This was posted 2 years 7 months 18 days ago, and might be an out-dated deal.

Related
  • expired

[NSW] Free Tickets to Royal Easter Show for Children 5-11 Who Get COVID-19 Vaccines 1-18 April at Olympic Park @ NSW Government

21763
[NSW] Free Tickets to Royal Easter Show for Children 5-11 Who Get COVID-19 Vaccines 1-18 April at Olympic Park @ NSW Government
Go to Deal
Meta on 04/04/2022 - 21:23 nsw.gov.au (1479 clicks)
Last edited 04/04/2022 - 22:53 by 2 other users

Hope this isn’t going to be too controversial.

From the NSW government website

Every child aged 5 to 11 who gets a COVID-19 vaccine at the Sydney Olympic Park Vaccination Centre between 1 – 18 April 2022 will receive a free children’s ticket to the Sydney Royal Easter Show for use at any time during the show (8 – 19 April, subject to capacity).

Consent is required from a parent or guardian at booking and at the appointment. If the parent or guardian is unable to attend the appointment, a nominated accompanying adult can be identified during the booking process.

Health & Beauty Agricultural Show COVID-19 Vaccination Exhibition Sydney Royal Easter Show

Related Stores

NSW Government
NSW Government
Sydney Royal Easter Show
Sydney Royal Easter Show

closed Comments

    • MasterScythe on 04/04/2022 - 21:29
      +24

      Its not a bribe. Its neither dishonest, nor exclusive.

      You can buy a ticket if you wish. Or you can not go, also.

      When your coke comes with a mars bar, you dont write letters complaining that mars bribed you to buy a coke. If you dont want the offer, you can still buy it at retail.

      Also, have you even been CPR trained? Those defibrillators at public locations arent usually safe for use on young children. In the event of a heart stopping electric shock on a child, chest compressions are MUCH higher recommended while the paramedics arrive.

      • Ghos7 on 04/04/2022 - 22:35
        +2

        safe and effective
        safe and effective
        safe and effective
        safe and effective
        safe and effective
        safe and effective
        reeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee

        • MasterScythe on 04/04/2022 - 22:48
          -5

          Ah yes, jojo references. Quality.

    • bradenpd on 04/04/2022 - 21:31
      +5

      What is it about the vaccine that requires 5-11 year olds to require a defibrillator, and what’s your source for that information?

      • MasterScythe on 04/04/2022 - 21:35

        To be fair, some of the wiring ive seen at almost every fair, park, and what have you, does carry an alarmingly high shock risk.

        Extension cords in extension cords…. Hmmm.

        Ah well, cant cotton-wrap everyone. Teach public safety, not public fear.

        • bradenpd on 04/04/2022 - 21:36
          +3

          Might not need a defibrillator then, just go stick a fork into that socket over there!

          • MasterScythe on 04/04/2022 - 21:42
            +1

            @bradenpd: Nah when a kid has no pulse, chest compressions save lives.

            We as adults are heavy enough to do QUITE a bit of compression, even if the ribs suffer.

            Its extremely extremely rare to need to defib a child under 10.

            Chest compressions.

            • nobro25 on 05/04/2022 - 00:40

              @MasterScythe: I just completed a First Air course at St. John's using the DRSABCD. CPR chess compression only really give you a 3 % chance of reviving. You're actually doing CPR until you can get the Defibrillator or when ambulance comes. But 3% is better than none.

              • MasterScythe on 05/04/2022 - 00:45

                @nobro25: In the hands of a pro, absolutely.
                But the ones you find in parks, and in shopping malls, are usually a 'locked configuration' and designed for adults.

                I can totally accept being wrong here, if things have changed (I can imagine the paddles reading body mass via resisitance before activating, for example), but I was told the 'on site' defibrilators that Goonerash sounded like he was suggesting, were for children over 12.

                I'll be thrilled if I'm wrong, and they're 'better' now, or we learned otherwise recently or such :)

    • Yabadabadoo on 05/04/2022 - 07:24
      +2

      Not much of a bribe as would likely cost more to travel homebush and back with and adult and child opal ticket or to park/petrol than the child ticket is worth.

      Just pathetic this is another Lib government that has to go

    • HaiG on 05/04/2022 - 09:55
      -1

      Yes shocking, and shocking how people react to it. They think it never gets to them. Once Government and businesses are allowed to discriminate and enforce, it will hit you eventually, ah yes if not you, then your children and grand children. For those people, smile today, and while you still can.

    • Inhmayz on 05/04/2022 - 12:55
      -1

      I agree with you.

      Shocking with all these neg comments cause they have nothing to say so they just neg.

      Sad reality really, they can't think of themselves and just listen to whatever the media tells them, lmao.

