What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

PVS: Post Vaccination Syndrome (2 Viewers)

After the convo here I reached out to my m I m to see what is going on i ling covid research. There are 10s of thousands of research projects going on worldwide. Close to home she suggested this site which includes some trials and cohorts that people can see if they qualify for.


This narrative that it's not being looked at is objectively false.
 
Last edited:
I'll ask directly now, do you agree with all of those four points, @LawFitz?

This thread isn't about me. I won't answer to litmus tests that try to make it so. I liked that post, so let's leave it at that and get back on topic, please.
 
@The Longtime Lurker ,

The problem is there is no profit incentive to do the research needed to differentiate causation between Long Covid and PVS. And contrarily, sadly, there is not just extreme profit motive in the other direction, but also a host of political and psychological factors at play that are impeding the conversation, not just here in these forums, but across society.

Here is an article from the NIH website from 2022-23, which posits breakdowns in immune system function as the cause for PVS and increased cancer risk. This would also explain why your body seemed to exhibit less resistance to Covid, once the booster made things go haywire.


Articles like this were/are brushed off too readily. I'm hopeful one day a govt entity will step in and do the necessary research to explore this issue properly. It certainly won't come from the private medicine/research market.

I remember people predicting early on that PVS would be widely attributed to Long Covid. Not suggesting Long Covid doesn't exist. As you have said, they seem to be very similar, but that also makes them widely conflated, to the disservice of all who have been harmed by the Covid vaxxes. :(
@The Longtime Lurker. Stuff like the above is what I'm talking about when they ignore the entirety of your situation and focus only on the vaccine. Be careful when you see this approach.
As i have from the start. I can't pretend the vaccine wasn't a major player, it was. But i was clear in my explanation to you that it's a matter of exposure regardless of the source.

The original post was about PVS and a research team I was personally involved with. And that's what the thread is about is it not? I'm a fully grown adult and am more than capable of navigating complex issues. That's what i did and that's why i recovered.

I'm also fully aware that you can't mention the vaccine in public. And honestly I would never in any other setting. I would say it was long covid and leave it at that. This isn't my first rodeo my friend.
I get it. Was just pointing out a real life example of what we were discussing in theory just yesterday. That's all.
 
I would say respectfully (because I think you've generated some valuable conversation here over the years) that you did your thread and this discussion a disservice by choosing to link an article from an outwardly agenda-driving author in your OP.

Thanks for the respectful approach. I'd love to cite more mainstream sources, but they won't touch this topic b/c so many have made it utterly taboo. If someone even dares suggest that the Covid vaxxes may have been problematic and should be questioned, they immediately get attacked and defamed, equated to flat-earthers, etc. The mainstream simply has way more to lose than gain by expressing such views, even if they have them, so any questioning ends up almost exclusively in off-stream sources, unfortunately.

I do appreciate that you made the effort to look past the messenger and consider the message. Hopefully others will too.
You think that's the only reason mainstream sources won't touch COVID vaccine items like turbo cancer? It's not because, say, the science and data doesn't support it? Just an example of another possible reason.

I didn't realize you didn't get the vaccine. If you take a step back, do you think confirmation bias may be playing a role in your persistent claims about the negative aspects COVID vaccines?
 
After the convo here I reached out to my m I m to see what is going on i ling covid research. There are 10s of thousands of research projects going on worldwide. Close to home she suggested this site which includes some trials and cohorts that people can see if they qualify for.


This narrative that it's not being looked out is objectively false.

Long Covid is being looked at. PVS + links to the vaccines not so much, unless you count studies funded and/or conducted by Big Pharma, which has a very long and dubious history of obfuscating truth to protect profit.

If you take a step back, do you think confirmation bias may be playing a role in your persistent claims about the negative aspects COVID vaccines?

Perhaps.

But I could reflect that same question to you and others who did take the vax - and even more so for anyone who dug in heels and became heated in the past, when discussing the issue of whether or not they were actually 'safe and effective.' That bias plays both ways.
 
I would say respectfully (because I think you've generated some valuable conversation here over the years) that you did your thread and this discussion a disservice by choosing to link an article from an outwardly agenda-driving author in your OP.

Thanks for the respectful approach. I'd love to cite more mainstream sources, but they won't touch this topic b/c so many have made it utterly taboo. If someone even dares suggest that the Covid vaxxes may have been problematic and should be questioned, they immediately get attacked and defamed, equated to flat-earthers, etc. The mainstream simply has way more to lose than gain by expressing such views, even if they have them, so any questioning ends up almost exclusively in off-stream sources, unfortunately.

I do appreciate that you made the effort to look past the messenger and consider the message. Hopefully others will too.
Mainstream what? This isn’t some media thing…medicine isn’t practiced in the manner you are speaking. Hypothesis must stand up to peer review and scrutiny. Thus far, such negative hypothesis about the Covid/mRNA vaccines have not been able to withstand scrutiny in the medical community. Do you really believe that is any meaningful number of scientists thought they created such harm beyond typical side effects…that they would not speak up and publish such work?
 
Long Covid is being looked at. PVS + links to the vaccines not so much, unless you count studies funded and/or conducted by Big Pharma, which has a very long and dubious history of obfuscating truth to protect profit.
What do you think the meaningful distinction is between "PVS" and long covid?

Again, the world is researching this stuff. Ignore if you wish. I gave you a link that has 7 or 8 under their single umbrella, but yeah, no one is looking at it except the people that are.
 
Long Covid is being looked at. PVS + links to the vaccines not so much, unless you count studies funded and/or conducted by Big Pharma, which has a very long and dubious history of obfuscating truth to protect profit.
What do you think the meaningful distinction is between "PVS" and long covid?

Again, the world is researching this stuff. Ignore if you wish. I gave you a link that has 7 or 8 under their single umbrella, but yeah, no one is looking at it except the people that are.

Post-Vaccination Syndrome
 
After the convo here I reached out to my m I m to see what is going on i ling covid research. There are 10s of thousands of research projects going on worldwide. Close to home she suggested this site which includes some trials and cohorts that people can see if they qualify for.


This narrative that it's not being looked out is objectively false.

Long Covid is being looked at. PVS + links to the vaccines not so much, unless you count studies funded and/or conducted by Big Pharma, which has a very long and dubious history of obfuscating truth to protect profit.

