Thread: A couple good articles debunking anti-vax disinformation

To be clear, the difference between "disinformation" and "misinformation" is that the former is a deliberate attempt to deceive via false information. The latter is if someone simply gets some information wrong by mistake. I believe the anti-vax movement has way more disinformation than misinformation, and whatever kernels of actual truth it contains are only very basics such as that the virus exists, and are not enough to legitimize the movement.

Here are the articles with some excerpts:

Experts Debunk Claims From New Anti-Vax Documentary

A so-called documentary about COVID-19 vaccines prompted the latest social media effort by physicians to dispel dangerous medical misinformation.

Jonathan Laxton, MD, of the University of Manitoba Max Rady College of Medicine in Winnipeg, is one of those experts leading the effort to set the record straightopens in a new tab or window. He called the claims made in the film -- titled "Died Suddenlyopens in a new tab or window" -- "blatant lies."

"My first impression was it's just basically over-the-top lies made to scare people away from getting the COVID-19 vaccine," Laxton told MedPage Today. "I think it's so over-the-top that it actually won't convince anybody who doesn't already believe it."

"Died Suddenly" was simultaneously released on Twitter and Rumble on November 21, and has been viewed more than 12 million times.

It features several embalmers and funeral directors who claim to be coming forward for the first time to share their concerns over supposedly unusual blood clots found in deceased individuals they prepared for burial. But the main individual featured in the film is Ryan Cole, MD, who has a history of promoting false claimsopens in a new tab or window about the COVID vaccines and cancer.

Katrine Wallace, PhD, an epidemiologist at the University of Illinois -- Chicago School of Public Health, debunked several of the claims from the filmopens in a new tab or window on her social media accounts, where she has become known for her work in pushing back against public health disinformation. She said the film follows a consistent pattern for disinformation campaigns.

[continued]

full article: https://archive.ph/fDGJr

========

Microchips, Magnets And Shedding: Here Are 5 (Debunked) Covid Vaccine Conspiracy Theories Spreading Online

Despite efforts from social media platforms and top health officials to combat disinformation, conspiracy theories about the coronavirus vaccine continue to spread rapidly across the internet—here’s a look at some of the recurring falsehoods threatening the U.S.’s inoculation drive.

That the vaccine includes a microchip, a wild conspiracy theory stemming from years of baseless misrepresentation of Microsoft billionaire Bill Gates’ vaccine advocacy efforts as a cover for establishing a global surveillance system that has continued to resurface with new and easily disproven claims, including that people can use magnets to identify the microchips in their arms.

That the vaccine alters your DNA, a claim that has circulated on social media since last year—based on multiple pseudoscientific posts and statements falsely attributed to Moderna’s chief medical officer—that experts have debunked as a fundamental misunderstanding of mRNA vaccines, which do not change a person’s DNA.

That the vaccine can be “shed” from one person to another, a claim that gained enough prominence through boosts from popular anti-vaccine activists that it prompted a Miami school to ask vaccinated teachers to keep their distance from students and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) to specify shedding can only occur when a vaccine contains a “live virus,” which the approved Covid-19 vaccines don’t.

That the vaccine is causing Covid-19 variants, a falsehood that picked up steam in May after Nobel-prize winning French virologist Luc Montagnier (a past participant in anti-vaccination protests) insisted in an interview “vaccination is creating new variants,” a claim other medical experts have deemed unscientific and “completely bonkers” as variants occur randomly and independently of vaccinations.

That the vaccine has already led to a large number of deaths, a claim buoyed by prominent conservatives including Fox News’ Tucker Carlson and Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wisc.) that is based on the thousands of deaths listed on the CDC’s Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS), though the database does not display verified information and the CDC has reported “no causal link” between the listed deaths and the Covid-19 vaccine.

CRUCIAL QUOTE

On Thursday morning, CDC Director Dr. Rochelle Walensky debunked a new and bizarre claim originating from TikTok that the Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine makes recipients Bluetooth connectable. “That’s ridiculous,” she told CBS “This Morning’s” Gale King. “We’re not being injected with chips. What we’re being injected with is this incredible scientific breakthrough that keeps us safe.”

[continued]

full article: https://www.forbes.com/sites/jemimam...h=1c51815226af

Comments: I love how you can detect that “subtle panic” amongst the jabbed. Despite how much you see them telling people “get real” and your just a conspiracy “theorist” you can also see they are trying to hide their panic. This is probably the BIGGEST “I told you so” in history and im enjoying every moment of it . . .

Elon, (and Damarr) the Fauchi jab wasn't a vaccine; it was an IQ test . . .

Originally Posted by CPRA

Same old unsubstantiated nonsense. The anti-vax crowd should have an anti-bridge movement. You're afraid of using the Oakland Bay Bridge because it's theoretically possible for it to collapse on you. Cars drive across every day with no problems, but you don't want to take that risk, so you swim across the Bay, with a lifejacket, of course, but you nearly die of frostbite. You could have just driven across the bridge and accepted its minuscule risks.

Originally Posted by mgtower

So swimming across the bay is better because there's a small chance you might drive on the bridge when an earthquake hits? The risks associated with the diseases like polio, measles, smallpox, and COVID were much, much higher than any risks of the vaccine. That greatest likelihood of side effects from the vaccine were a sore arm and maybe feeling temporarily feverish for a few hours. And the benefits of that minor inconvenience are antibodies that defeat a deadly disease.

I'll take my chances with my natural immunity.
Kung Flu survival rate of 98-99%+, I'd say the odds are in one's favor.

Numbers from a so-called "respected" (not by me, but they did come close on SOME of the percentages) news source...

CLAIM: If you are unvaccinated, you can get COVID and have over 99% chance of survival.
If you get vaccinated, you can STILL get COVID and will still have over 99% chance of survival.

AP’S ASSESSMENT: Missing context. On average about 98.2% of known COVID-19 patients in the U.S. survive, but each individual’s chance of dying from the virus will vary depending on their age, whether they have an underlying health condition and whether they are vaccinated.
While people who are vaccinated can still get infected, these “breakthrough” cases are rare and vaccines dramatically reduce severe illness and death.


THE FACTS: As of July 23, there were more than 34.3 million known cases of COVID-19 in the United States and 610,370 deaths, according to data from Johns Hopkins University. That means the case fatality ratio -- or the portion of known cases that result in death in the country -- is 1.8%. In other words, on average, 98.2% of known COVID-19 patients in the U.S. survive.
Because the true number of infections is much larger than just the documented cases, the actual survival rate of all COVID-19 infections is even higher than 98.2%.


A popular tweet this week, however, used the survival statistic without key context.
“Unvaccinated, you can get COVID and have over 99% chance of survival. Get vaccinated and you can STILL get COVID and will still have over 99% chance of survival,” reads the tweet.

The message is misleading. How so? The average for the entire country cannot be used to calculate an individual’s chance of dying from the virus.
The likelihood that a COVID-19 infection will result in death increases with age and if the patient has a pre-existing condition..Doesn't take a brainiac to figure this out


Dr. Thomas Giordano, professor of medicine and section chief of infectious diseases at Baylor College of Medicine, said the tweet ignores the fact that many people who survive COVID-19 have long-term symptoms, and that people who survive it can spread the disease to high risk patients who will not be as lucky. While infected, yes, but afterwards, again, how so?

“One in 500 people in the U.S. has died from COVID. Not true. To try to trivialize it and say it’s nothing, it doesn’t matter,
I think it’s just a gross mischaracterization of what we are all living through,” Giordano told The Associated Press in a call.


Furthermore, vaccinated people are far less likely to become severely ill or die from COVID-19 compared to unvaccinated people.

Most vaccinated people with breakthrough infections experience mild illness, Dr. William Moss, a vaccine expert at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, told the AP.
Giordano said compared to the average COVID-19 death rate in the U.S., “you look at what the vaccines can do, they decrease the risk of death and severe illness by more than 90 percent, 95 percent in the randomized studies.”
Data from May showed nearly all U.S. deaths from the virus were among people who haven’t received the vaccine, AP reporting found. About 99.5% of all deaths from COVID-19 are in the unvaccinated, They don't have enough info to make such an assertation as of yet. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Director Dr. Rochelle Walensky has said.

___

This is part of The Associated Press’ ongoing effort to address widely shared misinformation, including work with Facebook and other platforms to add context to misleading content and reduce its circulation online.

Link:
https://apnews.com/article/fact-checking-970830023526

This debate between the unvaxxed and the vaxxed reminds me of the difference between being involved vs. committed - are you a chicken or a pig?
Question: In a bacon and egg breakfast, what's the difference between the chicken and the pig?
Answer: The chicken is involved, but the pig is COMMITTED!

At this point, some of the committed are making numerous arguments why becoming committed to (aka jabbed with) the Fauchi sauce was justifiable and the right move - I'm OK with that since it is their body to experiment with, but I think they should hear the other side of the story, not just the establishment Big Media propaganda . . .

It really is too soon to tell the long term effects of mRNA C-19 so called "vaccination" (neither prevents nor stops the spread) and its multiple, perhaps indefinite, booster shots.

Natural immunity looks to be more promising than the risks of injection and boosters, especially long term. I can always crossover but I can never go back, I'm okay on this side of the bay, I have no need to swim or chance a bridge collapse.

I'm not really a fan of one-sided shills telling me what is debunked when actual critics and doctors who didn't tow the line are silenced, lost their license to practice and punished.
There is nothing scientific about shutting down legitimate questions that are swept under the rug - it all just reads like one sided propaganda that the media has been happily producing before CV19 even hit. People would've been wise to question it if they weren't already brainwashed - the fact that they were punished for doing so, in the age of my body my choice is disgusting hypocrisy.

This hilarious survey says it all.