Let's take a look at the recirculated nonsense being shoveled by anti-vax nutcases this week. It's amazing that there are people so ignorant on the face of the earth that they shovel this fabricated bullshiat. Claim: "You’re in danger” because the American Red Cross doesn’t label blood donations from donors vaccinated against COVID-19. No, COVID-19 vaccinated blood poses no risk, health experts say https://www.politifact.com/factchec...vid-19-vaccinated-blood-poses-no-risk-health/ There is no danger from blood transfusions that include blood from COVID-19 vaccinated donors, health experts said. Vaccine components are not found in the bloodstream, an American Red Cross spokesperson said. COVID-19 vaccine skeptics for three years now have baselessly claimed that blood donated by vaccine recipients is unsafe. Some patients have asked their doctors to use blood from unvaccinated donors — a tough task in the U.S., where 81% of Americans have received at least one dose of a COVID-19 vaccine. Despite repeated assurances from health officials that blood donated by vaccinated people poses no health risk, the claims persist on social media. "You’re. In. Danger," a Nov. 25 Instagram post’s caption read. It shared a screenshot of a Sept. 13, 2022, American Red Cross X post that said, "We don't label blood products as containing vaccinated or unvaccinated blood as the COVID-19 vaccine does not enter the bloodstream & poses no safety risks to the recipient." The post was flagged as part of Meta’s efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Meta, which owns Facebook and Instagram.) American Red Cross spokesperson Daniel Parra told PolitiFact, "Blood donations from individuals who have received a COVID-19 vaccine are safe for transfusion." Like other vaccines, including for influenza, Parra said, the COVID-19 vaccines are designed to generate an immune response. "Vaccine components themselves are not found within the bloodstream," he said. Parra said all U.S. blood collectors follow eligibility guidelines set by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. In a Nov. 27 statement to PolitiFact, the FDA said it "takes very seriously its responsibility to ensure the safety of the nation’s blood supply" and pointed us to guidance it issued in 2022 about COVID-19 and blood donation. The FDA hasn’t required or recommended delays in blood donations of people after they received COVID-19 vaccines, the statement said. The FDA’s statement added that there’s "no medical or scientific" justification for seeking donations from only unvaccinated people. Nevertheless, the false narrative has fueled the creation of anti-vaccine networks in which people can seek blood supposedly donated by unvaccinated people. In October, an FDA advisory said directed blood donation requests "lack scientific support" and urged people to "be cautious about websites that offer memberships" for blood "from individuals who have not been vaccinated for COVID-19." In January, the American Red Cross also issued a joint statement with America’s Blood Centers and the Association for the Advancement of Blood & Biotherapies reiterating the safety of blood donations from COVID-19 vaccinated people. "COVID-19 vaccines do not replicate, and all blood donations offer the same life-saving therapeutic benefits, regardless of the vaccination status of the donor," the statement said. The claim that blood transfusions from donors who have been vaccinated against COVID-19 endanger recipients has no basis in science, health experts said. We rate the claim False. Our Sources Instagram post, Nov. 25, 2023 (archived) American Red Cross, X post, Sept. 13, 2022 American Red Cross, Frequently Asked Questions — Medications and Vaccinations, accessed Nov. 27, 2023 American Red Cross, Donating Blood After Getting COVID or Flu Vaccine, Nov. 17, 2023 American Red Cross, Joint Statement: Blood Community Reiterates the Safety of America’s Blood Supply for Patients, Jan. 27, 2023 Daniel Parra, spokesperson for the American Red Cross, email interview, Nov. 27, 2023 U.S. Food and Drug Administration, emailed statement, Nov. 27, 2023 U.S. Food and Drug Administration, Important Information About Directed Blood Donations that are Not Medically Indicated, Oct. 23, 2023 U.S. Food and Drug Administration, Updated Information for Blood Establishments Regarding the COVID-19 Pandemic and Blood Donation, Jan. 11, 2022 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, COVID-19 Vaccinations in the United States, May 11, 2023 KFF Health News, ‘Tainted’ Blood: Covid Skeptics Request Blood Transfusions From Unvaccinated Donors, Aug. 17, 2021 Association for the Advancement of blood and biotherapies, Vaccination and blood donation, accessed Nov. 27, 2023
Let's fact check the cancer nonsense being shoveled by anti-vax nutcases. US government hasn't reported 'surge' in cancer among vaccinated people | Fact check https://www.usatoday.com/story/news...ccine-to-cancer-surge-fact-check/72085906007/ The claim: Government data shows '143,233% surge' in cancer among Americans vaccinated against COVID-19 A Dec. 8, 2023, article by The Exposé claims to unveil a major health crisis. "Shocking Report: U.S. Government Data Reveals a Staggering 143,233% Surge in Fatal Cancer Cases Linked to COVID Vaccinations," reads the article's headline. The article was shared more than 300 times on Facebook, according to CrowdTangle, a social media analytics tool. Our rating: False There is no evidence of a link between the COVID-19 vaccines and cancer, according to the American Cancer Society. The website that made the claim has previously shared misinformation and cited an unverified database that allows anyone to submit reports of adverse vaccine side effects. No evidence COVID-19 vaccines cause cancer The article claims the government data proving the connection between COVID-19 vaccines can be found in the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS). The database's website says anyone can submit a report, including the general public, and it has a disclaimer that says, “VAERS reports may contain information that is incomplete, inaccurate, coincidental or unverifiable. Reports to VAERS can also be biased. As a result, there are limitations on how the data can be used scientifically." There is no mention of a link between the COVID-19 vaccines and a surge in cancer cases anywhere on the CDC's website. Instead, it describes the COVID-19 vaccines as "safe and effective," and it states they've been evaluated in tens of thousands of clinical trial participants. Fact check: False claim Moderna admitted mRNA vaccines cause 'turbo-cancer' The American Cancer Society estimates the number of new cancer cases and deaths expected each year because actual data can lag "two to four years behind the current year." The CDC's data, for instance, is only available through 2020. The reports show nearly identical estimates of new cases and deaths for 2022 and 2023 – about 1.9 million expected new cases and about 609,000 expected deaths each year. In other words, there's no sign of a spike related to COVID-19 vaccines or any other cause. The American Cancer Society also says there is "no information" that suggests COVID-19 vaccines cause cancer, a finding that the National Cancer Institute reiterates on its website. "There is no evidence that COVID-19 vaccines cause cancer, lead to recurrence or lead to disease progression," the organization said. The article was published by The Exposé, which has previously published vaccine-related misinformation. USA TODAY reached out to The Exposé but did not immediately receive a response. Our fact-check sources: CDC, accessed Jan. 3, Safety of COVID-19 Vaccines CDC, accessed Jan. 3, Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) CDC, accessed Jan. 3, United States Cancer Statistics: Data Visualizations American Cancer Society, accessed Jan. 3, COVID-19 Vaccines in People with Cancer National Cancer Institute, accessed Jan. 3, COVID-19 Vaccines and People with Cancer USA TODAY, Nov. 4, 2021, Fact check: COVID-19 vaccines aren't linked to cancer, HIV Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System, accessed Jan. 3, VAERS Data
Now for some reality on the largest study... Largest Covid vaccine study ever finds shots are linked to small increased risk of neurological, blood and heart disorders - but they are still extremely rare They had doubled risk of Guillain-Barre, 3.7 times higher risk of brain swelling Largest study of its kind looked for health conditions in 99 million people READ MORE: Covid is FOUR TIMES more likely to cause heart problem than jab https://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/...cal-blood-heart-disorders-extremely-rare.html ‘Chances of having a neurological event following acute SARS-CoV-2 infection were up to 617-fold higher than following COVID vaccination, suggesting that the benefits of vaccination substantially outweigh the risks.’