If you take a step back, do you think confirmation bias may be playing a role in your persistent claims about the negative aspects COVID vaccines?

Perhaps.

But I could reflect that same question to you and others who did take the vax - and even more so for anyone who dug in heels and became heated in the past, when discussing the issue of whether or not they were actually 'safe and effective.' That bias plays both ways.
Yup. I agree. Which is why I keep an open mind and trust the science.
 
I would say respectfully (because I think you've generated some valuable conversation here over the years) that you did your thread and this discussion a disservice by choosing to link an article from an outwardly agenda-driving author in your OP.

Thanks for the respectful approach. I'd love to cite more mainstream sources, but they won't touch this topic b/c so many have made it utterly taboo. If someone even dares suggest that the Covid vaxxes may have been problematic and should be questioned, they immediately get attacked and defamed, equated to flat-earthers, etc. The mainstream simply has way more to lose than gain by expressing such views, even if they have them, so any questioning ends up almost exclusively in off-stream sources, unfortunately.

I do appreciate that you made the effort to look past the messenger and consider the message. Hopefully others will too.
You think that's the only reason mainstream sources won't touch COVID vaccine items like turbo cancer? It's not because, say, the science and data doesn't support it? Just an example of another possible reason.

I didn't realize you didn't get the vaccine. If you take a step back, do you think confirmation bias may be playing a role in your persistent claims about the negative aspects COVID vaccines?
Do you think confirmation bias exists because you didn’t have a stroke from the vaccine?
 
After the convo here I reached out to my m I m to see what is going on i ling covid research. There are 10s of thousands of research projects going on worldwide. Close to home she suggested this site which includes some trials and cohorts that people can see if they qualify for.


This narrative that it's not being looked out is objectively false.

Long Covid is being looked at. PVS + links to the vaccines not so much, unless you count studies funded and/or conducted by Big Pharma, which has a very long and dubious history of obfuscating truth to protect profit.

If you take a step back, do you think confirmation bias may be playing a role in your persistent claims about the negative as
Long Covid is being looked at. PVS + links to the vaccines not so much, unless you count studies funded and/or conducted by Big Pharma, which has a very long and dubious history of obfuscating truth to protect profit.
What do you think the meaningful distinction is between "PVS" and long covid?

Again, the world is researching this stuff. Ignore if you wish. I gave you a link that has 7 or 8 under their single umbrella, but yeah, no one is looking at it except the people that are.

Post-Vaccination Syndrome
Not to speak for Sparky, but they're one and the same based on exposure to COVID. Treatment for one would also treat the other.

Or are you hypothesizing that the vaccine has a unique method of inducing a reaction that doesn't occur in COVID exposure?

And out of curiosity, would that then only apply to mRNA-based vaccines and not J&J vaccine?
 
I would say respectfully (because I think you've generated some valuable conversation here over the years) that you did your thread and this discussion a disservice by choosing to link an article from an outwardly agenda-driving author in your OP.

Thanks for the respectful approach. I'd love to cite more mainstream sources, but they won't touch this topic b/c so many have made it utterly taboo. If someone even dares suggest that the Covid vaxxes may have been problematic and should be questioned, they immediately get attacked and defamed, equated to flat-earthers, etc. The mainstream simply has way more to lose than gain by expressing such views, even if they have them, so any questioning ends up almost exclusively in off-stream sources, unfortunately.

I do appreciate that you made the effort to look past the messenger and consider the message. Hopefully others will too.
You think that's the only reason mainstream sources won't touch COVID vaccine items like turbo cancer? It's not because, say, the science and data doesn't support it? Just an example of another possible reason.

I didn't realize you didn't get the vaccine. If you take a step back, do you think confirmation bias may be playing a role in your persistent claims about the negative aspects COVID vaccines?
Do you think confirmation bias exists because you didn’t have a stroke from the vaccine?
Not following. Yes, confirmation bias exists. On both sides of the equation.

The difference I'm seeing here is one person is actively going outside mainstream scientific literature - or at least using terms for ideas found outside that literature - to confirm his prior thinking.
 
After the convo here I reached out to my m I m to see what is going on i ling covid research. There are 10s of thousands of research projects going on worldwide. Close to home she suggested this site which includes some trials and cohorts that people can see if they qualify for.


This narrative that it's not being looked out is objectively false.

Long Covid is being looked at. PVS + links to the vaccines not so much, unless you count studies funded and/or conducted by Big Pharma, which has a very long and dubious history of obfuscating truth to protect profit.

If you take a step back, do you think confirmation bias may be playing a role in your persistent claims about the negative as
Long Covid is being looked at. PVS + links to the vaccines not so much, unless you count studies funded and/or conducted by Big Pharma, which has a very long and dubious history of obfuscating truth to protect profit.
What do you think the meaningful distinction is between "PVS" and long covid?

Again, the world is researching this stuff. Ignore if you wish. I gave you a link that has 7 or 8 under their single umbrella, but yeah, no one is looking at it except the people that are.

Post-Vaccination Syndrome
Not to speak for Sparky, but they're one and the same based on exposure to COVID. Treatment for one would also treat the other.

Or are you hypothesizing that the vaccine has a unique method of inducing a reaction that doesn't occur in COVID exposure?

And out of curiosity, would that then only apply to mRNA-based vaccines and not J&J vaccine?
I can answer that for you. J&J, Pfizer, moderna were all responsible for the same PVS reaction.
Which in my non-scientific mind would imply that's it's not the mRNA vaccine's fault. And more of an immune response to exposure.
 
The issue isn't mrna. I would be totally comfortable getting one if it were treating cancer, or any other condition. The issue is that the body considers it an exposure as has been pointed out. It's covid and anything that produces a similar reaction to a natural infection that creates PVS/long covid. That should be obvious with what research there is into both conditions.
Right. I may be putting words in LawFitz's mouth and apologize if I am. But my impression is he thinks the vaccine is causing a unique reaction.
 
