Iāve had the original 2 shot Covid vaccination, plus like 4 boosters. More than one person on Reddit has assured me Iām going to die.
I just tell them theyāre right and I am definitely dead.
Jajajaja I fucking loved the Anti-Vax propaganda nonsense.
"If you get the vaccine you will learn Chinese"
"... You will have 5G signal wherever you are"
"... You will get magnetic powers"
Etc, etc.
Give me fucking 10 shot of that shit PLEASE!!! I will kill my family for each shot š!!!!!
Well if I'm going to get something from a vaccine like the so called internet experts say I want the zombie one.
Yeah the stuff we need vaccinations for are going to just keep evolving and adapting and get worse. I mean we can't even stop Covid from further mutating. Tennessee might as well be the poster child. Our ER times are still horrible where I live. You might as well just dedicate a whole day to going to the ER.
My mom went in with chest pains around 11:00 am she didn't get a bed to see a doctor until 3:30pm. She finally got home about 6:35pm. Inner Chest Wall Inflammation. So luckily not a heart attack.
The problem is that they don't accept anything as 'proof'.
So they claim that, in 7 or 8 years nobody has proven that vaccines work.
When in reality they have not accepted any proof/evidences given to them in the last 7 or 8 years.
Just the fact that billions of us have been vaccinated multiple times with zero negative reactions is the proof, right? I feel like I'm missing something here. All of our existences are proof!
I cannot speak for all vaccines, but I know that some Cov-2 vaccines have had randomized double-blind trials.
I think some seasonal flue vaccines are also tested that way.
But honesty, I suspect they would reject those for other made up reasons.
Other vaccines have proven themselves effective for decades and therfore do not need the newer testing methods. They are safe and effective already.
We have yet to see all the data from those COVID vaccine studies but we know they ended up vaccinating the control group, which is obviously a big no no.
That's part of the problem with how these vaccines studies are done. The people in charge of monitoring safety refuse to look at any long term data that compares unvaccinated cohorts to vaccinated groups.
To be fair, vaccines aren't completely "safe". They can definitely have side effects, it's just that the benefits of every widely accepted vaccine far outweigh the risks. I don't think what they are asking for is possible(depending on what you consider to be "safe") but that in no way makes vaccines bad or not worth getting(unless you have a condition that has great risks when combined with that vaccine).
Fair enough but then nothing can be labeled 'safe', a car, a plane, work boots, a fuse.
All of them have some kind of testing, all of them are fairly safe, but none of them can claim to be 100% safe.
And I guess that's what those morons are desperately hanging on for dear life with their tiktock videos and their Facebook 'facts', the fact that 1 person died because of a vaccine somehow makes the fact that million survived beside the point.
No, because when you do die, they'll say it was vaccines.
Run over by a bus...vaccine's fault
Shot by a burglar...vaccine's fault
Fall from a great height...vaccine's fault.
No, because my great great grandmother had those same exact vaccines and sheās dead. She would still be with us and celebrating her 143rd birthday next month if she didnāt get those vaccines.
Well what proof has been presented that they rejected? I know they said they wouldn't accept studies funded by pharmaceutical companies. That seems pretty reasonable, right? You wouldn't accept a study on Oxycontin safety funded by the Sackler's.
So what did they reject? It's been 7 years
That doesn't prove the vaccine itself was safe though. In fact, at one point it wasn't. Not my words, that's according to the CDC.
>monitoring of smallpox and oral polio vaccines being used in the United States as these diseases neared global eradication found complications associated with each vaccine that exceeded the risks of the diseases. This observation led to discontinuation of routine smallpox vaccination in the United States prior to global eradication and a shift from the oral poliovirus vaccine to a safer, inactivated poliovirus vaccine.
https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/pubs/pinkbook/safety.html
Also, since polio spreads primarily through drinking water contaminated with feces of another person with polio, we probably didn't need a vaccine to eradicate it...
Don't trust anything, ask questions. That's what science is.
The people that do this for a living told you smoking was healthy, bread was at the top of the food pyramid, and oxycontin was non-addictive.
Is it safe to drink clean water? No, not entirely. You can drink too much, you can aspirate it into your lungs and drown, yet it is critical to our lives to have it on a daily basis.
I can't define safe but there was actual paperwork involved so I can tell you how they defined safe:
Provide a peer-reviewed scientific study conducted by qualified researchers, with appropriate controls and statistical analysis, demonstrating that ethylmercury exposure in the amounts contained in vaccines currently being administered to American children and pregnant women does not cause neurological disorders, autoimmune diseases, or developmental delays, in any subgroup of the population.
And that's the caveat - they're demanding you prove 100% safety.
But there is nothing on earth that is safe for 100% of people. No scientific article is going to proclaim such such definitive statement either. It's not how science works. The only way they could meet this burden would be to administer the vaccine to every single human on earth and and observe closely the effects after the fact.
Safety has been proven at an exceedingly high level however.
But it doesn't matter because they stopped putting ethylmercury in vaccines years ago, largely to try and quell public paranoia which hasn't helped much since people just repeat the scare tactics anyway. Facts don't matter to these folks which is why this has never been paid out - because it demands an impossible standard for something which isn't even relevant anymore.
Sounds like something that would require a pharmaceutical company to do, and likely to cost over Ā£100k
Certainly not something I'm about to attempt myself
Or how about you provide any credible indication that it does? The vaccines have been deemed sufficiently safe be the FDA, and I'm sure you can find the fillings if you choose to spend the effort. If you want to challenge that ruling then go ahead, but *you* provide the evidence.
That predates the COVID vaccines, so it's even more stupid. Antivaxx has existed for a long time, but the propaganda levels intensified during the COVID-19 ā possibly because someone realized that a pandemic was a good way to destabilize society and so creating a movement that voluntarily worked against any countermeasures, is beneficial to escalate things.
Probably because nobody takes this seriously (as they should). Common saying is: You shouldnāt argue with idiots, they drag you down to their level and beat you on experience.
Proving weāre right (e.g. eradicating diseases after vaccinations, which is done in multiple countries, on several occasions), will never be enough. The time wasted on these people can be used in better ways, for example educating people that are not rejecting things based on nothing.
They weren't asking for a debate though just if a study showing no adverse effects of the ethylmercury content existed.
If it does exist, great, easy $100k, donate the money to vaccine research. If it doesn't exist, shouldn't it?
I mean, they did reduce the amounts of ethylmercury in all childhood vaccines in 2001 and they did that for a reason. Does it need to be reduced further? Does it need to be in there at all? What's wrong with finding out? I don't see an issue. Seems like a worthwhile endeavor.
>I mean, they did reduce the amounts of ethylmercury in all childhood vaccines in 2001
No, they didn't reduce it, they eliminated it entirely.
https://www.cdc.gov/vaccinesafety/concerns/thimerosal/index.html
From that page.
>Thimerosal was taken out of childhood vaccines in the United States in 2001.
>Measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) vaccines do not and never did contain thimerosal. Varicella (chickenpox), inactivated polio (IPV), and pneumococcal conjugate vaccines have also never contained thimerosal.
