Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Covid

Mumsnet doesn't verify the qualifications of users. If you have medical concerns, please consult a healthcare professional.

Original poster

In 2021 Fauci said - 'Only very very rarely would vaccinated people get infected...

197 replies

statementstate · 25/03/2023 18:32

...and if they did, they wouldn't get sick, and they wouldn't even know they had it'

America calls this man "The Science" and every word he uttered back then and now, people take as absolute fact and truth.

On basis of his statement above, unvaccinated people were torn apart, shamed, demonised etc

Why wasn't all that shit he said classed as misinformation considering it wasn't true? Why won't he ever get de-platformed, or censored.

Why would a man of his expertise say things that aren't accurate? If he can openly spread false information such as the above, what else has he misled the world about since 2021 until now that heavily impacted peoples lives?

I think he deserves everyone an explanation (that was what we knew at the time bullsh*t) and an apology. Any one else agree?

OP posts:
Truestorypeeps · 25/03/2023 21:52

Biochemist · 25/03/2023 20:52

So many with their eyes and minds closed. Shame.

As always I am totally happy to read any evidence with an open mind @Elieza (though you haven't even said what it even shows), but as always it's vague claims and "do you own research"

I find these posts ironic as at this point you are completely blind to the evidence in front of your eyes regarding vaccine effectiveness and safety.

Personally, I've never questioned the vaccine effectiveness and safety, I just looked at my own age and physical condition and decided to pass. I caught Covid, had a high temp for 3/4 days and had to sleep a lot, that was it. I know of one vaccine death and a bad stroke within my small community. Thousands of others have been fine. Perhaps the risk to me in not taking the vaccine was greater than taking the vaccine, but I did what I was comfortable with. I don't think people who took a vaccine should 'open their eyes', but nor do I think those that didn't are all 'tin foil hat wearers'... That's rather simplistic and it's rare that anything is black and white.

However, no one can surely tell me that it was ever necessary for healthy children to take the vaccine, the risk was miniscule! The drug companies had to get a return on their investment and so it was pushed and pushed and pushed to all. Things like that make people question the agenda, they are a business, with share holders, surely the blind can see that that must form some of this? Oh no, they are all good Christian companies who care about us all immensely! Pfizer has never ever had to pay out billions in the US due to lies about their medications?! Oh wait, oh my, they have! This is why some people tell others to do your own research, because the media didn't give a balanced view, anything anti the vaccine was silenced, no debate. It struck me as odd but people call those looking a bit deeper as mad, is that right? Why don't you just believe the government and sky news?! You must be crazy!

Biochemist · 25/03/2023 21:56

@Truestorypeeps this seems like a bit of a misinterpreation of my post

I'm not commenting on anyone's personal decision on whether to get vaccinated or not, and of course the benefit/risk profile shifts once you have had the first infection

I was responding to a PP where someone was claiming they have "evidence" (presumably to show that on a population level vaccines are useles and/or dangerous).

They don't have robust evidence. They won't post this. And it's ironic of them to claim people need to "open their eyes", when at this point in time, there is a wealth of evidence demonstrating it was safer to be vaccinated than unvaccinated.

Biochemist · 25/03/2023 22:01

Why don't you just believe the government and sky news?! You must be crazy!

This seems to be a classic sidestep in these threads. If you point out disinformation, it means you must be automatically believing the government and "MSM" @Truestorypeeps

The media mangle science reporting all the time - long before COVID. The governemnt are a bunch of clowns who made so many mistakes and deliberate decisions that were not based on robsut evidence.

My points about vaccine safety and effectiveness are based on the current body of literature (which by this point is huge) of scientific research in this area.

However, no one can surely tell me that it was ever necessary for healthy children to take the vaccine, the risk was miniscule!
The most up to date evidence disagrees with your opinion on this.

Truestorypeeps · 25/03/2023 22:13

Biochemist · 25/03/2023 22:01

Why don't you just believe the government and sky news?! You must be crazy!

This seems to be a classic sidestep in these threads. If you point out disinformation, it means you must be automatically believing the government and "MSM" @Truestorypeeps

The media mangle science reporting all the time - long before COVID. The governemnt are a bunch of clowns who made so many mistakes and deliberate decisions that were not based on robsut evidence.

My points about vaccine safety and effectiveness are based on the current body of literature (which by this point is huge) of scientific research in this area.