The issue isn't mrna. I would be totally comfortable getting one if it were treating cancer, or any other condition. The issue is that the body considers it an exposure as has been pointed out. It's covid and anything that produces a similar reaction to a natural infection that creates PVS/long covid. That should be obvious with what research there is into both conditions.
Right. I may be putting words in LawFitz's mouth and apologize if I am. But my impression is he thinks the vaccine is causing a unique reaction.
I don't want to speak for him either, but i think he understands. Atleast that's how I've taken his comments. Hopefully he can clarify.
He made a point to say people weren't studying PVS. Sparky said they're studying Long COVID.

He seemed to think there was a distinction. That's when I entered the fray :).
 
Long Covid is being looked at. PVS + links to the vaccines not so much, unless you count studies funded and/or conducted by Big Pharma, which has a very long and dubious history of obfuscating truth to protect profit.
What do you think the meaningful distinction is between "PVS" and long covid?

Again, the world is researching this stuff. Ignore if you wish. I gave you a link that has 7 or 8 under their single umbrella, but yeah, no one is looking at it except the people that are.

Post-Vaccination Syndrome
Do you understand that this is a very specific kind of person that is basically of "unicorn" status? To do this honestly, they need to find people who've been vaccinated and have NOT gotten COVID and they'd preferably doing it with people where this occurred within the last year.
 
Which in my non-scientific mind would imply that's it's not the mRNA vaccine's fault. And more of an immune response to exposure.

J&J's DNA vaccine, like the mRNA variants both recode the body to produce debated amounts of Spike proteins. Covid exposes us to those same Spike proteins, or at least, close variants. Perhaps that is the link. Regardless, if the vaccines themselves have been doing harm, that is not good - especially given the 'safe and effective' campaigns and public shaming that continues to surround anyone that dares question them.

As for The Science... Nearly all modern institutions have been at many points and ways infiltrated by faulty incentive structures, economic, political, psychological. I wish it were as easy to simply 'trust the science' as you suggest. Even when scientific research was much more pure, it was ever evolving thanks to constant questioning and debate.
 
After the convo here I reached out to my m I m to see what is going on i ling covid research. There are 10s of thousands of research projects going on worldwide. Close to home she suggested this site which includes some trials and cohorts that people can see if they qualify for.


This narrative that it's not being looked at is objectively false.
In regards to your link now that I've looked a bit deeper at the solutions offered. This appears to offer what i would consider bandaid approaches. There's nothing here that's attempting to treat the root cause other then IVIG and that's been a hit or miss treatment for quite awhile, though it had helped some I've had conversations with. Paxlovid for example was never found to help long covid in anyway. The rest are more to find comfort and ease symptoms without actually addressing root cause. I know you used this link for illustrative purposes, but i wanted to point that out.
Is there a "root cause" for long covid? What is it?
 
And this is why i don't understand why this is so controversial. There's a small chance you can get long covid from an infection, just like there's a small chance you can get PVS from a covid vaccine. It's all about the exposure. I don't understand how that's still so hard to swallow.
Who's making it controversial?

Serious question. I saw one person in here
question if you're real. But I don't think anyone has questioned the existence of long COVID or PVS.

Or are you talking about outside of here?

I sympathize because I've heard of people go through similar tribulations after Lyme exposure and doctors say "there's no indication the bacteria is still there"

So they won't do anything. But the symptoms very much exist.
 
my impression is he thinks the vaccine is causing a unique reaction.

I am open to the idea that PVS and Long Covid may indeed by very similar conditions. Certainly not arguing against that.

What I am very curious about is whether or not the vaccines, in and of themselves, are the culprit for some (many?) people. And whether Long Covid is being blamed in many cases for what was actually PVS, caused by a Covid vax. That is what was predicted by many... People would be damaged by the vaccine, and deniers of that damage would blame Long Covid. That's not to say Long Covid doesn't exist. I do believe it does. I just think there's lots of potential conflation going on.

Why does that matter? Because the causal truth matters. Whether it was mRNA/DNA-vector tech or Spike proteins matters. People lost jobs over this. Many many more injected an experimental technological substance into their bodies because they didn't want to lose their jobs. It absolutely matters whether these conditions are caused by that experimental substance.
 
And this is why i don't understand why this is so controversial. There's a small chance you can get long covid from an infection, just like there's a small chance you can get PVS from a covid vaccine. It's all about the exposure. I don't understand how that's still so hard to swallow.
Who's making it controversial?

Serious question. I saw one person in here
question if you're real. But I don't think anyone has questioned the existence of long COVID or PVS.

Or are you talking about outside of here?

I sympathize because I've heard of people go through similar tribulations after Lyme exposure and doctors say "there's no indication the bacteria is still there"

So they won't do anything. But the symptoms very much exist.
I'm talking outside of here. The general consensus of the population as I've seen it
Weird. Because I was curious if there's any polling that would indicate that (because it's not my experience). First poll I could find says 82% of doctors and 76% of Americans think the US should increase funding for long COVID.

Looks like poking is from 2022. Online poll of 806 physicians and 2210 adults.
 
Which in my non-scientific mind would imply that's it's not the mRNA vaccine's fault. And more of an immune response to exposure.

J&J's DNA vaccine, like the mRNA variants both recode the body to produce debated amounts of Spike proteins. Covid exposes us to those same Spike proteins, or at least, close variants. Perhaps that is the link. Regardless, if the vaccines themselves have been doing harm, that is not good - especially given the 'safe and effective' campaigns and public shaming that continues to surround anyone that dares question them.

As for The Science... Nearly all modern institutions have been at many points and ways infiltrated by faulty incentive structures, economic, political, psychological. I wish it were as easy to simply 'trust the science' as you suggest. Even when scientific research was much more pure, it was ever evolving thanks to constant questioning and debate.
No. They provide new/unique instruction for the cells it comes in contact with to produce the spike protein. Your gene sequence remains firmly in tact.
 
After the convo here I reached out to my m I m to see what is going on i ling covid research. There are 10s of thousands of research projects going on worldwide. Close to home she suggested this site which includes some trials and cohorts that people can see if they qualify for.