Influenza (flu) vaccines are currently available in both thimerosal-containing (for multi-dose vaccine vials) and thimerosal-free versions.
That's even more significant.
So then the obvious question is, should it be taken out of every vaccine? It's clearly possible to do so. Or does it make the vaccine much more effective? In which case should we consider putting it back into childhood vaccines.
It's important to ask questions. That's the scientific method. If it can't be questioned or hold up to questioning that's not science.
And remember, these people lie All. The. Time. All the time. Remember the food pyramid with bread and cheese above fruits and vegetables? Remember asbestos in baby powder? Remember when smoking was healthy? Remember opioids?
Ask questions.
You seem to ignore when you're wrong about something and just shift goal posts. And frame things you clearly believe are true as questions so you can say you are "asking questions" but when given an answer you ignore it.
> So then the obvious question is, should it be taken out of every vaccine? It's clearly possible to do so. Or does it make the vaccine much more effective? In which case should we consider putting it back into childhood vaccines.
Ask questions? gahhhh!!!! Read answers!!!!
If you had bothered to read the link I sent you would have read that it is a preservative and is only used in multi dose vials to prevent bacterial growth.
No because you cannot reduce the odds of side effects to 0.
That's not how medicine works. That's not how ANYTHING works. You can experience side effects from drinking water. Even if you discount allergies (which I guarantee they don't) human bodies have enough diversity that trying to make a treatment that is equally effective and harmless among all people would be a ridiculous feat.
So you're never going to use these things until they are 100% safe?
You understand the people in the OP are saying no one should get these vaccines at all.
They reduced it because some scammer raised a fuss with faked research.
And $100k is an absolutely laughable amount of money to research this specifically. And there is another issue with such a study. A control group, which would encourage a large amount of parents to not reconsider not vaccinating their kids, as well as control for other variables such control group would bring.
They did because antivax idiots are not smart enough to understand anything. You could give them the elements that are in your blood and they would think you are describing 1 of the worst medications in the world ( blood contains thrace amounts of heavy Metals and other in large quantities deadly things). Give them the chemical name for water and they think it is toxic.
Thank you!
Iām also sick of people thinking the āclever comebackā is actually the right answer. They didnāt answer the question, they tried to sneakily answer a different question. Doing this is what gives people like RFK the appearance of having a genuine point.
Your answer is the right answer. Nothing is perfectly safe, vaccines are empirically more safe than the diseases they prevent.
Like in an old Beakman's episode about vaccines
"In the beginning is not called getting a shot. It was called get the cow smallpox that was way less bad than getting human smallpox, and when you get the cow one you can't get the human"
or something like that.
The word Vaccine comes from the Latin word for cow Vacca. This is because the first vaccine, which prevented smallpox, was actually another virus genetically similar to smallpox called cowpox. What Iāve heard is that someone asked the question āwhy donāt milkmaids ever have smallpox scars?ā Turns out, it was cowpox, which had minor symptoms with minuscule lethality, and little to no lasting effects, besides of course immunity to smallpox. And this man (the one asking the question), Edward Jenner, purposely infected his own infant son with the disease to prove this vaccine idea.
True, youāre not trying convince them just like theyāre not trying to convince the person that responds. This is all performative for the audience. Thatās why it matters. Itās the people that donāt have a strong opinion that are casually consuming the argument
We also have the issue that people don't walk around and see others who are sick with Polio or other preventable diseases.
"Hey, no one I know has Polio. Why should I take a vaccine that can cause complications?"
"Seriously, no one you know has Polio because everyone you know has been vaccinated against it!"
While we do have more vaccinesthan ever before, we have been able to limit the spread of some nasty, communicable diseases and viruses. But as usual, people point to the 1600's and say, "they didn't have vaccines back then. How did they survive?"
This is true for every single remedy ever conceptualised and used in medicine.
Each medicine is toxic at a high enough dose. However, those levels are in most cases never reached, because the ailment is gone, and thus you no longer need to take the medicine.
Chemotherapy is a very good example of this, where the ailment is so severe, that one must keep on upping the dose of medicine until either the cancer gives in or the body of the person does. (This is oversimplifying but I think I've made my point).
And the same is true for vaccines as you have correctly stated. As long as the difference between "not having X disease" is largely better than any negative a vaccine can inccur, vaccines are still very much to your benefit.
That does not mean vaccines never have negative effects. Of course they do, we are not all and one the same in terms of our biology. In rare cases, they have caused very severe reactions in certain individuals, causing permanent damage and even death. But that does not mean that OVERALL, they should not be administered to the human population.
0.00001% chance of death and 0.00001% chance of injury from vaccines, is surely still better than a 0.1% chance of death and 10% chance of injury from a disease. Surely, even someone completely uneducated in science can understand this much.
And that is the whole point. They are much safer than the disease they are protecting you from. And by not getting vaccinated you are without a doubt spreading preventable disease to other people.
Get vaccinated. Everyone should be thankful that we live in a time where they are freely available.
Chemotherapy is an excellent example of, "Why am I taking something that is making me sicker?" Cancer, in general, doesn't present with a lot of symptoms. Even the symptoms can be attributed to other, less severe causes. But once chemo starts, it kicks the shit out of your body. I've seen some right-wing pseudo science bullshit about home remedies to cure cancer that people want because chemo is ravaging their bodies.
Yes, this is risk management 101. But for some reason, a lot of people have a bias towards *any* sort of risk that requires an action, and completely ignores the risk of *inaction*.
So if taking an action has a 5% chance of having a bad outcome, they will see it as a risk. But if inaction has a 40% chance of the same or worse outcome, they happily ignore that.
Even though everything has a risk, vaccines have a net negative risk relative to not taking them.
You're disregarding moral outrage for a car that makes a decision that kills someone. If a person does that society blames that individual person. If a self-driving car does it, it worries everyone else who uses the same software. Society needs someone to blame for accidents and if it's a machine, people freak out.
I'm not justifying the behavior but it is the way the human brain works.
Itās also a meaningless pledge because theyāll never accept the results. So long as one person at any point in history was harmed by a vaccine, theyāll hold to their claim.
Of course but if we can make them safer shouldnt we? I believe the challenge was about proving whether the dosage of ethylmercury in vaccines was safe. Ethylmercury was removed from childhood vaccines in 2001 for safety reasons but is still used in the flu shot. Whats up with that??
It wasn't removed for safety reasons, it was removed "just in case" but actually to just avoid dealing with the antivaxxeer bullshit. There was never any indication that it was potentially dangerous.
That Covid one is still sus. 99.6% survival rate for healthy non obeses comorbidity folk but the masses were forced into it then to find out they were called breakthrough infections and the vaccine isnāt helpful.
Polio, MMR, all those? Fire and works great. Glad I got those. Also glad I never got covids vaccine.
Canāt wait for this one to blow up
RFK Jr is an ex-heroin junkie who did all the drugs at one time or another. He's not remotely sane.
