Man dies after receiving Sinovac vaccine in Phuket

[JamesE]

On 5/26/2021 at 2:07 AM, Thaiger said:

A man died the day after he received his first dose of the Sinovac Covid-19 vaccine.

"In related news, a man died the day after he ate breakfast."

[Soidog]

27 minutes ago, Xaos said:

Anti vaxxer is used to stigmatize ppl like anti semite, racist etc. I think that's his point

Well maybe. But people who were anti-apartheid were against the white South African government. Anti-doping agency is a positive move against sports doping. The term Anti-inflammatory is also positive. I just see Anti-vaxxer as someone who is not in favour of vaccination. 

[JamesE]

19 minutes ago, Zool said:

You've been well-trained to pull out the "anti-vaxxer" label. Well done.

So, if "anti-vaxxer" hurts the wittle snowflakes' feelings, what would they like to be referred to as?

[Ttalk]

It's amazing how many sheeple are out there and don't inform themselves of the facts and assess their risk profile in regards to age, comorbidities, diet, nutrition, what works for prophylaxis etc..  

Then there are the long term safety studies ( or lack thereof seeing as data will be compiled for a couple more years), how many people have died or have permanent injuries from said " vaccines" which should also be taken into consideration.

To call someone an "anti vaxxer" because the supposed " anti vaxxers" are informed of the risks and benefits of an experimental therapy, speaks volume for those calling people "anti vaxxers".

 

 

[JamesR]

 

@Ttalk wrote

"It's amazing how many sheeple are out there and don't inform themselves of the facts and assess their risk profile in regards to age, comorbidities, diet, nutrition, what works for prophylaxis etc..  "

It is amazing to me how many nutters are out there who can not see the risk of us not taking a vaccine en masse are open to many times more risk than not having one. 

You and the rest of the cowards out there will get a free ride as usual while the rest of us take all the risks. 

 

[Soidog]

32 minutes ago, Zool said:

Anti-vaxxer is a term meant to marginalize people and label them as nutty etc. It ends the dialogue. I have more vaccinations than most people here. I am not an anti-vaxxer. I refuse to take any of the covid "vaccines" because they aren't safe. I am not an anti-vaxxer. I am a person not wanting to die, not wanting to be permanently disabled, and not wanting to give the death jab to my family. I am trying to protect my family and friends. I'm also not "vaccine hesitant". I have many shots. The last time I got my shots updated, in the fall of 2019, I took 8 vaccines in one day at Bumrumgrad. I can show you my vaccine passport to prove it.

People are easily brainwashed by the mainstream media. They conduct psychological campaigns all the time. They introduce ideas and repeat them over and over and over again until the masses believe them. One of those terms is "anti-vaxxer". A few years ago there was a movement by a group of parents to try to explain sudden Autism in their children and they noticed a correlation in that their kids had had a vaccine shortly before they became permanently disabled. When they tried to speak about it publicly, they were mocked and ridiculed and called "anti-vaxxers"; deleted from YouTube, Facebook etc. Fast-forward to today. Anyone who is concerned about and wants to talk about the safety of the "covid vaccine", and rightly so, is immediately labelled an anti-vaxxer, is mocked and ridiculed.

Most of you guys on this forum are a pack of well-trained seals, predictably repeating whatever mantra the mainstream media tells you. You've been well-trained to pull out the "anti-vaxxer" label. Well done.

Well I certainly wouldn’t want to be one of those people who close down discussion and other peoples opinions. Some people don’t respect a differing opinion unless it’s backed up with facts that would stand up in court. Media such as this forum are all about opinions. Closing down other people views happens far too often with a whole set of topics that are “off limits”. Everything from Immigration to equal rights for women. If you dare to hold a view which is considered against “mainstream” thinking, then you are castigated as a nut job or a racist or sexist. It’s part of what our societies have become. Just about everything is polarised to the point where you are either 100% in, or 100% out. Keep on going with your views and opinions. 
 

For what it’s worth, I believe some of the Covid vaccines are, on balance safe. I’m actually nervous about the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines as they appear to be using relatively new vaccine technology? The AZ vaccine on the other hand seems to be based on more tried and trusted vaccine technology? The Chinese variants are simply not open to enough scrutiny of the trial data and so again, I’m dubious. However, overall, and for someone of my age, I feel the risk of the vaccine is less than the potential effects of Covid. If I was younger and in my 20’s, I may consider it a different risk and reward calculation.
 