This narrative that it's not being looked at is objectively false.
In regards to your link now that I've looked a bit deeper at the solutions offered. This appears to offer what i would consider bandaid approaches. There's nothing here that's attempting to treat the root cause other then IVIG and that's been a hit or miss treatment for quite awhile, though it had helped some I've had conversations with. Paxlovid for example was never found to help long covid in anyway. The rest are more to find comfort and ease symptoms without actually addressing root cause. I know you used this link for illustrative purposes, but i wanted to point that out.
Is there a "root cause" for long covid? What is it?
That's the million dollar question isn't it. I posted a lengthy comment on this yesterday, but the quick and dirty response would be:

Viral persistence, auto antibodies, fibrinogen clotting. Obviously it's more nuanced than that, but those are the current schools of thought.
I am pretty confident in my prediction that the answer to this question is going to be "it depends" with that dependency being on the individual's immune system. I'd just caution you when you say "attempting to treat the root cause" because the root cause isn't known. All that they can do is treat symptoms and try to reverse engineer to the origins. That's how they are going to solution this. Eventually enough "one off" cures are going to form a pattern that will likely get them to a place where they can provide a generally accepted treatment plan. Unfortunately, that treatment plan is still going to leave some people left wanting.
 
And this is why i don't understand why this is so controversial. There's a small chance you can get long covid from an infection, just like there's a small chance you can get PVS from a covid vaccine. It's all about the exposure. I don't understand how that's still so hard to swallow.
Who's making it controversial?

Serious question. I saw one person in here
question if you're real. But I don't think anyone has questioned the existence of long COVID or PVS.

Or are you talking about outside of here?

I sympathize because I've heard of people go through similar tribulations after Lyme exposure and doctors say "there's no indication the bacteria is still there"

So they won't do anything. But the symptoms very much exist.
I'm talking outside of here. The general consensus of the population as I've seen it
Weird. Because I was curious if there's any polling that would indicate that (because it's not my experience). First poll I could find says 82% of doctors and 76% of Americans think the US should increase funding for long COVID.

Looks like poking is from 2022. Online poll of 806 physicians and 2210 adults.
Yes, long covid, but I'm guessing they're not considering the vaccine angle in that polling, but if they are I would take a link. And this thread is about PVS in particular, so that's what I'm referencing.
Oh. As we litigated above, I don't see the distinction between PVS and long COVID. Just assumed others didn't as well.

I can understand that's not the case.
 
Long Covid is being looked at. PVS + links to the vaccines not so much, unless you count studies funded and/or conducted by Big Pharma, which has a very long and dubious history of obfuscating truth to protect profit.
What do you think the meaningful distinction is between "PVS" and long covid?

Again, the world is researching this stuff. Ignore if you wish. I gave you a link that has 7 or 8 under their single umbrella, but yeah, no one is looking at it except the people that are.

Post-Vaccination Syndrome
Do you understand that this is a very specific kind of person that is basically of "unicorn" status? To do this honestly, they need to find people who've been vaccinated and have NOT gotten COVID and they'd preferably doing it with people where this occurred within the last year.
This has always been the attempt, but it is very hard to find someone who's never had covid at this point.
Exactly. But that doesn't change the fact that those people are what are needed to try and attempt to isolate the vaccine impacts. OR, people could look at the vaccine and the components and try to trace impacts of a component to the outcomes. Problem with going that route is, you are likely going to end up with "those impacted have rare immune systems" mostly because all the ingredients in these mRNA vaccines are currently popular compounds that live naturally in all of us. There is no aluminum to blame or formaldehyde to blame or mercury to blame.

These vaccines are made up of the mRNA acid (the instruction), lipids, salts and sugars. There isn't even a portion of the protein. The body creates that. Noravax still has some of those traditional preservatives and stabilizers and uses a portion of the protein.
 
After the convo here I reached out to my m I m to see what is going on i ling covid research. There are 10s of thousands of research projects going on worldwide. Close to home she suggested this site which includes some trials and cohorts that people can see if they qualify for.


This narrative that it's not being looked at is objectively false.
In regards to your link now that I've looked a bit deeper at the solutions offered. This appears to offer what i would consider bandaid approaches. There's nothing here that's attempting to treat the root cause other then IVIG and that's been a hit or miss treatment for quite awhile, though it had helped some I've had conversations with. Paxlovid for example was never found to help long covid in anyway. The rest are more to find comfort and ease symptoms without actually addressing root cause. I know you used this link for illustrative purposes, but i wanted to point that out.
Is there a "root cause" for long covid? What is it?
That's the million dollar question isn't it. I posted a lengthy comment on this yesterday, but the quick and dirty response would be:

Viral persistence, auto antibodies, fibrinogen clotting. Obviously it's more nuanced than that, but those are the current schools of thought.
I am pretty confident in my prediction that the answer to this question is going to be "it depends" with that dependency being on the individual's immune system. I'd just caution you when you say "attempting to treat the root cause" because the root cause isn't known. All that they can do is treat symptoms and try to reverse engineer to the origins. That's how they are going to solution this. Eventually enough "one off" cures are going to form a pattern that will likely get them to a place where they can provide a generally accepted treatment plan. Unfortunately, that treatment plan is still going to leave some people left wanting.
You're correct and i agree. As i explained with IVIG it works for some, but not other's. Someone I was working with to crowd source information did the exact therapy I did and had no benefits while it was very clear it's how I was able to recover.

I'll try to clean up my language when talking with you. You're a stickler lol. I'm just having a casual conversation though. Don't get so caught up in semantics. We're not solving the world's problems here.
Honestly, it's a problem for me. I've become hyper sensitive to this and am trying to work on it :hifive: but with the amount of false information and misinformation out there, I just want to be as clear as possible in hopes that someone reads our convos and learns something useful. You've been cool to chat with on this and I appreciate your contribution.
 
Long Covid is being looked at. PVS + links to the vaccines not so much, unless you count studies funded and/or conducted by Big Pharma, which has a very long and dubious history of obfuscating truth to protect profit.
What do you think the meaningful distinction is between "PVS" and long covid?

Again, the world is researching this stuff. Ignore if you wish. I gave you a link that has 7 or 8 under their single umbrella, but yeah, no one is looking at it except the people that are.