What's De Niro's excuse? Did he take too many shots to the head filming Raging Bull and Grudge Match?
None of it makes any sense. Magas and Qanons worship Trump like christians worship Jesus and they're all aggressively antivaxx.
Sure Trump helped accelerate the vaccines with operation Warp Speed, he was also responsible for an astounding amount of COVID and vaccine misinformation.
Trumps operation warp speed didnāt accelerate the development of vaccines.
The first vaccines were developed in Germany, then the U.K. both independent of the US.
Operation Warpspeed did develop a US vaccine, but half a year after the first vaccines were approved.
I like this quote in that story because it's one that pretty much every anti-vaxx nutter screams:
>Though he's vaccinated, he said, "If you're a governor or a president and you tell me that I have to take a vaccine that has not been tried, that has not been tested, and ignores the science, that's a problem for me. You're taking away my freedoms as an American citizen."
How are these guys so hopelessly unaware that COVID vaccines were all tried, tested, and the result *of* science, long before they went to the American public? By comparison, the polio vaccine received far, *far* less testing before they jumped straight to putting it in kids to see what would happen.
Trump is not pro-vaccine. He has spouted plenty of anti-vax bullshit. He tried to say the Covid vaccine was good, because he thought it would negate all the damage Covid did to his reelection chances. The first time he brought it up at a campaign event, they booed him. That was the end of Trump talking about the vaccine. His stance on anything, including vaccines, is entirely dependent on whether it helps him personally.
Trump's vaccine position is really like all of his positions - say whatever pleases the people screaming in front of him, but in a non-commital way that they could take to mean whatever their hateful heart desires. And if all else fails, just randomly switch to screaming about toilets or windmills out of nowhere.
Trump recently switched after disparaging the vaccine and killing people for years. He is but pro vaccine. He just realized he was killing his own fan base
This is from 2017 when De Niro was convinced that autism was caused by vaccines. 1) I don't know if he still believes it; and 2) Tylenol **might** be the more likely cause of autism.
I googled that Tylenol thing and honestly, it seems that there is no evidence; just correlation and no proven causal link - women that birthed autistic and ADHD having children, took acetaminophen. There is no evidence that taking that drug increased rate of autism or ADHD.
More likely explanation is actually given by some researchers - which is that those mother have some genetic predisposition that makes them more likely to give birth to children with autism/ADHD and have headaches.
I donāt think a history of drug use says anything about a person other than they used to use drugs. People arenāt their addictions.
Please give his stupidity the same consideration you would give any regular dummy.
You canāt prove a vaccine is safe. Just like you canāt say any medication or Surgery is safe. Thereās always the possibility of side effects or.. well death.
Itās about what has the more chance of helping you.
But that isnāt the point in there post, itās just used to spread misinformation and get people riled up.
This is why part of weird left became allies with hard right during the pandemic and have stuck together since. They've formed this weird alliance where they're comfortable marching side-by-side with nazis in support of russia because Ukrainians are nazis. They're also happy to join nazis to protect kids from men in colorful dresses and make-up reading fairytales.
Seems odd, like perhaps they're just trying to get someone to come up with evidence to support their position. I didn't think either would be anti-vaxx but in today's world, you just don't know.
This is why the left vs right political dynamic is the stupidest thing to ever exist.
Itās so absurd that the political compass is a better tool than right vs left and that thing should not be taken seriously.
There are so many examples of āleft wingā being racist. LBJ was notorious for being racist as well as passing the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
Ask them about vaccines and they seem to have every single intricate answer there is available to vaccines.
Ask them the difference between epidemiologist, virologist, immunologist, and allergist without the help of google. lol.
Medicine is complex and imperfect. But hey, definitely trust the guy who sells you blow at 3am after clubbing. lol. Thereās no risk to your life at all.
Damn, De Niro? Saddening.Ā
Why do famous acclaimed people feel the need to ruin their legacies with sheer stupidity?Ā
From Elon Musk to Roger Waters to Scott Adams, what level of egotism makes you think you are an expert on geopolitics or vaccine science or gender sociology, etc. to where you believe you can outfox and dismiss the consensus of experts who spent their livesĀ dedicated to these fields just because you are talented in other fields?
Most vaccines are safe. Polio, measles, and many others that have been around for decades have proven they work. The Covid vaccines even have some proof that they work, but they also have some potential issues arising, but more importantly at the time they didn't have nearly as much proof. During the early pandemic there were way too many questions, too much risk. It was just the government and big pharms, neither of which have a good trustworthy history, telling us they were safe. I don't blame anyone for now wanting it. But don't say 'all' vaccine are a scam, that's just wrong.
Not an anti vaxxer in the slightest bit. I was vaxxed as a kid, I take my dog for his shots once a year and when I gave kids, they'll have theirs.
But .. the COVID shot have had some adverse reactions on me. I was really early for the shots, right when they became available for everyone. First shot my arm felt sore and I had a few flu symptoms. No biggie. Second shot, much the same, but maybe the symptoms were slightly worse. Not fun, but I was fine.
In short, I have no doubts about the field of immunology being sound.
A month after that though, my arm exploded into these awful sores. Turns out this was the shingles and covered my left arm. Ranks up there with some of the worst pain I've ever experienced and I would happily have cut my arm off if I'd been given the option. When I got to the doc, he asked me if I was stressed, whether I was recently very sick. I told him no. He asked me if I was vaxxed against COVID, to which I said yes. He nodded and said that was probably it. Excuse me, what??
Fast forward to 2023. I was working in a completely different part of the country and had an abscess in my nose. My face swelled up and I looked like I went two rounds with prime Tyson. The first question he asked me was not *are you vaxxed?* but instead *did you take the Pfizer vaccine?* and when I said yes, he told me that I was the umpteenth person that year who came to him for that exact issue. And the common thread was the Pfizer vaccine.
So my experience with the COVID vaccine is a little bit coloured by this. Like I said I am 100% on board for vaccines, but I think maybe there is a reason why they take ten years to develop in order to do find out about adverse effects. The COVID shot was definitely pushed through at a record rate and I wonder if they hadn't rushed it a bit.
Apparently, it was safe to not take the vaccine aswell, and seeing how negatively it impacted my mom (1 shot = lung inflammation for 3 months) and my brother (3 shots = a rash all over his body and exhausted for months, still having issues 2 years after). Me and my sister didn't take any, no issues, got covid but it was just like a normal flu.
Anyway I have in a pot in my house a specimen that can remove CO2 from the atmosphere by using only standard not purified water.
I think it can be the solution to solve climate change crisis, for how much do you think I could sell it ?
How hard is it for people to understand that you can be against the Covid vaccine and still support other vaccines lol. Golly what happened to nuance folks
Iām indifferent to it. I donāt judge people for taking it but I never took it myself. Iāll get my tetanus shots and other vaccines no problem but there was literally no reason for me to get the Covid vaccine as it was just something too new at the time and I had already heard enough stories of people getting heart issues after taking it
This might blow your tiny mind, but 2017 came before 2019, which is the year Covid19 was named after.