Where I draw the line, is that the vaccines are some global coordinated effort to inject tracking devices or mind control nanobots or some other conspiracy. That I simply ignore I’m afraid as I just fail to see how the world could coordinate such a thing on such a scale. 

[stuhan]

I do not have any problem with  vaccines but i do have  my reservations on which vaccine i prefer to have,this based on own investigations into what the vaccine contains and how it works.In saying that  nearly all things medical carry a risk whether its a drug,vaccine ,operation  or having an injection at your dentist.My own high blood pressure tablets nearly give you a heart attack reading the possible side effects and a small percentage of people  will have a reaction mild or serious .Its the same for  the vaccines there is a risk factor involved but again its small ,people  with serious underlying  medical conditions should be monitored for a few days in hospitals after taking the  jab.The risks from vaccination are small so i vote for having it [WHEN THAT WILL BE GOD ONLY KNOWS ].

[Objectivance]

17 hours ago, Chaimai said:

 

The Thaiger also needs to be careful of how it balances it's reporting of such events.

Really, or else what? 

[Chaimai]

45 minutes ago, Objectivance said:

Really, or else what? 

It will lose readers .....or at least those who seek objective reporting.

[JohninDublin]

4 hours ago, JamesR said:

Nearly 100 million vaccines have been administered in England, over 99.9% of people did not die due to the vaccine, the rate of deaths is roughly 1 in 1million which is a much lower risk than dying from the virus unvaccinated.

Anti-vaxxers please stay at home permanently if you do not wish to have a vaccine.

 

About 1 in every 1900 people on the planet have been killed by CV. One in 42 have caught covid, and 1in 3 those will develop long. That last figure currently equates to 60 mill + world wide.

Unless you are in a group where the vax is contraindicated, to vax or not to vax is a no-brainer.

As far as Xaos is concerned, he appears to have fallen in with a cult. It's noteworthy in his post that he refuses to accept any "experts" on rebuttal, because he claims they've all been paid off. He might want to see this doc https://www.channel4.com/programmes/the-anti-vax-conspiracy in which there are several cases of anti-vaxxers peddling their own cure. One of these includes Bleach. I can imagine Xaos  saying to himself, "I always knew Trump was a genius".

[SickBuffalo]

11 hours ago, Xaos said:

Are u saying no one dies from covid vaxx?

No. I said that you posted a deceptive graphic pretending to contain official figures.

It may have been an innocent mistake on your part, but this sort of material is intended to frighten people, not inform them.

If there is an honest case to be made against the vaccines, make that. Don't demean yourself and others by trading in lies.

[BlueSphinx]

56 minutes ago, stuhan said:

I do not have any problem with  vaccines but i do have  my reservations on which vaccine i prefer to have,this based on own investigations into what the vaccine contains and how it works.In saying that  nearly all things medical carry a risk whether its a drug,vaccine ,operation  or having an injection at your dentist.My own high blood pressure tablets nearly give you a heart attack reading the possible side effects and a small percentage of people  will have a reaction mild or serious .Its the same for  the vaccines there is a risk factor involved but again its small ,people  with serious underlying  medical conditions should be monitored for a few days in hospitals after taking the  jab.The risks from vaccination are small so i vote for having it [WHEN THAT WILL BE GOD ONLY KNOWS ].

Many - actually the large majority - of people that are queuing to get the 'most effective' latest (implied best) technology vaccine do not realize and are not told (byebye informed consent) :

#1 - that Pfizer/BioNTech and Moderna are NOT vaccines, but gene therapies, and that the WHO had to change the definition of a vaccine in order that these mRNA gene therapies could be labelled as such.   The reason being that the required tests for approval of a gene therapy need to address fertility.  By having them labelled as vaccines those tests would by definition take more than 9 months (yep, the pregnancy period), and 'time to market' would be affected.  Note that the above is not a 'crazy conspiracy theory' but confirmed by dr Robert Malone who is credited as being the inventor of the mRNA technology.

#2 - that - to paraphrase Lord of the Rings - 'the power of the mRNA cannot be undone'.  The effect of an mRNA jab is more permanent than a tattoo.  To put it in layman's terms you are tampering with the 'registry' of your immune system software, and there is no 'resetting' of the system once that has been done.  mRNA technology is not new, what is new is its use in hundreds of millions of people without any evidence of the longer-term effects of these super-jabs.  When going by all the unsuccessful animal-studies that were done in the 20 years that mRNA technology has been around, it is beyond reckless and downright criminal to have this technology used on humans.