Post-Vaccination Syndrome
Do you understand that this is a very specific kind of person that is basically of "unicorn" status? To do this honestly, they need to find people who've been vaccinated and have NOT gotten COVID and they'd preferably doing it with people where this occurred within the last year.
This has always been the attempt, but it is very hard to find someone who's never had covid at this point.
Exactly. But that doesn't change the fact that those people are what are needed to try and attempt to isolate the vaccine impacts. OR, people could look at the vaccine and the components and try to trace impacts of a component to the outcomes. Problem with going that route is, you are likely going to end up with "those impacted have rare immune systems" mostly because all the ingredients in these mRNA vaccines are currently popular compounds that live naturally in all of us. There is no aluminum to blame or formaldehyde to blame or mercury to blame.

These vaccines are made up of the mRNA acid (the instruction), lipids, salts and sugars. There isn't even a portion of the protein. The body creates that. Noravax still has some of those traditional preservatives and stabilizers and uses a portion of the protein.
You are correct. And it's definitely not ingredients as we've beat to death. It's the exposure.
I very much wish they'd get away from this term of PVS. On it's face it's deceiving. That deception is also a red flag for me to trust people who are using it. I know some will use it because that's what they've heard, but I'd much rather it be labeled something like "Repeated COVID Antigen Exposure" or something like that. It doesn't have the fear mongering element that the other does, but it's an honest summary of what they are doing.
 
And this is why i don't understand why this is so controversial. There's a small chance you can get long covid from an infection, just like there's a small chance you can get PVS from a covid vaccine. It's all about the exposure. I don't understand how that's still so hard to swallow.
It’s not.

The issue and vitriol comes from the group that buys into the hoax, mandates, conspiracy theories surrounding the nightmare that was Covid. Just as I’m not having a conversation with my nephew about his flat earth thoughts, they’re not willing to debate about the validity of their stance. both sides summarily dismiss the other. And both think they’re 100% correct with or without any facts.
 
And this is why i don't understand why this is so controversial. There's a small chance you can get long covid from an infection, just like there's a small chance you can get PVS from a covid vaccine. It's all about the exposure. I don't understand how that's still so hard to swallow.
It’s not.

The issue and vitriol comes from the group that buys into the hoax, mandates, conspiracy theories surrounding the nightmare that was Covid. Just as I’m not having a conversation with my nephew about his flat earth thoughts, they’re not willing to debate about the validity of their stance. both sides summarily dismiss the other. And both think they’re 100% correct with or without any facts.
COVID I could talk about calmly, the bolded I don't think I could.
 
Long Covid is being looked at. PVS + links to the vaccines not so much, unless you count studies funded and/or conducted by Big Pharma, which has a very long and dubious history of obfuscating truth to protect profit.
What do you think the meaningful distinction is between "PVS" and long covid?

Again, the world is researching this stuff. Ignore if you wish. I gave you a link that has 7 or 8 under their single umbrella, but yeah, no one is looking at it except the people that are.

Post-Vaccination Syndrome
Do you understand that this is a very specific kind of person that is basically of "unicorn" status? To do this honestly, they need to find people who've been vaccinated and have NOT gotten COVID and they'd preferably doing it with people where this occurred within the last year.
This has always been the attempt, but it is very hard to find someone who's never had covid at this point.
Exactly. But that doesn't change the fact that those people are what are needed to try and attempt to isolate the vaccine impacts. OR, people could look at the vaccine and the components and try to trace impacts of a component to the outcomes. Problem with going that route is, you are likely going to end up with "those impacted have rare immune systems" mostly because all the ingredients in these mRNA vaccines are currently popular compounds that live naturally in all of us. There is no aluminum to blame or formaldehyde to blame or mercury to blame.

These vaccines are made up of the mRNA acid (the instruction), lipids, salts and sugars. There isn't even a portion of the protein. The body creates that. Noravax still has some of those traditional preservatives and stabilizers and uses a portion of the protein.
You are correct. And it's definitely not ingredients as we've beat to death. It's the exposure.
I very much wish they'd get away from this term of PVS. On it's face it's deceiving. That deception is also a red flag for me to trust people who are using it. I know some will use it because that's what they've heard, but I'd much rather it be labeled something like "Repeated COVID Antigen Exposure" or something like that. It doesn't have the fear mongering element that the other does, but it's an honest summary of what they are doing.
This was the first i heard it referred to as PVS honestly. I just went with it since it was already being used here
Being completely honest, when I see some fear based title for things that already have a name, I don't really trust where it's coming from. My own bias for sure.
 
These discussions can drive a person batty, as so many people think in black and white rather than the shades of grey that exist in this world.

All of the following can be true:
* The vaccine was an amazing breakthrough that saved millions
* The vaccine can cause an adverse reaction for a small percentage of the population (this is a fact for some otc medications)
* There is no proven linkage that the vaccine causes _______ (fill in the blank with turbo cancer or anything else)
* The science may change related to adverse reactions as it becomes proven by known scientific methods

Why people go to their corners and ignore the possibilities outside their current frame of thinking, I’ll never understand.
I consider myself as someone who lives in the grey and has a general problem with black and white thinking. But I also acknowledge that not all shades of grey are equivalent and some pairs are much closer to black and white than they are to each other. I've probably been put into one of the "sides" of this thread by other posters, and if you fill in that blank with something like turbo cancer as suggested, I agree with every point - and have said similar in response to Lurker's questions. Lurker has probably been put into the other side by some, but he agreed 100%.

I would add that I think that not only is there no proven linkage regarding turbo cancer, but our current knowledge of how cancer itself works makes any eventual proven linkage extremely unlikely to the point it is only a fringe idea with little worth. And though the science could eventually prove more significant adverse reactions, the vaccines are currently an overwhelming net positive and current regulations and attitudes should reflect that. But yes, I still agree with all four points.

I might have missed it obviously, but in the all the past posts by LawFitz in this thread and the many others in the past on similar topics, I have never seen that kind of nuance expressed. So I guess I'll ask directly now, do you agree with all of those four points, @LawFitz?

I'll ask directly now, do you agree with all of those four points, @LawFitz?

This thread isn't about me. I won't answer to litmus tests that try to make it so. I liked that post, so let's leave it at that and get back on topic, please.

Just providing a little more information for those reading the thread who might otherwise paint "both sides" with the same extreme/black and white thinking brush.
There isn't an "both sides" equivalence here.
 
These discussions can drive a person batty, as so many people think in black and white rather than the shades of grey that exist in this world.

