COVID-19 vaccine #19 & general vaccine conversation

[Ensay]

"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.

Not only is it an insult it also proves you can't win in their eyes.

• Don't watch enough of his videos? You get criticised for not being well informed of his content.
• Watch lots of his videos? You get criticised for spending "an awful lot of spare time" watching those videos.

 

[monga]

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.

Can you link a factual account then .

 

[Emmelina Ball]

"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.

I don’t watch him so I can’t comment on what he does it just interests me why anyone would spend so much time watching someone that they perceive to be dangerous. Surely that would risk you getting sucked into his cult and you could be brainwashed as a result.

If they’ve taken down some of his videos then it’s a non issue. They obviously see it as honest mistakes if they’ve kept his account up and running.

Not only is it an insult it also proves you can't win in their eyes.

• Don't watch enough of his videos? You get criticised for not being well informed of his content.
• Watch lots of his videos? You get criticised for spending "an awful lot of spare time" watching those videos.

Im insulting no one here. It’s an observation - only alright when you do it though ey

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.

You should report him then!! YouTube take down anyone spreading misinformation or misleading claims.

 

[monga]

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.

So we’re to watch a YT site glorifying vaccines over a balanced view if you want to keep deluding yourself with vaccine positivity , crack on , I don't see the harm in someone reading out possible adverse reactions , the gov site had exactly the same info under side effects / warning and precautions , that's nitpicking at it's finest

 

[Doctor_Wibble]

I have watched a few of his videos -...

I've only watched a few but enough to know that it's the style that annoys me - instead of concentrating on the salient points of a piece he does his 'marking the homework' on every single sodding bit of it.
"This is a headline" "yes I'll accept that" *tick*
"this was printed on paper" *pauses, explains it was electronic first but yes, is now on paper* *tick*.

At which point I start to feel myself losing the will to live...

 

[grampositive]

Can you link a factual account then .

Of which specific claim?

This is the issue @monga - you mash everything together and dichtomise into "VACCINES ARE OUR LORD AND SAVIOUR" or "VACCINES ARE BAD"

You're asking me for a "factual account" of the entire pandemic, coronavirus policies, vaccine development, vaccine roll out, vaccine mandates, vaccine policies? There's a huge amount of nuance and shades of grey in there.

 

[Prefrontalmedialcortex]

So we’re to watch a YT site glorifying vaccines over a balanced view if you want to keep deluding yourself with vaccine positivity , crack on , I don't see the harm in someone reading out possible adverse reactions , the gov site had exactly the same info under side effects / warning and precautions , that's nitpicking at it's finest

Did you even watch it? He wasn’t reading them out as potential - he thought they were a list of actual side effects.

How is that nitpicking. Please go back and read my comment and watch that clip where Dr John Campbell himself says he made a mistake by thinking the 9 pages were actual side effects. My point is that he has made multiple mistakes yet continues to make these videos.

FYI - The Pfizer 9 pages of potential side effects are different to actual side effects.

 

[monga]

Of which specific claim?

This is the issue @monga - you mash everything together and dichtomise into "VACCINES ARE OUR LORD AND SAVIOUR" or "VACCINES ARE BAD"

You're asking me for a "factual account" of the entire pandemic, coronavirus policies, vaccine development, vaccine roll out, vaccine mandates, vaccine policies? There's a huge amount of nuance and shades of grey in there.

I want you to link a recent factual account on vaccine efficacy.

 

[Ensay]

I've only watched a few but enough to know that it's the style that annoys me - instead of concentrating on the salient points of a piece he does his 'marking the homework' on every single sodding bit of it.
"This is a headline" "yes I'll accept that" *tick*
"this was printed on paper" *pauses, explains it was electronic first but yes, is now on paper* *tick*.

At which point I start to feel myself losing the will to live...

A lot of YouTubers add padding to their videos because it allows more room for advertising.

The key mark to aim for is 10 minutes, because if a video exceeds that length, YouTube will allow the creator to insert adverts in the middle of their videos, therefore increasing revenue for said creator.

 

[grampositive]

I want you to link a recent factual account on vaccine efficacy.

Ok-dokie

Here is a review post from an epidemioloigst written in June, who has a relevant, recent portfolio of published research in this area.

 

[Emmelina Ball]

Ok-dokie

Here is a review post from an epidemioloigst written in June, who has a relevant, recent portfolio of published research in this area.