      If the first one doesn't work, what makes you think the second and third gonna do?

    • RDY4WR on 09/04/2022 - 01:37
      -4

      The govt has a budget for vaccine injuries. Our own govt knows it will harm our kids!

      As a parent I think that if you risk your children’s future health by giving them a vaccine that has no real research or history, you have shut for brains.

      Almost all the parents I know aren’t putting it near their kids. Even the most pro vax people I know laugh about covid now after hiding for months from it.

      Disgusting attempt from the NSW gov.

  • Herb Utsmellz on 04/04/2022 - 21:29
    +71

    My kids are vaxxed but don't agree with this approach at all…

    • bradenpd on 04/04/2022 - 21:30

      Why not?

      • hardya on 04/04/2022 - 21:48
        +6

        Another dose for good measure

      • cookie2 on 05/04/2022 - 18:08
        +6

        Because financial gain (free tkts) shouldn't be used where it is for the purpose of INCENTIVISING the guardian on the medical decision they make for their child.

    • MasterScythe on 04/04/2022 - 21:31

      Let the kids enjoy a free day out.

        • D3m3ntia on 05/04/2022 - 08:28
          +29

          I'm intrigued, what else does Facebook tell you is happening?

            • [Deactivated] on 06/04/2022 - 12:22
              +1

              @Motek Benzona: ‘You are nothing’ lol…. Settle down buddy.

          • nnolan on 05/04/2022 - 17:35
            -5

            @D3m3ntia: Facebook? i first hand had experience in a hospital bed unable to move because my heart was the size of a balloon. take your shit elsewhere

    • Travelbug on 04/04/2022 - 21:46

      No controversy here at all.

    • Savas on 04/04/2022 - 21:50
      +44

      this is OzBargain… i'd happily let my kids have any experimental vaccine in exchange for a freebie.

      • JeBs on 04/04/2022 - 22:11
        +38

        A vaccine applied to hundreds of millions of people, including millions of children, is not experimental - it’s life saving.

        • MasterScythe on 04/04/2022 - 22:29
          +32

          And RNA vaccine research and trials started in 1986, and mRNA in 2000. 20-40 years, depending where you want to read from, is quite a long time in medical advancements.

          Ive heard people call it 'quick'; but 20 years of development isnt thrown out just because they change a target protein.

          • Ghos7 on 04/04/2022 - 22:40
            +25

            @MasterScythe: Any ideas on why they said the injections would stop the spread and then changed their minds? Any idea why they said the injections would work but they now recommend boosters every few months?

            Sounds a bit like they didn't really know much about the effects of the injections. Post cognitive dissonance below.

            • MasterScythe on 04/04/2022 - 22:45
              +12

              @Ghos7: Yep, mainly because drama sells headlines.

              It was much more profitable for them to lie and then backpedal; its rampant in journalism.

              At least the peer reviewed data was always correct. Sadly; since that doesnt sell headlines, lots of people didnt actually follow it.

              Its amazing that we got so lucky; the initial projections of its affects on the wuhan strain were much lower than what we got, sometimes humanity just gets lucky :)

              • Ghos7 on 04/04/2022 - 22:48
                -3

                @MasterScythe: LOL I was referring to the CDC, the gatekeepers of 'approved science'. Try again.

                • MasterScythe on 04/04/2022 - 22:52
                  +15

                  @Ghos7: Try again for what?

                  I'm not American, and I'm able to read a research paper; I never relied on Americas government to tell me science.

                  • Ghos7 on 04/04/2022 - 23:14
                    +3

                    @MasterScythe: You're trying to dodge my question. You claimed the technology was thoroughly researched yet 'the science' keeps changing. All the errors seem to be in one direction.

                    If the technology was so well researched then why do they keep having to shift the goalposts and concede the injections are less effective than the approved 'scientists' claimed?

                    • MasterScythe on 04/04/2022 - 23:37
                      +35

                      @Ghos7: No, I just wasn't sure what you were implying.
                      Now I understand; you're asserting that the science keeps changing, because a foreign government misspoke, which is just incorrect.

                      If the technology was so well researched then why do they keep having to shift the goalposts

                      They haven't. Not once. The goal has always been to develop the most effective vaccine possible. They have never shifted their goal posts.
                      Journalists have, which is why I thought you meant them, when you spoke before, but the scientists involved never did.

                      Also, from literally day one, if you recall the livestream from the researchers at Oxford, they advised that revisions to 'any vaccine' would be likely if the virus mutated; so it's not like boosters were a 'shock' to learn about. We knew they were likely in 2020. (We even have an old example; Chickenpox and Shingles)

                      concede the injections are less effective than the approved 'scientists' claimed?

