study specifically for pregnant women exposed to mercury vaccines during pregnancy, and ONLY one outcome was measured "ADHD".
Any not if "mercury" causes general neurological issues or impaired development during pregnancy
The study is called:
"The Association of Prenatal Tetanus, Diphtheria, and Acellular Pertussis (Tdap) Vaccination With Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder"

So they expose preggos to literally a mutagenic neurotoxin, then exclude every bad child outcome except "ADHD".

Lol. Imagine giving women mercury, and then telling them, her deformed baby is not caused by litterally getting poisoned during pregnancy.
>but please don't eat fish it can expose the unborn to mercury

>>15270830
>>>Cites explanation of exclusion demonstrating it isn't biased

>inject child with mercury
>if child develops condition withn 2-3 months after exposure to mercury exclude it from study
>if child expresses an acute condition exlcude it
>only include child if it manages to not get any issued within the 2-3 months after exposure
>not biased
sure.

>>15270834
>So they expose preggos to literally a mutagenic neurotoxin, then exclude every bad child outcome except "ADHD".
I provided two, one on ADHD and another on autism, by the criteria set here >>15270688
Seems to me someone retarded would be unable to follow the plot. Having trouble keeping up?
>>15270836
Wow you're so easily shown to be a liar.
On the autism study,
>>Pairs were excluded if children were diagnosed with chromosomal or congenital anomalies.
On the ADHD study,
>>Finally, pairs were excluded if children were diagnosed with chromosomal or congenital anomalies.

So, what, now you're claiming vaccination causes chromosomal and congenital anomalies BEFORE they're even vaccinated? Yaknow what? I don't care. Because vaccination also has the inverse correlation with congenital anomalies.

Going down the list of prenatal vaccinations:
Null for seasonal flu https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35678518/
Null for tetanus, diptheria, TDap, https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264410X22007563

So the most common prenatal vaccines have no association with any congenital abnormalities. Ergo, also excluding your rescue device as meaningful.

Whatcha gonna lie about next?

>>15270845
>So, what, now you're claiming vaccination causes chromosomal and congenital anomalies BEFORE they're even vaccinated?

Not vaccinated...
"conditions that occurred before 6 months of age were excluded as were children who were re-corded as having an outcome event in the first 6 months of life"
These conditions can be diagnosed only after the child at least 2-3 months of age.
Since all infants have no cognitive ability to express beyond flailing arround and crying.
> congenital diagnosis does not have to happen AT birth.
It can be diagnosed and "retrospective" claimed "that is a birth defect".
For example "anemia" or "blood disorders" are not diagnosed at birth, but will be claimed to be "congenital".
Same for heart issues, mental issues, brain issues, eye and hearing issues.
These will be retrospectively not AT birth, claimed to be "congenital".

"chromosomal" is not only down syndrom, but also brain disorders that will be retrospectivly diagnosed as "chromosomal", such as:
>FragileX syndrome.
>Turner syndrome
these two are literally just autism and "developmental disorders" which can only be diagnosed later, because the symptoms are:
>delayed development
And are just CLAIMED to be "inherited" when nobody can know.
And even if, why need to exclude them?
They should be in both groups the same at baseline, if its just random birth defects, and not induced mutagenic poisoning.

>>15270862
Already showed two citations of prenatal vaccinations with no association for congenital anomalies. It does not matter if you're right, you're still wrong.

>>15270845
>https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264410X22007563

They esplicity did not compare the group with 100% unvaccinated groups?!
because quote:
> Although using a concurrent unexposed cohort as a comparator was an option, it was not feasible and could have introduced serious confounding by indication.
Not elaborating what exactly would be confusing directly comparing women 100% unexposed to vaccines, to the ones exposed to vaccines.
What would be so confusing?!
Why not doing science and comparing them?
Maybe we look into the raw data:
Oh... there is a statement:
>The data presented in this study are not publicly available due to privacy concerns.

Why using a "more or less representing" group that the lable as "unexposed" ?

> https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35678518/
> Finally, we excluded births with missing covariate information.
Meaning they excluded whatever they liked
> excluded births with congenital infections, from the cohort
Also with no explaination why this is.
Why exclude it?
There should be no difference in both groups if it is random.
Both should be at baseline in both groups.
If there is a difference, then there is a influence.

>>15270878
Why do they exlcude arbitrary anomalities if they have no causal releationship with vaccines?
There is no justification for that.
Why to they exclude these criterias?

If there is no influence, there is no need to exlcude.
An no you didn't showed me anything with birth defects in general.
You showed always stuff with exlcuded arbitrary anomalities, which are detremental for child development, but are excluded in prenatal exposure studies, with no raw data at all.
They just say "we excluded them, but also don't give you the raw data, because of privacy"

>>15270890
>Not elaborating what exactly would be confusing directly comparing women 100% unexposed to vaccines, to the ones exposed to vaccines.
...As stated, due to the rapid rate of growth of mothers being vaccinated.
>In fact, a post-hoc check indicated that Tdap uptake reached over 86% in 2019.
They could not feasibly get a consistent simultaneous cohort of women refusing to be vaccinated.

Maybe read the full paragraph next time?
>Meaning they excluded whatever they liked
So now, since you can't deny the evidence, you just make shit up instead. Hoo boy.
>Also with no explaination why this is.
Why would you when you're studying vaccination, not congenital infection?

Maybe, I don't know, think about it for two seconds and read the full thing before freaking out like a schizo?
>Why do they exlcude arbitrary anomalities if they have no causal releationship with vaccines?
Learn what confounds are.
>There is no justification for that.
So you basically know nothing about the topic. That figures.

>>15270901
>you just make shit up instead
they make up reasons on why not posting all the data and making up reasons why the exclude important outcomes.
Especcially if these should not in the leaste show any correlation with vaccination.

>>15270915
>Especcially if these should not in the leaste show any correlation with vaccination.
Gee, I don't know, maybe distinguishing causation from a confound like simultaneous infection wouldn't be possible?

Are you twelve, or have a history of severe head trauma? This is beyond absurd.

>>15270940
>distinguishing causation from a confound like simultaneous infection wouldn't be possible?

>infection
>inject neurotixin
>recipient develops encephalopathy or brain inflamation or neurological issues
>must be an infection not the fact that we inject neurotoxin
>so we just call it infection

>>15270980
Right, so, now you've moved the goalpost even further to an even more limited niche that's even more ridiculous due to its ad hoc nature. I think I've well proved my point about how dishonest you are.

