Dangers of Covid Shots

I think part of the problem is that the anti-vaxxers made so many dubious and outright spurious claims that they consigned themselves to the category of 'conspiracy theory'?

There might be a grain of truth somewhere, but it's so buried under a mountain of dross to be almost inaccessible.

Had they one indisputable fact, they could have made headway, but they haven't.

In Nov 22 The Irish Light, a far right journal, ran an issue with the images of 42 deceased individuals, claiming they had all died due to being vaccinated. Upon investigation, none of the deaths were found to be due to vaccines, but rather a variety of causes such as chronic conditions, drowning, car accidents ... in one case the suicide of a young man who was opposed to vaccination.

The fact that any sensible anti-vax campaigner would stay well away from such outfits that can only undermine the argument, that they don't, speaks volumes.

+++

Conspiracy Theory is to today what religious superstition was in the Middle Ages – it's old wine in new skins – they both claim 'unseen powers' are pulling the strings behind world events ... it's a deep-seated impetus, an evolutionary mechanism still in place – they're a by-product.

Triggers are deep, a sense of anxiety, of disenfranchisement, a need for recognition, a need for community.

Psychological mechanisms evolve for different purposes. Conspiracy theories contain several key components – pattern recognition, agency detection, and threat management. Separately they have little effect, collectively they might cause humans to be susceptible to conspiracy theories – notable is that once one accepts one theory, the evidence suggests one accepts all, and in some cases people accept even mutually contradictory theories, because they answer a need.
 
This thread has several links providing "indisputable facts",

The comments about political bias and conspiracy theorists is accurate.

Mr Weeks comments regarding other posters being stupid is uncalled for in any discussion.

While every vaccine ever made has shortcomings, (kills or sickens some people who are allergic) the volume of people saved from dying, hospitalization or sicked from the bug (currently) far exceeds those injured or killed by the vaccine.

I would hate to see this site turn into safe place for conspiracy theorists and think we may need to start deleting threads like this which only foment same by providing disinformation.
 
I do wish to add a note here. Just because someone doesn't trust certain Covid vaccines, doesn't trust drug companies, doesn't trust the government, and/or doesn't trust the media that does NOT mean they are an anti-vaxxer. I think that is something that isn't said enough. If you trust drug companies, the government, and the media... your history teachers failed you.
 
And another note -- without engaging this particular thread -- the fact that information is provided from a 'suspect' source does not make the information itself wrong. It needs to be checked, not simply dismissed because of where it comes from. For instance I don't like Tucker Carlson -- but that doesn't mean that everything he says should be disregarded simply because it comes from him?

Has anyone actually checked the facts provided in this link?

 
Last edited:
However I'm not sure that @Nicholas Weeks linking books or You Tube videos constitutes discussion? It's sometimes called 'book hurling' or 'link stacking' in the sense that most folks are never going to sit through lengthy videos or read through all the linked books and documents.

Opening this link:
takes me to a bookseller, not even to a pdf of the book:

book.png

Is anyone going to pay $9.99 and order the book, then read it, in order to respond to the discussion here?

Perhaps it would be better in the post to summarize the relevant points raised in the book or video as a discussion, and with the video time-extracts or a PDF copy of the book linked as a reference that can be examined -- rather than simply linking books and videos?
 
Last edited:
For instance I don't like Tucker Carlson -- but that doesn't mean that everything he says should be disregarded simply because it comes from him?
If he is the only one sounding the alarm, I wouldhit the snooze alarm and go back to bed.

He has admitted in court he is an entertainment show seeking more viewers like the ones he has and is not a news program. (I put John Stewart and Colbert in the same box)
 
However I'm not sure that @Nicholas Weeks linking books or You Tube videos constitutes discussion? It's sometimes called 'book hurling' or 'link stacking' in the sense that most folks are never going to sit through lengthy videos or read through all the linked books and documents.

Opening this link:

takes me to a bookseller, not even to a pdf of the book:

View attachment 4444

Is anyone going to pay $9.99 and order the book, then read it, in order to respond to the discussion here?

