COVID-19 vaccine #19 & general vaccine conversation

[monga]

I've given up. I think the way these posters are describing him speaks for itself that they don't actually watch his videos at all maybe a snip here and there. . Many lurkers here will see that as well, especially those who he helped through the pandemic. He most certainly isn't a CT or antivax. Those are the reasons I share anything of his because he isn't on my side of the fence at all, but in doing so, people now believe he is antivax and a CT.


I am actually going to do what @Freedomofspeech89 has done. because every time a new person joins we have the same merry-go-ound again.

It’s obvious they’re not open to any negativity towards the vaccines but push outdated benefits from last year, very odd for a scientist not to be up to spec

 

[Prefrontalmedialcortex]

It’s obvious they’re not open to any negativity towards the vaccines but push outdated benefits from last year, very odd for a scientist not to be up to spec

No one is pushing anything that is outdated. That paper was retracted and still is, nothing new has come to light about it.

 

[Emmelina Ball]

If anyone was sharing misinformation on YouTube it would get taken down. YouTube have a very strong policy around misinformation particularly around covid vaccines due to the global push back on anyone spreading misinformation. Wasn’t so long ago you couldn’t even write vaccine or jab etc without a warning showing alongside whatever you had written on social media posts!

 

[monga]

It was a retracted paper. Trigger word? Right.

Someone who has challeged Dr John Campbell and misinformation from a video. His bio: I'm Greg Tucker-Kellogg, a biology professor with a PhD in Molecular Biophysics and Biochemistry (Yale), postdoctoral training in biological chemistry and molecular pharmacology (Harvard Medical School), and 30 years of research experience.

Is this also misinformation then

 

[grampositive]

Can you link where he was pushing conspiracies I’d be genuinely interested to see that .I’ve always found him to be very unbiased in his vids.

There are many examples, but for example when he claimed the Pfizer vaccines (always Pfizer isn't it in these vids, never moderna/AZ/sinovax) had caused 1000+ deaths which was evidenced in their documents.

I read the documents linked, they said nothing of the sort. Many many verified scientists (i.e., those with public accounts not random posters on a forum like me) also confirmed this.

 

[monga]

No one is pushing anything that is outdated. That paper was retracted and still is, nothing new has come to light about it.

I’m talking about comments around transmission etc I’ve already linked the lancets view on it.

 

[grampositive]

That was in 2021 as we know ivermectin was studied long after that as a possible treatment for covid patients experiencing gut inflammation… It’s your trigger word is it not

I was waiting for ivermectin to come up.

If it's become a trigger word on here it's because it's one of the pandemic's greatest for-profit scams.

 

[monga]

There are many examples, but for example when he claimed the Pfizer vaccines (always Pfizer isn't it in these vids, never moderna/AZ/sinovax) had caused 1000+ deaths which was evidenced in their documents.

I read the documents linked, they said nothing of the sort. Many many verified scientists (i.e., those with public accounts not random posters on a forum like me) also confirmed this.

Would you class this as misinformation too , public platform as well.

I was waiting for ivermectin to come up.

If it's become a trigger word on here it's because it's one of the pandemic's greatest for-profit scams.

Only a trigger word for the other poster

 

[Prefrontalmedialcortex]

Is this also misinformation then View attachment 1577311

Regarding the above:

Fact Check-British health minister did not admit all pandemic deaths were overcounted

A remark made by British health minister Sajid Javid over the reliability of COVID-19 death rates has been misinterpreted by social media users who claim it is evidence that Javid admitted numbers have been consistently over-estimated.

www.reuters.com

 

[grampositive]

I've given up. I think the way these posters are describing him speaks for itself that they don't actually watch his videos at all maybe a snip here and there. . Many lurkers here will see that as well, especially those who he helped through the pandemic. He most certainly isn't a CT or antivax. Those are the reasons I share anything of his because he isn't on my side of the fence at all, but in doing so, people now believe he is antivax and a CT.

