Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 1075 of 1146 FirstFirst ... 75575975102510651073107410751076107710851125 ... LastLast
Results 16,111 to 16,125 of 17180
  1. #16111
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Central Iowa
    Posts
    7,916
    The media was ready to canonize him last year.

  2. #16112
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    44,829
    Quote Originally Posted by catman View Post
    The media was ready to canonize him last year.
    Do you mean this literally or figuratively?

    Because it seems you are mad at the media for covering the guy you’re saying we should be listening to.

  3. #16113
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    42,382
    Quote Originally Posted by catman View Post
    I read the story I posted. It has been peer reviewed. I do not recommend Ivermectin as a treatment for Covid, but if the Mexican government says it works, so be it.
    As I have said, Ivermectin was trialed due to it's antiinflammatory properties. It was discontinued in this country due to ineffectiveness. I have no problem with that decision.
    It was peer reviewed? Where was the study published?


    "`Can you explain this gap in your resume?`

    `Well, the vaccinated hosts on the news channel I like convinced me to resign to protest my work's vaccine mandate and take a few years off to help extend the pandemic”" - @LOLGOP

  4. #16114
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    42,382
    Absolutely astonishing that the media would talk a lot about the top federal infectious disease doctor in the US during a pandemic. It's like they don't even care what a self-certified ophthalmologist has to say.


    "`Can you explain this gap in your resume?`

    `Well, the vaccinated hosts on the news channel I like convinced me to resign to protest my work's vaccine mandate and take a few years off to help extend the pandemic”" - @LOLGOP

  5. #16115
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    America
    Posts
    102,768
    Quote Originally Posted by valade16 View Post
    Name a single person that called him a saint.
    Does this count?

    https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nat...ony-fauci/amp/

  6. #16116
    Join Date
    May 2020
    Posts
    5,365
    Quote Originally Posted by dbroncos78087 View Post
    The GOP and their voters are always looking to make mountains out of molehills with regard to stuff like this. There are one a couple of verified deaths out of millions upon millions of injections of each vaccine and yet Republicans are acting like it's a toss of the coin as to whether you will die. The same is true of other things such as voter fraud. It's a clear and present danger and trend of the party and their supporters.
    https://twitter.com/natty_red/status...928995849?s=20
    My Ignore List: bklynny67, nastynice, OhSoSlick, spliff(TONE), zmaster52

  7. #16117
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    IL
    Posts
    10,157
    That graph is based on the VAERS database, which if I recall correctly anyone at anytime can go on there and add information. There is no verification system associated with it.

    https://wonder.cdc.gov/vaers.html

    Here is the disclaimer:

    Disclaimer

    VAERS accepts reports of adverse events and reactions that occur following vaccination. Healthcare providers, vaccine manufacturers, and the public can submit reports to VAERS. While very important in monitoring vaccine safety, VAERS reports alone cannot be used to determine if a vaccine caused or contributed to an adverse event or illness. The reports may contain information that is incomplete, inaccurate, coincidental, or unverifiable. Most reports to VAERS are voluntary, which means they are subject to biases. This creates specific limitations on how the data can be used scientifically. Data from VAERS reports should always be interpreted with these limitations in mind.
    The strengths of VAERS are that it is national in scope and can quickly provide an early warning of a safety problem with a vaccine. As part of CDC and FDA's multi-system approach to post-licensure vaccine safety monitoring, VAERS is designed to rapidly detect unusual or unexpected patterns of adverse events, also known as "safety signals." If a safety signal is found in VAERS, further studies can be done in safety systems such as the CDC's Vaccine Safety Datalink (VSD) or the Clinical Immunization Safety Assessment (CISA) project. These systems do not have the same limitations as VAERS, and can better assess health risks and possible connections between adverse events and a vaccine.

    Key considerations and limitations of VAERS data:

    Vaccine providers are encouraged to report any clinically significant health problem following vaccination to VAERS, whether or not they believe the vaccine was the cause.
    Reports may include incomplete, inaccurate, coincidental and unverified information.
    The number of reports alone cannot be interpreted or used to reach conclusions about the existence, severity, frequency, or rates of problems associated with vaccines.
    VAERS data are limited to vaccine adverse event reports received between 1990 and the most recent date for which data are available.
    VAERS data do not represent all known safety information for a vaccine and should be interpreted in the context of other scientific information.
    VAERS data available to the public include only the initial report data to VAERS. Updated data which contains data from medical records and corrections reported during follow up are used by the government for analysis. However, for numerous reasons including data consistency, these amended data are not available to the public.
    Last edited by Pierzynski4Prez; 10-27-2021 at 10:11 AM.

