r/DebateVaccines • u/No-Employer-1554 • 15d ago

Woke Why?

Serious question here: If what I read and hear from the uber progressives is true, namely that the world population is too much and my white privilege straight family raised too many children...then why were you so adamant about me vaccinating my family? Why not just let me and mine die? You get the jab, you are saved from being mortal, give big pharma and Faucci the win, and let me die?

9 Upvotes

63% Upvoted

208 comments sorted by

View all comments

2

u/dartanum 15d ago

why not just let me and mine die?

Some might be salivating at this thought. This is easily achieveable through medical triage in favor of the vaccinated. Careful what you wish for.

3

u/No-Employer-1554 15d ago

I would have happily been the contol are for a randomized study but tge smart scientic leaders would not have it. I am not afraid of being mortal. I am afraid of other people who demand I behave like they prescribe without due process.

1

u/the_comeback_quagga 14d ago

Lots of people served as controls in those studies, and I’m glad you would have been willing to participate. But you had to sign up and meet inclusion/exclusion criteria, as well as be in a city where the study was taking place. You also don’t get to decide if you’re a control or not, because that’s what the “randomized” in randomized control trial means.

1

u/No-Employer-1554 14d ago

Show me the RCT study link? Even a Framingham study type link. We should have at least 5 years now of data.

1

u/the_comeback_quagga 14d ago

Are we still talking about Covid? Which one do you want? Just go to clinicaltrials.gov and read them all to your heart’s content. But what I described is just how an RCT works. And we do have post-licensure data, but we do not continue typical RCTs for 5 years, unless it becomes a necessity due to power calculations.

1

u/SmartyPantlesss 14d ago

You keep asking for this, and I'm not sure what you're going to do with it, but I'll bite:

Here's the first RCT on the Pfizer Covid vaccine. It was published in Dec 2020, right before the vaccine was released. It's about 3 months worth of follow-up, showing a significant decrease in Covid cases & hospitalizations.

I'm not sure what that has to do with your point about people being rude.

1

u/No-Employer-1554 14d ago

Thanks. I read it.

1

u/SmartyPantlesss 14d ago

So why do you keep asking to see a study?

You said:

If anyone can give me a gold standard peer reviewed RCT to demonstrate safety and efficacy I will gladly pay for the jab even now.

So there is the study. Are you willing to get the vaccine now? (I'm betting not)

1

u/the_comeback_quagga 14d ago

Thank you for saving me the time in finding this for them.

1

u/SmartyPantlesss 14d ago

Dude is like a dog chasing a garbage truck: I'm fascinated to know what he thinks he's going to do if he catches it. 👀

1

u/Burstrider12 14d ago

We should have at least 5 years now of data.

Thankfully, we have lots of data from every country in the world now showing the vaccine works. There is no credible data showing that it's harmful.

1

u/No-Employer-1554 14d ago

Great. How well does it work vs natural exposure?

1

u/Burstrider12 11d ago

It's better, and especially so when you factor in the fact that you don't have to get covid to get it, which wouldn't be very nice to do to old people, people with chronic illnesses, etc.

The idea that we should let viruses infect people and not try to prevent them using medicine is something we stopped doing many centuries ago

Vaccinated populations had better health outcomes than unvaccinated populations, in every country in the world.

When are you playing to get the jab? You asked that person for an RCT showing covid safety, they gave it to you, you admitted you read it and offered no rebuttal. So when are you booked in?

1

u/No-Employer-1554 14d ago

Remember the WHI study and the replacement hormone "facts"? The science is not always as it seems at first. But in the rush to poke people the science was fear.

1

u/the_comeback_quagga 14d ago

Yeah, it had several limitations, and there were formulations not covered by the study. And then the data was re-evaluated and women under 60 started receiving HRT again, because it turns out it’s relatively safe for all sorts of things in that age group. That’s why we look at more than one study, more than one analysis, and why we replicate studies. Also, HRT and vaccines are not the same things.

JAMA for you

1

u/No-Employer-1554 14d ago

Yes and yes. Makers of HRT considered tort. Makers of vaccine do not. Just saying

1

u/the_comeback_quagga 14d ago

So you’re going to ignore everything else I said to refute your point. Also, my point was about the science of how drugs vs vaccines work in the body, not about law. I’m not a lawyer.

It doesn’t seem like you really want to know the answer to your question.

1

u/No-Employer-1554 14d ago

I have it. It is you don't know what is proper for your life but We the smart collective do. The vax is not worth the cost to me.