All of the following can be true:
* The vaccine was an amazing breakthrough that saved millions
* The vaccine can cause an adverse reaction for a small percentage of the population (this is a fact for some otc medications)
* There is no proven linkage that the vaccine causes _______ (fill in the blank with turbo cancer or anything else)
* The science may change related to adverse reactions as it becomes proven by known scientific methods

Why people go to their corners and ignore the possibilities outside their current frame of thinking, I’ll never understand.
I consider myself as someone who lives in the grey and has a general problem with black and white thinking. But I also acknowledge that not all shades of grey are equivalent and some pairs are much closer to black and white than they are to each other. I've probably been put into one of the "sides" of this thread by other posters, and if you fill in that blank with something like turbo cancer as suggested, I agree with every point - and have said similar in response to Lurker's questions. Lurker has probably been put into the other side by some, but he agreed 100%.

I would add that I think that not only is there no proven linkage regarding turbo cancer, but our current knowledge of how cancer itself works makes any eventual proven linkage extremely unlikely to the point it is only a fringe idea with little worth. And though the science could eventually prove more significant adverse reactions, the vaccines are currently an overwhelming net positive and current regulations and attitudes should reflect that. But yes, I still agree with all four points.

I might have missed it obviously, but in the all the past posts by LawFitz in this thread and the many others in the past on similar topics, I have never seen that kind of nuance expressed. So I guess I'll ask directly now, do you agree with all of those four points, @LawFitz?
You didn't ask me, but I'll say it again. I do agree with you. I've plead my case repeatedly here that i fully understand where people are coming from and why. What i can't do is say the story I'm telling is anything less than factual.
Yes, I didn't ask you because you've been very clear about your thinking throughout the thread. I respect the nuance you have brought and your willingness to put a face on the numbers. I'll admit to being skeptical when you first showed up (honestly more so about the timing and that the OP had been busy but popped in again 20 minutes after you came in) but your posts changed that pretty soon after.
 
Since the rollout of the vaccine until today the CICP has approved only 26 claims (I assure you the total number of people experiencing PVS is FAR higher than that) almost all myocarditis, a few pericarditis, 2 for syncope, 1 GBS, 1 TTS, 1 anaphylaxis
26 claims paid doesn't fully explain things.

Total COVID-19 CICP claims filed: 13,659

  • Pending Review or In Review: 9,929
  • Decisions: 3,730
    • Claims found eligible for compensation: 66
      • Claims compensated: 26
      • Claims pending benefits determination: 39
      • Claims with no eligible reported expenses: 1
    • Denied: 3,664
      • Requested medical records not submitted: 666
      • Standard of proof not met and/or covered injury not sustained: 590
      • Missed filing deadline: 2,153
      • Not CICP covered product/not specified: 255
Feb. 1, 2025.
 
Within half an hour of my booster I had what I can best describe as a tightness in my neck, armpit area, and upper back. It was more of a sensation, but tightness is the best description. It didn't hurt, but was uncomfortable. I assumed it was some kind of lymph node involvement, but it wasn't and still don't know what it really was. It would come and go intermittently over the next couple years. Not a super horrific side effect, but worth mentioning.

I had the normal flu like side-effects most people experience after the first day and that remained for the next four days. Being a 40 something ex athlete I did what I always do when sick and tried to work it out. Have a glass of orange juice, rub some dirt on it, and get on with life just like always was my mindset. I like to workout and wear a smart watch, so i have a baseline for my HR at rest, working out, sleeping, ect. I covered this part in my initial post, so i won't go back over that in detail here, but I'll make a short mention. I rode my bike trainer, my HR was pretty normal during the ride, afterwards my HR never came back down. My resting HR is in the low 50s typically, but hours later it was stuck over 110 and I started getting nervous something was very wrong as i was also feeling really terrible. I can't say forsure, but part of me thinks if I would have continued to rest instead of trying to work out I might have avoided the worst of things. Hopefully someday research can shed light on this if it really was part of setting everything in motion. Off to the ER as I've already mentioned.

That night even after an IV with ativan at the ER and taking benadryl when i got home I still was unable to fall asleep. Insomnia was probably the worst symptom I had to deal with. I was lucky to avoid the ME/CFS (chronic fatigue syndrome) type illness a lot of people experience, but i suffered severe sleep deprivation so fatigue was a constant battle. Over the next 5 weeks my insomnia would progress into a combination of being unable to fall asleep, stay asleep, and worst of all relentless hypnic jerking. I'm sure we've all had them, you dream you're falling or fall asleep on the couch and jerk awake. Only in this instance it was all night, multiple nights a week of jerking awake just as I'm about to fall asleep. This is what affected my life the most and was severe for the next two years. I still deal with it from time to time. Once a week maybe every other week I'll still have excessive hypnic jerking as i fall asleep, but it doesn't keep me awake at night anymore.

The next morning after my trip to the ER my HR was still in the 90s. I ate breakfast and after that my HR was climbing back into the 100s sitting and jumping into the 140s standing. I wasn't convinced I wasn't experiencing a heart attack, so we went to a different hospital and I was admitted into a bed with suspected afib. Again i passed all the tests to rule out a heart attack and afib. A nurse mentioned she thought my wild HR swings looked a lot like POTS (postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome). I'd never heard of this before, but I'd get very familiar for the next few years. POTS is a sudden drop in blood pressure and rapid rise in HR to compensate due to change in posture, mostly laying/sitting to standing. This was an almost immediate symptom, but it took a few days to realize what exactly was happening. This made working out pretty much impossible and I had to be careful not to stand up to quickly. There were two occasions that I passed out trying to get to the kitchen in a hurry. I still have this to a small degree, but it doesn't prevent me from living normal and I'm told it will fully resolve.

I'll stop here for today and pick up at another time, there's a lot more. I'm open to suggestions if this is too long winded, hard to follow, or maybe i should make one long post instead of breaking it up. I also don't need to continue if I've already hijacked this thread enough.
Question for you regarding your heart rate issues. As I can speak to them a little bit from personal experience. What did they do for you in the hospital for the arrhythmia?