Exactly. Catchy title, but this is from the actual paper: "The researchers noted in their analysis that COVID-19 infections have consistently been found to be more likely to cause the conditions observed in this study than vaccinations, adding that factor should be considered when weighing the risk-to-benefit ratio of immunization."
Sorry Tsing, but you are still wrong on the whole covid and vaccin thing. Yes there are side effects. But covid is a lot worse. All studies so far confirm this. So please explain the whole "covid is just a cold" combined with "vaccins kill millions" logic to me. It just doesn't make sense.
Let's see the latest thing the demented anti-vaxxers have been pushing... Outraged Anti-Vaxxers Learn The Red Cross Doesn't Separate Vaccinated And Unvaccinated Blood What's sad is that they actually thought they did this to begin with. https://www.wonkette.com/p/outraged-anti-vaxxers-learn-the-red Earlier this week, there was a false report going around Infowars and other “news sources” where they kind of just make things up, claiming that the Red Cross wouldn’t accept blood from people who had been vaccinated against COVID. My God, they were overjoyed. Just absolutely deliriously thrilled, thinking that the medical establishment had finally confirmed what they knew to be true in their guts all along. Just look at this guy. This was the best day of his life. He couldn’t stop smiling! That’s Canadian conspiracy theorist Chris Sky, who ran for mayor of Toronto last year on a platform of banning 15-minute cities and digital IDs. (And he would have won, too, if the whole thing hadn’t been rigged!) He’s a real piece of work. They based this on the fact that the Red Cross asks if you’ve been recently vaccinated on their questionnaire to determine if you’re qualified to donate blood. This is, of course, not because the blood is “tainted,” but because many people get sick for a few days after taking the vaccine. The Red Cross won’t take your blood if you have a fever or are otherwise ill. Most of us already know that. They also won’t take your blood if you are anemic, if you are on certain other medications or if you are taking antibiotics. Alas, the celebration was short-lived. On Wednesday, woman-abusing creep Steven Crowder shared a clip of an “undercover journalist” talking to the Red Cross and finding out that they don’t even separate vaccinated and unvaccinated blood. “BREAKING!” he announced on social media. “[A Red Cross] official tells undercover journalist they DO NOT SEPARATE donated blood based on COVID-19 vaccination status; ADMITS unvaccinated recipients can UNWITTINGLY RECEIVE blood from vaccinated donors.” It’s a real nice touch, I think, to have an “undercover journalist” call in to find out what the Red Cross has been saying publicly for years. That way people will think it’s something they’ve been hiding. The “undercover journalist” pretended to be a doctor with no familiarity with blood transfusion protocols and called up the Red Cross to ask if her “patients” would be able to only get unvaccinated blood if they need a transfusion. The person on the other end of the call explained that of course they don’t separate vaccinated and unvaccinated blood and that if her “patients” want only “unvaccinated blood” they have to use their own blood that they’d previously taken and had set aside or blood from a family member. The Red Cross worker explained to the person obviously pretending to be a doctor that the reason they ask is because they wouldn’t take blood from someone currently experiencing side effects — specifically referencing a donor who got tinnitus after being vaccinated and was told she wouldn’t be able to donate. Tinnitus is known to be a side-effect of several vaccines and while the CDC hasn’t been able to “find any data suggesting a link between Covid-19 vaccines and tinnitus," cases of it happening have been well-documented. It’s not ideal, sure, but there’s nothing on earth that has no possibility of unwanted side-effects, including drinking water. (If you drink too much water you can get hyponatremia AKA a sodium deficiency!) Did they actually, seriously think the Red Cross was going to separate vaccinated blood and unvaccinated blood to accommodate the beliefs of ridiculous conspiracy theorists? What did they think was going to happen if they went into an emergency room unconscious? The doctors would wait to see which kind of blood they want? Did they think a blood sommelier would bring them a menu of options to choose from? “Oh, I’ll take the blood of a 26-year-old unvaccinated brunette with no history of seasonal allergies, thank you!” The responses to this non-revelation were wild. Janna M., whose profile states that she is a nurse, wrote, “This is exactly why my chart says no transfusions,” and then further explained that she would prefer death over getting a blood transfusion with vaccinated blood. Neal C. responded, “I have knocked on multiple blood bus doors at walmart and asked ‘f a person has taken the covid shot can they still donate blood?’ the response has been ‘yes’ [I[ then said ‘ok, so you are taking contaminated blood?’ I then get the door slammed in my face!” Wow, can you believe they wouldn’t want to talk to him? User Henry Facey added that he was also mad at the Red Cross helping immigrants not freeze to death. “The American Red Cross is giving out blankets in all the different ILLEGAL migrant centers across this country. They raise questions about donation eligibility, but they don’t care if you receive vaccinated blood or not? Color me shocked!” SJ Swami tried to sound intellectual about it (and failed), writing, “This revelation underscores a critical gap in blood donation protocols, posing potential risks for unvaccinated recipients. Transparency and stringent screening are imperative to ensure safety and informed consent.” The only safety risk is that they would bleed out and die because they refused transfusion that might have come from a vaccinated person. Someone using the handle A Nobody added, “They just need to look for the blood that is so clotted it looks like raspberry JELLO,” demonstrating some real medical expertise. “Thus,” opined A_FL_Salt, “opening the door to malpractice lawsuits when recipients get injured or die from getting tainted blood. We damn well know high rollers are getting the pureblood while the plebs get the depopulation supply. Imagine the chain expenses insurance companies are facing both medical and liability on this? A cost pass onto us!” Oh boy, does that ever seem like a thing that is really happening in real life. There were also some very healthy and normal reactions to this on the Great Awakening message board (the QAnon one): “Ask for the "Jehovah's Witness Protocol" if you have to have an operation. Avoids all blood products, and hence is safer.” “Red cross does not care if pure bloods get poisoned. Something must be impacting the money. Which is probably the sales of blood to big pharma. The poisoned blood will not created the products big pharma uses to make meds....big pharma tells blood gatherers ‘pure blood only’. That makes sense to me.” “They wanted to give me a transfusion summer of 2022 for a bleeding stomach ulcer. I told them no vaxxed blood. I would only take blood from someone who was not vaxxed. I signed out AMA. What can they do for me as the bleeding had stopped on it's own, PTL?” So, these people are going to refuse blood transfusions and possibly die, because they don’t want to accidentally get vaccinated blood, because they believe it will kill them. Take a moment to really absorb that one. I think part of the outrage is because many of them are living in a full-on LARP in which everyone has come around to their way of thinking on the COVID vaccine and there are only a few “backwards” outliers who think it’s a good thing. Either that, or they think that by pretending this is the world they are living in, people who don’t pay that much attention will assume that’s the case. Like, they are more or less doing The Secret. If the Red Cross were to accommodate their beliefs, that would be a huge win for them. It would allow them to point to it and say “See? If the vaccines were really ‘safe and effective,’ the Red Cross wouldn’t be doing this!” like they were doing the other day with the fake news that they weren’t taking vaccinated blood. At this point — especially given that they say they are willing to die to remain “purebloods” — I don’t think this is about the actual vaccine at all, so much as it is that being opposed to the vaccine is fulfilling an emotional/psychological need that these people cannot imagine living without. It makes them feel good to call themselves “purebloods,” to imagine all of the vaccinated people dropping dead from myocarditis (which you’re far more likely to get with actual COVID) and realizing they were wrong to believe the vaccine was safe. They like the idea of all the “smart” doctors and medical organizations having to admit that the conspiracy theorists were right all along. This has yet to happen, and it most definitely will not, so they have to will it into existence by pretending that it is.