You Either Keep Getting Your Booster Shots Or Admit You Were Wrong

a reply to: Xtrozero
Why you got to harsh the appeal to authority fallacy mellow, bro?

2nd line.

originally posted by: daskakik

Why you got to harsh the appeal to authority fallacy mellow, bro?

2nd line.

I would just accept that fallacy and move on, but DAMN one needs to at least have "authority" as part of it. This guy might be smart as hell, but his authority is in the field of Operations Research/management.

I think Asmodeus3 should be more careful in who they throw around as authority as that bat is more like a wet noodle.

My advice to Asmodeus3...don't except what everyone says just because it may agree with your narrative...

But who am I kidding... Asmodeus3 will now defend Levi as the top expert to the ends of time.

a reply to: Xtrozero
Don't get me wrong, lack of "authority" is what makes it a fallacy.

Asmodeus3, of course, doesn't want to see it.

Since I am here, I would also just like to say that I don't see how the old definition posted earlier would have excluded the mRNA jabs.

There was a change and, yes, the timing could surely cause suspicion, but, like you pointed out, there is nothing to keep them from being called vaccines even under the old definition.

Seems some people can't help but want to joust against windmills.

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

You mean his qualified professional opinion

I mean people from MIT have opinions that can be based on many things. BTW what exactly is he qualified in?

Here are his areas of interest from his own page.

Areas of Interest

Food Supply Chain Analytics and Sensing Initiative (FSAS)
Supply Chain, Logistics and Revenue Management Optimization
Health Systems
Approximation Algorithm to Multistage Stochastic Optimization Models
Data-driven Algorithms
Stochastic Optimization
Combinatorial Optimization
Risk Management

Others may have unqualified opinions. He doesn't. He has knowledge and years of experience.

Really?

How does his expertise relate exactly... He is not a medical doctor, nor medical scientist. He is a part of Sloan School of Management that is affiliated with MIT, not really MIT, where he is a professor of management. Here is his past experience...

He received a Bachelor's degree in Mathematics from Tel-Aviv University (Israel) in 2001, and a PhD in Operations Research from Cornell University in 2005. Levi spent almost 12 years in the Israeli Defense Forces in the Intelligence Wing and was designated as an Extra Merit Officer.

I'm a highly experienced pilot for 40+ years, so I think that makes me an expert too in the field of vaccines.

If you were a bit more careful to read my thread and his CV. But you don't seem to read much

Hi. My name is Retsef Levi, and since 2006 I’ve been a faculty member at MIT in Cambridge, Massachusetts. I have more than 30 years of experience as a practitioner and an academic in using data analytics to assess and manage risk, particularly in the context of health systems and health policies, as well as the management of safety and quality of manufacturing of biological products

I’m filming this video to share my strong conviction that at this point in time all COVID-19 mRNA vaccination programmes should stop immediately. They should stop because they completely fail to fulfil any of their advertised promises regarding efficacy. And more important they should stop because of the mounting and indisputable evidence that they cause an unprecedented level of harm, including the death of young people and children.

I personally became concerned with the vaccine safety around the middle of 2021, when it became known that the mRNA vaccines cause myocarditis, an inflammation of the heart.

Since myocarditis is known to be hard to diagnose I was very concerned that it will not be detected by the existing vaccine safety surveillance systems. Motivated by that, we decided to analyse the Israel national EMS [emergency services] data to see if there are any signals of increased out-of-hospital adverse events.

We detected an increase of 25% in the cause ‘with cardiac arrest’ diagnosis among ages 16-39 in the first half of 2021, exactly when the vaccination campaign in Israel was launched. A smaller increase was also detected in the older ages. Moreover, we also detected a statistically significant temporal correlation between the number of the Pfizer vaccine doses administered to this population and the number of EMS calls with cardiac arrest diagnosis.

By now I believe that the cumulative evidence is conclusive and confirms our concern that the mRNA vaccines indeed cause sudden cardiac arrest as a sequel of vaccine-induced myocarditis

And finally, autopsies of people that die closely after they receive the vaccine indicate that with the enlarged number of cases, there is strong evidence that the death was caused by vaccine-induced myocarditis.

So presented with all of this evidence, I think that there is no other ethical or scientific choice but to pull out of the market these medical products and stop all the mRNA vaccination programmes. This is clearly the most failing medical product in the history of medical products, both in terms of efficacy and safety. And we need to investigate and think hard: How did we end up in a situation that it’s also the most profitable medical product in the history of medical products?

Thank you for your attention.

You may be a pilot. But he is a Professor of MIT with specialization in data analytics and in particularly assessing and managing risks in the context of health systems and policies as well as assessing and managing the safety and quality of manufacturing of biological products.

Different to being a pilot....

The comparison you are trying to make is just ludicrous.

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: daskakik

Why you got to harsh the appeal to authority fallacy mellow, bro?

2nd line.

I would just accept that fallacy and move on, but DAMN one needs to at least have "authority" as part of it. This guy might be smart as hell, but his authority is in the field of Operations Research/management.

I think Asmodeus3 should be more careful in who they throw around as authority as that bat is more like a wet noodle.

My advice to Asmodeus3...don't except what everyone says just because it may agree with your narrative...

But who am I kidding... Asmodeus3 will now defend Levi as the top expert to the ends of time.

You want you give advise?!

Well... It's better if you start with a range of vaccine apologists and defenders of the pharmaceuticals who have no clue of even the most basics.

Trying to argue using debunked claims such as that of herd immunity which is shown not to be the case.

Or when they claim that Covid-19 came from SARS-CoV-2, both being a virus...

Or when they make further claims that the Spanish Flu lasted for a decade and ended because of the vaccines...

Or the several other arguments that lack merits and logic.

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: daskakik

Why you got to harsh the appeal to authority fallacy mellow, bro?

2nd line.

I would just accept that fallacy and move on, but DAMN one needs to at least have "authority" as part of it. This guy might be smart as hell, but his authority is in the field of Operations Research/management.

I think Asmodeus3 should be more careful in who they throw around as authority as that bat is more like a wet noodle.

My advice to Asmodeus3...don't except what everyone says just because it may agree with your narrative...

But who am I kidding... Asmodeus3 will now defend Levi as the top expert to the ends of time.

If it was only Professor Levi raising questions you may have had some point. Perhaps you haven't read anything lately or during let's say the last year or so. Or pretend you haven't read anything...

Obviously Professor Levi who

has more than 30 years of experience as a practitioner and an academic in using data analytics to assess and manage risk, particularly in the context of health systems and health policies, as well as the management of safety and quality of manufacturing of biological products

Has a qualified professional opinion and knowledge of the safety and quality of the products involved such as vaccines and drugs.

To make comparisons between him and s pilot or any other layman is just extraordinary.

a reply to: Xtrozero


There are many others joining him in criticising these products and asking for their withdrawal. Here is a cardiologist..

Results:

In the non-elderly population the “number needed to treat” to prevent a single death runs into the thousands. Re-analysis of randomised controlled trials using the messenger ribonucleic acid (mRNA) technology suggests a greater risk of serious adverse events from the vaccines than being hospitalised from COVID-19. Pharmacovigilance systems and real-world safety data, coupled with plausible mechanisms of harm, are deeply concerning, especially in relation to cardiovascular safety. Mirroring a potential signal from the Pfizer Phase 3 trial, a significant rise in cardiac arrest calls to ambulances in England was seen in 2021, with similar data emerging from Israel in the 16–39-year-old age group.

Conclusion: It cannot be said that the consent to receive these agents was fully informed, as is required ethically and legally. A pause and reappraisal of global vaccination policies for COVID-19 is long overdue

a reply to: Xtrozero


Speaking of narratives you need to see more closely to the safe and effective assertion that was never proven anywhere other than the headlines of the mainstream propaganda.

And then continues with all the debunked arguments about herd immunity, protecting granny and the elderly, do your part for the good of the society, and the rest of the nonsense. And don't forget the safe and effectiveness claim although Pfizer forgot to test for a few things things including transmission as they were going at the speed of science... They falsified data too in the phase3 clinical trials...

I will take the analysis and professional opinion of Professor Levi much more seriously than any of the above that emanate from the establishment, the MSM, and the pharmaceuticals and their cronies. Not many take seriously anymore the MSM or the Pharmaceuticals. And not many trust them anymore. Unless someone is a vaccine apologists and defender of the pharmaceuticals...

originally posted by: daskakik
a reply to: Xtrozero
Don't get me wrong, lack of "authority" is what makes it a fallacy.

Asmodeus3, of course, doesn't want to see it.

Since I am here, I would also just like to say that I don't see how the old definition posted earlier would have excluded the mRNA jabs.

There was a change and, yes, the timing could surely cause suspicion, but, like you pointed out, there is nothing to keep them from being called vaccines even under the old definition.

Seems some people can't help but want to joust against windmills.

All those who engage in vaccine apologetics and denialism of reality don't want to see any issues with these products. It's obvious why. They have invested emotionally and mentally in them and as their world is going to collapse are trying hard to defend their views.

So presented with all of this evidence, I think that there is no other ethical or scientific choice but to pull out of the market these medical products and stop all the mRNA vaccination programmes. This is clearly the most failing medical product in the history of medical products, both in terms of efficacy and safety. And we need to investigate and think hard: How did we end up in a situation that it’s also the most profitable medical product in the history of medical products?

originally posted by: daskakik
a reply to: Xtrozero
Don't get me wrong, lack of "authority" is what makes it a fallacy.

Asmodeus3, of course, doesn't want to see it.

Since I am here, I would also just like to say that I don't see how the old definition posted earlier would have excluded the mRNA jabs.

There was a change and, yes, the timing could surely cause suspicion, but, like you pointed out, there is nothing to keep them from being called vaccines even under the old definition.

Seems some people can't help but want to joust against windmills.

Suspicion? Yeah they literally changed the definition of a word to try to justify forcing dangerous experimental drugs on people. They also changed the definition of woman, proving they don't care about science or biology only agenda.

a reply to: v1rtu0s0
But can you explain why the mRNA jabs wouldn't have fit under the old definition posted here?

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

The comparison you are trying to make is just ludicrous.

I can't find anything in this area and there is a full list of everything he has written on.

quality of manufacturing of biological products

He is basing assumptions on data he didn't get himself and he has done zero analytical analyst on any of this to show something that is uniquely his to demonstrate where everyone else is wrong and only he is right. He is concern, OK...got it...

What you all read on every headline that is anti-vaccine is this

MIT Expert on Drug Safety...

That is BS.... All of this is dripping with appeal to authority as daskakik suggests.

originally posted by: Asmodeus3
It's obvious why.

Just like much of what you post, it seems obvious to you, because that is what you think. That isn't necessarily the case.

I am already on the record, before you even started posting on ATS, that the vaccines have issues. Everyone who brings up all medications having the potential to harm some people are doing the same. You just can't seem to wrap your head around that fact.

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

All those who engage in vaccine apologetics and denialism

Another thing you must have on cut/paste as much as you use it. You keep posting an expert, swinging a club of authority and all I did was look him up. Don't blame me if he doesn't fit the endless links on the net all saying the same thing over and over about this guy and all you need to do is go to his home page and see what he really does.

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

The comparison you are trying to make is just ludicrous.

I can't find anything in this area and there is a full list of everything he has written on.

quality of manufacturing of biological products

He is basing assumptions on data he didn't get himself and he has done zero analytical analyst on any of this to show something that is uniquely his to demonstrate where everyone else is wrong and only he is right. He is concern, OK...got it...

What you all read on every headline that is anti-vaccine is this

MIT Expert on Drug Safety...

That is BS.... All of this is dripping with appeal to authority as daskakik suggests.

I am afraid you have fallen again into your own trap. You are going in cycles trying to hold to something and you don't seem to 'find anything in the adea'. Perhaps you can email him and you will get some more detailed explanation...

You trying to appeal to numbers. Who said that everyone else is wrong and he is right? Who is 'everyone else'. That's a nonsensical argument.

Another fallacy when he is not the only one raising legitimate questions and concerns.

Your arguments seem to spiral out of control. First you compared pilots with an MIT professor who

has more than 30 years of experience as a practitioner and an academic in using data analytics to assess and manage risk, particularly in the context of health systems and health policies, as well as the management of safety and quality of manufacturing of biological products

Then you claim he didn't produce the data himself... What do you mean by this??

What are you talking about??

You completely misinterpreting and misrepresenting pretty much everything.

originally posted by: daskakik

originally posted by: Asmodeus3
It's obvious why.

Just like much of what you post, it seems obvious to you, because that is what you think. That isn't necessarily the case.

I am already on the record, before you even started posting on ATS, that the vaccines have issues. Everyone who brings up all medications having the potential to harm some people are doing the same. You just can't seem to wrap your head around that fact.

That's a classical sign of vaccine apology.

originally posted by: Asmodeus3
That's a classical sign of vaccine apology.

I honestly don't understand why you can't grasp that it isn't an apology for anything. I'm guessing it is just a buzz phrase you saw somewhere.

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

Speaking of narratives you need to see more closely to the safe and effective assertion that was never proven anywhere other than the headlines of the mainstream propaganda.

We keep going back to that, but you never define anything and when I hold you to a point you are dead wrong. Such as your 1 per 100,000 is dangerous point you have said 100 times now. What is my narrative? That we have common drugs that kill 75 per 100,000 and are still seen as safe?

And then continues with all the debunked arguments about herd immunity

So why do you keep adding me to this part when I have said over and over this has never been my point. I have said a number of times that herd immunity depends on the virus and it would be extremely had to do with the flu, cold, Sar-2 etc type viruses. So what are you looking from me on this?

I have also said a number of times that the immunity of a vaccine is all based on the type of virus too and some vaccines will not only do nothing to prevent you from getting the virus but will not keep you from dying with a 99% that you will die, but still called a vaccine long before 2020.

I will take the analysis

Post the number of deaths due to heart attack in ages from 18 to 29 in Isriel, from 2015 to 2022 then we can both look at the data.

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

All those who engage in vaccine apologetics and denialism

Another thing you must have on cut/paste as much as you use it. You keep posting an expert, swinging a club of authority and all I did was look him up. Don't blame me if he doesn't fit the endless links on the net all saying the same thing over and over about this guy and all you need to do is go to his home page and see what he really does.

I have two pieces of information above one by a cardiologist who knows about the heart related conditions following vaccination and the other who is professor qt MIT with specialization in risk assessment and management in the context of health policies and health systems.

Both agree that the products are unsafe and not effective causing plenty of harm and must be withdrawn from the market.

They are not the only ones though. Unless you pretend not to understand what is going on.

originally posted by: daskakik
a reply to: v1rtu0s0
But can you explain why the mRNA jabs wouldn't have fit under the old definition posted here?

Because they don't provide immunity which is literally the point.

It's like selling a car without wheels. It can't function as a car.