Covid 19 conspiracies dump

[The Architect Of Fate]

And no, we don't know enough about side effects of the vaccines. A shit load of people have reported supposed side effects. We don't know which of those side effects are genuinely from taking the vaccine, or which bad health effects are just coincidence and had nothing to do with the vaccines. This is information we do not have, therefore there is a lack of information out there and more work needs to be done to understand more about the situation we are in. If you can't say for sure whether these bad health effects were just coincidence or were actually from the vaccine, then how can you just handwave away all of these potential adverse health effects? Explain yourself. How can YOU possibly know what is unknown at the moment, about the individual reported possible adverse health effects of the vaccines, when no one else knows? You know what nobody else does?

TMI shit aside, there is, in fact, a way to test how much of these side effects are coindidence and how much of them are caused by the vaccine.  And here's an example of how they did it.

Case in point: some people in the trials for the Moderna and Pfizer vaccines ended up getting something called Bell's Palsy, a (temporary) paralysis of the muscles in the face. Alarm bells are probably going off in your head, but before you do it, here are the numbers.
In the Pfizer trials, 4 people out of a total of 43,000 got it. Odds of getting it from Pfizer: 1 in 10750
In the Moderna Trials, 3 people who got the vaccine (plus one who didn't) got it out of a total of 30,000. Odds of getting it from Moderna: 1 in 7500, (1 in 10,000 if you don't count the guy who got it from the placebo)
And for the control, in America, 40,000 people develop it every year out of a population (Estimated in 2020) of 328 million. Odds of getting it generally: 1 in 8200.

If there were some causal relationship, the chances of getting it would probably have to be significantly higher than normal. And, in this case, the only way I could get the numbers higher than normal was if I counted the case Moderna got from the one guy who only got the placebo. Hell, if I counted all eight and combined them into one number, it'd still be lower than the control (1 in 9125). So, in this case, you actually have less of a chance of getting it from the vaccine than normally. This does not sound like a good correlation.

I'm sure there's more to it when scientists test whether or not there's a causative factor (or even much of a correlation), but this is a good place to start understanding how people figure out which side effects could be caused by COVID and which ones are just coincidence.

And IA will simply respond "but it's not zero" 

You would have to be pretty desperate to make such an irrational counterargument

[Rev. Rye]

TMI shit aside, there is, in fact, a way to test how much of these side effects are coindidence and how much of them are caused by the vaccine.  And here's an example of how they did it.

Case in point: some people in the trials for the Moderna and Pfizer vaccines ended up getting something called Bell's Palsy, a (temporary) paralysis of the muscles in the face. Alarm bells are probably going off in your head, but before you do it, here are the numbers.
In the Pfizer trials, 4 people out of a total of 43,000 got it. Odds of getting it from Pfizer: 1 in 10750
In the Moderna Trials, 3 people who got the vaccine (plus one who didn't) got it out of a total of 30,000. Odds of getting it from Moderna: 1 in 7500, (1 in 10,000 if you don't count the guy who got it from the placebo)
And for the control, in America, 40,000 people develop it every year out of a population (Estimated in 2020) of 328 million. Odds of getting it generally: 1 in 8200.

If there were some causal relationship, the chances of getting it would probably have to be significantly higher than normal. And, in this case, the only way I could get the numbers higher than normal was if I counted the case Moderna got from the one guy who only got the placebo. Hell, if I counted all eight and combined them into one number, it'd still be lower than the control (1 in 9125). So, in this case, you actually have less of a chance of getting it from the vaccine than normally. This does not sound like a good correlation.

I'm sure there's more to it when scientists test whether or not there's a causative factor (or even much of a correlation), but this is a good place to start understanding how people figure out which side effects could be caused by COVID and which ones are just coincidence.

And IA will simply respond "but it's not zero" 

You would have to be pretty desperate to make such an irrational counterargument

And if IA makes such a response, it'll only prove he has no idea what he's talking about. Just like the time he insisted George Floyd's killing was in accordance with the guidelines of reasonable force, even after practically everyone up the chain of command from Chauvin testified and every single one said "No it isn't."

[polymath257]

Stop kink shaming me you normie. I don't think you understand what troll means. Those are actually some of the more popular videos on porn sites and millions are into that type of thing. It's perfectly normal, so get over yourself.

And I guess the leaders of Ontario and Quebec are trolls too, since they agree with me that unvaccinated nurses are desperately needed to prevent a collapse of the healthcare system.

What would help the healthcare system the most is having enough vaccinated people so that this disease gets under control. The burn out from watching people die unnecessarily every day, day in and day out, for over a year is the biggest problem the healthcare system has right now.

This is compounded by people arguing against the most effective means we have of trying to control this disease.

Add to that the pure selfishness of those that refuse to get vaccinated until they get covid and then beg to be vaccinated when it is too late. Or those that try to get healthcare workers to give 'treatments' that are known to not work.

