It is a listed side effect from the vaccines but this lot won’t even admit that it is even ‘rare’, they believe it genuinely cannot happen.
I have not seen any of them even say ‘well it’s possible that it could have been vaccine related as it is a listed side effect’.
It’s always got to be something else.
View attachment 887385View attachment 887386
COVID-19 vaccine #7 and general vaccine conversation
- Start date
-
- Tags
- Coronavirus Threads
- Status
New to Tattle Life? Click "Order Thread by Most Liked Posts" button below to get an idea of what the site is about:
Give us something to see instead of just saying, “open your eyes.”
Covid-19 is also linked to increased heart problems.
www.imperial.ac.uk
Heart damage found in half of COVID-19 patients discharged after hospitalisation | Imperial News | Imperial College London
COVID-19 HEART IMPACT - Half of patients who have been hospitalised with severe COVID-19 have damage to their hearts.
www.imperial.ac.uk
I've just read that article. It's a journalists view on him and clearly has an intent to discredit him. Did you consider the bias of this source also? Or just assumed it must be completely unbiased because it suits your narrative?That said, Robert Malone has also had criticism for his views as well. Here's an article from The Atlantic magazine (there are others):
The Vaccine Scientist Spreading Vaccine Misinformation
Robert Malone claims to have invented mRNA technology. Why is he trying so hard to undermine its use?www.theatlantic.com
As the author states: a lot of Malone's comments are based on misinformation. He has suggested that the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines might make Covid infections worse, which certainly hasn't been meted out by the numbers - i.e. the evidence.
You say we shouldn't believe everything the Government says (which I agree with), but similarly I'm not going to believe everything Robert Malone says either. Scientists often disagree with each other, which is healthy.
I've quoted some below, and added my comments in italics.
"In that alternate media universe, Robert Malone’s star is ascendant. He started popping up on podcasts and cable news shows a few months ago, presented as a scientific expert, arguing that the approval process for the vaccines had been unwisely rushed (It has). He told Tucker Carlson that the public doesn’t have enough information to decide whether to get vaccinated (They don't). He told Glenn Beck that offering incentives for taking vaccines is unethical (It is). He told Del Bigtree, an anti-vaccine activist who opposes common childhood inoculations, that there hadn’t been sufficient research on how the vaccines might affect women’s reproductive systems (There hasn't). On show after show, Malone, who has quickly amassed more than 200,000 Twitter followers, casts doubt on the safety of the vaccines while decrying what he sees as attempts to censor dissent.
In addition to being a medical doctor, he has served as a vaccine consultant for pharmaceutical companies.
His objections to the Pfizer and Moderna shots have to do mostly with their expedited approval process and with the government’s system for tracking adverse reactions. Speaking as a doctor, he would probably recommend their use only for those at highest risk from COVID-19. Everyone else should be wary, he told me, and those under 18 should be excluded entirely."
I don't think any of the above paint him as a loon that doesn't know what he's talking about, regardless of the rest of the article trying to discredit him.
I'm also interested in the evidence you're using to quote the above in bold, that the vaccines won't make covid worse. He says they might. If we look at the high number of cases of people in hospital currently in Ireland, where they have very high vaccine takeup (93%) - I wonder what it is exactly you think all these people are in hospital for?
I think you should apply that same rational thinking to everything you read. For example, "what motivation/incentive/bias does this media outlet have for this article?"
In the name of balance:
factcheck.afp.com
www.politifact.com
web.archive.org
www.the-scientist.com
Flawed study misrepresents Covid-19 vaccination fatality rate
A peer-reviewed study that spread on social media claims Covid-19 shots are dangerous and governments should rethink their vaccination campaigns. But the scientific paper used a flawed methodology and has been retracted by the journal.
factcheck.afp.com
There’s no sign the COVID vaccines’ spike protein is toxic
The headline on a YouTube video and a person who speaks in it make a troubling claim about the way the COVID-19 vaccines
Fact Check-COVID-19 vaccines are not ‘cytotoxic’
Posts are sharing the false statement that the spike protein in COVID-19 vaccines is cytotoxic, suggesting that it kills or damages cells. There is no evidence to support this.
Frontiers Pulls Special COVID-19 Issue After Content Dispute
The issue's guest editors resign after falling out with the publisher over the management of papers, including a rejected manuscript on ivermectin, that were submitted for a special issue on drug repurposing for COVID-19.
Good luck with that
How about you start with listening to Dr Robert Malone, Dr Geert Vanden Bossche, Dr Mike Yeadon, Dr Roger Hodkinson, and Dr Byram Bridle instead of a professor pants down.Give us something to see instead of just saying, “open your eyes.”
The respectful and agreeful "Like" reactGood luck with that
The challenging your fake facts "Haha" react
So kind of posters to supply us with balance.
Because we don't get enough of that tit fed to us 24 hours a day through our TV, radio,press,adverts, friends, families and beyond.
Because we don't get enough of that tit fed to us 24 hours a day through our TV, radio,press,adverts, friends, families and beyond.
I didn't say he was a loon, I was just saying not everything he says can, or indeed, should be taken without question, purely because of what he's done in the past. You were the one implying he was above question, yet you accuse me of trying to spin a narrative.
I don't have an issue with the latter. If the only reply one can muster to a post of mine is a 'haha' reaction when it's obviously not intended to be humorous, then I'd say that's evidence I've made a good point...
Damn gonna have to go back to university and get a PhD before the Tattlers will listen to me 
At no point did I imply he was above question! I gave him as an example of a credible scientist.
Again, use the logic and principle you've quoted above to everything you read, and you may just start to open to your eyes and mind a little more.
This is like the mask debate all over again.
There is evidence supporting both sides. But the fact is we don't really know whether the vaccine is safe or not. People could start dropping dead in the next 5 years, or everyone will be fine, covid will disappear and life will go back to normal.
But no-one really knows yet. I for one don't want to be the lab rat. I feel covid isn't a risk to me and so I don't want to take the vaccine incase there is health implications. I don't see what's so wrong with that. If I was over 50 or over weight I'd probably take it. But I'm not , so I don't.
There is evidence supporting both sides. But the fact is we don't really know whether the vaccine is safe or not. People could start dropping dead in the next 5 years, or everyone will be fine, covid will disappear and life will go back to normal.
But no-one really knows yet. I for one don't want to be the lab rat. I feel covid isn't a risk to me and so I don't want to take the vaccine incase there is health implications. I don't see what's so wrong with that. If I was over 50 or over weight I'd probably take it. But I'm not , so I don't.
Yeah but by describing him as 'credible' the implication is that we should assume he's right.
I think my mind *is* open. That's the point.
We'll never agree, I realise lol.
This is very interesting!
Similarities of stillbirths and preterm births for vaccinated and unvaccinated mothers.
Covid vaccines safe in pregnancy, data shows https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-59417509
Covid vaccines safe in pregnancy, data shows https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-59417509
Are they still classing these women as unvaccinated though until 14 days post vaccine? What if the vaccine caused the woman to go into premature labour a couple of days after vaccination with a still born baby, would this still be classed as unvaccinated? I haven't looked at the data thoroughly to see if it specifies.
It doesn’t mention this but the rates are similar for vaccinated and unvaccinated.
- Status