491–500 of 533 posts
I am a doctor. Pfizer Covid vaccine gave me a left leg DVT plus a peripheral neuropathy. I will never take another mRNA vaccine again.
You being a doctor matters how? Plenty of idiot antivax doctors out there.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I am not distrusting the method. I am distrusting the person that claims to follow it, behind closed doors and comes out with only a result.
Again: This reveals an ignorance about how trials actually work. You should be more curious. Clinical trials don't happen "behind closed doors and come out with only a result." Clinical trials are run independently across hundreds if not thousands of research sites. The people who run these studies do not work for the pharma companies . They do not work with each other. They do not know whether the drugs they're givi…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Again: This reveals an ignorance about how trials actually work. You should be more curious. Clinical trials don't happen "behind closed doors and come out with only a result." Clinical trials are run independently across hundreds if not thousands of research sites. The people who run these studies do not work for the pharma companies . They do not work with each other. They do not know whether the drugs they're givi…
He he...it is very funny that you just assume that I trust the FDA. I mean, the thought "May be this guy does not trust FDA" does not seem to have even cross your mind...
It has to do with incentives and capability.
Please describe the specific threat vector you're concerned about. Is it a rogue auditor changing some numbers around? Is it dozens of rogue reviewers just lying about what they see? Is it bribes? To whom? To do what, specifically?
Do you think the market is currently just flooded with ineffective or unsafe drugs because the FDA is bad at its job?
Tell me: Why haven't insurers – who spend all day every day understanding cost/risk/benefit tradeoffs of different drugs - detected this?
Or are they also in cahoots, and they just love spending their profits on drugs that are either ineffective or actively damaging their risk pool?
Surely you must have an actual theory of how this fraud happens, otherwise I suppose you just believe things with no evidence (but make it smug).
"Skeptic" brainworm got another one, it appears. So skeptical (and uncurious) that he's rendered himself incapable of evaluating evidence. Many such cases, unfortunately.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
He he...it is very funny that you just assume that I trust the FDA. I mean, the thought "May be this guy does not trust FDA" does not seem to have even cross your mind...
He he... it is very funny that you just assume this has anything to do with trust. It has to do with incentives and capability. Please describe the specific threat vector you're concerned about. Is it a rogue auditor changing some numbers around? Is it dozens of rogue reviewers just lying about what they see? Is it bribes? To whom? To do what, specifically? Do you think the market is currently just flooded with ineff…
They have. That is why they don't sell an insurance against vaccine injuries...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The Norwegian study landed on 4.5 cases per 100k from vaccinations [0]. Unvaccinated occurance was 200 per 100k [1]. [0] https://www.oslo-universitetssykehus.no/en/departments/hjert... [1] https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38262150/
In [1] "those who are not vaccinated" is a tiny subset of society that is actually composed of those who are infected, and also symptomatic, and also not vaccinated. A large portion of society can't be counted because they are asymptomatic. How do you find them to count them? In fact that's nearly everyone. And for those people the vaccine increases their risk by 4/100,000. (More harm than good.) Let me know if I've…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why increase? Are you saying that asymptomatic people don't have myocarditis risk?
Because it's causally linked to myocarditis[0]. [0] https://med.stanford.edu/news/all-news/2025/12/myocarditis-v... >Are you saying that asymptomatic people don't have myocarditis risk? No.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
He he... it is very funny that you just assume this has anything to do with trust. It has to do with incentives and capability. Please describe the specific threat vector you're concerned about. Is it a rogue auditor changing some numbers around? Is it dozens of rogue reviewers just lying about what they see? Is it bribes? To whom? To do what, specifically? Do you think the market is currently just flooded with ineff…
> Tell me: Why haven't insurers – who spend all day every day understanding cost/risk/benefit tradeoffs of different drugs - detected this? They have. That is why they don't sell an insurance against vaccine injuries...
First of all, insurers do sell insurance against vaccine injuries. And pharma companies buy that insurance.
Secondly, the companies that insure pharma companies are not the same companies (nor types of policies) that insure patients, and are completely unrelated to the question of insurers assessing evidence of drugs' safety or efficacy.
You (being deeply uncurious) are confusing "health insurers evaluate drug safety/efficacy" (which is true) with "corporate liability insurers refuse to insure vaccine injury risk" (which is false), with something completely unrelated, which is that governments generally create a first-order insurance fund for vaccines in order to prevent unpredictable litigation costs from completely obliterating the economic viability of making vaccines.
By the way, these public insurance funds do not cover cases of manufacturing defects, fraud, or negligence. So even giving you the benefit of the doubt on each of your points of confusion... it's still 100% irrelevant to whatever argument you think you're making.
Again: Some more curiosity about the world would really do you wonders!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why increase? Are you saying that asymptomatic people don't have myocarditis risk?
Because it's causally linked to myocarditis[0]. [0] https://med.stanford.edu/news/all-news/2025/12/myocarditis-v... >Are you saying that asymptomatic people don't have myocarditis risk? No.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because it's causally linked to myocarditis[0]. [0] https://med.stanford.edu/news/all-news/2025/12/myocarditis-v... >Are you saying that asymptomatic people don't have myocarditis risk? No.
I'm probably misunderstanding something, but if the overall population risk for myocarditis is bigger than 4/100,000, wouldn't that indicate that mRNA vaccinated people have a lower risk? The number I found for the global population is 10~20/100,000. If taking the vaccine increases the risk, wouldn't the risk be bigger than 10~20/100k?
Is that making more sense?
In part though, you are right to be noticing that the Pfizer study and the Stanford study disagree on the risk profile.
Why might that be?
Well, for one thing, if you look up the peer reviewers for the Pfizer study, it's the same list of names as the ones that performed the research, and each one of them is a Pfizer employee. Unsurprisingly, the lower risk profile was found in a study conducted by the same drug company that stands to profit from a lower risk profile. And it's not peer reviewed. Typically we rely on peer reviewed research in the world of science and medicine. Without it, it becomes very difficult to differentiate a science article from advertising, and pseudoscience.
Conversely the Stanford study was done by various researchers from various schools with no conflict of interest and no apparent profit from Pfizer, as best I can tell. And as we'd expect, they found not only a causal link, not only a higher incidence rate, but also the mechanism of action that drives it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because it's causally linked to myocarditis[0]. [0] https://med.stanford.edu/news/all-news/2025/12/myocarditis-v... >Are you saying that asymptomatic people don't have myocarditis risk? No.
Then you also accept that the asymptomatic (unvaccinated) covid risk of myocarditis is higher than the vaccine risk, because it is.
If you can't find a link to the court case on this, let me know. I'll find it for you.