                      Because lies like that would hurt credibility. The scientists won't lie, just to fit "the CDC" making a mistake.
                      When they're so significantly more effective than they originally claimed, it would be difficult to hide the success by claiming it didnt happen.
                      If you recall, the researchers were speaking publically about hoping to achieve 'around 55% efficacy' (to achieve a sub 1 replication rate in the community) results showed above 90%, and continue to do so against the wuhan strain.

                      In an ELI5 explaination;

                      The wuhan targeted vaccine is less effective against mutations, which is why we are currently relying on whats most easily described as the 'fringe effect' of the antibodies.
                      The way the immune system works when presented with an unknown pathogen, is to spew non-specific antibodies, until it finds one that works against the threat. Naturally, an antibody that 'sort of works' is still considered a success inside the body, so is also replicated; but just less so than the ones that worked the best; thats why boosters are effective; by re-invading, the body assumes what it has didn't work, and expands it's protection.

                      This is also why mixing and matching vaccines has typically shown a better response than just sticking to 1 brand, they all create slightly different, yet similar, proteins.

                      The above is why Cuba, who didn't rely on any outside help, has done so well with their vaccine program. It was a deliberate 'close miss' of the target combined with a mix-and-match 2 (different) dose vaccine.
                      Who would have guessed it was Cuba who would be the shining example of science in a pandemic? Just shows genius can come from anywhere.

                      Hopefully that's helped you understand; and I highly advise looking to scientists, not the American government for research results.

                      • bargaino on 05/04/2022 - 00:17
                        +8

                        @MasterScythe:

                        Who would have guessed it was Cuba who would be the shining example

                        Cuba actually has an impressive history with vaccines, and healthcare generally.

                        And with a population who are more rational than some, they have a very high vaccination rate, and low fatalities, unlike most of the Americas.

                        • MasterScythe on 05/04/2022 - 00:31
                          +3

                          @bargaino: Facinating :) Genuinely.
                          I had someone suggest that a big part of it will be the 'free education'; as high as you want to go.
                          That made sense to me, because I know I'd have studied more subjects for longer, if the debt wasn't looming.
                          It means literally EVERY person who has the urge to be in the sciences, can be.

                          It was just an unexpected success (to me), when somewere we're taught to think of as poor and backward, manages to achieve such a great thing.
                          It made me look at their culture more, and learned that what we're shown, isn't the 'only Cuba' thats out there.
                          Petty crime seems to be a rediculous problem, but outside of that? It's significantly 'better' than I expected.

                      • Ghos7 on 05/04/2022 - 09:59
                        -1

                        @MasterScythe: Wrong. The CDC and WHO have moved the goalposts. Please stop lying to yourself and others. The CDC and WHO are full of 'scientists'. The difference is they are approved scientists and any dissenting scientists are slandered and silenced (or killed in China).

                        • MasterScythe on 05/04/2022 - 11:29
                          +5

                          @Ghos7: I haven't lied. You're once again implying something with no basis.
                          Its a bad habit, try and break it.

                          Also, once again, please reach for the data, not the mouthpieces to do you research.

                          If the CDC and WHO misspoke, OK, but that doesnt invalidate the data.

                          The oxford data was public, and operated as a not for profit model; I suggest starting there.

                      • discobean on 05/04/2022 - 10:32
                        +2

                        @MasterScythe: "researchers at Oxford, they advised that revisions to 'any vaccine' would be likely if the virus mutated; so it's not like boosters were a 'shock' to learn about. "

                        A booster is identical to the second dose, which was identical to the first dose.

                        • MasterScythe on 05/04/2022 - 11:32

                          @discobean: Only if you chose it to be.
                          We have 4 vaccines approved in this country.

                          Also in places like Cuba, thats not true at all.

                          Im just glad humanity copped a break for once, and the so called 'fringe effect' even with the same booster, is so helpful.

              • kukul on 05/04/2022 - 13:29

                @MasterScythe: The fact is that the fatality of omicron is on par with original wuhan strain. It only appears to be lower because we all vaccinated.
                Research paper says

                • MasterScythe on 05/04/2022 - 14:22

                  @kukul: Which paper, I'd be interested to read that.
                  The majority of ones I've seen have had the animal modeling suggest Omicon is naturally somewhat less fatal; if there have been developments suggesting otherwise, I'd be very keen to have a read of the actual research paper.