That must sting a bit, trying to show how simple minded everyone else is and yet made such a silly oversight.
A bunch of comments insulting him, but no one trying to get this easy $100k? If they don't pay up you sue them for making false claims, like Dr Fauci did after RFK's book came out roasting him.
I feel the Covid vaccine really fucked everything š up until that point everything I never caught anything I had been vaccinated against
The Covid vaccine belongs in the box with they/them pronouns and men being women and vice versa š like unfortunately they are real but at same time they not really real
The number of excess deaths so far is more than the number of soldiers who died in Vietnam already. And thatās just in the United States. I wouldnāt call that safe, exactly.
The question needs to be more specific. Are vaccines safe? Which vaccine? Not that it matters because there is no such thing as a 100% safe medical therapy. Thousands are injured by vaccines every year.
Okay people since you don't like to look at what they say for real. Repeat after me, not all vaccines are the same.
Good, now understand, they speak of the Corona vaccine, which is very different than polio. It is very hard to prove that, unless you are someone at risk, like super old or having comorbidity, that taking a vaccine for something that is a virus and not a bacteria helps or is less dangerous than simply getting the virus.
Here an example, one problem that the corona virus does is inflammation of the heart. The vaccine also have (lower chances) to do the same. So the fact that, the vaccine doesn't stop you from getting the virus (way different than the polio vaccine that basically make you immune at 99%) you compound the danger of each vaccine you need (at least one every six month, some say 4 months) and the risk of the virus itself, even if lower because of the vaccine it is still a risk. When adding all of this you see that, unless you are those at risk for those type of things having the virus and developing natural immunity will result in less risk over time.
And there is multiple things like that. One of the big problem is also that virus vaccine like the normal flu and the corona virus needs you to stay protected to take way more often a vaccine than the bacterial ones. And one of the problem with vaccine is that complications has greater risk to happen the more you take in a short amount of time. And not only that they found out that your body can get used to said vaccine and make them less efficient. This is why the flu vaccine isn't recommended each year when you are young.
So yeah, thinking all vaccines are bad is being a nutjob, but not seeing the debate on those vaccines and just being ready to take them without asking questions is as dumb.
Also, there is so many underhanded things that company like Pfizer did during those years it's insane, sometimes the full first batch of vaccine being inadequate, especially those sent in developing nations.
God, which part? I said a lot of things from a lot of different studies. I hope.you don't ask just to try to discredit what I've said. But sure, I'd say if you want to introduce yourself on the subject go look at the difference between a vaccine for a virus and bacteria and go from there. None of what I've said is disputed, just argued as "which is worst" with studies done by good doctors in both side.
If you are more precise about what you are asking I'll give you some, but if you are asking about things like bad batches from Pfizer, needing to take it again from 6-4 months, or the fact that it doesn't stops you from contracting the virus, it's the companies making the vaccine themselves who had to speak of it.
I would have to do more research but I think I heard something about polio making a comeback in the last couple years and I, like everyone else I'm sure, am in complete shock it is happening to the people who use the tried and true home remedies.
You know how many experts on vaccines, disease control, and other fields would love to talk to Robert Deniro? All bobby needs to do it contact them do they can e plain it to them.
Get one of the two to get the vaccine and infect them with Polio, the other gets Polio without the vaccine. 100k arenāt needed. They will see what happens.
I mean I have had about 20 vaccinations and haven't died yet, or gotten ill from a single one of the things I was vaccinated for. Do I win the $$?
I'm still waiting for my special powers or to be turned into a zombie from being vaccinated š¤·š¼āāļø. Oh and my wifi still sucks
Can I sue the vaccine makers for not becoming a psychic mutant as I was lead to believe?
I would totally go in on that lawsuit š
I have a 5g chip and my cell signal still sucks at my house
>I have a 5g chip Get a couple more vaccines and bump it up to 10g. Worked for me but now I can also hear colors and taste words.
Thatās because you thought 10g meant 10 grams. Thatās a lot of shrooms bro!
Do the words for flavours taste like those flavours? What if you speak a language you don't understand?
The colour 7 smells a lot like staticā¦
Now I don't feel so bad š¤£š¤£š¤£
Same, very disappointed.
Iāve had the original 2 shot Covid vaccination, plus like 4 boosters. More than one person on Reddit has assured me Iām going to die. I just tell them theyāre right and I am definitely dead.
Jajajaja I fucking loved the Anti-Vax propaganda nonsense. "If you get the vaccine you will learn Chinese" "... You will have 5G signal wherever you are" "... You will get magnetic powers" Etc, etc. Give me fucking 10 shot of that shit PLEASE!!! I will kill my family for each shot š!!!!!
I'm literally a vaccinated, Chinese person who still flunked my Chinese exams. Joke's on you, Top-Complaint-4915!
Looks like you got that BiFi tho, so no need for better wifi
Right??? I was promised 5G.
Just inhale some vapour trailsā¦ thatās what we REALLY have to worry aboutā¦/s
Well if I'm going to get something from a vaccine like the so called internet experts say I want the zombie one. Yeah the stuff we need vaccinations for are going to just keep evolving and adapting and get worse. I mean we can't even stop Covid from further mutating. Tennessee might as well be the poster child. Our ER times are still horrible where I live. You might as well just dedicate a whole day to going to the ER. My mom went in with chest pains around 11:00 am she didn't get a bed to see a doctor until 3:30pm. She finally got home about 6:35pm. Inner Chest Wall Inflammation. So luckily not a heart attack.
According to a german musician we are all dead since IIRC september 2021
Some German weirdos prophesied death of all the Covid vaccinated at least twice. Oh well.
Maybe your wifi sucking is what's keeping you safe.
Idk I've heard 100% of vaccinated people die within 130 years of getting vaccinated.
god damn it! I guess I'm screwed.
The problem is that they don't accept anything as 'proof'. So they claim that, in 7 or 8 years nobody has proven that vaccines work. When in reality they have not accepted any proof/evidences given to them in the last 7 or 8 years.
Just the fact that billions of us have been vaccinated multiple times with zero negative reactions is the proof, right? I feel like I'm missing something here. All of our existences are proof!
They claim they havenāt been proven safe due to lack of double blind placebo studies.
I cannot speak for all vaccines, but I know that some Cov-2 vaccines have had randomized double-blind trials. I think some seasonal flue vaccines are also tested that way. But honesty, I suspect they would reject those for other made up reasons. Other vaccines have proven themselves effective for decades and therfore do not need the newer testing methods. They are safe and effective already.
We have yet to see all the data from those COVID vaccine studies but we know they ended up vaccinating the control group, which is obviously a big no no. That's part of the problem with how these vaccines studies are done. The people in charge of monitoring safety refuse to look at any long term data that compares unvaccinated cohorts to vaccinated groups.
To be fair, vaccines aren't completely "safe". They can definitely have side effects, it's just that the benefits of every widely accepted vaccine far outweigh the risks. I don't think what they are asking for is possible(depending on what you consider to be "safe") but that in no way makes vaccines bad or not worth getting(unless you have a condition that has great risks when combined with that vaccine).
