Quote from: nutildah on March 18, 2020, 01:30:41 PM

Quote from: tvbcof on March 18, 2020, 12:33:10 PM

Avoiding serious challenges (like a published study by the U.S. military showing, with statically relevance, that flu vax contributes to coronavirus infection) by deleting with the self-moderation power is hardly 'serious discussion.' Just as clearly it is censorship.

That's not what the study concludes. The study concludes this:

Quote

Examining 6120 people with respiratory viruses other than influenza and pan-negative results who submitted a respiratory specimen for laboratory testing to the DoDGRS team, those who received an influenza vaccine had a decreased risk of having other respiratory pathogens identified compared to the unvaccinated group.

Quote

The overall results of the study showed little to no evidence supporting the association of virus interference and influenza vaccination. Individual respiratory virus results were mixed, and some rebutted virus interference. Additionally those receiving the influenza vaccine were more likely to have no pathogen detected and reduced risk of influenza when compared to unvaccinated individuals. Further research is necessary to help character virus interference and validate or refute the validity of the test-negative design for influenza vaccine effectiveness.

You're taking one component of the study results and running away with it to come to conclusions which buttress your pre-existing beliefs. That's why oeleo considered your reply to be "not serious discussion."

Even you should be able to see that the paragraphs above are a dance around the finding that the flu vaccine was associated with a higher rate of coronavirus infection. They did this by leaving the finding out of the paragraph and talking about other things like how great the flu vax is (as required.)

And of course they had the obligatory 'further research necessary'. After researching these things for a while, 'further research necessary' usually translates to 'do a study designed to not find this pesky association.'

It should be noted that at the time of the data, nobody (except possibly a few people within the biowarfare development groups) had heard of SARS-cov-II' so 'coronavirus' indicated just a minor cold. Even if people were more susceptible to it because of the flu vaccine, the 'benefits outweighed the costs'. They allude to this principle time and time again, and especially in the paragraph that you cherry-picked.

Fast-forward to early 2020 with practically the whole world in lockdown because of a 'killer coronavirus.' You have to be pretty dense to think that the cost-benefit hasn't changed.

For completeness in this post [emphasis mine]:

Quote

Conclusions

Receipt of influenza vaccination was not associated with virus interference among our population. Examining virus interference by specific respiratory viruses showed mixed results. Vaccine derived virus interference was significantly associated with coronavirus and human metapneumovirus; however, significant protection with vaccination was associated not only with most influenza viruses, but also parainfluenza, RSV, and non-influenza virus coinfections.