Is it ok to ask about the ramping up of vaccine side effects stories?

[SparklingJam]

I’m generally pro vaccines, but I’m starting to question the effects of the covid jab, and wonder if it’s possible to have a discussion about it. Apologies if this has been done to death, or isn’t an accepted topic.

I’ve been seeing more information about deaths of young men, how the vaccine isn’t very effective against covid, and hearing all about dreadful side effects, to the point where some people won’t have the jab because they “know” they’ll die.

I can fully accept that there are side effects, but the talk of increased deaths (apparently 1300 excess deaths per week, coupled with videos of supposed undertakers saying they are 50-100% busier now) is making me question things and worry.

Having said that, in my extended circle of friends, family and colleagues, I know many people who are mostly vaccinated, and apart from a day or 5 of feeling fluey they all have no side effects and haven’t died.
At the same time through the same extended group, I know a couple who have died of covid and several who still have long covid which has disabled them to varying degrees.

It would be logical to think that the excess deaths are a catch up to lock down and lack of hospital treatment, plus the current issues many have with seeing a gp or calling an ambulance, but I am assured by certain people that the excess deaths are solely due to the vaccine.

I too will follow the advice of people qualified enough to have an opinion.

I know everyone's a keyboard scientist these days. I just don't understand why anyone wants to believe some random unqualifieds on tik tok, youtube, twitter etc ?

Anyway, I'm grateful for all the jabs I've had throughout my life, and that I live in a time of such advances in medical science. Previous generations in centuries past were not so lucky.

To be clear - I totally accept that some will have had adverse effects to the Covid jab and I do sympathise, but I don't believe in all the global conspiracy, death jab crap. It's disinformation.

Apologies - copied from my original placement on a different thread as it seems more relevant here.

I am genuinely torn on this one. As an ex-nurse I am not remotely 'anti-vacc' - I was so delighted to receive my first one. I've also had two more. But I can't deny (and my GP also says this) that I have had endless autoimmune issues since (alopecia, sinus problems, tinnitus, eye issues). While none of these is serious (although I could do without them all!), my concern is that my next reaction might be worse - I really do not want lupus, or arthritis, or some other autoimmune thing that my body kicks off.

I have huge sympathy and empathy with this!

I hope your symptoms go away & completely understand why it would put you off a booster!

I think it's important to point out there also really isn't a mechanism by which a vaccine would somehow increase risk for all autoimmune disorders - it's not how they work. Also tinnitus and sinus issues aren't specifically AI?

It is of course possible one of the vaccine could trigger a specific autoimmmune disorder - but with billions of doses given there have been no safety signals identified for any of these.

Specific side effects - carditis, CVSTs etc have been identified, which need to be taken into account when considering the costs & benefits for specific groups.

I have alopecia too :-(

if you read the Nature article you’ll see in vivo work on mRNA and the first mouse trials started in 1990. The first human vaccine trials in 2013. 10 years of vaccine trials- where is your source for “never any successful trials”. Rabies, HIV, flu, Zika.

you “truly believe” mRNA vaccines will be the next big scandal? When they’ve been in development for over 30 years and in trials for 10a and it’s not the vaccine itself but the efficacy of the inert delivery system that slowed things down.

Just to add to this excellent post by @Reallyreallyborednow I can second this. DD2, who lives with me, has a first-class Masters in control of infectious diseases – she's basically a cross between an epidemiologist and a virologist – told me this when Covid vaccines first came out. It was problems with the delivery system rather than any issues about the mRNA element which was causing delays.

Also incidentally, the new malaria vaccine (DD2's area of expertise) which has been launched to much fanfare recently, is an mRNA vaccine too.

I'm guessing that's a dig at me?! Can't say I've seen anyone else with a "foliage related name".

Please link to any of my posts where I've been trying to "stamp out" people?

If someone does not want to be vaccinated, that's totally fair enough. If someone has side effects associated with a vaccine, I really feel for them & hope it is being taken seriously.

Have previously linked before some of the research groups who are investigating prevalence/pathomechanism of side effects etc & how people can report anything.

I can do this alongside pointing out misnformation - which benefits literally no one. All it does is coerce someone out of making an informed decision, and causes anxiety in people who have already been vaccinated. This includes the "paper" written by Aseem Malhorta, which is simply a narrative of his opinions, published in a low impact predatory journal he is editor of.

What do you mean @EcoTourist ?

A "predatory journal" is an established term in the scientific community.

Fairly easy to spot as they have a low impact factor, few publications, charge extortionate fees and typically accept any article even if it is not in their remit.

The "Journal of Insulin Resistance" fits all these boxes - if Malhorta's paper was good quality, he could have easily published it somewhere legit (and where he is not the editor).