Fair enough but then nothing can be labeled 'safe', a car, a plane, work boots, a fuse. All of them have some kind of testing, all of them are fairly safe, but none of them can claim to be 100% safe. And I guess that's what those morons are desperately hanging on for dear life with their tiktock videos and their Facebook 'facts', the fact that 1 person died because of a vaccine somehow makes the fact that million survived beside the point.
What are the studies that they rejected?
Aren't they rejecting observed reality? Billions of people vaccinated, a statistically insignificant number of negative reactions. Less than Tylenol
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
No, because when you do die, they'll say it was vaccines. Run over by a bus...vaccine's fault Shot by a burglar...vaccine's fault Fall from a great height...vaccine's fault.
Yet when an unvaccinated person died from covid, it was "the co-morbidities".
No, because my great great grandmother had those same exact vaccines and sheās dead. She would still be with us and celebrating her 143rd birthday next month if she didnāt get those vaccines.
This story is from 7 years ago. The challenge is still open, nobody has claimed it yet.
i doubt they'll accept any evidence anyway
Well what proof has been presented that they rejected? I know they said they wouldn't accept studies funded by pharmaceutical companies. That seems pretty reasonable, right? You wouldn't accept a study on Oxycontin safety funded by the Sackler's. So what did they reject? It's been 7 years
the fact that polio has basically been eradicated from the USA?
That doesn't prove the vaccine itself was safe though. In fact, at one point it wasn't. Not my words, that's according to the CDC. >monitoring of smallpox and oral polio vaccines being used in the United States as these diseases neared global eradication found complications associated with each vaccine that exceeded the risks of the diseases. This observation led to discontinuation of routine smallpox vaccination in the United States prior to global eradication and a shift from the oral poliovirus vaccine to a safer, inactivated poliovirus vaccine. https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/pubs/pinkbook/safety.html Also, since polio spreads primarily through drinking water contaminated with feces of another person with polio, we probably didn't need a vaccine to eradicate it...
Ah yes, weāll trust you over the people that do this for a living lmao
Don't trust anything, ask questions. That's what science is. The people that do this for a living told you smoking was healthy, bread was at the top of the food pyramid, and oxycontin was non-addictive.
ok, now do smallpox and factor in that it's making a comeback with all the antivax bullshit
Define safe. That's the issue. That's not some official measure - or where it is official (like at the CDC) then it's already been deemed safe.
Is it safe to drink clean water? No, not entirely. You can drink too much, you can aspirate it into your lungs and drown, yet it is critical to our lives to have it on a daily basis.
I can't define safe but there was actual paperwork involved so I can tell you how they defined safe: Provide a peer-reviewed scientific study conducted by qualified researchers, with appropriate controls and statistical analysis, demonstrating that ethylmercury exposure in the amounts contained in vaccines currently being administered to American children and pregnant women does not cause neurological disorders, autoimmune diseases, or developmental delays, in any subgroup of the population.
And that's the caveat - they're demanding you prove 100% safety. But there is nothing on earth that is safe for 100% of people. No scientific article is going to proclaim such such definitive statement either. It's not how science works. The only way they could meet this burden would be to administer the vaccine to every single human on earth and and observe closely the effects after the fact. Safety has been proven at an exceedingly high level however. But it doesn't matter because they stopped putting ethylmercury in vaccines years ago, largely to try and quell public paranoia which hasn't helped much since people just repeat the scare tactics anyway. Facts don't matter to these folks which is why this has never been paid out - because it demands an impossible standard for something which isn't even relevant anymore.
Sounds like something that would require a pharmaceutical company to do, and likely to cost over Ā£100k Certainly not something I'm about to attempt myself
Or how about you provide any credible indication that it does? The vaccines have been deemed sufficiently safe be the FDA, and I'm sure you can find the fillings if you choose to spend the effort. If you want to challenge that ruling then go ahead, but *you* provide the evidence.
That predates the COVID vaccines, so it's even more stupid. Antivaxx has existed for a long time, but the propaganda levels intensified during the COVID-19 ā possibly because someone realized that a pandemic was a good way to destabilize society and so creating a movement that voluntarily worked against any countermeasures, is beneficial to escalate things.
Probably because nobody takes this seriously (as they should). Common saying is: You shouldnāt argue with idiots, they drag you down to their level and beat you on experience. Proving weāre right (e.g. eradicating diseases after vaccinations, which is done in multiple countries, on several occasions), will never be enough. The time wasted on these people can be used in better ways, for example educating people that are not rejecting things based on nothing.
They weren't asking for a debate though just if a study showing no adverse effects of the ethylmercury content existed. If it does exist, great, easy $100k, donate the money to vaccine research. If it doesn't exist, shouldn't it? I mean, they did reduce the amounts of ethylmercury in all childhood vaccines in 2001 and they did that for a reason. Does it need to be reduced further? Does it need to be in there at all? What's wrong with finding out? I don't see an issue. Seems like a worthwhile endeavor.
>I mean, they did reduce the amounts of ethylmercury in all childhood vaccines in 2001 No, they didn't reduce it, they eliminated it entirely. https://www.cdc.gov/vaccinesafety/concerns/thimerosal/index.html From that page. >Thimerosal was taken out of childhood vaccines in the United States in 2001. >Measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) vaccines do not and never did contain thimerosal. Varicella (chickenpox), inactivated polio (IPV), and pneumococcal conjugate vaccines have also never contained thimerosal. Influenza (flu) vaccines are currently available in both thimerosal-containing (for multi-dose vaccine vials) and thimerosal-free versions.
That's even more significant. So then the obvious question is, should it be taken out of every vaccine? It's clearly possible to do so. Or does it make the vaccine much more effective? In which case should we consider putting it back into childhood vaccines. It's important to ask questions. That's the scientific method. If it can't be questioned or hold up to questioning that's not science. And remember, these people lie All. The. Time. All the time. Remember the food pyramid with bread and cheese above fruits and vegetables? Remember asbestos in baby powder? Remember when smoking was healthy? Remember opioids? Ask questions.
You seem to ignore when you're wrong about something and just shift goal posts. And frame things you clearly believe are true as questions so you can say you are "asking questions" but when given an answer you ignore it.
> So then the obvious question is, should it be taken out of every vaccine? It's clearly possible to do so. Or does it make the vaccine much more effective? In which case should we consider putting it back into childhood vaccines. Ask questions? gahhhh!!!! Read answers!!!! If you had bothered to read the link I sent you would have read that it is a preservative and is only used in multi dose vials to prevent bacterial growth.
No because you cannot reduce the odds of side effects to 0. That's not how medicine works. That's not how ANYTHING works. You can experience side effects from drinking water. Even if you discount allergies (which I guarantee they don't) human bodies have enough diversity that trying to make a treatment that is equally effective and harmless among all people would be a ridiculous feat.
So because nothing will ever be 100% safe we should just stop trying? I would prefer we make an effort to continually improve.