  8. #16118
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Central Iowa
    Posts
    7,916
    Quote Originally Posted by natepro View Post
    It was peer reviewed? Where was the study published?
    You didn't read the story, did you. This failure on your part does not cause me any shock or surprise.
    Read the story.

  9. #16119
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    62,103
    Brett once again proves that his critical thinking skills are critically damaged.

  10. #16120
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    America
    Posts
    102,768
    Quote Originally Posted by Pierzynski4Prez View Post
    That graph is based on the VAERS database, which if I recall correctly anyone at anytime can go on there and add information. There is no verification system associated with it.

    https://wonder.cdc.gov/vaers.html

    Here is the disclaimer:

    Disclaimer

    VAERS accepts reports of adverse events and reactions that occur following vaccination. Healthcare providers, vaccine manufacturers, and the public can submit reports to VAERS. While very important in monitoring vaccine safety, VAERS reports alone cannot be used to determine if a vaccine caused or contributed to an adverse event or illness. The reports may contain information that is incomplete, inaccurate, coincidental, or unverifiable. Most reports to VAERS are voluntary, which means they are subject to biases. This creates specific limitations on how the data can be used scientifically. Data from VAERS reports should always be interpreted with these limitations in mind.
    The strengths of VAERS are that it is national in scope and can quickly provide an early warning of a safety problem with a vaccine. As part of CDC and FDA's multi-system approach to post-licensure vaccine safety monitoring, VAERS is designed to rapidly detect unusual or unexpected patterns of adverse events, also known as "safety signals." If a safety signal is found in VAERS, further studies can be done in safety systems such as the CDC's Vaccine Safety Datalink (VSD) or the Clinical Immunization Safety Assessment (CISA) project. These systems do not have the same limitations as VAERS, and can better assess health risks and possible connections between adverse events and a vaccine.

    Key considerations and limitations of VAERS data:

    Vaccine providers are encouraged to report any clinically significant health problem following vaccination to VAERS, whether or not they believe the vaccine was the cause.
    Reports may include incomplete, inaccurate, coincidental and unverified information.
    The number of reports alone cannot be interpreted or used to reach conclusions about the existence, severity, frequency, or rates of problems associated with vaccines.
    VAERS data are limited to vaccine adverse event reports received between 1990 and the most recent date for which data are available.
    VAERS data do not represent all known safety information for a vaccine and should be interpreted in the context of other scientific information.
    VAERS data available to the public include only the initial report data to VAERS. Updated data which contains data from medical records and corrections reported during follow up are used by the government for analysis. However, for numerous reasons including data consistency, these amended data are not available to the public.
    VAERS is theoretically a great system, but unfortunately because we have people who want to hurt the vaccine so they can go report anything and everything they want.
    Let's get embedded tweets working again!

    https://forums.prosportsdaily.com/sh...5#post33780085

  11. #16121
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    44,829
    That VAERS data talking point is from May. How come we haven’t been able to verify any of these deaths as vaccine related in the past 6 months?

  12. #16122
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    42,382
    Quote Originally Posted by catman View Post
    You didn't read the story, did you. This failure on your part does not cause me any shock or surprise.
    Read the story.
    I did. And that's why I'm asking you where it was published, because your claim here is telling me that you didn't look into it.

  13. #16123
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Central Iowa
    Posts
    7,916
    It was published in Mexico in Principa Scientific.
    Obviously, you didn't actually read the story. You may have glanced through it. Again, failure to read something for content on your part is nothing I can correct.

  14. #16124
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Central Iowa
    Posts
    7,916
    Quote Originally Posted by valade16 View Post
    That VAERS data talking point is from May. How come we haven’t been able to verify any of these deaths as vaccine related in the past 6 months?
    Not sure how often VAERS publishes findings.
    Here is a report on the findings of deaths from the vaccines, though:
    https://www.reuters.com/article/fact...-idUSL1N2PB2H3
    They say that there have been 3 documented cases of death connected to the Janssen vaccine (not currently in use in the US).

  15. #16125
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Central Iowa
    Posts
    7,916
    Quote Originally Posted by natepro View Post
    I did. And that's why I'm asking you where it was published, because your claim here is telling me that you didn't look into it.
    Now it's time for you to stop ducking the question about Ivermectin being labeled for use in humans. Will you finally admit that it is and stop whining about it?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •