[stack]

Professor Peter Openshaw, professor of Experimental Medicine at Imperial College London, told Full Fact: “There is absolutely no reason to draw parallels with thalidomide: vaccines are not drugs, and the whole system of licencing has been completely reformed since that era.

“There has never been as much research on which to base vaccine licensure - it was done very fast because we face a global emergency and almost unlimited resources were put into the studies.”

Here's his bio: Peter Openshaw is a respiratory physician and mucosal immunologist, studying how the immune system both protects against viral infection but also causes disease.

Actually he cites no experiments or examples. He is merely citing trust that things are better and that the FDA can now determine long-term effects on novel genetic manipulation mechanisms in record time. "Trust them" is not part of the scientific method.

Sure he does. Examples:

"...the whole system of licencing has been completely reformed since that era."

"...a global emergency and almost unlimited resources were put into the studies."

What experiments did Dr Bowden cite?

And a sentence later in your citation:

"Serious adverse effects after any vaccination usually occur within six weeks of administration. No serious side effects have been reported within six weeks of the receipt of the COVID-19 mRNA vaccine."

Yes, because if it's safe for six weeks it means that it's safe forever and won't ever result in cancer no matter how many boosters you take. 

How many verified cancer cases have come from the year+ of MRNA and Non-MNRA vaccines administered out of the 12 billion shots given worldwide to date?

How many years should we wait to be considered free of "long-term" side effects for any therapy? We only had to wait a couple of months to find out that a Covid infection can result in long-term adverse side-effects. So far so good a year into the various vaxs tho.

[markjo]

Your link says that they are still monitoring for safety: "This review process continues to monitor vaccine safety."

Of course the review process is ongoing.  It's a necessary step for full FDA approval.

If they still need to study it, then it means that they don't know.

Maybe not, but some of the long term effects of COVID are known, and rather unpleasant.
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/long-term-effects/index.html

They are not performing much study of the safety of orange juice, for example.

That's because the long term dangers of orange juice is already well known.
https://www.livestrong.com/article/495611-side-effects-of-too-much-orange-juice/

[BillO]

Your link says that they are still monitoring for safety: "This review process continues to monitor vaccine safety."

If they still need to study it, then it means that they don't know. They are not performing much study of the safety of orange juice, for example.

The website continues:

"Continuous monitoring for problems and side effects. Once a vaccine gets an EUA and is being given to people, the FDA and the CDC continue to watch carefully in case problems arise. Data on the vaccine’s safety record accumulates over time, as more and more people who receive it report on their experience and any side effects. One important way to report adverse events after vaccination is through the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System."

This is true of any and every vaccine given.  The monitoring never stops.

Oh, but you guys don't want us to talk about VAERS because you don't like what it says and the US government's only vaccine reporting mechanism could be wrong. 

VAERS says nothing.  It is a database of unsorted, unprocessed, unverified and unanalyzed raw data.

From the VAERS site:

The number of reports alone cannot be interpreted as evidence of a causal association between a vaccine and an adverse event, or as evidence about the existence, severity, frequency, or rates of problems associated with vaccines.
Reports may include incomplete, inaccurate, coincidental and unverified information.
VAERS does not obtain follow up records on every report. If a report is classified as serious, VAERS requests additional information, such as health records, to further evaluate the report.
VAERS data are limited to vaccine adverse event reports received between 1990 and the most recent date for which data are available.
VAERS data do not represent all known safety information for a vaccine and should be interpreted in the context of other scientific information.

Anyone can enter a report into VAERS.  You, me, Thork, Mr. Potato Head..

[AATW]

Actually I cited a doctor.

Yep. Of the million medical doctors in the US you found one who says something which fits your agenda.
You can keep ignoring this if you like but is your doctor's view the prevailing one? If it isn't then you're just cherry picking. Again.

I have pointed this out a bunch of times. You have two go to dishonest tactics:
1) Appeal to authority if the authority says something which fits your agenda, reject any authority which does not. So you reject all scientific authority
2) Cherry pick an authority who is an outlier and ignore the prevailing view.

In a community of a million people you're pretty much guaranteed to find someone who says things which fit your agenda. To just cite them as an authority and dismiss the near consensus is dishonest.

And of course the long term effects of something new is unknown, by definition. What's the long term effect of Covid 19? It's unknown. Because of the 19 part.

[Tom Bishop]

Yep. Of the million medical doctors in the US you found one who says something which fits your agenda.
You can keep ignoring this if you like but is your doctor's view the prevailing one? If it isn't then you're just cherry picking. Again.

Actually it's not cherry picking at all. The prevailing view is that it is unknown if the vaccine is safe long term.

And of course the long term effects of something new is unknown, by definition.

Yes, and that is exactly the message given by the previous doctor I cited on this. Due diligence is required because "safe" drugs have turned out to be unsafe.

[Action80]

Anyone can enter a report into VAERS.  You, me, Thork, Mr. Potato Head..

You would enter a false report into VAERS?

[Rama Set]

Anyone can enter a report into VAERS.  You, me, Thork, Mr. Potato Head..

You would enter a false report into VAERS?

True and false are not the only two ways to characterize VAERS posts.

[Rama Set]

Yep. Of the million medical doctors in the US you found one who says something which fits your agenda.
You can keep ignoring this if you like but is your doctor's view the prevailing one? If it isn't then you're just cherry picking. Again.

Actually it's not cherry picking at all. The prevailing view is that it is unknown if the vaccine is safe long term.

And of course the long term effects of something new is unknown, by definition.

Yes, and that is exactly the message given by the previous doctor I cited on this. Due diligence is required because "safe" drugs have turned out to be unsafe.

You are being dishonest of course. You are implying there is a serious risk associated with potentially unknown side effects when the prevailing opinion based on a vast body of knowledge is that unknown side effects are almost certainly not going to present themselves in a long time frame but instead present acutely. The prevailing medical opinion is that the vaccines are VERY safe.

[markjo]

The prevailing view is that it is unknown if the vaccine is safe long term.

The problem with "long term" is that the longer the term, the harder it becomes to tell the difference between the effects of the vaccine and other non-vaccine related factors.

[Tom Bishop]

You are being dishonest of course. You are implying there is a serious risk associated with potentially unknown side effects when the prevailing opinion based on a vast body of knowledge is that unknown side effects are almost certainly not going to present themselves in a long time frame but instead present acutely. The prevailing medical opinion is that the vaccines are VERY safe.

No. Unknown most certainly does not mean "VERY safe". Unknown means unknown. You might be able to find a doctor telling you that they think it's safe, or that it is safe as far as they know, but the official consensus is that it is unknown.

https://www.umc.edu/CoronaVirus/Vaccinations/FAQs.html#long-term



The vaccine might harm you, and it might not. Unknown is unknown. This is the risk of signing up for a novel genetic manipulation experiment. You are in fear of your life because of muh Covid and are choosing to gamble your health against the fallacy of man.

aap.org reiterates the official position in advising parents on vaccinating their children:

https://www.aap.org/en/pages/2019-novel-coronavirus-covid-19-infections/covid-19-vaccine-for-children/about-the-covid-19-vaccine-frequently-asked-questions/



The official position is that it is impossible to know.

You have to weigh the hope that it doesn't happen because it hasn't happened before with the fact that the mechanism of this licensed vaccine is unlike the mechanism of other licensed vaccines. Most other licensed vaccines do not involve genetic manipulation, and do not require boosters every six months. If it is "impossible to know" then any sentiment to the positive is just a hope that it is safe. It is not knowledge that it is safe. The knowledge that it is safe is unknown.

[Tom Bishop]

Apparently the FDA also thinks the safety is unknown and thinks children would make the perfect experimental base to test this.

https://sboh.wa.gov/sites/default/files/2022-01/Tab05a-PublicComment-Packet-Final.pdf?ver=2021-10-08-155349-087

[markjo]

The vaccine might harm you, and it might not. Unknown is unknown. This is the risk of signing up for a novel genetic manipulation experiment. You are in fear of your life because of muh Covid and are choosing to gamble your health against the fallacy of man.

Of course choosing to get vaccinated or not is a gamble.  If you get vaccinated, you risk several known short term, relatively benign side effects and any number of unknown possible long term side effects.  However, if you choose not to get vaccinated, you risk catching a disease that has a number of known serious effects, up to and including death.  Your choice is yours, but I'd rather take my chances with the vaccine that President Trump created Operation Warp Speed to fast track than with the disease that has killed over one million Americans.

[Rama Set]

Apparently the FDA also thinks the safety is unknown and thinks children would make the perfect experimental base to test this.

https://sboh.wa.gov/sites/default/files/2022-01/Tab05a-PublicComment-Packet-Final.pdf?ver=2021-10-08-155349-087

No. They are making an obvious tautology. Of course you can’t know how a vaccine will affect a child until you give it to a child.