>>15270984
>Right, so, now you've moved the goalpost even further to an even more limited niche that's even more ridiculous due to its ad hoc nature. I think I've well proved my point about how dishonest you are.

They and you are dishonest.
Vaccines are not effective against any disease.
They all cause problems with the same patterns, they should protect against:
>MMR vaccines should protect against Skin rashes and fever, commonly skin rashes (which they then call erythrema multiforme but expess exactly like mumps or measels and high fever


>Polio vaccine should protect against extremly rare brain inflamatory disease which can lead to paralysis
> causes neurological disease (rare) in neurological diseases such as flaccid myelitis, encephalopathy, menengitis which can lead to paralysis aswell "But it has not the label polio so its actually a good thing"

It's all memes and never effective.
It's all excuses to inject neurotoxins in children.
It's never effective against any disease, because it cannot be tested, because the pattern is:
> if child unvaxxed then the symptoms must be [insert vaccine-preventable disease]
> if child vaxxed but has the same symptoms as [insert vaccine-preventable disease] then it is called [other disease name and ICD-10] which is indistinguishable from [insert vaccine-preventable disease]

They poison children then claim "oh oh oh the ehm disease we want to protect against, just appeared in the child we vaccinated, bu-bu-but its a immunisation that means it's a good thing, and it's not the diease we want to vaccinate against, b-bu-but it's ehm a random other disease with the same exact symptoms like the disease we want to vaccinate against, but that means it's a good thing".
https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/documents/referral/priorix-article-30-referral-annex-iii_en.pdf

>>15271161
Did you actually just post an image claiming MMR is ineffective because some people have an allergic reaction?
...And you think MMR should somehow prevent skin rashes caused by histamine response?

If you aren't trolling, and I am more serious than I've ever been here, you are actually insane. You cannot string together a coherent thought. You genuinely, sincerely, need psychiatric help.

>>15271180
>And you think MMR should somehow prevent skin rashes caused by histamine response

Inject MMR vaccine
>inject Amino acids, lactose, mannitol and sorbitol, Neomycin sulphate, Humanalbumin, phenol red (which is a skin irratable agent), potassium chloride, disodium hydrogen phosphate, dipotassium hydrogen phosphate

>inject it subcutanous not intrasmuscular
>create skin issues and fever and diahrrea

>to protect skin issues and fever
>call it a day
Because diease from injecting crap that never is injected, is better, than a rare to miniscule chance of getting a disease, with an even more rare and miniscule chance that this disease causes problems.

But rare encephalitis and myelitis from vaccines is a good thing.
And rare skin rash with fever from a "virus" is a bad thing.
Just because.
And common skin rash is also even better, because that means it's working.

>>15271203
You've got a lot in common with Francis E. Dec. That is not a good thing.

>>15271229
>we need to protect infants against the hypothetical case of a uncanny experience with skin rash and fever

>so we expose infants to the risk of
>measles/rubella like skin rashes
>high fever
>wierd swellings
>diahrroea
>respiratory reactions
>encephalitis
>menegitis
>Meningeal irritation
>general nervous system problems
>gullian barre syndrom
>transverse myelitis
>athritis
>vommiting
>convulsions

With increasing severeness with follow up injections.
But this is way way way better than getting "measels".
But having the same group of symptoms as reaction of vaccination is better.

Because.

>>15267730
We dont vaccinate babies for the fun of it, ya know? There are reasons. Data. Decades and decades of data to justify use, prove efficacy, and prove safety. Yes, get them vaccinated.

Unless you'd rather roll the dice on blindness, permanent brain damage, death, and other fun shit like that all because the poor kid's dad wasn't smart enough to understand how medical research/guidelines/medicine works.

Ignore all the ramblings about the covid crap, for 1 - completely different situation. For 2 - most people posting about it are idiots who have no idea what they are talking about. There was plenty of retardation in the anti-vax crowd before covid came along, we didn't need even more layers to the retard cake.

Did you know - there ARE vaccines that have higher risks of adverse effects/more severe adverse effects? Such as - smallpox.... and you know what, since we KNOW the risks are more severe/are at a higher frequency than what would be acceptable in the general population for people with a very, very ungodly minimal chance of ever being exposed to smallpox... that is why we DON'T include smallpox as a recommended standard vaccine - and reserve it for very specific groups, such as the military or maybe for people working in labs with the shit.

So there you go - when there are vaccines that have a higher risk/harm potential that far outweighs their benefit except for in ungodly specific/rare circumstances - we DON'T give them to people willy nilly. It's almost like we know what we're doing or something, and that going to university for like 8-10 years is more valuable than just reading crap on the internet.

>>15271270
so what you're saying is, you have zero understanding of statistics & also can't even begin to fathom the black magic that is something called a "percentage"

Sometimes seat belts kill people in car accidents. Most of the time, they don't. Oddly enough, those damn things save a lot of lives. But since every now and then someone in a really oddly specific type of accident/combination of unlikely circumstances gets grievously injured/killed by a seat belt - do you think we should remove them from all cars?

or should we teach people that if "they think" their next crash will be one of the like 0.01% types of crash that the seat belt kills them... then they should skip the seat belt on that day? or since 'they are probably gonna get hurt anyways' that they should just skip it?

OR do you think it is probably best to wear the seat belt. This is a real thinker, take your time.

>>15271791
>We dont vaccinate babies for the fun of it, ya know?
Kind of does seem that. If you follow the CDC's recommended vaccine schedule, it's well over 50 doses by the age of 18, and over 20 doses from birth to 15 months. That's an absurd amount of vaccination.

>Did you know - there ARE vaccines that have higher risks of adverse effects/more severe adverse effects? Such as - smallpox....
Unironically has a lower rate of adverse events than the mRNA vaccines, and by a wide margin. 50 serious adverse events per million, or a rate of 1 per 20k. The mRNA vaccines have a listed rate of 12.5 serious adverse events per 10k.

