Where is the debate here? All we see in that video is a nursing instructor - his PhD is in nursing education, not medicine - reviewing a paper from January 2021 .
A debate would feature a second person in the video, preferably someone with a relevant background - you know, an infectious disease or a public health specialist, or maybe a virologist or an immunologist.
Instead all we get is a non-expert's unchallenged opinion.
Here's some of what the paper says (he provides the link
"Primary pharmacology studies indicate the vaccine ... conferred some protection of monkeys from infection."
"The sponsor has generally conducted adequate studies on pharmacology and toxicity (GLP compliant repeat dose and developmental and reproductive toxicity studies) with BNT162b2 (V9)."
"BNT162b2 (V9) was found to be immunogenic in non-clinical studies in mice, rats and rhesus macaques. BNT162b2 (V9) induced humoral and cellular immune responses in mice and monkeys."
"The vaccine protected monkeys from infection when challenged 55 days after the 2nd vaccine dose based on viral RNA load and radiographic lung lesions."
"BNT162b2 (V9) was tolerated in rats without evidence of systemic toxicity. Rats administered BNT162b2 (V9) (3 IM doses once weekly at 30 μg/dose, ~200 times the clinical dose on a μg/kg basis)'
"A combined reproductive and developmental study showed no adverse effects on female fertility, embryofetal development and post-natal development (up to weaning) in rats."
"Considering the chemical structure of the excipients and limited potential lifetime exposure, the excipients are not expected to pose genotoxicity or carcinogenicity potential."
Some of the conclusions drawn were:
"Repeat dose toxicity studies with the proposed vaccine and a variant, both in the LNP formulation, in rats raised no safety issues."
"Neither the mRNA nor the lipid excipients of the LNP formulation are expected to have genotoxic potential."
"A combined reproductive and developmental study showed no adverse effects on female fertility, embryofetal development and post-natal development (up to weaning) in rats."
"There are no nonclinical objections to the provisional registration of the vaccine"
Once again Bullshityouharder can't find a single link so I should just tell her that her personal opinions are noted and move on. But I can't. Sigh.
BSYH: complains of lack of debate, then posts a video of a nursing instructor's opinions, with no debate.
Tuchodi: shouldn't there be a subject matter expert debating the nursing instructor?
BSYH: Yeah, well, Trucker convoy
T: Notices goal posts seem to have moved.
BSYH: info is government funded
T: Interesting that all the governments - world wide - say the same thing: get vaccinated, wear a mask in crowds
BSYH: nano particles travel throughout your entire body.
T: says who?
BSYH: pathologists , doctors and medical staff who were speaking out
T: Let's look at them. Who are they?
BSYH: I told you that already I can't provide any links
T: Fixed that for you.
BSYH: I have spoken to EMTs and fire fighters ... hospitals were empty
T: hmmmm - stories from anonymous people on social media folks. Sketchy. No science.
BSYH: remdesivir a drug that was known to kill 2/3rds of the people who were given it
T: hmmmm - stories from anonymous people on social media folks. Sketchy. No science.
BSYH: 95 percent of the people who died from the sniffles were in hospitals or nursing homes with an average age of death of 80 years old.
T: How is that different from everybody who dies?
BSYH: And we know that these people were being misdiagnosed.
T: We know BSYH knows that, but she chooses not to provide any proof that it's true.
BSYH: Most of those who were quarantined and neglected.
T: She's talking about nursing homes, I think. It's true that old people are hit harder and nursing homes didn't have the staff to handle an outbreak. She seems to be ignoring everyone else that dies though. Interesting to note that the for-profit care homes [as opposed to non-profit and government ones] had the worst outcomes: "Several observational studies suggest that for-profit LTC homes tend to deliver inferior care across a variety of outcome and process measures." https://www.cmaj.ca/content/192/33/E946 and "For-profit status was associated with both the extent of an outbreak in an LTC home ... and the number of resident deaths ... compared with nonprofit homes." https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32699006/
BSYH: Pfizer was trying to hide their studies for 75 years
T: Nope, and I believe she has spread that misinformation in the past despite having been shown the truth. Pfizer turned over their data in accordance with the trial rules. It was the FDA that initially asked for time to address privacy concerns, given their staffing level at the time. https://duckduckgo.com/?q=%22Pfizer%22+%22FDA%22+%2275+years%22&va=b&t=hc&ia=web
BSYH: documents they were releasing were almost completely redacted
T: See, if she would only look into these matters for herself she could save herself the embarrassment of blaming the wrong agency.
BSYH: you shill for big pharma
T: Me, every medical institution on the planet, and virtually every government. Imagine that folks: the USA, Iran, Iraq, China, North Korea, and all the rest of them all cozied up together and working cooperatively to pull the wool over BSYH's eyes, but she's too smart for them.
Folks Bullshityouharder says she doesn't like "people unwilling to publicly debate"
Where is the debate here? All we see in that video is a nursing instructor - his PhD is in nursing education, not medicine - reviewing a paper from January 2021 .
A debate would feature a second person in the video, preferably someone with a relevant background - you know, an infectious disease or a public health specialist, or maybe a virologist or an immunologist.
Instead all we get is a non-expert's unchallenged opinion.
Here's some of what the paper says (he provides the link
"Primary pharmacology studies indicate the vaccine ... conferred some protection of monkeys from infection."
"The sponsor has generally conducted adequate studies on pharmacology and toxicity (GLP compliant repeat dose and developmental and reproductive toxicity studies) with BNT162b2 (V9)."
"BNT162b2 (V9) was found to be immunogenic in non-clinical studies in mice, rats and rhesus macaques. BNT162b2 (V9) induced humoral and cellular immune responses in mice and monkeys."
"The vaccine protected monkeys from infection when challenged 55 days after the 2nd vaccine dose based on viral RNA load and radiographic lung lesions."
"BNT162b2 (V9) was tolerated in rats without evidence of systemic toxicity. Rats administered BNT162b2 (V9) (3 IM doses once weekly at 30 μg/dose, ~200 times the clinical dose on a μg/kg basis)'
"A combined reproductive and developmental study showed no adverse effects on female fertility, embryofetal development and post-natal development (up to weaning) in rats."
"Considering the chemical structure of the excipients and limited potential lifetime exposure, the excipients are not expected to pose genotoxicity or carcinogenicity potential."
Some of the conclusions drawn were:
"Repeat dose toxicity studies with the proposed vaccine and a variant, both in the LNP formulation, in rats raised no safety issues."
"Neither the mRNA nor the lipid excipients of the LNP formulation are expected to have genotoxic potential."
"A combined reproductive and developmental study showed no adverse effects on female fertility, embryofetal development and post-natal development (up to weaning) in rats."
"There are no nonclinical objections to the provisional registration of the vaccine"
For extra points folks: figure out how much money Dr. John Campbell has made so far off that one video given that it has 273,000 views to date: https://finance.yahoo.com/news/much-youtubers-213800157.html
Once again Bullshityouharder can't find a single link so I should just tell her that her personal opinions are noted and move on. But I can't. Sigh.
BSYH: complains of lack of debate, then posts a video of a nursing instructor's opinions, with no debate.
Tuchodi: shouldn't there be a subject matter expert debating the nursing instructor?
BSYH: Yeah, well, Trucker convoy
T: Notices goal posts seem to have moved.
BSYH: info is government funded
T: Interesting that all the governments - world wide - say the same thing: get vaccinated, wear a mask in crowds
BSYH: nano particles travel throughout your entire body.
T: says who?
BSYH: pathologists , doctors and medical staff who were speaking out
T: Let's look at them. Who are they?
BSYH:
I told you that alreadyI can't provide any linksT: Fixed that for you.
BSYH: I have spoken to EMTs and fire fighters ... hospitals were empty
T: hmmmm - stories from anonymous people on social media folks. Sketchy. No science.
BSYH: remdesivir a drug that was known to kill 2/3rds of the people who were given it
T: hmmmm - stories from anonymous people on social media folks. Sketchy. No science.
BSYH: 95 percent of the people who died from the sniffles were in hospitals or nursing homes with an average age of death of 80 years old.
T: How is that different from everybody who dies?
BSYH: And we know that these people were being misdiagnosed.
T: We know BSYH knows that, but she chooses not to provide any proof that it's true.
BSYH: Most of those who were quarantined and neglected.
T: She's talking about nursing homes, I think. It's true that old people are hit harder and nursing homes didn't have the staff to handle an outbreak. She seems to be ignoring everyone else that dies though. Interesting to note that the for-profit care homes [as opposed to non-profit and government ones] had the worst outcomes: "Several observational studies suggest that for-profit LTC homes tend to deliver inferior care across a variety of outcome and process measures." https://www.cmaj.ca/content/192/33/E946 and "For-profit status was associated with both the extent of an outbreak in an LTC home ... and the number of resident deaths ... compared with nonprofit homes." https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32699006/
BSYH: Pfizer was trying to hide their studies for 75 years
T: Nope, and I believe she has spread that misinformation in the past despite having been shown the truth. Pfizer turned over their data in accordance with the trial rules. It was the FDA that initially asked for time to address privacy concerns, given their staffing level at the time. https://duckduckgo.com/?q=%22Pfizer%22+%22FDA%22+%2275+years%22&va=b&t=hc&ia=web
BSYH: documents they were releasing were almost completely redacted
T: See, if she would only look into these matters for herself she could save herself the embarrassment of blaming the wrong agency.
BSYH: you shill for big pharma
T: Me, every medical institution on the planet, and virtually every government. Imagine that folks: the USA, Iran, Iraq, China, North Korea, and all the rest of them all cozied up together and working cooperatively to pull the wool over BSYH's eyes, but she's too smart for them.