I went to the ER for irregular heart beat. Suddenly shot up over 160. I was given a protein in the ER that stops the heart briefly in an attempt to correct the arrhythmia. It didn’t work. HR continued motoring along above 160 for hours. Charge nurse tells me if it doesn’t normalize they are going to have to shock me to stop the heart again in the hopes of correcting the rhythm. So I’m sitting there meditating, breathing, talking to my heart. Nothing is working. Zero symptoms other than arrhythmia. You know what did work? Taking a dump. 😂. I had the joy of taking a dump in the little chair with 2 orderlies and a nurse watching me. HR went up over 200. But then started to normalize. I was put on a diltiazem IV drip and a 24 hour hold. Diagnosed in the hospital by the attending cardiologist with atrial flutter. I wasn’t released from the hospital until my HR was normal for quite some time, 50-60 bpm.

Subsequently had every heart test known to man. All came back clean. Saw 3 cardiologists. All recommended the same thing. Cardiac ablation. Had the ablation(scary). Atrial flutter solved. And to the topic of the thread, my dad died of a heart attack at 51. So I don’t attribute this to the covid vaccine. And neither did any of my drs. I was 52 at the time.

You may have skimmed over the heart issues in your story, since it’s not about your heart, but I was curious since the initial drs seemed dismissive of it. Thanks for any answer.
 
Within half an hour of my booster I had what I can best describe as a tightness in my neck, armpit area, and upper back. It was more of a sensation, but tightness is the best description. It didn't hurt, but was uncomfortable. I assumed it was some kind of lymph node involvement, but it wasn't and still don't know what it really was. It would come and go intermittently over the next couple years. Not a super horrific side effect, but worth mentioning.

I had the normal flu like side-effects most people experience after the first day and that remained for the next four days. Being a 40 something ex athlete I did what I always do when sick and tried to work it out. Have a glass of orange juice, rub some dirt on it, and get on with life just like always was my mindset. I like to workout and wear a smart watch, so i have a baseline for my HR at rest, working out, sleeping, ect. I covered this part in my initial post, so i won't go back over that in detail here, but I'll make a short mention. I rode my bike trainer, my HR was pretty normal during the ride, afterwards my HR never came back down. My resting HR is in the low 50s typically, but hours later it was stuck over 110 and I started getting nervous something was very wrong as i was also feeling really terrible. I can't say forsure, but part of me thinks if I would have continued to rest instead of trying to work out I might have avoided the worst of things. Hopefully someday research can shed light on this if it really was part of setting everything in motion. Off to the ER as I've already mentioned.

That night even after an IV with ativan at the ER and taking benadryl when i got home I still was unable to fall asleep. Insomnia was probably the worst symptom I had to deal with. I was lucky to avoid the ME/CFS (chronic fatigue syndrome) type illness a lot of people experience, but i suffered severe sleep deprivation so fatigue was a constant battle. Over the next 5 weeks my insomnia would progress into a combination of being unable to fall asleep, stay asleep, and worst of all relentless hypnic jerking. I'm sure we've all had them, you dream you're falling or fall asleep on the couch and jerk awake. Only in this instance it was all night, multiple nights a week of jerking awake just as I'm about to fall asleep. This is what affected my life the most and was severe for the next two years. I still deal with it from time to time. Once a week maybe every other week I'll still have excessive hypnic jerking as i fall asleep, but it doesn't keep me awake at night anymore.

The next morning after my trip to the ER my HR was still in the 90s. I ate breakfast and after that my HR was climbing back into the 100s sitting and jumping into the 140s standing. I wasn't convinced I wasn't experiencing a heart attack, so we went to a different hospital and I was admitted into a bed with suspected afib. Again i passed all the tests to rule out a heart attack and afib. A nurse mentioned she thought my wild HR swings looked a lot like POTS (postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome). I'd never heard of this before, but I'd get very familiar for the next few years. POTS is a sudden drop in blood pressure and rapid rise in HR to compensate due to change in posture, mostly laying/sitting to standing. This was an almost immediate symptom, but it took a few days to realize what exactly was happening. This made working out pretty much impossible and I had to be careful not to stand up to quickly. There were two occasions that I passed out trying to get to the kitchen in a hurry. I still have this to a small degree, but it doesn't prevent me from living normal and I'm told it will fully resolve.

I'll stop here for today and pick up at another time, there's a lot more. I'm open to suggestions if this is too long winded, hard to follow, or maybe i should make one long post instead of breaking it up. I also don't need to continue if I've already hijacked this thread enough.
Question for you regarding your heart rate issues. As I can speak to them a little bit from personal experience. What did they do for you in the hospital for the arrhythmia?

I went to the ER for irregular heart beat. Suddenly shot up over 160. I was given a protein in the ER that stops the heart briefly in an attempt to correct the arrhythmia. It didn’t work. HR continued motoring along above 160 for hours. Charge nurse tells me if it doesn’t normalize they are going to have to shock me to stop the heart again in the hopes of correcting the rhythm. So I’m sitting there meditating, breathing, talking to my heart. Nothing is working. Zero symptoms other than arrhythmia. You know what did work? Taking a dump. 😂. I had the joy of taking a dump in the little chair with 2 orderlies and a nurse watching me. HR went up over 200. But then started to normalize. I was put on a diltiazem IV drip and a 24 hour hold. Diagnosed in the hospital by the attending cardiologist with atrial flutter. I wasn’t released from the hospital until my HR was normal for quite some time, 50-60 bpm.

Subsequently had every heart test known to man. All came back clean. Saw 3 cardiologists. All recommended the same thing. Cardiac ablation. Had the ablation(scary). Atrial flutter solved. And to the topic of the thread, my dad died of a heart attack at 51. So I don’t attribute this to the covid vaccine. And neither did any of my drs. I was 52 at the time.

You may have skimmed over the heart issues in your story, since it’s not about your heart, but I was curious since the initial drs seemed dismissive of it. Thanks for any answer.
Sorry to hear you went through that. When the heart acts up there's few things as scary, but the dump portion of your story is amazing 🤣. Just goes to show a good dump can cure just about anything.

