Another of John Daysh and others' lies exposed (from the Courier Mail):

Yes they claimed the vaccines would prevent transmission -
"... setting aside what it says in the fine print, the public was told repeatedly, for months, both explicitly and implicitly, that the vaccines would prevent transmission.

They’re all on tape saying it.

US President Joe Biden, for example, said in July 2021 that “you’re not going to get Covid if you have these vaccinations”.

White House chief medical adviser Dr Anthony Fauci said in May 2021 that vaccinated people become “dead ends” for the virus.

CDC director Rochelle Walensky said in March 2021 that “vaccinated people do not carry the virus, don’t get sick”.
In Australia, politicians and health officials held millions of people hostage for months, lecturing and threatening them to get vaccinated to regain their “freedoms”.

The vaccines were the “way out” of the pandemic, they were not to just to protect ourselves but to “protect others”, they would “stop the spread”, and not getting vaccinated was “selfish”.

Vaccine passports, the “vaccinated economy”, were necessary so people who “did the right thing” would feel “safe” knowing they weren’t “mixing” with the unvaccinated, who were a “risk to the community”.

By late 2021 and early 2022, as Omicron became dominant and it was clear vaccinated people were still catching and spreading the virus, the messaging changed...."

https://www.couriermail.com.au/technology/science/yes-they-claimed-the-vaccines-would-prevent-transmission/news-story/a176eb002c29e603fc29ef9fe0b33b18

Mikko2,

"Another"? How did we get to "another lie" when there wasn't a previous lie?

Yes, some officials said vaccines would stop transmission early on, but they weren’t lying, they were working with the data they had at the time. In the beginning of the whole saga, the evidence suggested vaccines would slow down the spread (especially against earlier strains like Delta.) Science is based on the best information available at any given moment, and things change as more data comes in. That's how it works.

None of this is indicative of conspiracy or coverup.

Biden, Fauci, and Walensky weren’t deliberately misleading people. They were giving advice based on what the studies were showing then. Fast forward to Omicron, and yeah, vaccinated people were still catching and spreading covid, but that doesn't turn the early messaging into some big conspiracy. What happened was the virus mutated - welcome to the world of infectious diseases. We had to adapt, and so did the messaging.

The vaccines did what they were supposed to do: they kept people from ending up in hospitals and morgues. Sure, the idea of stopping transmission was part of the early pitch, but the bigger win was always keeping people alive and reducing severe cases. Public health responses evolve, and that’s what happened here.

So, let’s not cherry-pick quotes. The reality is that the vaccines saved countless lives, and just because the messaging had to shift with the emergence of new variants doesn’t mean it was all lies.

Welcome to the reality of dealing with a global crisis in real-time.

"It’s easy to Monday-morning quarterback the decisions made in the middle of a crisis,"

Yes it is. But that's not what happened. Indeed, in these very pages (and elsewhere) I was calling the lockdowns a disaster in the middle of the first quarter (to continue the footy metaphor).

Specifically, on 1 April 2020, in the very midst of the first lockdowns, I was pointing out the data that showed they were unnecessary. But that level of independent thought would be unrecognisable to JD who always ALWAYS follows the government line, no matter what it is.

JD, in his endless attempts to distort the facts in the service of exonerating the errors, tells us that the vaccine wasn't billed as way to stop the transmission of the dreaded wuflu. Yet governments the world over were enforcing vaccine mandates, people were denied entry to all manner of places if unvaccinated and leaders such as Chairman Dan were telling people that the pandemic was a disease of the unvaccinated. History, even recent history, seems to elude JD.

BTW, more people died in Australia from the dreaded wuflu in the year AFTER the introduction of the vaccine than in the year prior to its release on an unexpecting public. Tell me again how it saved lives.

mhaze,

You’re patting yourself on the back for calling lockdowns a disaster back in April 2020. But let’s not pretend that early 2020 was a time of crystal-clear data and obvious solutions. Either way you were wrong.

"aSSeRtIoN!"

No, we when through all that in a past thread.

Governments worldwide were facing an unknown, rapidly spreading virus. Some data suggested alternatives to lockdowns, but the main concern was preventing healthcare systems from collapsing - and rightly so. Erring on the side of caution saved lives. If we followed your advice back in early 2020, we might’ve been looking at an overwhelmed healthcare system, mass deaths, and a public health disaster.

On to vaccines. Yes, governments pushed mandates, and there was messaging around stopping transmission. But the primary purpose of the vaccines was to reduce severe illness and death, and they did that remarkably well.

The transmission angle was based on early data - especially for variants like Delta - when vaccines were shown to reduce spread. When more contagious variants like Omicron emerged, the messaging evolved, as it should in a situation like this. Science adapts to new information, but that doesn’t mean the original claims were lies. Let’s not forget, too, that reducing severe illness and death was always the key goal. The vaccines succeeded in that.

Your jab (no pun intended) about how "more people died in the year after vaccines were introduced" - that’s a gross oversimplification. In 2021 and beyond, we had more transmissible variants circulating, restrictions were lifted, and a much larger portion of the population was exposed to the virus. So, yes, more people died, but it’s a deliberate distortion of the facts to blame that on the vaccines.

Without the vaccines, those numbers could’ve been far worse. The vaccines allowed people to resume things as normal and kept hospitals from being overwhelmed. Raw numbers don’t tell the whole story, especially when you ignore the context as you insist on doing every single time.

So, it seems you’re the only one distorting the facts here, and with your trademark cherry-picking too.

Well maze, let's trust that all the covid vaccine / government doctrine believers will keep up their healthy boosters. Meanwhile here are some comments on a peer-reviewed study about heightened risks of various diseases including serious heart and neurological defects post vaccination among a sample population of 99 million:
Some highlighted increases include a 6.1-fold increase in myocarditis from the second dose of the Moderna mRNA vaccine. Cases of pericarditis had a 6.9-fold increase as a result of the third dose of the AstraZeneca vaccine. There is a 2.5-times greater risk of developing Guillain-Barré syndrome from the AstraZeneca vaccine along with a 3.2-times greater risk of developing blood clots from the same vaccine. There is a 3.8-times greater risk of getting acute disseminated encephalomyelitis from the Moderna vaccine, and a 2.2-fold increase in the AstraZeneca vaccine.
“When choosing to get vaccinated, it is important to weigh the benefits and risks of the vaccine. Information like this makes it easier to make the right choice…”

I agree - "the right choice" should be FREE choice - NOT forceful mandates and coercion!

I was pointing out the data that showed they were unnecessary.
mhaze,
Do you have proof that they were unnecessary ?