>>15271809
dude. they do the following for thousands of yeas:
>1) collect a group of symptoms from various or similar diseases (or ICD-10 codes)
>2) declare the group of collected symptoms now are a new Disease
>3) deploy a scare campaign and panic and make sure that [insert new disease] is diagnose as often as possible, so that people with one or more symptoms can be declared as "infected"
>4) include a asymptomatic form of disease, and make sure it gets diagnosed
>5) declare pandemic based on epidemiological/ statistical increase of diagnosis [insert new Disease or ICD-10 code]
>6) use pandemic to increase regulatory power, thin out population and force product on them
>7) after product is deployed revise what you told on step 2) and say symptoms are now different diseases and should be diagnosed as such
>8) declare pandemic is over based on epkdemiolical/statistical decrease of diagnosis with [insert new disease or ICD-10 Code]

Diseases are started and ended with the strike of a pen.
Always were.
They did this exact same shit with:
>leprosy
>pestilence
>syphillis
>polio
>AIDS
>Covid

Collect symptoms, declare all symptoms are now one disease. And then split them apart when feasable.
Doctors cannot even distinguish between: Rubella, Measels, Scarlet fever, Mumps, Erythema multiforme and other skin rashes.
They simply cannot find a "pathognomonic" exact symptom, they pretend to know.
But only run with "exclusion criteria".
[math]
\begin{equation}
\text{Child has rash}=\begin{cases}
Measels , & \text{child is not or incompletly vaxxed}.
\\
\\
Erythema+Fever , & \text{if child is vaxxed}.
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
[/math]

you can create a pandemic everytime whenever you like, you just have to claim:
>all these symptoms are sign of [insert new disease]
Picrel

>>15267730
measles vaccines increase your risj of inflammation

>>15271809
are you the retarded anon from the portal threads

>>15271869
(1/2)

"number of doses" I see we are working with some real high tier thinking here - focused on the things that matter like "whether a number sounds big to me, based on nothing but 'it seems more than I think it should be"

So, is there an acceptable averaged out number of "doses" per year for you across the 0-18yr and 0-15 month time-span? As you've defined the numbers on the CDC recommendations as "absurd" - I wanna know what your definition of "a not absurd/acceptable" number is - and what you base that on.

You know, there are lots of preventable diseases out in this big bad world. And vaccinating infants/children against some of the real nasty bastards is one of the many reasons why half of us don't die before age 10 these days. And even if you don't die from it, polio, measles, & others kinda suck & can wreak some nasty havoc - infinitely more havoc than their vaccines, I guess that's why we give those shots.

Also, considering that a flu shot is an annual thing - then for every year of "being alive" then that is a "dose" - seems you're tryin to make the numbers sound as big & scary as possible, mate. So that would drop your 0-18yr figure from 50 down to 32, plenty of people don't get the flu vaccine.

2 doses for chickenpox - that vaccine wasnt available for me, we just had to try to go get sick on purpose before we got to be older so that we didn't risk hospitalization & death. I'll take the shot over the real thing given the chance.

Hep B - people who work in healthcare get that; didn't used to be general guidance, but sure, risk needing a liver transplant because of a lame virus if you want.

Same with tetanus & meningitis "doses" - whatever, if you wanna get taken out or watch your kid suffer horribly & die young from something lame and preventable, go for it

HPV? Ok, skip that & risk throat/anal/genital cancer & more warts instead if ya want. Your call

I'll get into your 2nd line in my next post.

>>15267758
this.
>>15267730
i think tetanus is one of the ones that's good to have in your system. maybe the hpv one for chicks.

other than that, yeah it's more of a matter of "herd" immunity rather than keeping the individual safe.

i had my anti vaccine streak back when the whole covid shit started, becuase it was a blatant lie and I became skeptical of all, but now I think that there are bound to be medical manufacturers of vaccines that have some integrity. also yeah, most kids would be fine without their childhood vaccines.

>>15271926
>Hep B - people who work in healthcare get that; didn't used to be general guidance, but sure, risk needing a liver transplant because of a lame virus if you want.
>HPV? Ok, skip that & risk throat/anal/genital cancer & more warts instead if ya want. Your call
We don't need to risk complete reproductive failure in our children from a vax if we just teach them to not have promiscuous sex and not do IV drugs.

>>15271931
>i think tetanus is one of the ones that's good
based on what?

>>15271899
exposure to anything that activates your immune system causes inflammation, what the hell are you talking about? inflammation happens ALL THE TIME for MANY REASONS. It is a problem when it is constant/non-beneficial, but in acute reactions/responses to things - you want that to be happening. Do you have anything to add on about "toxins" next?

>>15271931
HPV vax is extremely bad to get. It causes ovarian failure in girls.

>>15270784
>>15270845
>>15270830
Going to screenshot those comments because I'm tired of searching up very basic research in order to refute the idiotic statements of people literally falling for a psy-op, not much different than Q-anon, the deep state, america first etc.

Ever noticed how, for whatever reason back in 2018 and 2019, most media outlets started brutally scrutinizing anti-vaxxers even if they were only a small minority mostly linked to groups pushing and selling alternative medicine?

Ever noticed how mass media was broadcasting, very aggressively so, in 2021 that now this and that 'celebrity' suddenly died of cardiac arrests?

If you've ever studied totalitarian governments, you would know that the point of propaganda is to psychologically break down people. Tremendous power can be yielded by forcing people to take an experimental 'vaccine' while some disguised media outlet owned by the same corporation quietly pushes the meme that you're going to die of it.

It's well known since the 60s that the CIA has invented multiple conspiracy theories, including the term itself, and let them circulate around.

>>15269456
>You obviously know nothing about biology,
If you want to subject a literal CHILD to pharmacological toxins in the form of a vaccine you are a complete fucking moron. Never post on this board again.

>>15271944
>If you've ever studied totalitarian governments, you would know that the point of propaganda is to psychologically break down people. Tremendous power can be yielded by forcing people to take an experimental 'vaccine' while some disguised media outlet owned by the same corporation quietly pushes the meme that you're going to die of it.
So you're suggesting that the government... Is conspiring to make people hate them and want to topple them... Because being toppled by angry goylems makes them more powerful?

>>15271932
>We don't need to risk complete reproductive failure in our children from a vax if we just teach them to not have promiscuous sex and not do IV drugs.
>>15271926
>Hep B - people who work in healthcare get that; didn't used to be general guidance, but sure, risk needing a liver transplant because of a lame virus if you want.

OOOH The hepatitis lie.
>My hep b SAb is >100iu which shows immunity from three injections
kek.
You literally believe, they posses the ability with a verified repeatable method to identify and decleare which antibody you have, and based on that they can tell you if you have hepatitis?!

Hepatitis is inflamation of the liver. It doesn't even has to do with a virus. nor do they have a clear test.

Let me get this straight:
>Antibody response means
>you have hepatitis or you are immune or you have it even if you are immune?!
>depending on the interpretation of the lab

They CANNOT say, that you are Immune...
They literally can ONLY interpret it that way.
Because for that the Laboratory requires your whole vaccine history...

> blood sample gets sent to a lab for analysis.
> Your healthcare provider will evaluate the results
> in line with your vaccination history, symptoms, and exposure risk
> as well as the results of other hepatitis tests.