However, no one can surely tell me that it was ever necessary for healthy children to take the vaccine, the risk was miniscule!
The most up to date evidence disagrees with your opinion on this.

However, no one can surely tell me that it was ever necessary for healthy children to take the vaccine, the risk was miniscule!
The most up to date evidence disagrees with your opinion on this.

Do you happen to know the percentage chance of a healthy 5 year old contracting Covid and having serious complications or death? I'd say it's a tiny drop in the ocean. If we are talking about risk of serious injury or death from an activity, it is so many more times dangerous to drive them about in a car than leaving them unvaccinated, so people better stop doing that if they are trying to mitigate every risk in their child's lives.

Anyway, night night :-)

sunglassesonthetable · 25/03/2023 22:18

This is why some people tell others to do your own research, because the media didn't give a balanced view, anything anti the vaccine was silenced, no debate. It struck me as odd but people call those looking a bit deeper as mad, is that right? Why don't you just believe the government and sky news?! You must be crazy!

Yep and all the people " who do their own research " are experienced rigorous and balanced. Or even vaguely scientific.

anything anti vaccine on here rarely ( not always ) stands up to much scientific rigour or debate.

It's not mad " to look deeper". They rarely do though.

You must be crazy to believe the shite that pops up all over SM.

rockly · 25/03/2023 22:27

Truestorypeeps · 25/03/2023 22:13

However, no one can surely tell me that it was ever necessary for healthy children to take the vaccine, the risk was miniscule!
The most up to date evidence disagrees with your opinion on this.

Do you happen to know the percentage chance of a healthy 5 year old contracting Covid and having serious complications or death? I'd say it's a tiny drop in the ocean. If we are talking about risk of serious injury or death from an activity, it is so many more times dangerous to drive them about in a car than leaving them unvaccinated, so people better stop doing that if they are trying to mitigate every risk in their child's lives.

Anyway, night night :-)

Show quote history

It is so many more times dangerous to drive them about in a car than leaving them unvaccinated, so people better stop doing that if they are trying to mitigate every risk in their child's lives.

This makes absolutely no sense @Truestorypeeps - I'm not sure what point you're trying to make

Vaccination was offered to groups where there was enough evidence to demonstrate it was worthwhile - i.e., the benefits outweighed risks.

Parents were free to turn this down if they didn't agree with JCVI guidance

AFAIK 5 year olds (unless CEV) weren't offered the primary course in the UK, so irrelevant to your post?

Biochemist · 25/03/2023 22:30

it is so many more times dangerous to drive them about in a car than leaving them unvaccinated, so people better stop doing that if they are trying to mitigate every risk in their child's lives.

Eh? Are you trying to say that no health interventions that offer a relatively modest benefit should be offered because driving is dangerous? Or no one should be driving their kids around? I honeslty don't understand where this analogy is going @Truestorypeeps

Do you happen to know the percentage chance of a healthy 5 year old contracting Covid and having serious complications or death?
I am pretty sure JCVI did not offer coronavirus vaccines to this demographic of the general population, so why are you bringing up?

For 12-16 year olds, there is a robust body of evidence that it was worthwhile offering the primary course, hence why it was offered.

QueefofSheena · 25/03/2023 22:47

Ah Jesus, people are still wilfully ignorant. I had a healthy close relative in their mid 40’s die of Covid late 2020 unvaccinated, yet my FIL in his late 80’s with cancer, diabetes and a raft of other health conditions, who was due back from hospital to his care home had just tested positive for Covid with no obvious symptoms. I’m guessing that the conspiracy nutters don’t believe this was due to vaccinations but dumb luck. Fucking wankers.

Hiheyho · 26/03/2023 09:27

Agree op! It’s all a circus, isn’t it? So many of them filmed saying that and implemented mandates when jab doesn’t stop transmission.

sunglassesonthetable · 26/03/2023 09:34

On basis of his statement above, unvaccinated people were torn apart, shamed, demonised etc

Why is there so much victim hood in this ?

Certainly wasn't at the time. You didn't want, so you didn't take it.

The real victims of Covid are forgotten.

sunglassesonthetable · 26/03/2023 09:38

Agree op! It’s all a circus, isn’t it? So many of them filmed saying that and implemented mandates when jab doesn’t stop transmission

And?

I'm thankful there were mandates and a vaccine. I don't think we'd be where we are now without it.