Perhaps it would be better in the post to summarize the relevant points raised in the book or video as a discussion, and with the video time-extracts or a PDF copy of the book linked as a reference that can be examined -- rather than simply linking books and videos?
It is not difficult to search for a pdf of many books. Why would my summary be believed instead of reading a book? Also searching for Ed Dowd, the author produces several hits.

https://archive.org/details/cause-unknown-the-epidemic-of-sudden-deaths-in-2021-2022-2022-ed-dowd
 
As for
It is not difficult to search for a pdf of many books. Why would my summary be believed instead of reading a book? Also searching for Ed Dowd, the author produces several hits.

https://archive.org/details/cause-unknown-the-epidemic-of-sudden-deaths-in-2021-2022-2022-ed-dowd
Yes, but do you expect folks to spend time chasing down the information that you are referencing to support your own arguments?

Isn't it on you to provide it in a clear format, backed by linked references to the specific points -- not to complete books or videos -- if you are using it to support your own arguments?
 
Last edited:
As for

Yes, but do you expect folks to spend time chasing down the information that you are referencing to support your own arguments?

Isn't it on you to provide it in a clear format, backed by linked references to the specific points -- not to complete books or videos -- if you are using it to support your own arguments?
No & No
 
The Foreword to Dowd's book Cause Unknown:

FOREWORD

Among the world’s towering financial titans is BlackRock, a company with a bigger economy than
every country on Earth except the U.S. and China. They manage $10 trillion in assets. In 2002,
BlackRock recruited the brilliant Wall Street careerist Edward Dowd, and soon promoted him to serve
as Managing Director. Turns out BlackRock made a very good bet on Ed Dowd: The Growth Fund he
managed started at $2 billion; by the time he left BlackRock it was $14 billion.
His work with BlackRock required a keen ability to understand markets, pick stocks, analyze
statistics, and identify trends.

In 2021, Dowd found himself withdrawing from Wall Street to study an entirely new kind of trend:
the expanding and tragic epidemic of sudden deaths among healthy young people.
Every country dutifully maintains statistics on what’s called All-Cause Mortality – deaths from any
cause whatsoever. Whether accidents, disease, suicide, homicide, natural disaster or unexplained deaths,
there is a long-established and fairly consistent baseline of All-Cause Mortality, year over year.
Anything above that baseline is considered Excess Death. In 2021, it was Ed Dowd – not the public
health officials that citizens rely upon– but Dowd who brought international attention to the fact that
healthy working-age Americans were dying, and dying suddenly, at an alarming rate not seen before.
These excess deaths were not anticipated by insurance actuaries, and weren’t attributed to COVID.

Dowd framed the issue in a way I can’t forget:
“From February 2021 to March 2022, millennials experienced the equivalent of a Vietnam war, with more than 60,000 excess
deaths. The Vietnam war took 12 years to kill the same number of healthy young people we’ve just seen die in 12 months.”

One after another, reports from life insurance companies confirmed what Dowd was discovering, and
in early 2022, he convened a group of insurance industry executives to explore it further. Later, he
recruited expert analysts from around the world, and drawing on data from various official sources in
many countries, he and his growing team committed to study the topic from every available vantage point.

In this unusual book, Ed Dowd proves an undeniable and urgent reality, laid out with facts that can be confirmed by any reader, point by point, page by page. He has helped us all understand something that many powerful people want to deny – and would get away with denying were it not for his skills and integrity.
Anyone who appreciates truth and accuracy owes Ed Dowd their gratitude. He certainly has mine.
RFK, Jr.
 
Last edited:
The Foreword to Dowd's book Cause Unknown:

FOREWORD

Among the world’s towering financial titans is BlackRock, a company with a bigger economy than
every country on Earth except the U.S. and China. They manage $10 trillion in assets. In 2002,
BlackRock recruited the brilliant Wall Street careerist Edward Dowd, and soon promoted him to serve
as Managing Director. Turns out BlackRock made a very good bet on Ed Dowd: The Growth Fund he
managed started at $2 billion; by the time he left BlackRock it was $14 billion.
His work with BlackRock required a keen ability to understand markets, pick stocks, analyze
statistics, and identify trends.