So they cannot even say, if you have it or not or if you are immune or not.
BASED on the antibody test.
THEY HAVE TO INTERPRET IT...
Based on your whole compliance history... of vaccination?!
Or if you are """"asymptomati"""" you are immune, or have an asymptomatic hepatitis ?!
>t-t-trust me you ehm are sick with it you just don't notice, o-o-or you are already immune
>o-o-r have asymptomatic autoimmune hepatitis
Kek imagine believing you are sick, based on the same metric that tells you you are immune...
But no symptoms are even required kek.
And if your liver is inflamed and the test is negative... you don't have """"hepatitis""" but autoimmune hepatitis?!

And not just a fucked up liver

>>15271932
Do you think healthcare workers got the hep b vaccine before the CDC also added it to the general public guidance because we do IV drugs on the job?

>teach them not to have promiscuous sex?

yeah, them there abstinence-only sex ed courses sure are effective, great data on that. Little Suzy can be at a higher risk of cancer, that's fine. We'll just teach her not to sleep around and assume that will be good enough, and that she wont get a horribly cancerous strain of HPV from her first partner who lies to her about being a virgin too... even in your imaginary world, you're fine having that on your conscious when your daughter gets cancer later on? 'oh, well we told you not to be a whore and we thought getting the shot would make you think it was ok to be whore, but then you lived life and made your own choices and now you have cancer, that's cool with me, I was worried about how many "doses" you were getting. Sure, cancer is bad and all, but at least you didn't get a couple extra "doses" "

>risk complete reproductive failure in our children from a vax

What??? Do you have some data about this well known, well-defined condition "complete reproductive failure" and it being caused by vaccines? Sounds like an interesting read....

>>15271956
>Little Suzy can be at a higher risk of cancer, that's fine.
Better an extremely minute risk of cancer (only if she sleeps around without protection) than having ovarian failure.

>>15271934
You seem oddly easy to get a rise out of.
I meant that measles vaccines are correlated with a significantly increased lifetime risk of joint inflammation disorders. I read a paper on it a while ago.

>>15271962
People like him are so invested in the government narrative that legitimate evidence he's betting on a blind horse is more angering than schizophrenia.

Retards thinking vaccines don't work are the same retards who don't study history.

Read up on Polio then come back pl0x
That's assuming you have enough reasoning skills

>>15271951
Not them but what about the idea of a UN global government fomenting revolt against national government to depose them? Basically the New World Order plan.

>>15271964
>Retards thinking vaccines don't work are the same retards who don't study history.
>Read up on Polio then come back pl0x
This is extremely funny bait.

>>15271972
People blame the UN/WHO-aligned governments for causing the problem. It made people much more populist and much more nationalist than ever, demanding self-determination and rejecting the GAE. This was disastrous for trust and support for a world government.

>>15271954
ok, 1. you get a cookie for knowing that hepatitis means 'inflammation of the liver' - very good, you have demonstrated the ability to learn - you can be reached.
2. your cookie is immediately taken away because you don't understand that there is 'viral' hepatitis and non-viral hepatitis. sorry to say, you didn't make a discovery here, we already know this.

***The HbsAB in your picture is but one of many lab tests we have at our disposal***

I have a handy chart for you that shows some of our other labs and what they mean.

We sacrificed so many babies to satan - that we can even tell whether someone has Hep B immunity from the vaccine or from a previous infection.

Satan was kind enough to even throw in the ability to tell the difference between 'acute infection' vs 'chronic infection' - thanks to his sacrificed baby rewards points program.

Again, wow, it is almost like going to school for medicine and working in medicine is more valuable than reading shit on the internet that conforms to your pre-existing biases, hooray!

>>15271964
>Read up on Polio then come back pl0x
I already did, that's actually why I became so sceptical of vaccines, polio is a gateway red pill. A very well put together breakdown can be found in Torsten Engelbrecht's "Virus Mania", copies of which can be found on libgen if you wish to peruse them at your leisure.

The hep B vaccine for new born babies is a crime.
It offers no protective benefit for such a low risk group and only causes injury.

>>15271958
I know you really don't care, but to anyone reading who is interested - HPV transmits ridiculously easily, even with protection, FYI.

Like, your odds of getting HIV from *unprotected* sex with someone you *KNOW has HIV* - is infinitely lower than your odds of getting HPV during *protected* sex from someone who you don't know the HPV status of. And most people who have HPV, don't know they have it - varies strain to strain a lot whether there will even be any warts/observable symptoms, too. Just a quick, interesting aside there.

>>15271983
The Moth and the Iron Lung is also great. I think that anon was trolling to redpill people.

>>15271998
>Like, your odds of getting HIV from *unprotected* sex with someone you *KNOW has HIV* - is infinitely lower than your odds of getting HPV during *protected* sex from someone who you don't know the HPV status of.
Considering heterosexual sex has a nearly 0% chance to transmit HIV, this isn't the own you think it is. Anyway just don't have promiscuous sex period.

>>15271991
please define the injury and provide data for said hep b vaccine infant injury - facebook posts, tweets, memes, and anecdotes do not count as data.

please provide data to show that it is impossible for babies to get hep b - if that is why you are saying there is 0 protective benefit for infants.

If you think people only get hep b from doing IV drugs and whatnot like a previous comment or 7.... no, that isn't the only way to get hep b. besides, hep c is the one more associated with IV drug use stereotype anyhow. get your damn stereotypes right

>>15271978
>The HbsAB in your picture is but one of many lab tests we have at our disposal

Show please how these tests were validated by:
>isolation of the agent in question "hepatitis virus"
>repeated test with same results from different labs
>the method of declaring a "antibody"
>proof of antigene beeing a marker of the the agent in question

These tests are meaningless because the method never underwent any repeatable standartized tests and validation.
There is no standard measure nor causal releationship between antibodies and disease, because the test is not diagnostic, but interpreted because the markers are not sufficient to show causal releationship.
And if so, provide a study and experiment in which this method underwent a control.

>>15272009
>please provide data to show that it is impossible for babies to get hep b - if that is why you are saying there is 0 protective benefit for infants.
My negro, the only way for a baby to get hep b is if the mother has it. And if that's the case then the baby is grade A fucked from birth since they have it already. A vax won't help him.

>>15272009
>hep b vaccine infant injury
aluminium poisoning
>sepsis decleared as "anaphylaxis" or "allergic reaction"

https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/documents/referral/engerix-b-article-30-referral-summary-product-characteristics_en.pdf

>vaccine contains toxic metals
>child expresses signs of metal poisoning or serum sickness or blood poisoning to various degrees

>they relable the "side effects" as "immunization effects"
And 100% discard the possibility of an chemical/blood poisoning.