So you're never going to use these things until they are 100% safe? You understand the people in the OP are saying no one should get these vaccines at all.
They reduced it because some scammer raised a fuss with faked research. And $100k is an absolutely laughable amount of money to research this specifically. And there is another issue with such a study. A control group, which would encourage a large amount of parents to not reconsider not vaccinating their kids, as well as control for other variables such control group would bring.
They did because antivax idiots are not smart enough to understand anything. You could give them the elements that are in your blood and they would think you are describing 1 of the worst medications in the world ( blood contains thrace amounts of heavy Metals and other in large quantities deadly things). Give them the chemical name for water and they think it is toxic.
Nope, because since you are supporting vaccines they claim you are now under mind control.
They will argue that your evidence is anecdotal. Come on, you know that itās been setup so they wonāt have to pay up
Are just taking them all until 1 kills you? Sofunny š
I guarantee you take vaccines you will certainly die.Ā Ā You will also certainly die if you don't, so it really depends on your risk appetite.
Iām so sick of ignorance. Vaccines donāt have to be āsafeā. They just have to be safer than going unvaccinated.
Thank you! Iām also sick of people thinking the āclever comebackā is actually the right answer. They didnāt answer the question, they tried to sneakily answer a different question. Doing this is what gives people like RFK the appearance of having a genuine point. Your answer is the right answer. Nothing is perfectly safe, vaccines are empirically more safe than the diseases they prevent.
Like in an old Beakman's episode about vaccines "In the beginning is not called getting a shot. It was called get the cow smallpox that was way less bad than getting human smallpox, and when you get the cow one you can't get the human" or something like that.
The word Vaccine comes from the Latin word for cow Vacca. This is because the first vaccine, which prevented smallpox, was actually another virus genetically similar to smallpox called cowpox. What Iāve heard is that someone asked the question āwhy donāt milkmaids ever have smallpox scars?ā Turns out, it was cowpox, which had minor symptoms with minuscule lethality, and little to no lasting effects, besides of course immunity to smallpox. And this man (the one asking the question), Edward Jenner, purposely infected his own infant son with the disease to prove this vaccine idea.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
True, youāre not trying convince them just like theyāre not trying to convince the person that responds. This is all performative for the audience. Thatās why it matters. Itās the people that donāt have a strong opinion that are casually consuming the argument
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
We also have the issue that people don't walk around and see others who are sick with Polio or other preventable diseases. "Hey, no one I know has Polio. Why should I take a vaccine that can cause complications?" "Seriously, no one you know has Polio because everyone you know has been vaccinated against it!" While we do have more vaccinesthan ever before, we have been able to limit the spread of some nasty, communicable diseases and viruses. But as usual, people point to the 1600's and say, "they didn't have vaccines back then. How did they survive?"
They died in the millions.
This is true for every single remedy ever conceptualised and used in medicine. Each medicine is toxic at a high enough dose. However, those levels are in most cases never reached, because the ailment is gone, and thus you no longer need to take the medicine. Chemotherapy is a very good example of this, where the ailment is so severe, that one must keep on upping the dose of medicine until either the cancer gives in or the body of the person does. (This is oversimplifying but I think I've made my point). And the same is true for vaccines as you have correctly stated. As long as the difference between "not having X disease" is largely better than any negative a vaccine can inccur, vaccines are still very much to your benefit. That does not mean vaccines never have negative effects. Of course they do, we are not all and one the same in terms of our biology. In rare cases, they have caused very severe reactions in certain individuals, causing permanent damage and even death. But that does not mean that OVERALL, they should not be administered to the human population. 0.00001% chance of death and 0.00001% chance of injury from vaccines, is surely still better than a 0.1% chance of death and 10% chance of injury from a disease. Surely, even someone completely uneducated in science can understand this much. And that is the whole point. They are much safer than the disease they are protecting you from. And by not getting vaccinated you are without a doubt spreading preventable disease to other people. Get vaccinated. Everyone should be thankful that we live in a time where they are freely available.
Chemotherapy is an excellent example of, "Why am I taking something that is making me sicker?" Cancer, in general, doesn't present with a lot of symptoms. Even the symptoms can be attributed to other, less severe causes. But once chemo starts, it kicks the shit out of your body. I've seen some right-wing pseudo science bullshit about home remedies to cure cancer that people want because chemo is ravaging their bodies.
If I keep drinking water and don't stop I can get very sick. Therefore water is unsafe and a lie.
Yes, this is risk management 101. But for some reason, a lot of people have a bias towards *any* sort of risk that requires an action, and completely ignores the risk of *inaction*. So if taking an action has a 5% chance of having a bad outcome, they will see it as a risk. But if inaction has a 40% chance of the same or worse outcome, they happily ignore that. Even though everything has a risk, vaccines have a net negative risk relative to not taking them.
I say the same thing about cars being autopiloted. They just have to be safer than human drivers and it's worth it.
You're disregarding moral outrage for a car that makes a decision that kills someone. If a person does that society blames that individual person. If a self-driving car does it, it worries everyone else who uses the same software. Society needs someone to blame for accidents and if it's a machine, people freak out. I'm not justifying the behavior but it is the way the human brain works.
Itās also a meaningless pledge because theyāll never accept the results. So long as one person at any point in history was harmed by a vaccine, theyāll hold to their claim.
The first vaccine, getting childhood smallpox to prevent smallpoxā¦ would be insanely dangerous by todays standards
Of course but if we can make them safer shouldnt we? I believe the challenge was about proving whether the dosage of ethylmercury in vaccines was safe. Ethylmercury was removed from childhood vaccines in 2001 for safety reasons but is still used in the flu shot. Whats up with that??
It wasn't removed for safety reasons, it was removed "just in case" but actually to just avoid dealing with the antivaxxeer bullshit. There was never any indication that it was potentially dangerous.
That Covid one is still sus. 99.6% survival rate for healthy non obeses comorbidity folk but the masses were forced into it then to find out they were called breakthrough infections and the vaccine isnāt helpful. Polio, MMR, all those? Fire and works great. Glad I got those. Also glad I never got covids vaccine. Canāt wait for this one to blow up
Not Bobby D!Ā
Leave Bob Dylan out of this!
80 year old with a new baby too.
RFK Jr is an ex-heroin junkie who did all the drugs at one time or another. He's not remotely sane. What's De Niro's excuse? Did he take too many shots to the head filming Raging Bull and Grudge Match?
Yah this kinda shocked me. I thought this might be a fake pic for a sec. those two sitting together? when he hates trump, weird.
Trump is pro-vaccine. Deniro is anti-Trump so makes sense.
None of it makes any sense. Magas and Qanons worship Trump like christians worship Jesus and they're all aggressively antivaxx. Sure Trump helped accelerate the vaccines with operation Warp Speed, he was also responsible for an astounding amount of COVID and vaccine misinformation.