@Purrrrrrr I have watched at least half of his videos, and all of those that have gone viral on places like bitchute and odesee.

I can assure you that yes he makes mistakes, yes he misleads, and yes he references papers that are retracted (included that were found to be totally fraudalent, and the study described never actually occured).

I am not saying this because of his general views, I am saying this because of the specific claims he is making.

Scams happen in science, people make significant money from them. It's just madness to me that you're so suspicious of anyone who holds views you disagree with but absolutely fine with anyone who holds views that corroborate yours, no matter the actual content of their blogs/videos.

 

[Ensay]

No I did not post on here something you had posted on the CT thread…please tell me what it was?

No one is being nasty and again I will continue to post on here as this is the vaccine thread. I do believe telling people where to post is a form of moderating?

Best to rise above it. Some people think simply disagreeing with a post here is antagonisation. The accusation is wheeled out to make the person who disagrees feel bad for their behaviour, because antagonisation has negative connotations.

I know some people would think it was lovely if everything they posted got likes and no challenges, but message boards don't work like that. They're here for discussions. Sometimes that means people will agree with what's been posted and sometimes it means people will disagree. It's not a new concept.

If someone is looking for an echo chamber where only one view is expected or tolerated, this thread is the wrong place. And if people want to put me on ignore for simply explaining how forums work, knock yourself out.

 

[Prefrontalmedialcortex]

Best to rise above it. Some people think simply disagreeing with a post here is antagonisation. The accusation is wheeled out to make the person who disagrees feel bad for their behaviour, because antagonisation has negative connotations.

I know some people would think it was lovely if everything they posted got likes and no challenges, but message boards don't work like that. They're here for discussions. Sometimes that means people will agree with what's been posted and sometimes it means people will disagree. It's not a new concept.

If someone is looking for an echo chamber where only one view is expected or tolerated, this thread is the wrong place. And if people want to put me on ignore for simply explaining how forums work, knock yourself out.

I am not going to be made out to be doing something that I am not. I do not disrespect posters, result to insults or name calling. I post here because it is the relevant thread to do so. Just because my view is one that differs from others it does not mean that I should not be able to post on here or I am trying to shut down/derail conversation.

It is a discussion thread for vaccines, for different perspectives whether people agree or disagree - it is not an echo chamber for a one sided discussion.

 

[monga]

Regarding the above:

Fact Check-British health minister did not admit all pandemic deaths were overcounted

A remark made by British health minister Sajid Javid over the reliability of COVID-19 death rates has been misinterpreted by social media users who claim it is evidence that Javid admitted numbers have been consistently over-estimated.

www.reuters.com

Isn’t it true that’s how they changed the data to open society up, same as the hospital patients were changed from being admitted suffering from covid to incidental infections.

 

[Emmelina Ball]

@Purrrrrrr I have watched at least half of his videos, and all of those that have gone viral on places like bitchute and odesee.

I can assure you that yes he makes mistakes, yes he misleads, and yes he references paper's that are retracted (included that were found to be totally fraudalent, and the study described never actually occured).

I am not saying this because of his views, I am saying this because of the specific claims he is making.

You must have an awful lot of spare time to be watching so many videos (over 1000 if you’ve really watched half) of someone you strongly disagree with and believe is spreading misinformation. Why don’t you report them and let YouTube make the call? They’ve pulled down plenty of creators for spreading and misleading people.

 

[grampositive]

You must have an awful lot of spare time to be watching so many videos (over 1000 if you’ve really watched half) of someone you strongly disagree with and believe is spreading misinformation. Why don’t you report them and let YouTube make the call? They’ve pulled down plenty of creators for spreading and misleading people.

When you don't have a good argument, try and insult someone personally instead? JC has many many videos which were published pre-pandemic, and many which are not about coronavirus. He set himself up as an online educator (which makes a lot of sense given he did a PhD in online education methods), which includes making videos such as "genetics", the "immune system" etc etc.

