The Safety and Efficacy of Vaccines

[Yakuda]

A chart such as that is meaningless if it derives its evidence from pseudoscientific methods. I found yet another article referencing Dr. Scobey's work. I doubt you'd read it, but perhaps someone in the audience might find it interesting:

The Infectious Myth Busted Part 5: Is Polio Contagious?

“In addition to the failure to prove contagiousness of human poliomyelitis, it has likewise been impossible to prove contagiousness of poliomyelitis in experimental animals.” – Ralph Scobey While i…

viroliegy.com

This just adds more research to the article below that I've referenced before:

A Story About Polio, Pesticides and the Meaning of Science

We’re told the science on polio is settled — but that may not be the case. There are scientists who believe polio-like symptoms could be caused by toxic substances, including pesticides.

childrenshealthdefense.org

Most people who got the covid "vaccine" got covid. That's idiotic to everyone but an idiot

 

[Scott]

Only science and facts, not faith and belief, are used to measure vaccine worth.

And the vaccines work.

You have presented no facts.

Neither has the deniers.

False- I've presented a lot in this th read, along with links where one can find even more.

So far the best evidence is more than 400,000 died in one year under Trump without a vaccine and 400,000 died in three years with Biden and a vaccine.

I'm not sure where you're getting your 400k numbers- feel free to share your source. I personally found that a recent article that gets into the excess deaths of 17 million people worldwide during Covid. The author of said article gets into the fact that covid vaccines were not the -only- cause of these excess deaths, but they were certainly a part of it. I'll quote a few paragraphs from the article in question that I think are pretty good for my point here:
**
There is no reasonable doubt that the C19 vaccines cause death, not to mention mass injury, as established in a growing number of published autopsy reports and clinical observations (3,580 science-journal articles to date). That is not the question.

Another aspect that should be considered proven is that the notion that the C19 vaccine “saved lives”, or “millions of lives”, is a ridiculous notion. The untenable nature of that theoretical proposition (advanced in The Lancet) was demonstrated by me and co-author Joseph Hickey here: https://correlation-canada.org/nobel-vaccine-and-all-cause-mortality/. Likewise, the recent estimate of “lives saved” by Ioannidis and co-authors is erroneous and silly.

So, on the one hand, there are strong correlations in time between peaks in excess all-cause mortality and vaccine rollouts (hundreds of examples), whereas, on the other hand, reasonably estimated fatal vaccine toxicity is not large enough (by some 3 orders of magnitude) to explain the measured vaccine-associated all-ages excess all-cause mortality.

I provided an answer to this paradox in section 3.3.6 of my recent paper: https://www.preprints.org/manuscript/202412.0480/v1
**

Source:

Did the C19 vaccine kill 17 million? Yes, but how? Not what you think!

Clinical data proves lethality but not of this magnitude

denisrancourt.substack.com

And, yes, viroielgy.com is a sham source.

Again, accusations are a dime a dozen. Evidence is what is needed for decent arguments.

 

[gfm7175]

Well, it looks like Cambridge's definition works for the new types.

They (and many others) have recently redefined the term 'vaccine' (from how it used to be defined) so as to include the "new types". The "new types" are not vaccines.

As I imagine you know, I don't think that any vaccines help anyone

Yes sir, I am aware. Since COVID, I've definitely shifted my stance closer to your position, but I'm still not as far in that direction as you are. I do believe that certain vaccines can be helpful or "worth the risk" re: potential side effects, especially under certain circumstances, but I do find many vaccines to be unnecessary, largely ineffective, or otherwise "not worth the risk" re: potential side effects, especially under certain circumstances.

and most if not all vaccines actually harm people,

In an overall sense, I'm in a surface-level agreement with this. I think that reverting back to, say, a late 80s/early 90s "vaccine schedule" would be loads better than the monstrosity that is the present-day "vaccine schedule".

so the "type" doesn't really concern me that much- although I acknowledge that some vaccines may be more harmful than others. The Covid vaccines certainly seemed to do a number on a lot of people, but then so many were taken that it stands to reason just from a numerical point of view.