I am sure we will all feel safe tonight knowing that we are privileged to have such an unbiased guardian of 'misinformation' happy to spend all of there time protecting us all from anything that deviates from what the government and pharmaceutical companies tell us...

These posts are weird - I'm not sure why you're trying to turn it into a personal attack. They also fail to see any kind of nuance when it comes to managing the harms of a novel pandemic.

I have disagreed with the vast majority of the government's handling of the pandemic. There have also been many issues regarding the current coronavirus vaccines & their roll out.

My opinions are based on what the most up to date evidence tells us - and it still remains true that is was safer to be vaccinated than not be vaccinated.

Doesn't mean you have to be and indeed only a minority of people are now being offered boosters.

Do you have a reasonable argument to discount the facts presented in the peer reviewed paper that Dr. Aseem Malhotra published?
I assume you have read it and are not just attempting to dismiss it out of hand because it doesn't fit with the story you like to push?

Yes I have read it - both parts.

It is not of publication level quality. It a narrative of his thoughts about the pandemic - this isn't science.

He presents a selection of cherry picked quotes for various studies and statistics that have already been demonstrated to be incorrect, that have been provided by Clare Craig (of the HART group).

It is exhausting because if there was good quality evidence that vaccines caused more harm than benefit for a particular group, I'd update my opinions accordingly. But this isn't it.

The legitimacy of Malhotra's views - and his credentials are extensively discussed in the first several pages of this thread.

Yes @Piggywaspushed

It's just madness because no-one pushing his views seems to care that he is literally making a career out of this.

Can't you see how starting threads like this perpetuates this whole issue, though?

If enough people say 'I saw this thing that said vaccines aren't 100% safe' then that gets spread around, and even if that thing they saw is complete nonsense, people start to doubt, and that causes more doubt. It's like a bloody virus in itself!

You've just started a thread doubting the safety of vaccines.

Now a lot of people are going to see this thread - people who might have been coming to terms with the idea of having the vaccine/ it being safe - and it could reset their thinking and get them worrying again.

It is so critical right now for people to think before they talk.

Do you actually know what you're talking about? If not, why not try being quiet and listening for a while, rather than spreading potential misinformation even further.

Again @EcoTourist I find your posts really strange!

You asked for specific critiques of the paper, I gave you some examples. I've no idea why you're now accusing me of having a "massive ego" and "assumed position of authority" lol.

It's almost as if you're trying to intimidate me into not posting on the thread?

I'm an anonymous poster on a forum and could be anyone - but my views are shared by the vast vast majority of the scientific community. Of course you don't need to take my word for it when there are many verified people who have publicly commented.

You seem to be trying to discredit me in a very aggressive fashion, it's just very odd.

@EcoTourist

I don't understand what you're trying to achieve here.

If you post things that are low quality, like Malhorta's recent paper, people will point this out.

I've given you specific examples of some of the issues in his paper like you asked. You don't seem to want to engage, you'd rather attack me and go on this strange rant about me having a "script" and "maintaining a position".

You're entitled to your opinion, other posters are allowed to reply to you. It sounds like you'd rather an echo chamber where no-one is allowed to challenge what you post?

Because you know the tide is turning and think this is enough to try and deflect.
Again - you seem to have built this up in your head into something it isn't. The vast majority of scientists & clinicians agree with the current situation - offering boosters to a certain demographic of the population. If you don't want to be vaccinated, that's fine. If you want to push claims that are not based in fact, that's fine too.

So leaving aside your views of Maholtra himself, foliage, what is your view on the data presented by Pfizer this far?

You're going to have to be a bit more specific @BeethovenNinth - what data presented by Pfizer? Do you have a link to a particular document?

And why just the focus on Pfizer rather than Moderna/AZ/Sinopharm?

And why only data from them - lots of independent bodies including research institutes have evaluated things like vaccine efficacy, safety & side effects - surely that's of interest too?

My question is simple. Maholtra says he recommended the vaccine until he saw the Pfizer data. Then he says he no longer can recommend.

leaving aside all other criticisms of the man and his writing style, is the Pfizer data in itself indicative that there is an issue?

the data is being slowly released by Pfizer.

I'm late to this discussion but wasn't it the pfizer data that showed some of the participants dropped out of the trials because they developed some kind of autoimmune MS type illness? I definitely recall reading that at some point but can't remember if it was pfizer of one of the other pharmaceutical companies.

@BeethovenNinth

Again I have to ask - what Pfizer data are you referring to?

Clearly I cannot answer the question "what is your view of the Pfizer data" or "is the Pfizer data in itself indicative of an issue" unless you provide a link to the data you're referring to so I can look at it!