Do you understand that consensus science changes?

Hiheyho · 26/03/2023 10:08

You entitled to your opinion, I don’t think you should mandate this jab if it doesn’t stop transmission

sunglassesonthetable · 26/03/2023 10:10

You entitled to your opinion, I don’t think you should mandate this jab if it doesn’t stop transmission

It's not mandated

Hiheyho · 26/03/2023 10:13

It was going to, they sacked thousands of care workers for this and haven’t reinstated them, if people didn’t react, they would have been mandated. Plus, loads of people only got injected because they said this would stop transmission

sunglassesonthetable · 26/03/2023 10:18

Re Care workers I can see they were trying to protect the people living n care homes ( at last ) 🤷‍♀️

How many is " loads" ? Billions, millions, hundreds , 10 people you know?

Did you realise science, changes and evolves
and new information was being found all the time?

sunglassesonthetable · 26/03/2023 10:19

if people didn’t react, they would have been mandated.

You sure? I wonder how you 'know' that?

Hiheyho · 26/03/2023 10:20

How would they protect vulnerable if it doesn’t stop transmission which one of Phizer directors said they never tested vax for this?
I do realise the science evolves constantly.

sunglassesonthetable · 26/03/2023 10:22

How would they protect vulnerable if it doesn’t stop transmission which one of Phizer directors said they never tested vax for this?
I do realise the science evolves constantly.

How would they protect vulnerable if the carers hadn't had it??

Hiheyho · 26/03/2023 10:22

Hadn’t had what?

sunglassesonthetable · 26/03/2023 10:24

I do realise the science evolves constantly.

You don't sound like it. You sound like you think decisions were knowingly made in opposition what would / could improve the survival rate odds.

Rather than a worldwide fast moving situation with a novel virus.

sunglassesonthetable · 26/03/2023 10:25

Hadn’t had what?

guessing

Miajk · 26/03/2023 10:47

Jonei · 25/03/2023 19:54

I had to take the vaccine or lose my job. I didn't want it but I had it. I decided that I wouldn't take it again and would look for another job if it was still mandatory. Work backed down on it. Retrospectively, I should have just looked for another job in the first place. I'm still fucked off about being forced into that position.

Show quote history

I can't help but think that all the people who have died from preventable diseases (including these poor unvaccinated people sick with COVID begging to be vaccinated when it's too late and they were on ventilators dying) would be in sheer disbelief that we have the option to get vaccinated but some of the population simply chooses not to.

Not to mention that as a society apparently now some us believe that our own opinion based on what Karen said on Facebook trumps medical evidence or expertise.

Jonei · 26/03/2023 11:36

I always think when some people have to resort to using Karen as a slur, they immediately show their hand as someone who is not very intelligent, deeply intolerant, incapable of understanding that there is often more to the story and certainly not worth the time or energy debating with them.

rockly · 26/03/2023 12:21

Hiheyho · 26/03/2023 10:20

How would they protect vulnerable if it doesn’t stop transmission which one of Phizer directors said they never tested vax for this?
I do realise the science evolves constantly.

Many many posters have explained this to you when you've spammed over threads with these kinds of claims. It's even been posted on this thread @Hiheyho

There is a difference between transmission and onward transmission.

Someone cannot transmit if they are not infected, hence the statements back in 2021 when almost 100% efficacy at preventing infection was observed in trials.

It is impossible to test onward transmission if no-one is infected in the treatment arm, which is one of the reasons this was not tested in trials.

Pfizer (and others, but it's always Pfizer in these kinds of posts!) never said they were looking at this and their trial protocols published publicly online explain what was and wasn't being examined.

In early population data, reductions in both transmission and onward transmission looked promising, hence statements in late 2021 about reductions in onward transmission.

You are just copying and pasting snippets put out by various anti-vaccine groups without thinking for yourself.

sunglassesonthetable · 26/03/2023 13:31

There is a difference between transmission and onward transmission

it's a scientific difference and tbh @Hiheyho
doesn't sound particularly rigorous in their approach.

Don't think they even want to understand however well it's explained.

I think some of the types who post and post on a thread like this just miss the bustle of an argument like the heady sheeple v tin hatters days of 2021.

For all the big talk the tin hat types became the minority. Most people just went and had the vaccine. And carried on.

And here they are , 'victims'. Unlike the actual victims.