I hear ya. If it's "all hooey", then the specific "type of hooey" won't concern you. It likewise seems to me that the COVID jabs (I don't consider them vaccines) did a real number on a bunch of people. Even here in Wisconsin, I at one point was concerned about leftists forcing me to choose between my job/livelihood and an mRNA jab that I absolutely did NOT want injected into my body. Thankfully, it never came to that point for me, but that would've been numerous nights of deep prayer.

 

[EdwinA]

False- I've presented a lot in this th read, along with links where one can find even more.

Your joke posts and lunatic 'sources' aren't presenting anything, they're just trash posting.

 

[Scott]

Viroliegy.com is widely regarded as non-scientific and unreliable within the mainstream medical and scientific communities.

Reputation Summary​

• Trust score: Rated 25% (Poor) by Scamdoc, a site that evaluates digital credibility based on domain history, transparency, and user feedback.
• Domain details:
  • Created in August 2021.
  • Owner identity is hidden in the WHOIS database.
• Content focus: The site promotes anti-virology and anti-vaccine narratives, often challenging the existence of viruses and the validity of germ theory.
• Scientific standing: It is not peer-reviewed, lacks institutional backing, and is not cited in reputable journals or academic databases.

Key Concerns​

• Promotes fringe theories that contradict decades of virological research.
• Uses selective citations and misinterpretations of scientific literature.
• Not recognized by any major health, academic, or scientific organization.

What was your source for the above, ChatGPT?

 

[Scott]

Viroliegy.com is widely regarded as non-scientific and unreliable within the mainstream medical and scientific communities.

Reputation Summary​

• Trust score: Rated 25% (Poor) by Scamdoc, a site that evaluates digital credibility based on domain history, transparency, and user feedback.
• Domain details:
  • Created in August 2021.
  • Owner identity is hidden in the WHOIS database.
• Content focus: The site promotes anti-virology and anti-vaccine narratives, often challenging the existence of viruses and the validity of germ theory.
• Scientific standing: It is not peer-reviewed, lacks institutional backing, and is not cited in reputable journals or academic databases.

Key Concerns​

• Promotes fringe theories that contradict decades of virological research.
• Uses selective citations and misinterpretations of scientific literature.
• Not recognized by any major health, academic, or scientific organization.

Mainstream science and medical communities are unreliable.

You dont get to play this game after COVID.

Well said.

 

[Scott]

Hawkeye 10's posts are what is unreliable.

What draws you to that conclusion?

 

[Scott]

Yes, long term covid is a fact, a generally, thank heavens, considering the hundreds of millions of jabs, a very rare fact.

I have a friend who is afflicted, and it is a very unhappy one.

But... anybody who thinks vaxxes can be or should be without consequences are not operating in reality.

The cost benefit analysis is clear that they work extremely well

No, it really isn't:
**
Another aspect that should be considered proven is that the notion that the C19 vaccine “saved lives”, or “millions of lives”, is a ridiculous notion. The untenable nature of that theoretical proposition (advanced in The Lancet) was demonstrated by me and co-author Joseph Hickey here: https://correlation-canada.org/nobel-vaccine-and-all-cause-mortality/. Likewise, the recent estimate of “lives saved” by Ioannidis and co-authors is erroneous and silly.
**

Source:

Did the C19 vaccine kill 17 million? Yes, but how? Not what you think!