Even though it resembles a metal/mercury poisoning.
Aluminium and mercury are neurotoxins.
The child is trivially poisoned.
Yet they declare it as "immunisation".

Also the paradox, that this should "prevent" a very hypothetical event of an liver inflamation (hepatitis), yet it can cause liver problems because you give the recipient of the vaccine a injected dose of neurotoxic, reactive and mutagenic metals

>>15272007
wasn't intended to be an "own" - was just an interesting fact that I thought others might find interesting.

>heterosexual sex has nearly a 0% chance to transmit HIV

Well, yes, sex between 2 men is puts you at a much, much higher risk of getting HIV - for sure.

CDC data from 2019 states that approx 22% of new HIV cases were from people who reportedly only engaged in heterosexual sex.

Yeah, HIV is a lot harder to catch than a lot of STDs and is a lot less likely to be encountered if you are a heterosexual man and your woman didn't study promiscuous anal in college/doesn't have a roster of bisexual male partners then your risk is far, far lower still. I wouldn't call it "0%" but yeah, I'd be far more concerned/expect it to be far more likely to encounter other STDs.

But as you said, 'that isn't the own you think it is'

I only brought up HIV as a side comment r/t the HPV vaccine discussion anyhow, so, moving on...

>>15272047
>who reportedly
Doing all the legwork here btw. Most of these are men from the black community who don't consider casual homosexual sex to be gay.

Why do children need so many vaccines? it's at least 60 now, why did the number explode so much? I can't see how this overload of vaccines can't pose a danger to children.

>>15272063
No-one has ever explained that to me. And why is the covid vax on the childhood schedule now? Children have a higher risk from rhinovirus than coronavirus.

>>15272033
I'm just gonna take the L and let's say you won, there isn't anything I can say and there isn't any data I could ever present that would make you question your conclusions. I mean, that's probably the case for most people posting on here - but man - you're just throwing around terms you don't understand and then making conclusions off of assumptions about said terms that you don't understand.

There is a difference between vaccine package insert lists of POSSIBLE side effects vs actual data on instances/rates of those things occurring...

And like, your picture highlights 'abnormal liver function tests' - do you have any idea how easy it is to cause a transiently slightly abnormal liver function test? You can spend too much time thinking really hard about your liver and end up raising your LFTs - you saw the word liver and you jumped on it thinking it was a big 'gotcha' - well, sorry, anyone who knows anything about LFTs knows that is a meaningless point of fixation. You know what is even worse for your liver? Hepatitis B.

Elevated LFTs aren't "a liver problem" again - this is the danger of having very, very minimal knowledge about a topic - you've made all these irrational conclusions that make it patently obvious you have no formal medical background or functional understanding of what you're trying to argue. Jesus Christ, I need to stop procrastinating & avoiding shit I actually need to do, getting sucked into the time vampire of posting on here as if anyone is actually reading these replies and putting in some objective, critical thinking time. I must be brain damaged from all my childhood vaccines to think that this worth my time - damn, you've won the day.

>>15267730
>Had a big argument with my gf about whether or not we should get our future kids vaccinated and I said they are only like 2% effective and she took me for a retard
She sounds like a NPC and brain-washed. DUMP HER and tell her why.

She might mend her ways and smarten up. Probably not though. Show her this anon's chart and tell her to research more.>>15267834

>>15272116
>inject neurotoxic, reactive and mutagenic metals
Somehow "implausible" and even if they have a reporting of these specific events, which normally don't just randomly occur in an environment in which a doctor thinks vaccines are the holy grail.
And even in these circumstances it appears that these reported associations end up in the inserts because despite all the "holyness of vaccines" it is suspicious enough temporaly to see the vaccine at fault.
But the best thing is, most docs don't even know that in vaccines are neurotoxic mutagenic metals.
Because most docs just believe vaccines are just saline with supsended virus particles, and they are unable to put the pieces together, because it does not make sense that "virus particle based immunisation" causes "neurological, inflamatory and organ responses".

But for neurotoxic metals it is.
because... your body has a lot of nerves...
And neurotoxins and nerves don't mix well.
Mercury and aluminium are neurotoxic.

>>15272063
>Why do children need so many vaccines? it's at least 60 now, why did the number explode so much? I can't see how this overload of vaccines can't pose a danger to children.
Follow the money.
It leads to crooked government lawmakers, politicians, and big pharmaceutical companies.

>>15272150
Just remember the old adage: vaccines give the strongest immunity to their makers.

>>15272157
>vaccines give the strongest immunity to their makers
heh

>>15267730
>Had a big argument with my gf about whether or not we should get our future kids vaccinated
NO
DO NOT DO THAT
KEEP THE HUMAN DNA PURE
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y_Q91YlDnXw

>>15271926
>So, is there an acceptable averaged out number of "doses" per year for you across the 0-18yr and 0-15 month time-span?
I wouldn't even look at it over time span. One vaccine at a time, one antigen at a time. The CDC's vaccine schedule allows up to 6 different vaccines at a time. That's too much immunostimulation in an infant that is still developing his/her immune system. And why are we doing annual flu vaccines when the efficacy is awful?

>You know, there are lots of preventable diseases out in this big bad world. And vaccinating infants/children against some of the real nasty bastards is one of the many reasons why half of us don't die before age 10 these days.
Were half of us dying before age 10 in the 80's and 90's? I don't recall that. Some illnesses are certainly dangerous, others not so much. I see no reason to fear chicken pox, for example.

>HPV? Ok, skip that & risk throat/anal/genital cancer & more warts instead if ya want. Your call
Oh, it lowers cancer risk? Where's your evidence of that? I would think you'd need decades to be able to prove that, yet the dangers of the vaccine were evident early on.

>tetanus
No argument over that one given the CFR.

Is there a part 2? I'd like to see your response as to why you felt the smallpox vaccine was so dangerous with a 0.5 per 10k severe adverse event rate, when the mRNA vaccines are at 12.5 per 10k.

>>15269507
kek we've gone from
>2 more weeks and you'll drop dead vaxxie
to
>w-well...it'll happen eventually...

>>15272381
People are already dropping dead right now at an alarming rate. You're just not one of them (yet).

>>15272381
Millions worldwide didn't even last two weeks after the jab bloke.
Higher excess death rates than even during WWII.

>>15272390
>at an alarming rate
proofs??????????????