Thanks for sharing that. It’s not really that helpful or groundbreaking though is it? Clear as mud, full of estimates. Then there’s this nugget that answers the question that is being asked; the answer is “somewhat unknown”

 

[rainbowlemon]

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.

Public Health and Medical Professionals for Transparency (PHMPT). Only took a court case to reveal.

I'm not an expert but I don't openly claim to have each read ALL of Pfizer's released stuff to date. ( 383 documents ) .

Pfizer's Documents - Public Health and Medical Professionals for Transparency

Documents with a large file size are provided in a .zip file and will need to be uncompressed after download.

phmpt.org

This is the pesky table in question causing the issues. 1223 fatal.

From the report 5.3.6 CUMULATIVE ANALYSIS OF POST-AUTHORIZATION ADVERSE EVENT REPORTS OF PF-07302048 (BNT162B2) RECEIVED THROUGH 28-FEB-2021

View: https://perma.cc/6W69-9WFT

 

[grampositive]

Thanks for sharing that. It’s not really that helpful or groundbreaking though is it? Clear as mud, full of estimates. Then there’s this nugget that answers the question that is being asked; the answer is “somewhat unknown” View attachment 1577480

I am actually applauding - because you've accidentally hit the nail on the head.

This is real science - a credible researcher will convey uncertainty, nuance and caveats. It is the cranks and the scammers (and often the politicians) who make wild spurious claims with no flexibility for movement.

Guess which type of article would get lots of clicks and likes, and help someone quickly generate a profile to profit from?

I doubt you read the full article in the time it took you to reply, but here are the conclusions:

"Ultimately, vaccination has been an enormous success story in the Covid-19 pandemic. This paper estimates that nearly 80% of all deaths during 2021 were averted due to vaccination. To put it another way, if we had not had vaccines, the total death toll from Covid-19 would more than double, which is a staggering statistic.

It’s true to say that these numbers are uncertain, and it’s plausible that some of the estimates of deaths prevented are based on incorrect assumptions. However, even if we were to assume that vaccines are significantly less effective that randomized trials have shown them to be, the number of lives saved remains quite high simply due to the sheer scale of the pandemic. On the other hand, it’s entirely plausible that the vaccines saved far more lives than this study estimated, because we simply don’t know what would’ve happened without the immunizations with any certainty.

Ultimately, the facts are fairly clear — Covid-19 shots have saved many lives. The precise numbers are uncertain, but the evidence is strong that literally millions of people are alive today because they were able to avoid serious disease and death with some of the most impressive medical interventions of the last 50 years."

 

[monga]

Ok-dokie

Here is a review post from an epidemioloigst written in June, who has a relevant, recent portfolio of published research in this area.

I haven’t clicked in and the first thing I notice is MAY HAVE so that’s no different than Dr John speculating on his channel

 

[Emmelina Ball]

I am actually applauding - because you've accidentally hit the nail on the head.

This is real science - a credible researchers will convey uncertainty, nuance and caveats. It is the cranks and the scammers (and often the politicians) who make wild spurious claims with no flexibility for movement.

I doubt you read the full article in the time it took you to reply, but here are the conclusions:

"Ultimately, vaccination has been an enormous success story in the Covid-19 pandemic. This paper estimates that nearly 80% of all deaths during 2021 were averted due to vaccination. To put it another way, if we had not had vaccines, the total death toll from Covid-19 would more than double, which is a staggering statistic.

It’s true to say that these numbers are uncertain, and it’s plausible that some of the estimates of deaths prevented are based on incorrect assumptions. However, even if we were to assume that vaccines are significantly less effective that randomized trials have shown them to be, the number of lives saved remains quite high simply due to the sheer scale of the pandemic. On the other hand, it’s entirely plausible that the vaccines saved far more lives than this study estimated, because we simply don’t know what would’ve happened without the immunizations with any certainty.

Ultimately, the facts are fairly clear — Covid-19 shots have saved many lives. The precise numbers are uncertain, but the evidence is strong that literally millions of people are alive today because they were able to avoid serious disease and death with some of the most impressive medical interventions of the last 50 years."

Well I must disagree with you, as the facts can’t be clear if it’s built entirely on estimates. You were asked for recent concrete evidence and failed to provide - I’d welcome to see some hard concrete data that is not estimated.