[MrStretch]

12 hours ago, BlueSphinx said:

Sorry, but this consistent use of the derogatory term 'anti-vaxxer' for all those that have serious concerns about these rushed experimental covid-vaccines, is testimony to your utter ignorance on the subject.

I agree.  The term 'anti-vaxxer' has been around a lot longer than people concerned with Covid vaccinations.

This is a group of nutters, led by a blond airhead who has no medical qualifications, whatsoever, and wants to blame vaccinations on her son's autism.

Perhaps another term should be considered for those that are concerned with Covid vaccines, for reasons that are different than just being against all vaccines.

I propose "q-vaxxer" as a more appropriate term, as these people question the rushed nature and development of an entirely new type of vaccination.  

While I share some of that concern, and would prefer J&J, the situation is so dire, I'll entertain Pfizer, Moderna or Novavax when it comes available.

I'm neither an "anti-vaxxer", nor am I a "q-vaxxer" to the point I won't take the jab.

I'll take the jab instead of death, thanks.

 

[SickBuffalo]

3 minutes ago, JohninDubin said:

About 1 in every 1900 people on the planet have been killed by CV.

Those providing the official numbers, including in Ireland, have agreed that the official figures are always of those who are believed to have died with Covid. There is no way anyone can say how many were actually killed by Covid.

Last year, even hospital patients were rarely tested, so, dying patients were classed as having Covid based on symptoms, such as shortness of breath, rather than a test. Bear in mind that shortness of breath is pretty common when people die of anything.

Once we got the tests, they were expensive and prone to false positives, around 15%. If someone was recorded as having Covid, felt fine, and was killed by a bus within 30 days, that death was counted as "dying with Covid".

It is estimated that roughly 10% of the people in the worldwide figures would not have died if they had not been infected with Covid, so, they could be said to have been killed by Covid, but we have no real idea. The average age of death was 84, and a disproportionate number were already in hospitals or care homes. Even without Covid, most probably did not have that much longer.

The previous 3 years had unusually light flu seasons, so, there was a lot of "low-hanging fruit". A bad flu season last winter would probably have claimed many of them if Covid had not come along.

None of what I am saying here is conspiracy stuff or denied by the authorities. The situation is simply more complex than the politics of Covid sometimes allows.

[JohninDublin]

6 hours ago, SickBuffalo said:

Those providing the official numbers, including in Ireland, have agreed that the official figures are always of those who are believed to have died with Covid. There is no way anyone can say how many were actually killed by Covid.

Last year, even hospital patients were rarely tested, so, dying patients were classed as having Covid based on symptoms, such as shortness of breath, rather than a test. Bear in mind that shortness of breath is pretty common when people die of anything.

Once we got the tests, they were expensive and prone to false positives, around 15%. If someone was recorded as having Covid, felt fine, and was killed by a bus within 30 days, that death was counted as "dying with Covid".

It is estimated that roughly 10% of the people in the worldwide figures would not have died if they had not been infected with Covid, so, they could be said to have been killed by Covid, but we have no real idea. The average age of death was 84, and a disproportionate number were already in hospitals or care homes. Even without Covid, most probably did not have that much longer.

The previous 3 years had unusually light flu seasons, so, there was a lot of "low-hanging fruit". A bad flu season last winter would probably have claimed many of them if Covid had not come along.

None of what I am saying here is conspiracy stuff or denied by the authorities. The situation is simply more complex than the politics of Covid sometimes allows.

Those are all valid points in raising questions about the true figures, though I would take exception to the implication that a lot of the elderly may have died anyway. Their cause was not helped by getting infected. But as far as the UK in particular are concerned, for months we were shown the weekly stats for the excess deaths from the Office of National Statistics, and they pretty much mirrored what was going on with CV. Turning to the elderly specifically, they showed that there was an increase of 20k deaths in care home compared to the five year figure. 

Worldwide, again we will never know with any certainty. I recall a time when the focus was on Yemen, where 1 in 5 who were reported as being infected later died. This was 9x higher than the rest of the world and they were already suffering a humanitarian crisis including hunger in a country that most of us would regard as backward. How accurate were these figures? Did Yemen have sufficient resources to make proper diagnoses (possible under/over reporting). Did lack of resources including food and meds, contribute to these figures?

