Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

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:
sunglassesonthetable · 27/03/2023 14:24

@BeethovenNinth GroupThink is alive and well, so many atrocities in the past do indeed make sense now. I can't even read the nonsense coming from sunglasses.

Too right group think is alive and well.

There are some logic atrocities just on these pages.

Original poster
statementstate · 27/03/2023 14:58

@henlee pffff, grow up. I don't want to convince you of anything. Get over yourself, I truly don't give a toss what you think or believe. IF anything it is the opposite.

I don't reply to things I have already seen written and responded to from the same folks across difference posts over the past however long. It is all repetitive. Which I have already said above, and here you are making me repeat myself.

The same people say the same thing, no matter what is presented to them. I am sure they think the of me too, solution, don't respond to me.

Lastly, I am never wrong! ha

OP posts:
henlee · 27/03/2023 15:09

The same people say the same thing, no matter what is presented to them

But you literally never present any evidence to back up your claims? @statementstate

And when people reply asking follow up questions, or presenting evidence that proves these claims are incorrect, you ignore them.

solution, don't respond to me.
You will get replies when you post things about health, COVID, and vaccines that are untrue. These fake claims aren't just a bit of fun, they cause real life harm.

sunglassesonthetable · 27/03/2023 15:33

I don't reply to things I have already seen written and responded to from the same folks across difference posts over the past however long. It is all repetitive. Which I have already said above, and here you are making me repeat myself.

Fancy thinking it was a discussion site😂

You should just post a newsletter statement.

sunglassesonthetable · 27/03/2023 15:35

pffff, grow up. I don't want to convince you of anything. Get over yourself, I truly don't give a toss what you think or believe. IF anything it is the opposite.

Well you're sending very mixed messages.
You're always posting this stuff.

Typing practice?

sunglassesonthetable · 27/03/2023 16:46

The same people say the same thing, no matter what is presented to them. I am sure they think the of me too, solution, don't respond to me.

😂 magic

henlee · 28/03/2023 17:07

Do you honestly feel, or know, based on the evidence that everyone onto planet had a better chance (at fighting off Covid) with the vaccine than natural infection?

Still waiting on @statementstate to explain why they think the best way of "fighting off Covid" is to be infected with the virus that causes COVID........

Puzzledandpissedoff · 28/03/2023 17:53

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

He couldn't have done OP - whatever the situation/evidence at the time we're constantly told that no such thing was ever claimed Hmm

henlee · 28/03/2023 17:58

Puzzledandpissedoff · 28/03/2023 17:53

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

He couldn't have done OP - whatever the situation/evidence at the time we're constantly told that no such thing was ever claimed Hmm

Hmm I'm not sure where you're getting your information from if you think statements like this were never made

Trial data and measures collected early after vaccine authorisation demonstrated this to be true at the time.

As has been repeatedly stated, very very high efficacy at preventing infection was observed (i.e., >95%) which was reported to governments/media/general public.

I'm not sure why you think it was unreasonable for this to be reported when it was based on robust evidence.

Puzzledandpissedoff · 28/03/2023 18:07

I'm not sure where you're getting your information from if you think statements like this were never made

That's not what I wrote, henlee - my whole point is that whatever the perceived justification at the time such comments were made, but that this is now frequently denied

And since the trial data later turned out to be very wide of the mark, it seems questions around how it was produced may well be appropriate:

Covid-19: Researcher blows the whistle on data integrity issues in Pfizer’s vaccine trial

Revelations of poor practices at a contract research company helping to carry out Pfizer’s pivotal covid-19 vaccine trial raise questions about data integrity and regulatory oversight. Paul D Thacker reports In autumn 2020 Pfizer’s chairman and chief...

https://www.bmj.com/content/375/bmj.n2635

henlee · 28/03/2023 19:00

And since the trial data later turned out to be very wide of the mark, it seems questions around how it was produced may well be appropriate:

Important to place this paper in the context that:

  1. The claims made would not bias effect estimates derived
  2. This is about one sub study -what about all other trial sites for Pfizer, all trial sites for AZ, J&J, moderna etc - what's the reasoning behind these estimates also being wrong?
  3. For those who have studied the evolution and genome of SARS-COV-2, it is obvious why efficacy/effectiveness were initially reported as high, but then waned.

This has all been communicated, but swiftly ignored @Puzzledandpissedoff

henlee · 28/03/2023 19:03

I just think it is ridiculous at this point in the pandemic, with the wealth of evidence we do have, people are still trying to claim vaccination was a mistake when it is obvious it's blindingly the opposite.

As many posters have said - why is this statement widely accepted by the medical & scientific community? Why does @statementstate have knowledge that has somehow escaped the attention of tens of thousands of experts with decades of experience?

sunglassesonthetable · 28/03/2023 19:33

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*

Honestly it's like an 8 yr old wrote this. And literally NO interest in answers. Banging your head against a brick wall.

It's just a way of getting this sh** out there. A newsletter from the dark side or wherever they hang out.

