Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Alarm as FDA willing to issue Covid-19 vaccine before stringent safety testing

mindhive.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 121 posts

Re: Alarm as FDA willing to issue Covid-19 vaccine before stringent safety testing

#91

Post by wegs »

_-___________-_ wrote: post #85
macintux wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Death is not the only metric that matters.

Are you trying to ambiguously perpetuate the myth that Covid-19 is likely to cause strange and unknown medical issues even in people that it only causes a minor acute illness in? If you're not trying to spread that falsehood, could you clarify what you mean?

Indeed. In that case, BMJ publishes myths.

https://www.bmj.com/content/370/bmj.m2815

Plus, there's common sense. I live in an area hit by COVID hard. About half of the people who I've heard of catching COVID19 through friend networks have some sort of long-term effects. Most are minor, but a few are not. I think the question is what happens a few years out.

Re: Alarm as FDA willing to issue Covid-19 vaccine before stringent safety testing

#92

Post by wegs »

_-___________-_ wrote: post #84
LarvaFX wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not true. Covid 19 is about 10x as likely to kill you even in that age group. See: https://i.insider.com/5ef234caf34d051bc821d0d8?width=1000&fo...

Have you got a more compelling source than that? Because that disagrees not only with the common sense of seeing what is happening in front of us, but also with all the other evidence I've seen.

From your other comments in this thread, I assume the evidence you refer to is the President's twitter feed, rather than scientific journals?

Re: Alarm as FDA willing to issue Covid-19 vaccine before stringent safety testing

#93

Post by falcolas »

logicchains wrote: post #71
latch wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is absurd bordering on trolling. That isn't the "whole point of rights" (maybe this is what you believe, but that's an opinion, don't present it as a fact). At best, a right is a societal norm. They're almost always conditional and complex - if for no other reason than, without conditions, some rights cannot co-exist. A strong commitment to human rights doesn't mean rights are non-conditional, so you're moving t…

>This is absurd bordering on trolling. That isn't the "whole point of rights" (maybe this is what you believe, but that's an opinion, don't present it as a fact). From the first line of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights ( https://www.un.org/en/universal-declaration-human-rights/ ): "Whereas recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the fo…

The freedom of speech is provided for by both the UN human rights declaration, and an amendment to the constitution - yet there are still some forms of speech which are illegal.

Individual rights can (and IMO should) be abridged when it impedes on the greater good.

Re: Alarm as FDA willing to issue Covid-19 vaccine before stringent safety testing

#94

Post by dekhn »

throwaway815190 wrote: post #64

The narrative about COVID is starting to fall apart and these cynical people want to make as much money as they can before it falls apart completely. CDC admits only 6% of reported COVID-19 deaths were actually caused by COVID.[0] [0]: https://t.co/W7Sxq4Pmos?amp=1

you are making basic factual errors about the actual science and medicine of COVID, using a throwaway account. Why?

Re: Alarm as FDA willing to issue Covid-19 vaccine before stringent safety testing

#95

Post by throwaway815190 »

dekhn wrote: post #94
throwaway815190 wrote: post #64

The narrative about COVID is starting to fall apart and these cynical people want to make as much money as they can before it falls apart completely. CDC admits only 6% of reported COVID-19 deaths were actually caused by COVID.[0] [0]: https://t.co/W7Sxq4Pmos?amp=1

you are making basic factual errors about the actual science and medicine of COVID, using a throwaway account. Why?

Why do you accuse people who say things you don't like of being white supremacists?

Re: Alarm as FDA willing to issue Covid-19 vaccine before stringent safety testing

#96

Post by throwaway815190 »

nojs wrote: post #72
throwaway815190 wrote: post #64

The narrative about COVID is starting to fall apart and these cynical people want to make as much money as they can before it falls apart completely. CDC admits only 6% of reported COVID-19 deaths were actually caused by COVID.[0] [0]: https://t.co/W7Sxq4Pmos?amp=1

You probably know this, but that’s not what that table means. > Table 3 shows the types of health conditions and contributing causes mentioned in conjunction with deaths involving coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). For 6% of the deaths, COVID-19 was the only cause mentioned. For deaths with conditions or causes in addition to COVID-19, on average, there were 2.6 additional conditions or causes per death.

No, that's exactly what the table means. The fact you feel you have to preface your statement with "You probably know this" means you know you're lying.

Re: Alarm as FDA willing to issue Covid-19 vaccine before stringent safety testing

#97

Post by dekhn »

throwaway815190 wrote: post #95
dekhn wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

you are making basic factual errors about the actual science and medicine of COVID, using a throwaway account. Why?

Why do you accuse people who say things you don't like of being white supremacists?

I didn't do that. Now you are arguing in bad faith.

Re: Alarm as FDA willing to issue Covid-19 vaccine before stringent safety testing

#98

Post by throwaway815190 »

dekhn wrote: post #97
throwaway815190 wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why do you accuse people who say things you don't like of being white supremacists?

I didn't do that. Now you are arguing in bad faith.

I'm not arguing at all. I'm speaking the truth. What are you doing?

"Accuse your opponent of what you are doing, to create confusion and to inculcate voters against evidence of your own guilt"

Saul Alinsky, Rules for Radicals

Re: Alarm as FDA willing to issue Covid-19 vaccine before stringent safety testing

#99

Post by dekhn »

throwaway815190 wrote: post #98
dekhn wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I didn't do that. Now you are arguing in bad faith.

I'm not arguing at all. I'm speaking the truth. What are you doing? "Accuse your opponent of what you are doing, to create confusion and to inculcate voters against evidence of your own guilt" Saul Alinsky, Rules for Radicals

I'm really struggling to see where you're coming from here. You made a claim about what the CDC "admitted" (which is technically correct in the sense that they said it, but it wasn't some sort of "admission"), but misinterpreted it. I called you out on that, and you accused me of accusing you of being a white supremacist. Obviously I did nothing of the sort. I'm just curious why you're pushing the narrative you are.

Re: Alarm as FDA willing to issue Covid-19 vaccine before stringent safety testing

#100

Post by ghthor »

swiley wrote: post #2

This is why people are uncomfortable with mandatory vaccination orders. I’m pro vaccine and in general well tested vaccines are very important for eradicating some pretty awful diseases. I have all of mine and I’m thankful my parents were sane and paid attention to science. Safe modern medicine involves care and testing, that’s the whole point of organizations like the FDA. If we just carelessly push stuff like this…

The FDA is the leading example for how NOT to protect the public from the medical industry. See the documentary "The Bleeding Edge".
Post reply on HN