 As you imply, we can dig down into the data and never really be certain of anything. What we can be certain of though, is that the VAERS data, is pretty much useless in making objective decisions and for that reason, nobody in the decision making process is even listening to the anti-vaxxers regarding this. If you listen to this group, especially the claim that 99% of adverse event are not reported. To begin with, VAERS is not set up to verify any of these claims, and if you rely on the claim of 99% of cases not being reported. 

Compare that with with the EU. The US has a population of of 330 mill, and if you rely on the claims of the anti-vaxxers, there have been 44 mill adverse events. The EU with a population of 440 mill has reported 1.7 mill. The US figure per capita is 35X higher. Does that make sense? Now add to that, all the cases in the EU were reported by healthcare pros, whereas anyone can make a report to VAERS. Then factor in the Dutch are reporting at least 10X more events per capita that the rest of the EU, and you can probably conclude that the Dutch have a lower criteria for what they report.

Regardless of my attack on the VAERS system, it is obvious that if you inject 100's of millions with a new vax, there will be deaths directly attributable to the new vax. That's the whole point of the reporting system. AZ was suspected in a small number of blood-clotting deaths. The stats showed that these were in the under-30's age group. Many countries either stopped AZ, or raised the age limit to only those over 40, and this problem stopped. In the UK 41 dead in a 4 month period, probably due to the vax. Compare that to the average death toll of about 270 a day from Jan 1st, and you are 1300 times more likely to die from CV than from blood clots. For the over 40's, there is no known risk. And I do know that blood clots are not the only thing linked to the vax, but by and large, the other suspected risks are on the same scale.

The VAERS system and it's interpretation by anti-vaxxers is mass hysteria on steroids. The vax might kill you, but you are many times more likely to die from CV.

[Shark]

8 hours ago, MrStretch said:

as these people question the rushed nature and development of an entirely new type of vaccination.  

People are questioning something outside there scope of knowledge. By the "logic" game, which can't be logic since it's outside your realm of knowledge and every idiot on this flat earth can scream that it's round! Oh... wait.... did I just.

It's like me asking a dentist why he needs todo his work while I'm a teacher. I'm neither but it was here as a sole example.

anti-vaxxer has been around for ages and snow flakes whom takes offensive of it can happily ignore me. I don't feel bad by that - I also believe that I'm lucky enough to no longer see there bullshit if they ignore me right? :-)

[Alavan]

14 hours ago, Xaos said:

JUST IN - FDA expected to announce that the Johnson & Johnson vaccine has been linked to a "serious but rare side effect" called Guillain-Barré syndrome, in which your body's immune system attacks your nerves (WSJ)

Why not post the rest of the story, which states that this can be cured?

[Guest]

11 hours ago, Zool said:

Anti-vaxxer is a term meant to marginalize people and label them as nutty etc. It ends the dialogue. I have more vaccinations than most people here. I am not an anti-vaxxer. I refuse to take any of the covid "vaccines" because they aren't safe. I am not an anti-vaxxer. I am a person not wanting to die, not wanting to be permanently disabled, and not wanting to give the death jab to my family. I am trying to protect my family and friends. I'm also not "vaccine hesitant". I have many shots. The last time I got my shots updated, in the fall of 2019, I took 8 vaccines in one day at Bumrumgrad. I can show you my vaccine passport to prove it.

People are easily brainwashed by the mainstream media. They conduct psychological campaigns all the time. They introduce ideas and repeat them over and over and over again until the masses believe them. One of those terms is "anti-vaxxer". A few years ago there was a movement by a group of parents to try to explain sudden Autism in their children and they noticed a correlation in that their kids had had a vaccine shortly before they became permanently disabled. When they tried to speak about it publicly, they were mocked and ridiculed and called "anti-vaxxers"; deleted from YouTube, Facebook etc. Fast-forward to today. Anyone who is concerned about and wants to talk about the safety of the "covid vaccine", and rightly so, is immediately labelled an anti-vaxxer, is mocked and ridiculed.

Most of you guys on this forum are a pack of well-trained seals, predictably repeating whatever mantra the mainstream media tells you. You've been well-trained to pull out the "anti-vaxxer" label. Well done.

Same goes for ppl calling conspiracy theory card. It's the ppl who do 0 research, and only go by MSM.

So called CT go deep in to rabbit hole.

Term was invented by CIA or FBI when they shoot Kennedy, to discredit ppl who seek truth. 

 

[Shark]

8 minutes ago, Xaos said:

Same goes for ppl calling conspiracy theory card. It's the ppl who do 0 research, and only go by MSM.

So called CT go deep in to rabbit hole.

Term was invented by CIA or FBI when they shoot Kennedy, to discredit ppl who seek truth. 

so by the pseudoscience of fake news it's good to be a anti-vaxxer?

[Soidog]

I sometimes wonder what people do when they don’t “Trust the experts”. How do they ever get on a flight? How can you trust radar system. Flight control systems. The software used extensively throughout. How do they watch satellite Tv or use mobile phones. 
 

Id like to think I’m not someone who blindly follows anything. However, I do trust society and methods that have been used for many years. Vaccination being one of them. 

[Guest]

18 minutes ago, Soidog said:

I sometimes wonder what people do when they don’t “Trust the experts”. How do they ever get on a flight? How can you trust radar system. Flight control systems. The software used extensively throughout. How do they watch satellite Tv or use mobile phones. 
 

Id like to think I’m not someone who blindly follows anything. However, I do trust society and methods that have been used for many years. Vaccination being one of them. 

We trusted them in 2009 with Swine flu pandemic, it was same scare campaign same experts etc. Just lesser scale then now. In 2010 it ended up biggest medical scandal with made up data, numbers done by WHO etc. Countries were canceling millions worth vaccine contracts. 

Now 10 years later they upped their tactics and marketing.

Why would you trust them if they lied before on record?. That should be red flag right here.

 

[Soidog]

1 hour ago, Xaos said:

We trusted them in 2009 with Swine flu pandemic, it was same scare campaign same experts etc. Just lesser scale then now. In 2010 it ended up biggest medical scandal with made up data, numbers done by WHO etc. Countries were canceling millions worth vaccine contracts. 

Now 10 years later they upped their tactics and marketing.

Why would you trust them if they lied before on record?. That should be red flag right here.

They didn’t lie. They just got their highly complex modelling wrong. These are new challenges for the world. A lot of that middling is based on how they see governments and individual people responding. Medicine is an evolving science just as Physics is. I’m sure 100 years from now if the world faces a similar pandemic there will be changes to the response. It’s called learning from your mistakes. And where have they got this wrong? Overall the response by individual nations has been broadly the same. Contain the virus through various measure until vaccination is available. Not sure I follow the point you are making ? 

[Stonker]

19 hours ago, vlad said:

 I live in the UK and i have never hear'ed or seen anything about a yellow card just another trouble making post.

I agree with your sentiments, @vlad, but if you've not heard of the  yellow card reporting system that just means you're not aware of it, and there's probably little reason why you should be as it's mainly used by GP's for reporting follow-ups to vaccinations.

[Stonker]

13 hours ago, BlueSphinx said:

Many - actually the large majority - of people that are queuing to get the 'most effective' latest (implied best) technology vaccine do not realize and are not told (byebye informed consent) :

#1 - that Pfizer/BioNTech and Moderna are NOT vaccines, but gene therapies, and that the WHO had to change the definition of a vaccine in order that these mRNA gene therapies could be labelled as such.   The reason being that the required tests for approval of a gene therapy need to address fertility.  By having them labelled as vaccines those tests would by definition take more than 9 months (yep, the pregnancy period), and 'time to market' would be affected.  Note that the above is not a 'crazy conspiracy theory' but confirmed by dr Robert Malone who is credited as being the inventor of the mRNA technology.

#2 - that - to paraphrase Lord of the Rings - 'the power of the mRNA cannot be undone'.  The effect of an mRNA jab is more permanent than a tattoo.  To put it in layman's terms you are tampering with the 'registry' of your immune system software, and there is no 'resetting' of the system once that has been done.  mRNA technology is not new, what is new is its use in hundreds of millions of people without any evidence of the longer-term effects of these super-jabs.  When going by all the unsuccessful animal-studies that were done in the 20 years that mRNA technology has been around, it is beyond reckless and downright criminal to have this technology used on humans.

They're not told that, at least by medical professionals, because it's not true and is pure fantasy.

[Stonker]

2 hours ago, Xaos said:

We trusted them in 2009 with Swine flu pandemic, it was same scare campaign same experts etc. Just lesser scale then now. In 2010 it ended up biggest medical scandal with made up data, numbers done by WHO etc. Countries were canceling millions worth vaccine contracts. 

Now 10 years later they upped their tactics and marketing.

Why would you trust them if they lied before on record?. That should be red flag right here.

No, it wasn't the "same experts", etc.

 

That's not correct.