Clinical data proves lethality but not of this magnitude

denisrancourt.substack.com

 

[Hawkeye10]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1980242956331130964

View: https://x.com/redpilldispensr/status/1980242956331130964

 

[Scott]

This might be next for me:

https://twitter.com/x/status/1980318092900303025

View: https://x.com/TuckerCarlson/status/1980318092900303025

(0:00) Peter Daszak, USAID, and Predicting Pandemics(8:49) The Moment Huff Realized His Company Was Doing Gain-Of-Function Research(14:07) China’s Bioweapons Labs, Wuhan, and the CIA(24:17) How to Transport and Collect Deadly Viruses From Around the World(35:05) Is All Gain-Of-Function Research Bad?(39:44) Big Pharma and the Government’s Covid Psyop(50:53) How They Targeted Dr. Huff for Speaking Out(1:00:35) Dr. Huff Being Mysteriously Followed(1:10:16) What Actually Were the 2001 Anthrax Attacks?(1:14:39) The Dangerous Network of Global Biolabs(1:19:52) How Dr. Huff Caught the Spies Who Were Tailing Him(1:25:00) Was Anyone Held Accountable for Terrorizing Dr. Huff?(1:27:47) Did the CIA Ever Gather Any Valuable Intel From Wuhan?(1:36:03) Was Covid Released on Purpose?(1:39:07) Is There a Connection Between mRNA Vaccines and Cancer?(1:40:47) Has Man Created Life?(1:44:20) The Dangerous Combination of Nanotechnology and AI(1:50:43) Why Did RFK Jr. Face Backlash for Saying This?(1:54:13) How Do We Fix the Pharmaceutical Industry?

Let me know if you watch it and what you think. Tucker Carlson is pretty much the only mainstream journalist I know that is willing to challenge the vaccine narrative. As you know, I don't believe in biological viruses, but based on the summary, this video definitely covers some vaccines as well.

 

[Hawkeye10]

Let me know if you watch it and what you think. Tucker Carlson is pretty much the only mainstream journalist I know that is willing to challenge the vaccine narrative.

I watched all of it......and this is very long for me at 2 hours.....but it held my interest. Turns out that Bret long ago did a very long talk with this guy and as you might know I think a lot of Bret Weinstein.

 

[jimmymccready]

False- I've presented a lot in this th read, along with links where one can find even more.



I'm not sure where you're getting your 400k numbers- feel free to share your source. I personally found that a recent article that gets into the excess deaths of 17 million people worldwide during Covid. The author of said article gets into the fact that covid vaccines were not the -only- cause of these excess deaths, but they were certainly a part of it. I'll quote a few paragraphs from the article in question that I think are pretty good for my point here:
**
There is no reasonable doubt that the C19 vaccines cause death, not to mention mass injury, as established in a growing number of published autopsy reports and clinical observations (3,580 science-journal articles to date). That is not the question.

Another aspect that should be considered proven is that the notion that the C19 vaccine “saved lives”, or “millions of lives”, is a ridiculous notion. The untenable nature of that theoretical proposition (advanced in The Lancet) was demonstrated by me and co-author Joseph Hickey here: https://correlation-canada.org/nobel-vaccine-and-all-cause-mortality/. Likewise, the recent estimate of “lives saved” by Ioannidis and co-authors is erroneous and silly.

So, on the one hand, there are strong correlations in time between peaks in excess all-cause mortality and vaccine rollouts (hundreds of examples), whereas, on the other hand, reasonably estimated fatal vaccine toxicity is not large enough (by some 3 orders of magnitude) to explain the measured vaccine-associated all-ages excess all-cause mortality.

I provided an answer to this paradox in section 3.3.6 of my recent paper: https://www.preprints.org/manuscript/202412.0480/v1
**

Source:

Did the C19 vaccine kill 17 million? Yes, but how? Not what you think!

Clinical data proves lethality but not of this magnitude

denisrancourt.substack.com

Again, accusations are a dime a dozen. Evidence is what is needed for decent arguments.

Scott, you are a conspiracy theorist who offers no facts of worth. The evidence is clear: vaxxes have been very good.

But I encourage you to stop taking all vaxxes, your family as well. You will feel justified, and we hope we will get the best of it.