Why pretend that you care about the healthcare workers/system when doing everything in your power to bring it down?

[Irreligious Atheist]

We may have some idea about some things, Rye, but to claim that we know everything there is to know a year after the vaccines have come out is nonsense, and I think you know that. There is still much to learn. Your stance here is anti-scientific imo.

What does the word 'safe' mean when it comes to the covid vaccines? People mean different things by safe. I think you can argue that the vaccines are reasonably safe, but they can also rightfully be called risky vaccines, which I have no problem calling them. These vaccines were put out extremely quickly and I think nurses should have the right to make this risk assessment for themselves when there are still many unknowns out there. I believe you are certainly overstating what we know at the moment, so we'll have to agree to disagree on that point. This short video below explains my position on this pretty well. I think your position is anti-scientific.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NGElw8Txs9A&t=607s

And as far as the George Floyd thing goes, I waited for the trial to make up my mind completely, and before the verdict came out, my position was that he was guilty of manslaughter, so I didn't think Chauvin should have gotten off. George Floyd jumped out of the back of the police car after he was placed in there, which can be considered an escape attempt, so I understood why Chauvin put him in the restraint for those actions, but after the Floyd situation happened, I agreed with everyone else that Chauvin's actions were immoral and that he held Floyd down for way too long.

[The Architect Of Fate]

And IA keeps making excuses. 

The Vaccine isn't "risky " in the slightest and we know what we need to know 

And the darkhorse podcast is a place for kooks and lunatics and Winestien is a hack  

[Irreligious Atheist]

And IA keeps making excuses. 

The Vaccine isn't "risky " in the slightest and we know what we need to know 

And the darkhorse podcast is a place for kooks and lunatics and Winestien is a hack  

You know what you need to know to support your preconceived narrative and you don't want to know anything further is what I'm hearing from you. If you were alive back in the day, you surely would have supported censoring Copernicus.

[The Architect Of Fate]

You know what you need to know to support your preconceived narrative

Nope, we know enough to say the vaccine is safe and effective and there is no valid excuse not to take it 

and you don't want to know anything further is what I'm hearing from you. 

Nope, I'm just no interest in laboring on the opinion of quacks who have tossed their credibility into the shitter for fame and wealth or due to irrational fear then try and pretend their standing up for science.

If you were alive back in the day, you surely would have supported censoring Copernicus.

Nope because Copernicus wasn't a snake oil salesman who demand we abandon established science he was merely restoring what was previously known since ancient times. Nor would I imagine he would suffer the prattle of people who don't want to take a perfectly safe and effective medical treatment based on their fee-fees.

[Rev. Rye]

If you were alive back in the day, you surely would have supported censoring Copernicus.

Nope because Copernicus wasn't a snake oil salesman who demand we abandon established science he was merely restoring what was previously known since ancient times.

That and Coperrnicus actually had evidence for his assertions. He didn’t rely on sophistries about how just Because there
Could be stuff about the celestial orbits we don’t know that it would be safe to assume that heliocentrism is true. He did what he could with his admittedly limited data to explain why it was superior to the Ptolemaic system.

Also, Copernicus didn’t have a long track record of talking absolute shit.

[The Architect Of Fate]

Nope because Copernicus wasn't a snake oil salesman who demand we abandon established science he was merely restoring what was previously known since ancient times.

That and Coperrnicus actually had evidence for his assertions. He didn’t rely on sophistries about how just Because there
Could be stuff about the celestial orbits we don’t know that it would be safe to assume that heliocentrism is true. He did what he could with his admittedly limited data to explain why it was superior to the Ptolemaic system.

Also, Copernicus didn’t have a long track record of talking absolute shit.

And I point out again he wasn't saying anything that hadn't been said since the time of the Ancient Greeks even if their understanding of the mechanism of heliocentrism were much simpler and lacking in some areas.

---

Nicolaus Copernicus- Was a deep and insightful genius who restored our understanding of cosmology and was persecuted by church grifters 

Bret Winestein- A man whose degree isn't worth the paper it's printed on is a grifting fuckwit who runs a shitty podcast where he and similar grifting fuckwits jerk each other off.

The comparison is fucking absurd 

[Irreligious Atheist]

Yeah. Not enough concrete evidence is out there, yet you do not think further scientific inquiry and studies are necessary. Sounds like you don't want there to be concrete evidence.

And also in the news, Justice Sotomayor spreads lies, conspiracies and propaganda about covid. Shameful.

https://apnews.com/article/fact-checking-052172757066

CLAIM: More than 100,000 children are in “serious condition” with COVID-19 in the U.S.

AP’S ASSESSMENT: False. Federal data shows that around 5,000 minors are currently hospitalized with confirmed or suspected COVID-19.