What i went through was different than what you're describing, atleast what they did in the ERs. Both trips to the ER for me resulted in an EKG and the second ER also performed a CT scan with contrast. I didn't present like you did with arrhythmia and before my POTS diagnosis (this came a month and a half later) they weren't sure what was causing my HR spikes, but they were confident at the time that functionally and structurally my heart was ok so i didn't get any of the treatment you got. I ended up wearing a heart monitor for a few days which showed no PVCs, but did record all kids of crazy HR spikes while sleeping and moving around. Like you all my other tests were clean. I was sent to a cardiologist, but he might have been the worst cardiologist in the world and since the tests were clean he was willing to chalk it up to anxiety (which will be a running theme trying to medical help until I, on my own dime paid for much more advanced testing) and was absolutely no help at all. My pcp did prescribe propranolol later in the week to help as things didn't remain as simple as POTS.

Did this answer your question? I can answer anything else if there's more I can add.
Interesting. Thanks for the answer. Bad drs are the worst.
 
TURBO-CANCER
What is the point of this other than to troll the thread?
What specifically bothers you about a ridiculous conspiracy theory being mocked?

And why are you afforded protection against this discomfort if others are equally subjected to harmful misinformation and conspiracy theories?
Its more that it adds nothing to the conversation.
I think calling out the anti-vax stuff as nonsense is of critical importance to try and prevent others from falling down the same rabbit hole of misinformation. This isn't moon landing/earth is flat harmless stuff. This is stuff that has and will lead directly to dead kids.

If we're going to be so careful to take care of everyone's feelings then maybe we should consider squashing some of the harmful conspiracies and misinformation rather than pick and choose who's feelings we care to protect? Maybe.
 
There are real, documented risks to vaccines that people are openly informed about when they get them.

Making up and pushing false narratives to scare people is downright dangerous.
 
TURBO-CANCER
What is the point of this other than to troll the thread?
What specifically bothers you about a ridiculous conspiracy theory being mocked?

And why are you afforded protection against this discomfort if others are equally subjected to harmful misinformation and conspiracy theories?
Its more that it adds nothing to the conversation.
I think calling out the anti-vax stuff as nonsense is of critical importance to try and prevent others from falling down the same rabbit hole of misinformation. This isn't moon landing/earth is flat harmless stuff. This is stuff that has and will lead directly to dead kids.

If we're going to be so careful to take care of everyone's feelings then maybe we should consider squashing some of the harmful conspiracies and misinformation rather than pick and choose who's feelings we care to protect? Maybe.
Am i spreading misinformation and endangering your kids in your opinion? Is this directed at me?
Are you insisting turbo cancer is a thing?
 
TURBO-CANCER
What is the point of this other than to troll the thread?
What specifically bothers you about a ridiculous conspiracy theory being mocked?

And why are you afforded protection against this discomfort if others are equally subjected to harmful misinformation and conspiracy theories?
Its more that it adds nothing to the conversation.
I think calling out the anti-vax stuff as nonsense is of critical importance to try and prevent others from falling down the same rabbit hole of misinformation. This isn't moon landing/earth is flat harmless stuff. This is stuff that has and will lead directly to dead kids.

If we're going to be so careful to take care of everyone's feelings then maybe we should consider squashing some of the harmful conspiracies and misinformation rather than pick and choose who's feelings we care to protect? Maybe.
Then state the case. Posting two words isn't doing that.
 
TURBO-CANCER
What is the point of this other than to troll the thread?
What specifically bothers you about a ridiculous conspiracy theory being mocked?

And why are you afforded protection against this discomfort if others are equally subjected to harmful misinformation and conspiracy theories?
Its more that it adds nothing to the conversation.
I think calling out the anti-vax stuff as nonsense is of critical importance to try and prevent others from falling down the same rabbit hole of misinformation. This isn't moon landing/earth is flat harmless stuff. This is stuff that has and will lead directly to dead kids.

If we're going to be so careful to take care of everyone's feelings then maybe we should consider squashing some of the harmful conspiracies and misinformation rather than pick and choose who's feelings we care to protect? Maybe.
Then state the case. Posting two words isn't doing that.
What two words did I post?
 
TURBO-CANCER
What is the point of this other than to troll the thread?
What specifically bothers you about a ridiculous conspiracy theory being mocked?

And why are you afforded protection against this discomfort if others are equally subjected to harmful misinformation and conspiracy theories?
Its more that it adds nothing to the conversation.
I think calling out the anti-vax stuff as nonsense is of critical importance to try and prevent others from falling down the same rabbit hole of misinformation. This isn't moon landing/earth is flat harmless stuff. This is stuff that has and will lead directly to dead kids.

If we're going to be so careful to take care of everyone's feelings then maybe we should consider squashing some of the harmful conspiracies and misinformation rather than pick and choose who's feelings we care to protect? Maybe.
Am i spreading misinformation and endangering your kids in your opinion? Is this directed at me?
Are you insisting turbo cancer is a thing?
Absolutely not and I've been very clear about that here
Ok, so maybe this isn’t about you?
 
TURBO-CANCER
What is the point of this other than to troll the thread?
What specifically bothers you about a ridiculous conspiracy theory being mocked?

And why are you afforded protection against this discomfort if others are equally subjected to harmful misinformation and conspiracy theories?
Its more that it adds nothing to the conversation.

I believe strongly that anti -vax conspiracy needs shot down.

This is not trolling.
 
TURBO-CANCER
What is the point of this other than to troll the thread?
What specifically bothers you about a ridiculous conspiracy theory being mocked?

And why are you afforded protection against this discomfort if others are equally subjected to harmful misinformation and conspiracy theories?
Its more that it adds nothing to the conversation.
I think calling out the anti-vax stuff as nonsense is of critical importance to try and prevent others from falling down the same rabbit hole of misinformation. This isn't moon landing/earth is flat harmless stuff. This is stuff that has and will lead directly to dead kids.

If we're going to be so careful to take care of everyone's feelings then maybe we should consider squashing some of the harmful conspiracies and misinformation rather than pick and choose who's feelings we care to protect? Maybe.
Am i spreading misinformation and endangering your kids in your opinion? Is this directed at me?
Are you insisting turbo cancer is a thing?
Absolutely not and I've been very clear about that here
Ok, so maybe this isn’t about you?
Ok. Thank you?
This is twice you’ve inserted yourself into a conversation I’m having with someone else and tried to make it about you.

You didn’t start this thread, right? Yet you’ve made it about you. That’s fine, these things happen. But not everything discussed here directly pertains to you or is specifically targeting you.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top