 

[jimmymccready]

What was your source for the above, ChatGPT?

It was posted. Look it up.

 

[jimmymccready]

Scott keeps posting "busted" sites for support.

 

[jimmymccready]

OK, the thread is a bust. It can be closed or readers encouraged to move on.

 

[Scott]

Most people who got the covid "vaccine" got covid.

I think we can agree that a lot of people who got 1 or more covid vaccines got -something-. There's a documentary on mRNA vaccines that I thought was pretty good. I even made a thread about it here:

Thread 'Inside mRNA Vaccines: The Movie'

Aug 12, 2025

Just finished watching the film that shares the title of this thread. As some here know, I no longer believe in biological viruses, so I don't agree with that part of the documentary, but the focus is on the mRNA vaccines, and I thought that part was quite well done, including some video testimonials of some who have shown clear signs of being injured from these vaccines. Anyway, the film can be seen free of charge here:

Inside mRNA Vaccines: The Movie

This hard-hitting film rips the lid off the disastrous mRNA rollout — with stunning 3D animation and unfiltered testimony from the world’s leading experts.

www.thefocalpoints.com

Constructive feedback welcome.

• Scott
• covid 19 covid 19 vaccine program covid 19 vaccines erki tangsoo fauci mrna vaccines operation warp speed
• Replies: 67
• Forum: General Politics Forum

 

[Scott]

Well, it looks like Cambridge's definition works for the new types.

They (and many others) have recently redefined the term 'vaccine' (from how it used to be defined) so as to include the "new types". The "new types" are not vaccines.

As you know, I don't believe any vaccines protect anyone from anything, but I think I understand what you're trying to convey- that your own definition of vaccines doesn't encompass the new types.

 

[Scott]

As I imagine you know, I don't think that any vaccines help anyone [snip]

Yes sir, I am aware. Since COVID, I've definitely shifted my stance closer to your position, but I'm still not as far in that direction as you are. I do believe that certain vaccines can be helpful or "worth the risk" re: potential side effects, especially under certain circumstances, but I do find many vaccines to be unnecessary, largely ineffective, or otherwise "not worth the risk" re: potential side effects, especially under certain circumstances.

Understood. I think our positions on vaccines is 'close enough' that I think I can consider you an ally in this thread, much like I imagine you consider IBDaMann in the Abortion thread.

 

[Scott]

Well, it looks like Cambridge's definition works for the new types. As I imagine you know, I don't think that any vaccines help anyone and most if not all vaccines actually harm people [snip]

In an overall sense, I'm in a surface-level agreement with this. I think that reverting back to, say, a late 80s/early 90s "vaccine schedule" would be loads better than the monstrosity that is the present-day "vaccine schedule".

Agreed. I'm curious, what do you think of RFK Jr.'s work on reforming the HHS in regards to vaccines?

 

[Yakuda]

I think we can agree that a lot of people who got 1 or more covid vaccines got -something-. There's a documentary on mRNA vaccines that I thought was pretty good. I even made a thread about it here:

Thread 'Inside mRNA Vaccines: The Movie'

Aug 12, 2025

Just finished watching the film that shares the title of this thread. As some here know, I no longer believe in biological viruses, so I don't agree with that part of the documentary, but the focus is on the mRNA vaccines, and I thought that part was quite well done, including some video testimonials of some who have shown clear signs of being injured from these vaccines. Anyway, the film can be seen free of charge here:

Inside mRNA Vaccines: The Movie

This hard-hitting film rips the lid off the disastrous mRNA rollout — with stunning 3D animation and unfiltered testimony from the world’s leading experts.

www.thefocalpoints.com

Constructive feedback welcome.

• Scott
• covid 19 covid 19 vaccine program covid 19 vaccines erki tangsoo fauci mrna vaccines operation warp speed
• Replies: 67
• Forum: General Politics Forum

The difference is 99% of the people that got the polio VACCINE never got polio.