>>15272399
>most of the population got the vaccine, should expect that most of the people that die will also have gotten it as well
>SEE THIS IS PROOF THAT THEY'RE ALL DROPPING LIKE FLIES!!!!!!!!!!

i...i can't believe this is actually used as "proof" of something. you can deduce this by looking at this graph and thinking for more than 10 seconds. holy kekaroni

>>15272116
vaxxed lmao

>>15272406
Not that anon, but everyone, even the lying CDC is having to admit it now, after trying to blame it all on racism, climate change, video games, weed, eggs, or shaking duvets too virgorously.

>>15272416

This man was right all along.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=71v4-pzovjs

>>15272425
>gets BTFO with the graph
>comes back with more "corrleation means causation" bullshit from twitter
critical thinking isn't your strong suit, is it anon?

>>15272416
>most of the population got the vaccine, should expect that most of the people that die will also have gotten it as well
Do you not understand rates?

>>15272498
>Evidence and facts are not real!
>Nothing is happening even if it is!

>>15271933
It was revealed to me in a dream.

>>15271944
There are others that I can't really find public portals or access to, like cohort comparisons with non-vaccinated for things like general mortality. Google and other search engines have just chronically been trending toward shit no matter how many dorking methods I apply, and I sure as fuck wasn't going to go trudging to a university library to find them.

But uh... the rest of that is a schizopost my friend. Kind of disappointed you aren't just in general intellectually curious and seem to be motivated by ammunition instead. You're going to do it anyway but I gotta perform the cute romantic ritual of wishing it were otherwise.

>>15272740
You best be believing in dystopian dreams, because ye be in one matey!

>>15272416
>i...i can't believe this is actually used as "proof" of something. you can deduce this by looking at this graph and thinking for more than 10 seconds. holy kekaroni

How about you show corelation for the claims made with covid?
If you would have principles you would go:
>correlation != casation
>if covid test is positive and person is not sick this means there is no causation of the disease covid
>because if a positive test does not or rarely correlate with the disease
>then the test is meaningless
>correlation != causation

But there are interesting other things with the start of the vaccination campaign.
Anomalies in neurological diseases for example.
Picrel:
Source: German Official Insurance diagnostic and invoice data.

Official data of the foia request:
https://fragdenstaat.de/anfrage/daten-zu-diagnosecodes-zu-den-2-478-526-kassenpatienten-mit-impfnebenwirkungen-bezugsjahr-2021/

>>15267730
>they are only like 2% effective and she took me for a retard
effective against what?

>>15267730
At this point I'm tempted to believe the antivaxxers. Their stuff is bullshit but so is most of medicine it turns out.

>>15273893
Read about Harold Hillman's work on cell biology, then build up from his opinions on how the system becomes warped

>>15267730
Usually yes. Most countries have had great success with vaccines for polio and such, but what most people are arguing nowadays are vaccines made for each new strain of flu or SARS related viruses that have high rates of spread and mutation. The best argument you have is "I don't want to vaccinate my children with vaccines that have not been throughly tested for X amounts of years on actual people."

Also keep in mind that fear around vaccines aren't a new thing. In Brazil, they actually had a vaccine revolt because of said issue with people on the streets fighting because of that, but afterwards Brazil became a reference for preventive medicine in LATAM and basically erradicated several diseases through vaccination. Vaccine policy and confidence on it is also tied to how much you trust your government and officials and how privatized health and medicine is. Usually when said vaccines and medicines are researched by public entities like universities, you can follow the whole research and testing procedure and the usual slowness of public areas contribute for longer research cycles and more chances for public peer reviews.

>>15273929
>success with vaccines for polio
why did polio disappear?"

> because they just renamed it after the introduction of tha vax
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/CHRG-87hhrg84426/pdf/CHRG-87hhrg84426.pdf

>But the most incredible discovery is a change in the rules by changing the definition of “paralytic poliomyelitis” before and after the 1955 introduction of the Salk vaccine. It is like comparing a sneeze and pneumonia. “Prior to 1954,” Joan Beck, in reporting this same panel in the Chicago Sunday Tribune (Mar. 5, 1961), observes, “any physician who reported a case of paralytic poliomyelitis was doing his patient a favor because funds were available to help pay his medical expenses (from a large voluntary health organization). At that time most HDs used a definition of paralytic poliomyelitis which specified “partial or complete paralysis of one or more muscle groups, detected on two examinations at least 24 hours apart.” Laboratory confirmation and the presence of residual paralysis were not required. “In 1955, these criteria were changed. Now, unless there is paralysis lasting at least 60 days after the onset of the disease, it is not diagnosed as paralytic polio.

They did the solve and cuagula Trick:
> before 1955, 24h of:(stiff neck, pain in the limbs, fever) = polio
> after 1955 60 days of persistant paralyitic symptoms.
> Also split it up in menegitis, chinese paralytic syndrome, flacid myeltis, gullian barré syndrome, tansverse myelitis, encephalitis etc.

How to start and eliminate a pandemic with the strike of a pen?
read:>>15271894

>>15273960
Whatever you say anon.

>>15273929
polio is a great lie

>>15273929
>The best argument you have is
I don't want to contaiminate my child by injecting it with neurotoxic metals with no clear pathway and timerange of decomposition and excretion.
>>15272033
>>15270714
>>15270688

>>15273984
Ok.

>>15273988
So your worry is more about dosage?

>>15273984
No it's a terrible lie. yet it perpetuates.

>>15274000
>So your worry is more about dosage?
The worry is about the lack of requirement for testing so called:
>excipients
>adjuvants
>preservatives

There are specific laws, which circumvent the requirement for safety testing.
You can literally put mercury and aluminium in vaccines, without ever studying these compounds and what they do to the body.

if you put it in vaccines, the manufacturer does not have to show safety of any of the excipients or adjuvants, except that it does not kill it.
No pharmacokinetics, toxicology, mutagenicity, pharmacodynamic study is required for any excipient or compound that is declared by the manufacturer as "inactive ingredient".

Also they don't have to do "real placebos" and never did, so no foundation for safety is there.
You can take a "licensed" vaccine as comparator to an vaccine.
With the same amount of toxic "excipients" in question and pretend it is a placebo.
Then when the placebo group and the main vaccine group has similar amount of adverse events you call it "placebo effect" when in fact the reaction stems from the "adjuvant" and not the "active ingredient" namely: virus particle or memeRNA.

