I'm saying that VAERS is how we judge safety of vaccines. Yet, at the same time, people want to poke holes in the VAERS data. So then what, we have no legitimate way of assessing the safety of vaccines?
Definition of vaccine: "a substance used to stimulate the production of antibodies and provide immunity against one or several diseases"
Exactly. Does NOT guarantee immunity because the "stimulation" may not be sufficient for certain individuals. Also.. saying "used to" does not imply the intended effect (immunity) is guaranteed. It's like saying weapon system X is used to do Y, but that doesn't mean X is guaranteed to succeed at doing Y because there are all kinds of other factors that matter (like what the enemy does).
But it can't be used to spread misinformation either. Some people use that data as proof that X number of people died. I am not trying to suggest that you are saying that but I am asking do you think that is irresponsible?
NFL teams have been informed that if a game postponed by Covid can't be rescheduled within the normal schedule, the team responsible for the outbreak will forfeit, will be responsible for financial reimbursement for the game that didn't get played, neither teams players will be paid, and the originating team may be subject to additional penalties. There's been a certain snap back to reality in certain quarters which is kind of wild to watch how sudden it is.
Exactly nothing. The word "and" is a conjunction. It links things together. A vaccine "stimulates" AND "gives immunity.". If it doesn't grant immunity, it isn't a vaccine.
I think that VAERS is a good indicator. Honestly, when you report to VAERS, It's a federal thing. They follow up. Many many people never follow through with reporting.
I already pointed out how "used as" doesn't guarantee the effect. And literally everyone in the medical community will tell you a vaccine does not guarantee immunity. You on the other hand are now arguing there has NEVER been anything you can call a vaccine because no vaccine has 100% effectiveness (see there's a word for that). Totally ludicrous. Seriously, you're one of the most anti-fact and anti-science people I know. And it's dangerous for society. While you and others keep attacking vaccines, 99% of COVID deaths are now happening among the unvaccinated. People die from this nonsense.
Well since its not currently an indicator of anything I would hope you agree that that data should be reported on but reported on with the appropriate context and all the necessary facts Some people spread that data like its a vaccine death toll and that is not only wrong its dangerous.
No dude. Obviously there are going to isolated, rare cases where a vaccine doesn't work. That doesn't change the fact that vaccines, by definition, need to give immunity. The covid injections do NOT claim to give immunity.
VAERS is the ONLY indicator we have for vaccine adverse events. So, they point to VAERS to support vaccines being safe...until these injections, which are blowing VAERS numbers for all other vaccines, but now VAERS isn't an indicator? Come on man.
“FDA requires healthcare providers to report any death after COVID-19 vaccination to VAERS, even if it’s unclear whether the vaccine was the cause. Reports of adverse events to VAERS following vaccination, including deaths, do not necessarily mean that a vaccine caused a health problem.
More misinformation on your part. First of all, you attacked the yellow fever vaccine and anthrax vaccine for not giving immunity. They do, just not at 100% (no vaccine does). So that was a total lie. And COVID vaccines do provide immunity. Also not at 100%. Finally, you can't even be consistent. Can't claim on one hand that the definition of vaccine requires that it provide immunity but then say there are exceptions. Your own words against you there. No, almost everything you've pushed so far is total misinformation. From DDT causing polio, smallpox being eradicated by sanitation instead of a vaccine (for both of these the timelines don't even fit) to basically saying there's never been anything you can call a vaccine lol. Like I said, viewpoints like yours, when widespread, kill people.