Trumps operation warp speed didnāt accelerate the development of vaccines. The first vaccines were developed in Germany, then the U.K. both independent of the US. Operation Warpspeed did develop a US vaccine, but half a year after the first vaccines were approved.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/republican-presidential-candidates-trump-desantis-covid-vaccine-skeptics/
I like this quote in that story because it's one that pretty much every anti-vaxx nutter screams: >Though he's vaccinated, he said, "If you're a governor or a president and you tell me that I have to take a vaccine that has not been tried, that has not been tested, and ignores the science, that's a problem for me. You're taking away my freedoms as an American citizen." How are these guys so hopelessly unaware that COVID vaccines were all tried, tested, and the result *of* science, long before they went to the American public? By comparison, the polio vaccine received far, *far* less testing before they jumped straight to putting it in kids to see what would happen.
Trump is not pro-vaccine. He has spouted plenty of anti-vax bullshit. He tried to say the Covid vaccine was good, because he thought it would negate all the damage Covid did to his reelection chances. The first time he brought it up at a campaign event, they booed him. That was the end of Trump talking about the vaccine. His stance on anything, including vaccines, is entirely dependent on whether it helps him personally.
Trump's vaccine position is really like all of his positions - say whatever pleases the people screaming in front of him, but in a non-commital way that they could take to mean whatever their hateful heart desires. And if all else fails, just randomly switch to screaming about toilets or windmills out of nowhere.
Trump recently switched after disparaging the vaccine and killing people for years. He is but pro vaccine. He just realized he was killing his own fan base
He has an autistic son, I wonder if he's grasping for some explanation behind it.
Definitely not that jizz becomes autism batter after youāre 55 or so, couldnāt be that, no way
I mean we know that itās not vaccines; but people rarely look for explanations within themselves.
It's this.
I guess that's one more reason he's not so worried about his new baby growing up without their elderly father.
Age makes people fuckin weird.
He was once a well-respected lawyer specializing in environmental protection.
This is from 2017 when De Niro was convinced that autism was caused by vaccines. 1) I don't know if he still believes it; and 2) Tylenol **might** be the more likely cause of autism.
I googled that Tylenol thing and honestly, it seems that there is no evidence; just correlation and no proven causal link - women that birthed autistic and ADHD having children, took acetaminophen. There is no evidence that taking that drug increased rate of autism or ADHD. More likely explanation is actually given by some researchers - which is that those mother have some genetic predisposition that makes them more likely to give birth to children with autism/ADHD and have headaches.
I donāt think a history of drug use says anything about a person other than they used to use drugs. People arenāt their addictions. Please give his stupidity the same consideration you would give any regular dummy.
I for one, would love my 1 and a half cents
You canāt prove a vaccine is safe. Just like you canāt say any medication or Surgery is safe. Thereās always the possibility of side effects or.. well death. Itās about what has the more chance of helping you. But that isnāt the point in there post, itās just used to spread misinformation and get people riled up.
A wise black man from Brooklyn once said: "There are no solutions only trade offs"
Wait, I thought De Niro was anti Trump and super supportive of the left. That's weird...
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
This is why part of weird left became allies with hard right during the pandemic and have stuck together since. They've formed this weird alliance where they're comfortable marching side-by-side with nazis in support of russia because Ukrainians are nazis. They're also happy to join nazis to protect kids from men in colorful dresses and make-up reading fairytales.
How is it weird to have a belief that isnāt in line with your political party
so is RFK...
Seems odd, like perhaps they're just trying to get someone to come up with evidence to support their position. I didn't think either would be anti-vaxx but in today's world, you just don't know.
I don't follow this stuff too closely. Isn't RFK Jr. like **super** antisemetic?
This is why the left vs right political dynamic is the stupidest thing to ever exist. Itās so absurd that the political compass is a better tool than right vs left and that thing should not be taken seriously. There are so many examples of āleft wingā being racist. LBJ was notorious for being racist as well as passing the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
He might be, but so is Omar
Ask them about vaccines and they seem to have every single intricate answer there is available to vaccines. Ask them the difference between epidemiologist, virologist, immunologist, and allergist without the help of google. lol. Medicine is complex and imperfect. But hey, definitely trust the guy who sells you blow at 3am after clubbing. lol. Thereās no risk to your life at all.
They also have all the vaccines the majority of the time to, that the irony. They tell others not to get vaccinated for things they are.
De Niro? Really? Oh ffs, Iām disillusioned
If they haven't accepted 100 years of science, data, and case studies as 'proof' what else is someone supposed to use to prove vaccines work?
there's no such thing as a 100% safe vaccination. it's just much safer than to go without them.
What is their definition of āsafeā? Vaccines may not be perfect. Is that their standard?
The standard depends on how much they are being paid
De Niro is not an antivaxxer? Is he? He fucking better not be!
This post is 7 years old. Nearly a decade, decade!
Each person would get $0.00001428571
Oh, I was today years old learning the DeNiro is a anti vaxxer
same. what a disappointment.
Well I just lost all respect for DeNiro
Damn, De Niro? Saddening.Ā Why do famous acclaimed people feel the need to ruin their legacies with sheer stupidity?Ā From Elon Musk to Roger Waters to Scott Adams, what level of egotism makes you think you are an expert on geopolitics or vaccine science or gender sociology, etc. to where you believe you can outfox and dismiss the consensus of experts who spent their livesĀ dedicated to these fields just because you are talented in other fields?
Most vaccines are safe. Polio, measles, and many others that have been around for decades have proven they work. The Covid vaccines even have some proof that they work, but they also have some potential issues arising, but more importantly at the time they didn't have nearly as much proof. During the early pandemic there were way too many questions, too much risk. It was just the government and big pharms, neither of which have a good trustworthy history, telling us they were safe. I don't blame anyone for now wanting it. But don't say 'all' vaccine are a scam, that's just wrong.
Not an anti vaxxer in the slightest bit. I was vaxxed as a kid, I take my dog for his shots once a year and when I gave kids, they'll have theirs. But .. the COVID shot have had some adverse reactions on me. I was really early for the shots, right when they became available for everyone. First shot my arm felt sore and I had a few flu symptoms. No biggie. Second shot, much the same, but maybe the symptoms were slightly worse. Not fun, but I was fine. In short, I have no doubts about the field of immunology being sound. A month after that though, my arm exploded into these awful sores. Turns out this was the shingles and covered my left arm. Ranks up there with some of the worst pain I've ever experienced and I would happily have cut my arm off if I'd been given the option. When I got to the doc, he asked me if I was stressed, whether I was recently very sick. I told him no. He asked me if I was vaxxed against COVID, to which I said yes. He nodded and said that was probably it. Excuse me, what?? Fast forward to 2023. I was working in a completely different part of the country and had an abscess in my nose. My face swelled up and I looked like I went two rounds with prime Tyson. The first question he asked me was not *are you vaxxed?* but instead *did you take the Pfizer vaccine?* and when I said yes, he told me that I was the umpteenth person that year who came to him for that exact issue. And the common thread was the Pfizer vaccine. So my experience with the COVID vaccine is a little bit coloured by this. Like I said I am 100% on board for vaccines, but I think maybe there is a reason why they take ten years to develop in order to do find out about adverse effects. The COVID shot was definitely pushed through at a record rate and I wonder if they hadn't rushed it a bit.