I actually watched them for work in a work context- scientists are interested in the current "trends" of misinformation, and personally invested in provided easy to access, factual accounts an alternative for people who are interested.

As always, I don't think misinformation benefits anyone, and the only thing I'll argue for is that people should be able to make an informed choice regarding their healthcare decisions. This includes not being coerced by misinformation, or terrified because they've been vaccinated and are now being told they'll drop dead at some point in the future.

 

[Ensay]

No - he is not being factual because of the reasons I stated, this completely irrespective to what the views are.

There are many specific examples of John Campbell making very basic errors, referencing retracted papers (this includes ones that were found to be totally fraudalent - i.e. the study never actually happened), makings statements that are misleading/incorrect, and pushing conspiracy theories with no evidence base.

You need to see past this dichtomy @monga - there have been several points where I've changed my opinion because newer (robust) scientific evidence came out.

If there genuinely was good quality, replicated, data that showed vaccination against coroavirus was now uncessary (or indeed they were killing us all) I'd say so - most of us don't blindly agree with whoever coorobates our currently held views.

And yes - plenty of the people pushing misinformation and those leading misinformation campaigns are actually vaccinated themselves, because they know it's a win-win & don't care about the health of the people they're misleading.

You make a good point with your last sentence. I remember Candace Owens spouting anti vaccination views, even though she then did a YouTube video at an event that only allowed vaccinated people to attend.

A lot of them don't fully believe everything they say, but because it's their livelihood they carry on doing it. As a disclaimer, I'm not saying that applies to all YouTubers who are sceptical of vaccines, especially the much smaller ones as they don't have a financial incentive.

 

[Emmelina Ball]

When you don't have a good argument, try and insult someone personally instead? JC has many many videos which were published pre-pandemic. He set himself up as online educator, which includes making videos such as "genetics", the "immune system" etc etc.

I actually watched them for work in a work context- scientists are interested in the current "trends" of misinformation, and personally invested in provided easy to access, factual accounts an alternative for people who are interested.

As always, I don't think misinformation benefits anyone, and the only thing I'll argue for is that people should be able to make an informed choice regarding their healthcare decisions. This includes not being coerced by misinformation, or terrified because they've been vaccinated and are now being told they'll drop dead at some point in the future.

Where have I insulted anyone personally?

You seem to dodge when I mention reporting him - why wouldn’t you do that and then you would limit the spread of misinformation if that’s what he is doing.

 

[grampositive]

Where have I insulted anyone personally?

You seem to dodge when I mention reporting him - why wouldn’t you do that and then you would limit the spread of misinformation if that’s what he is doing.

"You must have an awful lot of spare time to be watching so many videos (over 1000 if you’ve really watched half)" - thinly veiled at best @Emmelina Ball

I have already responded to that several times - youtube allow quite of lot of similar content on their site and prefer to flag rather than remove. They have deleted some of his videos, but not all.

Don't really understand how that's dodging?

You also seem to ignore all posts that question why you are so relunctant to consider how he is motivated to promote misinformation rather than accurate reporting, and why you have high level of skepticism to certain groups, but blindly follow anyone who corroborates your views, no matter the quality of their evidence.

 

[monga]

 

[Prefrontalmedialcortex]

You must have an awful lot of spare time to be watching so many videos (over 1000 if you’ve really watched half) of someone you strongly disagree with and believe is spreading misinformation. Why don’t you report them and let YouTube make the call? They’ve pulled down plenty of creators for spreading and misleading people.

I have watched a few of his videos - not all and he does misinform. Another example would be the Pfizer 9 pages of adverse events which people were making out to be all side effects of the vaccine when they are actually ‘potential adverse events’ to keep an eye out for.

Dr John Campbell misinformed by saying they were vaccine side effects. Here he correct himself but he still makes videos on topics which are not in his field.