In regards to safety, you can easily find an extremely large number of institutions and professionals vouching for the safety of the vaccine. This isn’t controversial unless you actively look constantly to undermine orthodoxy and are willing to disregard vast amounts of evidence to do so. It doesn’t matter how many red herrings like “novel genetic manipulation” or the frequency of boosters, you offer. The data is being collected and continues to agree with the safety assessments. Sorry, you are neither convincing enough nor scary enough to change anyone’s mind.

[Tom Bishop]

In regards to safety, you can easily find an extremely large number of institutions and professionals vouching for the safety of the vaccine.

And if you ask them they will tell you that the long term safety is unknown.

An "extremely large number of institutions and professionals" also once vouched for cigarettes. They didn't know the long term health implications, but vouched for it nonetheless.



People also used to think that sugar was good for you:



Children were allowed to play with X-Ray machines in shoe stores

Coca-Cola had cocaine in it

Heroin was legal

Over 10,000 FDA approved drugs have been recalled in just the last ten years -

https://www.maylightfootlaw.com/blogs/fda-drug-recall-statistics/



History is replete with one mistake after the next. In FDA's case, thousands of mistakes after the next.

Doctors acknowledge that it can take a significantly long amount of time before we have knowledge of safety:

https://www.natap.org/2007/HIV/052507_01.htm

"Drs George Sawaya and Karen Smith-McCune of the University of California, San Francisco, said that while Gardasil appears to be safe and effective, "a cautious approach may be warranted" because of questions that still remain about the drug's long-term effectiveness and potential for adverse effects that could emerge over time. "Until we have the data, I view the situation as an ongoing experimental trial. The ultimate safety of the vaccine is unknown and it's going to be decades before we know anything,'' wrote the doctors.

If you don't have the data then you just have an opinion.

[Rama Set]

That’s a long post that doesn’t say anything about COVID. Not surprising.

[AATW]

The official position is that it is impossible to know.

Yeah. Just like it's impossible to know the long term effects of Covid. It is, by definition, impossible to know the long term effects of a new thing. Because of how time works.
But I note you accidentally forgot to highlight a different part of the paragraph you quoted:



You're acting like it's a complete roll of the dice, when the reality is every activity in life involves risk.

[Tom Bishop]

"That said no vaccines have been found to have an unexpected long-term safety problem, that was only found years or decades after introduction"

You do realize that you have spent this entire thread denying early negative results from the Covid vaccine, right? This is simply inapplicable, because people are claiming a whole host of negative side effects, which you are currently denying. There is data from VAERS showing that this vaccine is much more dangerous than other vaccines, which you are denying. There is data suggesting significant risk for pregnant women, which you are denying. There are a number of doctors shouting danger, claiming that the vaccine is harmful, which you are denying. Athletes were mysteriously going down by the hundreds, increasing in number over the same months as the vaccines were rolled out, which you are denying. The sentence above implies there is no negative data, but there is.

When early Cigarette data came out people also spent a long time denying it and refused to believe that they were killing themselves. It is sad, but true.

Also, as previously mentioned, the Covid vaccine is much different than most other previously licensed vaccines. Most other vaccines do not involve genetic manipulation and do not require boosters every six months. It's not the same mechanism. This is just a hope based on a leap of logic that it is going to turn out like other vaccines, and assumes that there is no current negative data. This is not knowledge that the vaccine is safe long term. They admit directly that the long term safety is "impossible to know". If it was possible to know based on the logic you gave then it would be possible to know, which they specifically did not state. What was given was a fig leaf to hedge your hopes on.

[Rama Set]

Tom, as you know dishonest McTrollface, the VAERS data can not distinguish between a positive result, a false positive, a deception or a mistake. It’s the beginning of an investigation, not a conclusion.

[stack]

Also, as previously mentioned, the Covid vaccine is much different than most other previously licensed vaccines.

So you're ok with the J&J, Novavax, Bio E vaccines ? It's just the novel MRNA ones you take issue with?

Most other vaccines do not involve genetic manipulation and do not require boosters every six months.

Flu vaccine is seasonal, essentially every 6 months. J&J, Novavax, Bio E vaccines function like common vaccines, so you're ok with those?

This is not knowledge that the vaccine is safe long term. They admit directly that the long term safety is "impossible to know".

How do you define "long-term"? The FDA approves approximately 50 pharma drugs per year. Aren't all of them in the "impossible to know" long-term effects category?

[Tom Bishop]

Life Insurance companies also reported significantly increased claims in 2021, despite that Covid started in 2020. Weird.