"But, my body, my choice!" NFL warning to teams: COVID-19 outbreaks among unvaccinated players could lead to forfeited games 2:26 PM ET Kevin Seifert ESPN Staff Writer The NFL has added an additional COVID-19 vaccination incentive for players, threatening forfeits and the loss of game checks if an outbreak among unvaccinated players causes an unresolvable disruption in the regular-season schedule. Commissioner Roger Goodell informed clubs of the new policy Thursday in a memo. The league has encouraged vaccination for players but has not required it, per an agreement with the NFL Players Association. Instead, the league has set up a series of incentives. As of Thursday, Goodell wrote, more than 75% of NFL players were at least partially vaccinated and more than half of the league's teams have player vaccination rates above 80%. Unvaccinated players will be subject to severe protocols during training camp and the regular season, including daily testing, mask-wearing and travel restrictions. Thursday's memo made it clear that unvaccinated players could, in theory, be responsible for the losses of games and paychecks as well. The new policy drills down on a scenario that never occurred in 2020, when the NFL postponed five games and moved 10 others to accommodate outbreaks. A forfeit will be called in 2021 if all of the following circumstances occur: • A game is postponed by requirement of government authorities or medical experts, or at the discretion of the commissioner, because of ongoing health concerns of an outbreak. • The league can't find a suitable date to reschedule within the 18-week framework of the regular season. • The original postponement was caused by an outbreak among unvaccinated players of one team. The NFL was able to reschedule all of the games it postponed in 2020, but it's possible it might not go to the same extremes -- such as playing a game on a Tuesday or Wednesday -- as it did during its first pandemic season. According to the memo: "Whether to reschedule a postponed game will be dependent on health and safety reasons at the recommendation of medical experts as well as considerations of stadium availability, schedule integrity, fan convenience, and other appropriate matters." If the forfeit occurs, players from both teams will lose their game checks. The team that suffered the outbreak would be responsible for any shortfall in the league's revenue-sharing pool and also would be credited with a loss for the purposes of playoff seeding, with the opposing team credited with a win. According to Caesars William Hill, if a game is forfeited, a wager for standard spread, money line and total wager on that game will be voided. "These operating principles are designed to allow us to play a full season in a safe and responsible way," Goodell wrote, "and address possible competitive or financial issues fairly. While there is no question that health conditions have improved from last year, we cannot be complacent or simply assume that we will be able to play without interruption -- either due to Covid outbreaks among our clubs or outbreaks that occur within the larger community. These principles are intended to help inform decisions, recognizing that, as in 2020, we will need to remain flexible and adapt to possibly changing conditions." According to the memo, if an outbreak among vaccinated players causes the postponement of a game, the league "will attempt to minimize the competitive and economic burden on both participating teams." https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id...aks-unvaccinated-players-lead-forfeited-games
Here is the definition of a "vaccine," directly from the CDC website. "A product that stimulates a person’s immune system to produce immunity to a specific disease, protecting the person from that disease." I didn't "attack" any vaccines. YOU brought those up, not me, and all I said was, there are rare cases where vaccines don't work on someone. But a vaccine by definition, still needs to give immunity. Those aren't MY words, those are the words of the "experts." You trust the government and their agencies implicitly. I do not.
You've been attacking vaccines the ENTIRE time. And when you say: "a vaccine, by definition, still needs to give immunity", that does NOT allow for exceptions. So yes you've been arguing there are no such things as vaccines at all. Finally this isn't about trust. It's about basic knowledge in science and the ability to investigate claims. You kept pushing this DDT causing polio nonsense and can't even ask the simplest question of all: how come there were major polio outbreaks BEFORE the widespread use of DDT. So it's not about trust at all. It's about the ability or lack thereof to determine what is accurate and what is not. You're simply not doing any kind of respectable job at asking the right questions or making reasonable inferences. It's constantly unreasonable inferences.
A vaccine gives immunity. There are some people who rarely it doesn't. But the expectation for the overwhelming majority of people is that a vaccine will grant immunity. That is FAR different than these covid injections, which do NOT grant immunity, to ANYONE. You are trying to split hairs with me, over the tiny fraction of people for whom vaccines do not grant immunity, and trying to act like that somehow means the covid injections are the same. They aren't. You can argue all you want, but by definition, a vaccine grants immunity.
Right.. you're claiming no vaccines exist by your reading of the definition, which is an incorrect reading (the "used as" is what you're not interpreting correctly.. that "used as" tells you what the intent is when people use it, not that immunity is guaranteed). Furthermore, you're falsely claiming COVID vaccines don't provide immunity, or that yellow fever or anthrax vaccines don't provide immunity. It's like you have no understanding of the underlying biology. What the hell do you think the antibodies are in response to??
