Oh don’t worry, I saw it too. They said if it was live it wouldn’t be offered to children
- Status
New to Tattle Life? Click "Order Thread by Most Liked Posts" button below to get an idea of what the site is about:
No I didn't - I said if it was live it wouldn't be offered to immunosuppressed or pregnant people. Kids can have live vaccines.Oh don’t worry, I saw it too. They said if it was live it wouldn’t be offered to children
Both my original post (quoted by monga) and my edited are on the previous page, so no-one can debate what was or wasn't said. Believe they're even timestamped too.
My confusion was that I thought it was the adult flu vaccine being talked about - as I said, I made a mistake.
Where's all this correcting and admittance of mistakes from others on the thread.....?
I thought they were supposed to be ignoring you.@Emmelina Ball - I never said it wasn't - but if this is how you get your kicks on a sunday who am I to judge eh.
I didn't know which vaccine was being spoken about (adult versus child 'flu vaccine), and all I said was that as long as a vaccine isn't live attentuated, there is no risk to anyone else. I even corrected my post to avoid this level of confusion, but glad I could provide you with this oppoutunity
I didn't realise it was the kids vaccine being spoken about, and edited my post as soon I twigged. Yup - I made a mistake and corrected it! I have no qualms in admitting when I get things wrong.
This is how things progress guys
Very good point - I think it was seen as too good an oppoutunity to missI thought they were supposed to be ignoring you.
I'm glad I could provide them with something to increase morale haha.dhjshehe
factually inaccurate as flu vaccines are live for children so when you made your blanket statement you were wrong. Thanks for apologising! 🫢
my apologies for misquoting you on your misinformation and misleading claims. Here is what you said:
factually inaccurate as flu vaccines are live for children so when you made your blanket statement you were wrong. Thanks for apologising! 🫢
So while I have all this attention on me
McCullough is claiming no RCTs exist that demonstrate the coronavirus vaccines reduce deaths or severe disease - in a tweet posted by a user who has ordered me not to @ them.
I listed four RCTs that definitely exist (and there are many more) - no one sees an issue with McCullough balatantly lying? And yet everyone is happy to blindly follow him?
Any takers?
McCullough is claiming no RCTs exist that demonstrate the coronavirus vaccines reduce deaths or severe disease - in a tweet posted by a user who has ordered me not to @ them.
I listed four RCTs that definitely exist (and there are many more) - no one sees an issue with McCullough balatantly lying? And yet everyone is happy to blindly follow him?
Any takers?
Last edited:
@grampositive already said they didn’t know which vaccine was being spoken about. They are right in saying the flu vaccine is not live and obvious they are referring to the adult one (and not the child one) as they mention pregnant women and immunosuppressed.
They did not make a misleading claim or misinform but nice try.
Thanks @Prefrontalmedialcortex !!
Seems to have become a convenient smokescreen for the dozens of actual errors that no one seems to want to address (and I don't repeatedly bring up because it's a bit of a derailment)
Seems to have become a convenient smokescreen for the dozens of actual errors that no one seems to want to address (and I don't repeatedly bring up because it's a bit of a derailment)
It’s pretty obvious what your comment refers to and that your statement was not about the children’s vaccine.
Regarding McCullough - I do see an issue and there are others like him that make unfounded claims. Malone, Yeadon.
Yes @Prefrontalmedialcortex ! I think Yeadon become such a caricature that he turned even the most ardent of "anti-vaxxers" off - his claims about everyone who had been boosted would die in two years & the vaccines being used for tracking were laughable.
Malone is more insidious as he knows how to make claims that sound plausible - but very easy to disprove and plenty of people have done.
The thing they all have in common is this inappropriate glee when it comes to talking about vaccines and how they will harm or kill people. I saw a genuinely shocking tweet from Malone where he was bragging about a (fake) article describing hundreds of child deaths - it isn't how anyone who is truly invested in public health talks. Or anyone with any sense of morality.
Malone is more insidious as he knows how to make claims that sound plausible - but very easy to disprove and plenty of people have done.
The thing they all have in common is this inappropriate glee when it comes to talking about vaccines and how they will harm or kill people. I saw a genuinely shocking tweet from Malone where he was bragging about a (fake) article describing hundreds of child deaths - it isn't how anyone who is truly invested in public health talks. Or anyone with any sense of morality.
McCullough is clearly lying, but as he backs up certain views, anti vaccine people generally won't apply much scrutiny to what he posts.So while I have all this attention on me
McCullough is claiming no RCTs exist that demonstrate the coronavirus vaccines reduce deaths or severe disease - in a tweet posted by a user who has ordered me not to @ them.
I listed four RCTs that definitely exist (and there are many more) - no one sees an issue with McCullough balatantly lying? And yet everyone is happy to blindly follow him?
Any takers?
Generally what happens is those who are anti vaccines will automatically label certain sources fake, unreliable, etc. But other sources will be believed no matter what.
I've seen it happen before where tweets are shared here pretty speedily and if mistakes are pointed out, the poster of the tweets will ignore the main point and hook on something small they feel they can argue against. But if there's not even a small hook, they'll usually completely ignore the response or make out that you've said something you didn't (ie 'bad faith' debating).
Dr John has been censored and warned by YT he can’t question the covid vaccine side effects…Informed choice anyone…
There are research groups worldwide examining prevalence of vaccine side effects, mechanism, prognosis, risk groups etc. Happy to link them if you're interested.
This isn't the same thing as a retired nurse speculating and making fake claims. If youtube don't want to host this content that's their prerogative - Campbell can still promote this kind of content elsewhere.
It does always make me chuckle how I hear so much from those who claim to be censored. Bit of an oxymoron.
Don’t you worry John has already posted (on YT recommendation )the only links we’re to check
Bit strange for an advert about a child being diagnosed with myocarditis to be made.. suppose anything goes in America.
Not sure how that's a reply to my post @monga - but none of those bodies are research groups.
I understand the suspicion towards WHO/GAVI/CDC/NHS etc etc etc.
I understand the suspicion towards WHO/GAVI/CDC/NHS etc etc etc.
I think it's only if you fill in the bit that asks if your in contact with immunosuppressed people
I’ve never noticed that bit on the form .I’m certainly going to check when they send them out again.
You would think the media would be linking them as reputable sources as that’s who most people follow for information.
Linking who....?
The media generally provide quotes from the bodies you've listed.
They also often highlight published research or quotes from experts from the research groups I mentioned.
They do both of these with varying degrees of (in)accuracy and contradiction.
They'll also allow people with no expertise or credibility whatsoever to write articles or be interviewed
We know they do , the whitewash continues when they threaten people unless they post from certain sites that they deem appropriateLinking who....?
The media generally provide quotes from the bodies you've listed.
They also often highlight published research or quotes from experts from the research groups I mentioned.
They do both of these with varying degrees of (in)accuracy and contradiction.
They'll also allow people with no expertise or credibility whatsoever to write articles or be interviewed
- Status