They obfuscate effects and never provided a true safety assesment of any compound that is "alongside" the "active" ingredient.
Hell they even put soap in vaccines as excipents and attempt to put ricin as "adjuvant" in vaccines, because "its inactive".
https://ir.soligenix.com/2021-08-23-Soligenix-Announces-Publication-Demonstrating-Successful-Formulation-and-Heat-Stabilization-of-Filovirus-Vaccine-Platform-for-Ebola-and-Marburg-Virus-Diseases

> Elements of this vaccine platform have been utilized in our ricin toxin, filovirus and COVID-19 vaccine candidates, indicating its broad applicability.
In case you don't know ricin is a extremly toxic plant poison:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ricin

>>15274035
Are we talking american standards?

>>15274041
The picrel are european standards.
And as you can read there, no safety and "real placebo" is encuraged.
And in fact never done.
Merck for example put a "own" magic excipient in their vaccine, which is unobtainable to test for safety for anyone see:
>>15270682

>>15274044
Ok, I gave a Brazilian example up there and I assume OP lives in US, so show me Brazilian or american standards and then we can talk.

>>15274041
I can give you an example with an very nice vaccine, which apparently got "some flag for causing so much side effects".
Astrazeneca.

> Picrel
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/P-9-2020-005248_EN.html

The Commission has pledged to purchase 300 million doses of the ChAdOx1 vaccine produced by AstraZeneca (AZN). However, it appears that the clinical trials conducted by AZN to ascertain the side-effects of the vaccine do not comply with the standard protocol followed by pharmaceutical companies to verify the efficacy and safety of medicinal products. Instead of using a control group of test subjects injected with a saline solution as a placebo, the AZN clinical trials use injections of the meningitis vaccine Nimenrix (Pfizer).

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)31604-4/fulltext

"Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine or the MenACWY vaccine. MenACWY was used as a comparator vaccine to maintain blinding of participants who experienced local or systemic reactions, since these reactions are a known association with viral vector vaccinations. Use of saline as a placebo would risk unblinding participants as those who had notable reactions would know they were in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine group."

>recieive vaccine
>because the participants would notice
>because they already know that this vaccine has notable side effects
>so they use a vaccine with similar side effects
>so the participants were not unblinded

Meaning, with each and every trial, the vaccines will get a little bit more toxic, since a product is a allowed to have a little more adverse events than the (pseudo)-Placebo group.

>>15274056
Never took it, but it doesn't answer my question. You are pointing out one recent vaccine while vaccines have been a thing for decades all over the world. You have to give me worldwide data or you are just nitpicking some specific countries with shady government decisions.

If vaccines don't actually work what are they actually doing, no meme answers please.

>>15272865
>Kind of disappointed you aren't just in general intellectually curious
A discussion isn't constructive or meaningful when it is solely centered on speculating and throwing around hypotheticals that can't be meaningfully proven anyway.

Most of the 'antivax' infographics seem to be weirdly geared towards that 'Gotcha!' moment, (for example by showing that there are aluminium compounds used in some vaccine), only to fall out flat when it comes to establishing coherent biological theories for any kind of vaccine side effects that goes beyond temporary inflammation (e.g. not showing how that aluminimum compound is actually involved in causing biological dysfunction).
I have dealt with antivax literature before, including 'The Real Anthony Fauci', and was quite surprised how many factual or simply argumentative errors I could point in the book. And this doesn't even include all the more subtle errors that a medical researcher, which I happen to know, pointed out to me later on. There is also lying by omission and the established 'antivax' literature surely does not provide its readers with any critical interpretation of the few studies it does choose to cite nor does it contrast them with studies that might contradict its agenda.

>But uh... the rest of that is a schizopost my friend.
Not really. The 'vaccines causes autism/asthma/ADHD/allergies' meme, among others, was clearly pushed by the mass media for some time between 2007 and 2010 (which I can remember clearly), quickly dropped thereafter, then briefly pushed again in the very year prior to the lockdown, only to be dropped again. I'm not going so far as to claim that this was all intentionally done to 'program' people. But it wouldn't be that unreasonableto draw that conclusion when one also takes into account all that weird shit with Q-Anon etc. Why would you assume that a government wasn't 'programming' its people?

>>15274075
Gardasil (hpv vaccine) with:

> Aluminium Hydroxyphosphate Sulphate.
Nobody knows what it does, except that it is a toxin.
Never studied just put in the Gardasil and approved.
https://ebm.bmj.com/content/26/6/285

They put it in the Placebo arm of the trial.

Saline with aluminium adjuvants vs. the vaccine which also contains the aluminium adjuvants.
And never disclosed it to the participants.
See:
>>15270682

Also here clinical trial for MMR vaccine.
No true placebo group:
https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/results/NCT01702428

No safety study.
Only "noninferiority".
Also no efficacy in preventing disease.
Only "more inflamatory immune markers, stronger reaction to injection".
>that means it working
>irrelevant if it protects against claimed disease
>just more immune reaction triggering with vaccine

>>15274160
Funnily enough, all that aggressive speculation around alleged vaccine side effects, only for them to be disproven, has de facto established a precedent that allows pharmaceutical companies among others to be much more careless with safety standards.

There are tons of drugs in circulation that have documented adverse side effects, yet practically no one is screaming and warning people about the danger of anti-depressants or aggressive chemo-therapy etc. Which is an arguably weak indication that much of the antivax movement is simply astroturfed.

>>15274160
>The 'vaccines causes autism/asthma/ADHD/allergies' meme

Inject children with toxic metals.
Cause chronic inflamatory symptoms.
metals are also neurotoxic.
Knonw to cause neuro-psychological abormalities such as "erethrism".
>muh conspiracy
>just inject my child with mercury and aluminium hydroxide and phosphate
>hmmm I wonder why all children are depressed, increase in learning disabilities, speech delays, allergies, childhood inflamatory bowelsyndrom, childhood parkinson, childhood dementia
> wierd that all this shit resembles neurological metal poisong or "erethrism" or "mad hatter disease

>>15274160
>Not really. The 'vaccines causes autism/asthma/ADHD/allergies' meme, among others, was clearly pushed by the mass media for some time between 2007 and 2010 (which I can remember clearly), quickly dropped thereafter, then briefly pushed again in the very year prior to the lockdown, only to be dropped again. I'm not going so far as to claim that this was all intentionally done to 'program' people. But it wouldn't be that unreasonableto draw that conclusion when one also takes into account all that weird shit with Q-Anon etc. Why would you assume that a government wasn't 'programming' its people?
Media will report on anything no matter how retarded for views. That is why what you said was a schizopost. You're confusing a simple profit motive with a grand narrative of malice. People are fucking stupid and short sighted. No special conspiracy theory needed.