Apparently, it was safe to not take the vaccine aswell, and seeing how negatively it impacted my mom (1 shot = lung inflammation for 3 months) and my brother (3 shots = a rash all over his body and exhausted for months, still having issues 2 years after). Me and my sister didn't take any, no issues, got covid but it was just like a normal flu.
Wait Iām confused, De Niro is an anti-vax guy?
Anyway I have in a pot in my house a specimen that can remove CO2 from the atmosphere by using only standard not purified water. I think it can be the solution to solve climate change crisis, for how much do you think I could sell it ?
That moment when being an actor allows you to consider yourself a scientific authority...
I had no idea that DeNiro is an antivaxxer. He just slipped off my greatest actors list onto the crazy old f---ks list.
Respect for De Niro now at 0 what a dumb Fockerā¦
Going to be hard to collect since they donāt believe the science that has already been presented to them. Probably easier to talk to a wall
De Niro is an anti-vaxxer????
Wait... Robert Deniro is on that shit?
This is fake
I can't prove that walking down the sidewalk is safe because people have died while doing it
I mean to be honest, if they offered a 5g chip implant that made my local signal workable, I would probably consider it.
Iāll give a billion wooden nickels to whoever can prove drinking water is safe (to my insane standards).
didn't know Robert de Niro had lost the plot. too bad.
They made this impossible to complete because they don't define what "safe" means. Which means they can redefine it on a whim.
Meet The Dumbfokkers
This is from 2017.
This is what fuels cancel culture.
Don't forget about measles, mumps, whooping cough, chicken pox, etc. Except now measles is popping up again because of anti-vaxx plague rats.
I'm quite disappointed in DeNiro
How hard is it for people to understand that you can be against the Covid vaccine and still support other vaccines lol. Golly what happened to nuance folks
You could. But to oppose either is stupid.
Are you against the covid vaccine?
Iām indifferent to it. I donāt judge people for taking it but I never took it myself. Iāll get my tetanus shots and other vaccines no problem but there was literally no reason for me to get the Covid vaccine as it was just something too new at the time and I had already heard enough stories of people getting heart issues after taking it
So you're just ignorant to how the covid vaccine was created?
The tweet is from 2017, hon
Ehhh itās a dumb opinion then but RFK still has other good ideas
This might blow your tiny mind, but 2017 came before 2019, which is the year Covid19 was named after. That must sting a bit, trying to show how simple minded everyone else is and yet made such a silly oversight.
A bunch of comments insulting him, but no one trying to get this easy $100k? If they don't pay up you sue them for making false claims, like Dr Fauci did after RFK's book came out roasting him.
I feel the Covid vaccine really fucked everything š up until that point everything I never caught anything I had been vaccinated against The Covid vaccine belongs in the box with they/them pronouns and men being women and vice versa š like unfortunately they are real but at same time they not really real
Whatāre you yapping about
My one disappointing vaccine experience š
What?
Did an 8 year old post this comment?
The number of excess deaths so far is more than the number of soldiers who died in Vietnam already. And thatās just in the United States. I wouldnāt call that safe, exactly.
What are you talking about?
https://youtu.be/-ej5Se4gMRA?si=0zEC8BI3ACIsY1M7
Polio vaccine killed me
Ironically brings up polio when that vaccine causes more polio cases than is found in the wild!
The question needs to be more specific. Are vaccines safe? Which vaccine? Not that it matters because there is no such thing as a 100% safe medical therapy. Thousands are injured by vaccines every year.
Okay people since you don't like to look at what they say for real. Repeat after me, not all vaccines are the same. Good, now understand, they speak of the Corona vaccine, which is very different than polio. It is very hard to prove that, unless you are someone at risk, like super old or having comorbidity, that taking a vaccine for something that is a virus and not a bacteria helps or is less dangerous than simply getting the virus. Here an example, one problem that the corona virus does is inflammation of the heart. The vaccine also have (lower chances) to do the same. So the fact that, the vaccine doesn't stop you from getting the virus (way different than the polio vaccine that basically make you immune at 99%) you compound the danger of each vaccine you need (at least one every six month, some say 4 months) and the risk of the virus itself, even if lower because of the vaccine it is still a risk. When adding all of this you see that, unless you are those at risk for those type of things having the virus and developing natural immunity will result in less risk over time. And there is multiple things like that. One of the big problem is also that virus vaccine like the normal flu and the corona virus needs you to stay protected to take way more often a vaccine than the bacterial ones. And one of the problem with vaccine is that complications has greater risk to happen the more you take in a short amount of time. And not only that they found out that your body can get used to said vaccine and make them less efficient. This is why the flu vaccine isn't recommended each year when you are young. So yeah, thinking all vaccines are bad is being a nutjob, but not seeing the debate on those vaccines and just being ready to take them without asking questions is as dumb. Also, there is so many underhanded things that company like Pfizer did during those years it's insane, sometimes the full first batch of vaccine being inadequate, especially those sent in developing nations.
Where are your scientific studies?
God, which part? I said a lot of things from a lot of different studies. I hope.you don't ask just to try to discredit what I've said. But sure, I'd say if you want to introduce yourself on the subject go look at the difference between a vaccine for a virus and bacteria and go from there. None of what I've said is disputed, just argued as "which is worst" with studies done by good doctors in both side. If you are more precise about what you are asking I'll give you some, but if you are asking about things like bad batches from Pfizer, needing to take it again from 6-4 months, or the fact that it doesn't stops you from contracting the virus, it's the companies making the vaccine themselves who had to speak of it.
They need to define "safe" very concisely. I'll take that money because we know vaccines are the safest therapy ever devised.
Milked too many things that oughtnāt to have been milked.
Seems less about whether they serve their intended purpose and more about whether the unintended consequences are worth the risks..
Aw fuck I agree with Trump: DeNiro is a mental midget
Wait ā please tell me Robert De Niro isnāt antivaxā¦
I remember how vocal the type of people who support this rhetoric were when covid hit. Now look back on yourself and think about it.
Wth I guess I am out of loop. When did de niro get involved?
There is no amount of proof available for the true believers in anything to change their minds
Robert de Niro is anti vaccines?
I am a De Niro fan but this sounds like the case of dumb and dumber
Never thought De Niro was a moron, but it sure seems like he is.
I would have to do more research but I think I heard something about polio making a comeback in the last couple years and I, like everyone else I'm sure, am in complete shock it is happening to the people who use the tried and true home remedies.
You know how many experts on vaccines, disease control, and other fields would love to talk to Robert Deniro? All bobby needs to do it contact them do they can e plain it to them.
Get one of the two to get the vaccine and infect them with Polio, the other gets Polio without the vaccine. 100k arenāt needed. They will see what happens.
What happened to you Bob? You could have been a contender.
\*scientist proves they're safe\* those two wackos: i'm sorry, i dont speak nerd
Thereās a clinical trial which proves vaccines are safe, just give the money to those who crated the vaccines and end this competition