There used to be thread after thread like this back in the early days of Covid. Now the Covid board seems to be mostly people still struggling with after effects.

Every now and then a thread like this gets started. Sort of desperately.

MoronOnTheTable · 05/04/2023 02:30

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

mathanxiety · 05/04/2023 02:58

Is there some sort of anti vax campaign going on here?

This is the second thread I've seen in two days where the OP expresses wild eyed anti vax ideas.

Original poster
statementstate · 05/04/2023 08:40

Applause @MoronOnTheTable

@mathanxiety wild eyed anti vax ideas? Rubbish.

OP posts:
GoldenAye · 05/04/2023 09:57

statementstate · 05/04/2023 08:40

Applause @MoronOnTheTable

@mathanxiety wild eyed anti vax ideas? Rubbish.

😂 It can't have been that great, then - it's been deleted. Oops.

Puzzledandpissedoff · 05/04/2023 12:13

You'd applaud personal attacks, statementstate? What an odd thing to post ...

ZeldaWillTellYourFortune · 05/04/2023 12:20

Random789 · 25/03/2023 18:45

Was he speaking sincerely, on the basis of his best understanding of a rapidly changing situation and a novel vaccine? My best guess is, yes he was.
It was obvious to everyone that experts were moving with lightening speed , and that they were constantly adapting their comments to new evidence, new understandings. And that, despite their sincere commitment to the truth and the public interest, they were likely to get things wrong sometimes.
I don't think you need to apologise for that.

Exactly this.

sunglassesonthetable · 05/04/2023 17:55

@statementstate

Applauding abusive attacks undermines your credibility tbh.

Especially when they hope someone has a slow and painful end.

Childish and nasty.

AnnaDablam · 16/04/2023 20:05

To quote one poster on here:

"What we do have is robust, replicated evidence from all over the world that vaccinated people showed better outcomes than unvaccinated - be it likilhood of infection, severity of illness, hospital admission etc. This is true across demographic groups."

That's the official line of course, 'safe and effective' trotted out at any opportunity, but real world data paints a somewhat different picture.

Firstly the 95% efficacy the media like to parrot refers to the Relative Risk Reduction rather than the Actual Risk Reduction. If you don't understand the differences between these two types of risk reduction and why this is is so important, please look into it.

Secondly, looking at the official government data from NSW in Australia is interesting. Page 4 details hospital admissions and deaths by vaccination status.

NSW Weekly C-19 Data Review

The UKHSA data was showing similar figures before they pulled the weekly updates by vaccination status. Might I suggest you draw your conclusions from what you see from the actual data, rather than what you are told by our governments and our media.

Biochemist · 16/04/2023 20:27

AnnaDablam · 16/04/2023 20:05

To quote one poster on here:

"What we do have is robust, replicated evidence from all over the world that vaccinated people showed better outcomes than unvaccinated - be it likilhood of infection, severity of illness, hospital admission etc. This is true across demographic groups."

That's the official line of course, 'safe and effective' trotted out at any opportunity, but real world data paints a somewhat different picture.

Firstly the 95% efficacy the media like to parrot refers to the Relative Risk Reduction rather than the Actual Risk Reduction. If you don't understand the differences between these two types of risk reduction and why this is is so important, please look into it.

Secondly, looking at the official government data from NSW in Australia is interesting. Page 4 details hospital admissions and deaths by vaccination status.

NSW Weekly C-19 Data Review

The UKHSA data was showing similar figures before they pulled the weekly updates by vaccination status. Might I suggest you draw your conclusions from what you see from the actual data, rather than what you are told by our governments and our media.

Seems a little sneaky to deliberately not quote my post or @ me @AnnaDablam !

Nevertheless, I'm the poster you're quoting and I'll reply anyway

The statements I made are not from "parotting" media and government lines, but are a summary of the most up to date evidence regarding vaccine efficacy and side effects. As a research scientist, I am relatively qualified to evaulate the quality of evidence for health interventions.

I have no idea why you are quoting a "95% efficacy" statistic or what specifically you're referring to.

In none of my posts did I claim vaccines were "safe and effective" which is obviously an oversimplication of risk:benefit profiles.

It is ironic you are accusing people of doing the very thing you are -repeating claims from various groups without actually looking at the evidence yourself.

AnnaDablam · 16/04/2023 20:33

Thanks, for perspective I added the most up to date data from Australia from which vaccine effectiveness can be determined. Did you look at this? What does it show in your opinion?

Biochemist · 16/04/2023 20:34

AnnaDablam · 16/04/2023 20:33

Thanks, for perspective I added the most up to date data from Australia from which vaccine effectiveness can be determined. Did you look at this? What does it show in your opinion?

Would you like to explain what you think these numbers in the table show?

Biochemist · 16/04/2023 20:35

also not sure why you've cherry picked figures from 24 and 31 December 2022 in Australia, or why you're claiming this is the "most to up to date evidence", but your misunderstanding will be the same nevertheless!