>>15274188
According to you, the wide-spread use of leaded fuel should have provoked an epidemic of neurological issues in children to an extend far more severe than what we're currently seeing, given the small total metal exposure due to vaccine injections in comparison with chronic exposure to car exhaust. And I'm aware of the fact that leaded fuel had actual adverse effects on at least two generations.
>>hmmm I wonder why all children are depressed, increase in learning disabilities, speech delays, allergies, childhood inflamatory bowelsyndrom, childhood parkinson, childhood dementia
Are most of these diagnoses grounded in biology? Can you guarantuee that a diagnosis of depression or learning disability is grounded and based on hard biological data rather than subjective criterias? The arguments you invoke are practically meaningless GIVEN the lack of a biological disease pathway making it unfalsifiable. That's what makes this discussion disingenuous.
> wierd that all this shit resembles neurological metal poisong or "erethrism" or "mad hatter disease
Yes, but one also usually dies of erethrism and/or suffers severe life-long brain damage. The fact that children seem to grow out of juvenile depression, ADHD etc. implies a lack of permanent brain damage due to heavy metal exposure which is precisely not what we would expect. Following my argument here, your point simply can't meaningfully hold up in a majority of cases.
>>15274191
>That is why what you said was a schizopost.
For me at least, schizo post implies that the very arguments provided are incoherent and stupid. Not that I'm endorsing a conspiracy theory of my own (which I'm aware of).
>No special conspiracy theory needed.
Yes, you're probably right.

>>15274229
not him but blaylock pointed to and overload effect on devceloping brains

the lead deficiency anon might be around soon if we're lucky too

>>15274229
>For me at least, schizo post implies that the very arguments provided are incoherent and stupid. Not that I'm endorsing a conspiracy theory of my own (which I'm aware of).
Hm. You're right actually, I communicated that poorly given how the phrase is used (misused) around here. My apologies for that.

>>15274229
>leaded fuel should have provoked an epidemic of neurological issues in children to an extend far more severe than what we're currently seeing

>lead in paint banned
>lead in soldering banned
>lead in general accepted as toxic

We have an """unexplainable""" increase in the phenomena of autoimunity, trannies, chronic inflamations, fibromyalgia, chronic fatigue syndrom, weak and crappy young men, weak bones, shitty eyesight.

And shortly before this increased....
We increase the amount of neurotoxic metal we inject in our children during their initial life period of development.

Schizos and shills will talk at each other for hours on end but won't convince each other of anything.

Real vaccines work fine, they just stimulate an immune response with weak enemies which makes your immune system stronger pretty much like going to a gym. It's how your body is supposed to work.
Covic vaccine isn't a real vaccine and it's a jewish idea that just because you don't take the jab means you have to oppose all vaccines. That's why you get paid to post threads like this.

>>15274075
>You are pointing out one recent vaccine while vaccines have been a thing for decades all over the world.
That anon pointed out something important, in that there's hardly ever a true placebo group with something that is benign, like saline. The ostensible reason is because if the placebo group doesn't feel like shit after getting the injection, they'll know it was the placebo. Gardasil specifically had a very high rate of miscarriage in both groups, much higher than the background rate. It got a pass anyway because the difference between the placebo group and experimental group wasn't that different. We know it was the adjuvants because another HPV vaccine was trialed and had a miscarriage rate similar to the background rate. Now anyone who tries to challenge Gardasil as dangerous is an anti-vaxxer.

>>15273960
It disappeared after indoor plumbing and improved sanitation became widespread.

>>15274347
All vaccines are dysgenic. Especially if they work.

>>15274347
Why do you think the classic vaccines work?

>>15274347
smallpox vaccine didn't actually work. Alfred Russel Wallace literally oroved that in the 1800s.

>>15274746
>indoor plumbing and improved sanitation became widespread.
^THIS has saved more lives than all the pharma drugs combined.

>>15274229
>leaded fuel
Lead is not that toxic really. People can ingest large amounts of it for years and years before even noticing an effect.

For thousands of years people ate, cooked, and drank out of lead containers, and even put oxidized lead (oxidized lead salts are much more poisonous) in their food and wine as "artificial sweeteners".

>>15274665
>The ostensible reason is because if the placebo group doesn't feel like shit after getting the injection, they'll know it was the placebo.
Absolutely retarded argument.
HPV is a cancer...
Happening in women post 50 years of age.
They created a vaccine.
Gardasil 5...
Within a period of 8 years.
And a small 42 month trial of pre 26 year old girls.

To show efficacy of preventing cancer... that normally appears after tha age of 50...
Within a 42 months trial.

And some subsequent 12 and 7 months trials...

Then after mysteriously all of a sudden the girld who got vacced with Gardasil 5 got cancer (which they normally should not get).

Then gardasil 5 got pulled from the marked..
But they did a upgrade.
> Gardasil 9
With the same conditions.
https://www.fda.gov/files/vaccines,%20blood%20&%20biologics/published/Package-Insert---Gardasil.pdf

Study 001
> Dose-finding substudy extended from Day 1 through Month 7, and the duration of immunogenicity substudy was
42 months

Study 002
>Lot consistency substudy compared 3 manufacturing lots for immunogenicity of the
vaccine in 9-15 year-old girls, in a randomized and double-blinded fashion.
The duration of P002 study was 12 months (for safety).

Study 009
> The study compared 9vHPV vs. Gardasil for immunogenicity and safety in 9-15 year-old girls. This was a
double-blind randomized trial with the duration of 7 months.

> 9-15 year-old girls.
> 7 months
Efficacy for cancer prevention...

>>15267834
Correlation does not equal causation. If this is all the evidence you have, it's embarrassing.

>>15274943
>Correlation does not equal causation.
Yes, it usually does. It is the rare exception when it doesn't.

Occam's Razor BTFO you.

>>15274188
"Mercury is safe and effective! If you disagree, you are a racist homophobic terrorist supremacist misogynist!"
Probably what the US Government CDC said in the 1940s? kek

>>15274961
>Yes, it usually does.
I have bad news for you anon https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schizophrenia

>>15274923
>Absolutely retarded argument.
Um, it seems like you wrote an entire post agreeing with me. Did you look up the definition of "ostensible" before replying?

>>15275277
>Schizophrenia
Definitely correlates with transgender dysphoria mental illness.

Perhaps that's the cause of the mental illness that causes homosexuality also?

>>15274943
>Correlation does not equal causation
Correlation indicated causation.
And if indication is given, further and more explicit experiments and observation need to be done, to explicitly refute or confirm causal releationship.

Correlation is not meaningless.
But yes. It is not proving causality.
But still people avoiding the direct and simple experiment