 

[rainbowlemon]

Just curious but what do you also think of Pfizer's LNP biodistribution studies with the Wistar Han rats?

 

[grampositive]

Public Health and Medical Professionals for Transparency (PHMPT). Only took a court case to reveal.

I'm not an expert but I don't openly claim to have each read ALL of Pfizer's released stuff to date. ( 383 documents ) .

Pfizer's Documents - Public Health and Medical Professionals for Transparency

Documents with a large file size are provided in a .zip file and will need to be uncompressed after download.

phmpt.org

This is the pesky table in question causing the issues. 1223 fatal.

From the report 5.3.6 CUMULATIVE ANALYSIS OF POST-AUTHORIZATION ADVERSE EVENT REPORTS OF PF-07302048 (BNT162B2) RECEIVED THROUGH 28-FEB-2021

View attachment 1577481

View: https://perma.cc/6W69-9WFT

This a very basic misunderstanding that has been heavily discussed online.

If no one died in the months after vaccination this would be very unexpected - we would have found the cure for immortality as it would be preventing death.

Consider the same date in 2018. You take large sample of people and follow them up for 6 months. Some of them will die - appendicitis, heart attacks, cancer, suicide. Sadly humans are not immortal, and there is a baseline mortality rate in the population.

Raw numbers are therefore meaningless.

What you are interested in is whether the rate of death is higher in those vaccinated, compared to a comparable sample of unvaccinated people - it wasn't (nor was it for the other SEs examined), and therefore this is why scientists find these documents reassuring, rather than scary.

Rinse and repeat for all those scary fake claims about miscarriage - 1 in three women sadly miscarry in normal life. Therefore 1 in 3 will miscarry if they have been vaccinated.

 

[Tatooine_legend1]

It's a weird one for me. I am sure vaccines have saved many lives. I am neither anti or pro vaccine. I think they are necessary for those with autoimmune issues or those with cancer etc.

My father is 76 and has had an operation for bladder cancer. He is fully vaxxed and been called up for his next one. I am pro vaccine in that situation.

My elder brother had a single jab and he's 53, a smoker, but is a builder too so he's in pretty good physical health in that regard. He caught Covid and was laid up for a day with body aches, but then 24 hours later he was back to work.

On the flipside, my elder sister who is a similar age as my brother was fully vaxxed yet suffered worse than my brother did from it. she's ok now, but it's interesting. Meanwhile I've had two jabs and yet to catch Covid. Maybe I will get it bad, mild, who knows.

I just don't enjoy vaccines or meds in general if I can help it, unless absolutely necessary. I am 33, so I am two decades younger than both of my siblings. I was overweight though, but have since lost 3 stone and on a return to fitness again.

 

[Prefrontalmedialcortex]

I haven’t clicked in and the first thing I notice is MAY HAVE so that’s no different than Dr John speculating on his channel

Dr John doesn’t speculate, he makes outright claims such as the Pfizer 9 pages being something that they were not.

 

[Emmelina Ball]

It's a weird one for me. I am sure vaccines have saved many lives. I am neither anti or pro vaccine. I think they are necessary for those with autoimmune issues or those with cancer etc.

My father is 76 and has had an operation for bladder cancer. He is fully vaxxed and been called up for his next one. I am pro vaccine in that situation.

My elder brother had a single jab and he's 53, a smoker, but is a builder too so he's in pretty good physical health in that regard. He caught Covid and was laid up for a day with body aches, but then 24 hours later he was back to work.

On the flipside, my elder sister who is a similar age as my brother was fully vaxxed yet suffered worse than my brother did from it. she's ok now, but it's interesting. Meanwhile I've had two jabs and yet to catch Covid. Maybe I will get it bad, mild, who knows.

I just don't enjoy vaccines or meds in general if I can help it, unless absolutely necessary. I am 33, so I am two decades younger than both of my siblings. I was overweight though, but have since lost 3 stone and on a return to fitness again.

I think this really helps highlight the need for individual healthcare instead of blanket healthcare. As you (and many others on this thread) have observed many different outcomes for vaccination and it is important to consider pre existing health - is the individual in optimal health or are they obese, do they have pre existing conditions, what is the likely outcome for someone who is in optimal health to have a vaccine compared with someone in optimal health to catch covid. It’s very complex!