In 2021, Dowd found himself withdrawing from Wall Street to study an entirely new kind of trend:
the expanding and tragic epidemic of sudden deaths among healthy young people.
Every country dutifully maintains statistics on what’s called All-Cause Mortality – deaths from any
cause whatsoever. Whether accidents, disease, suicide, homicide, natural disaster or unexplained deaths,
there is a long-established and fairly consistent baseline of All-Cause Mortality, year over year.
Anything above that baseline is considered Excess Death. In 2021, it was Ed Dowd – not the public
health officials that citizens rely upon– but Dowd who brought international attention to the fact that
healthy working-age Americans were dying, and dying suddenly, at an alarming rate not seen before.
These excess deaths were not anticipated by insurance actuaries, and weren’t attributed to COVID.

Dowd framed the issue in a way I can’t forget:
“From February 2021 to March 2022, millennials experienced the equivalent of a Vietnam war, with more than 60,000 excess
deaths. The Vietnam war took 12 years to kill the same number of healthy young people we’ve just seen die in 12 months.”

One after another, reports from life insurance companies confirmed what Dowd was discovering, and
in early 2022, he convened a group of insurance industry executives to explore it further. Later, he
recruited expert analysts from around the world, and drawing on data from various official sources in
many countries, he and his growing team committed to study the topic from every available vantage point.

In this unusual book, Ed Dowd proves an undeniable and urgent reality, laid out with facts that can be confirmed by any reader, point by point, page by page. He has helped us all understand something that many powerful people want to deny – and would get away with denying were it not for his skills and integrity.
Anyone who appreciates truth and accuracy owes Ed Dowd their gratitude. He certainly has mine.
RFK, Jr.
OK so the hypothesis is essentially that the excess deaths attributed to covid, were actually due to the vaccine?

The majority or a significant percentage ... with figures in support
 
Last edited:
OK so the hypothesis is essentially that the excess deaths attributed to covid, were actually due to the vaccine?

The majority or a significant percentage ... with figures in support
The link to entire book is in the 7:12 am post.

As Dowd writes in his Introduction:

"Though I’ll share my best conclusions, I aim most of all to help you reach your own conclusions. In the coming pages, I won’t ever ask you to rely upon me for anything; all the facts I share will have citations you can quickly confirm. I won’t be expressing mere opinions or making arguments. The facts just are, and the math just is."
 
Last edited:
OK so the hypothesis is essentially that the excess deaths attributed to covid, were actually due to the vaccine?

The majority or a significant percentage ... with figures in support
Despite the number of deaths before the vaccine...
The link to entire book is in the 7:12 am post.

As Dowd writes in his Introduction:

"Though I’ll share my best conclusions, I aim most of all to help you reach your own conclusions. In the coming pages, I won’t ever ask you to rely upon me for anything; all the facts I share will have citations you can quickly confirm. I won’t be expressing mere opinions or making arguments. The facts just are, and the math just is."
Are we back to tucker Carlson not being news but entertainment playback?

I don't know if I have ever read a better attempt at legal avoidance.
 
Despite the number of deaths before the vaccine...
Whether the majority of excess deaths were from or with covid, the vaccine was not as safe or effective as it was originally made out to be and Pfizer hid and buried information and statistics.

There were adverse vaccine effects and even deaths in healthy young people outside the older covid demographic, not just allergic reactions.

But it wasn't a deliberate conspiracy, and it's false to attribute most or a significant proportion of the excess deaths to the vaccine, imo
 
Last edited:
I guess my problem is I don't see vaccines as perfect...in any situation, but the best we got and better than nothing.

My bivalent booster (the fifth overall) was last november...time for another one....and rsv too.

If I don't post next month tell nick he was right, lol
 
I took the first vacc + booster to be responsible in time of covid because I believed it would reduce the chance of me taking up medical resources at a busy time for the health services-- but I see no point in going on taking it for the good of 'society' now the covid scare is past, since it's only minimally as good at it's supposed job as it was originally thought to be and may actually cause harm to some folks

I don't even like taking aspirin unless I'm that sick
 
Last edited:
Back
Top