Cbrad, AGAIN, I did not make these definitions. Your problem is not with me. According to the CDC, the are no vaccines that fit the definition 100%. The expectation for a vaccine is that it GRANTS IMMUNITY.
Yeah, but they occurred BEFORE widespread use of DDT. Polio is caused by the poliovirus. "Expectation" does not imply "guarantee". There is nothing wrong with the definition. Saying "used as" gives them a sufficient qualifier. Instead, they use the word "effectiveness" to convey how likely it is to grant immunity.
Even with this tiny fraction of people dying after taking the vaccine....they’re dying of Covid, not the vaccine. The vaccine just couldn’t protect them, likely because they are almost always the elderly with underlying health conditions or a weakened immune system.
DDT poisoning can mimic polio. Not to mention, polio was never a problem. Then, all of a sudden, in the 20th century, we have an epidemic of a nerve disorder, while using DDT everywhere. We stop using DDT, while simultaneously releasing a polio vaccine in the 50s. Now polio is gone. You say it was the vaccine. I say it wasn't. You say the government and it's agencies say so, so it must be true. We aren't going to agree.
No, we're not talking about"vaccinated" individuals dying from covid. We are taking about people dying after having received the "vaccine," but they don't have covid.
"A product that stimulates a person’s immune system to produce immunity to a specific disease, protecting the person from that disease." That is the definition from the CDC. A "vaccine", by their own words, causes the immune system to produce immunity from a disease. It's that simple. Vaccines give immunity.
This isn't about agreeing or disagreeing. You're simply wrong. First of all, polio became a problem about 40 years before widespread DDT use so don't make it look like we were "using DDT everywhere". Totally false. That alone disproves your crazy DDT hypothesis. Furthermore, polio outbreaks continued long after DDT stopped being used. You still had 350,000 cases in 1988, over 16 years after DDT stopped being used. Now it's down to a few thousand per year, mostly in places without the vaccine (Afghanistan/Pakistan etc). That's why I said the timeline doesn't fit at all. You're talking cause-effect when the effect came way before the cause, and the effect continued to exist way after you took away the hypothesized cause. Furthermore, you can prove the poliovirus causes polio, not just because some people got polio through the vaccine (early versions), but also because we pretty much understand the molecular basis. As far as why polio became a problem in the early 20th century, it's paradoxically (for you) BECAUSE of better sanitation. People were no longer constantly being exposed to the poliovirus, which had conferred a sense of natural immunity. This is all well researched. You of course only care about conspiracy theories so you'll believe something else, but the onset of polio outbreaks isn't a mystery. No it doesn't. "Stimulates" immunity does not imply it successfully causes immunity. "Stimulate" is defined as "to encourage development of or increased activity in". In other words, to say a vaccine stimulates a process does not imply it is guaranteed to cause that process.
The Bills are going to have to hold separate practices for vaxxed and unvaxxed. And team meetings are going to be split. Their chemistry has a great chance of being blown to ****.
If the Fluufy Ho Jills don't want to get vax and take that risk, how much you wanna bet BellyCheat sends a few girls with CVD to party with players before their games? And if he doesn't...
I just gotta lol at this lie that is being propagated all over the place with zero data to back it up. These are the "science" people. I know several vaccinated people who have been infected again. This is just cope for the vaxxed. Breakthrough cases oh no! https://www.nbcboston.com/news/loca...ported-in-mass-at-least-80-have-died/2435719/ https://insiderpaper.com/singapore-vaccinated-covid-cases/ By the way - those drug companies that you are not allowed to sue for these vaccines just paid out 26 billion for creating the opiate epidemic in America. These vaccines are different though, they are just to save the world!! https://www.wsj.com/articles/states...lement-to-resolve-opioid-lawsuits-11626890613
Also pretty seriously considering stopping watching NFL altogether if this is the big brother **** they want to start pulling. Get woke go broke.