            • OhtheHughmanity on 05/04/2022 - 00:51
              +6

              @Ghos7: i'm not going to comment on the vaccine conspiracy stuff but why is everyone using cognitive dissonance wrong lately?
              it refers to an internal conflict between two arguments and is a sign of a smarter person that can reason both sides. I don't understand why it's being used as an insult

              • Ghos7 on 05/04/2022 - 10:05

                @OhtheHughmanity: LOL, no you don't understand. Cognitive dissonance is the discomfort someone feels when reality doesn't comport with their beliefs and they start doing mental gymnastics instead of updating their beliefs. It's usually at the sub-conscious level. I think you meant to say 'incorrectly'.

                • MasterScythe on 05/04/2022 - 11:47
                  +1

                  @Ghos7: Thats an incredibly liberal definition, and while occasionally used, not widely shared.

                  Its quite common for someone to have dissonance while not feeling discomfort.

                  Good examples are things like recreation, such as music. Some people believe they "hate electronic music" for example, but then, without discomfort can say "except I heard this new song…."

                  Its also a common feeling in conditions like Munchausen-by-Proxy.

                  • Ghos7 on 05/04/2022 - 15:36

                    @MasterScythe: Maybe check your assumptions there. If it's not widely shared then why do about 65% of the first page results on Google mention discomfort? That would seem to confirm that it is very widely shared.

                    • MasterScythe on 05/04/2022 - 17:16
                      +1

                      @Ghos7: Sorry, I misspoke. I meant to say it's not a widely shared definition in Australian psychology. You're correct it seems to be used widely in American sources.
                      I live in Australia, and attend mostly Australian training sorry, so I wasn't up to date with USA used terms.

                      I now know if I ever travel to America, there's an extra connotation attached.

                      • Ghos7 on 05/04/2022 - 20:17

                        @MasterScythe: Fair enough. The world is shrinking fast though and I was using google.com.au.

                        Per chance do you have any links to pre 2020 studies of mRNA vaccines that show the numbers of clots and heart injuries they found and that the injections would offer negligible protection after 5 months?

                        Do you think the studies on these vaccines are fundamentally flawed given that in real world situations viruses mutate faster than vaccines can be developed?

                        Were the scientists that you listen to warning everyone that the government scientists and media were lying about the effectiveness of the vaccines?

                        • MasterScythe on 06/04/2022 - 03:55
                          +1

                          @Ghos7:

                          Per chance do you have any links to pre 2020 studies of mRNA vaccines that show the numbers of clots and heart injuries they found and that the injections would offer negligible protection after 5 months?

                          They're all used as citations in the mRNA wikipedia article, so you'll find them easily.

                          From my recollection, there were zero vaccine complications, but the patient trial (but not the studies) were shelved because attempts against things like Zika and Rabies, were roughly a 20-dose vaccine to achieve weak immunity. It worked, but the expectation of being able to administer that reliably to a large population was unlikely.

                          Who would have guessed a Corona based virus would be the correct target for the technology. As I said earlier, sometimes humanity just gets lucky. (Smallpox and Cowpox anyone?)

                          Do you think the studies on these vaccines are fundamentally flawed given that in real world situations viruses mutate faster than vaccines can be developed?

                          No, since the immune system is very clever, we've proven that 'close enough' has a positive effect. It's also uncommon for viruses to mutate quickly. (This one is, but it's already slowing, new variants like XE are recombinant, rather than mutated.)
                          However if you rephrased your question, yes, I do think it would be better if the boosters were more tailored to each version.
                          But no, I don't think there's a limit on speed of development, it's the testing and approval stages that are slow.

                          Were the scientists that you listen to warning everyone that the government scientists and media were lying about the effectiveness of the vaccines?

                          No need, I already said earlier, Oxford specifically refused to lie to match the narrative.
                          The media under-sold it, expecting 55% and they crushed it at over 90% efficacy against the Wuhan strain.
                          Then, went further and offered it not-for-profit for so long as it's declared a pandemic.

                          What they did warn about was the need for boosters, and that they expected the immunity to last about 9-12 months.
                          Sadly, that didn't pan out, and were more than happy to publically release their research showing it needed to be more often.
                          At least we've known that since day 1 though, it's not like it was a shock, just that the timeframe was smaller than the educated guess.

            • Gradesbrah on 05/04/2022 - 07:03
              +3

              @Ghos7: Yeh, it is always well understood when making safety claims and when asserting the NEED for the next booster round (6 soon for some according to an unbiased CEO). However when asking for an indication of how many boosters will be suggested, or mandated, it is ‘we don’t have the data yet to know’.

              We have a pandemic, we needed options, the vaccine provided one such option. But there is no honesty to the assertions of confidence in long term safety or effectiveness claims.

              I suggest people read the peer reviewed literature to develop their opinions on outcome claims. However all are entitled to an ethical opinion to be heard.

            • JoeSchmogan on 05/04/2022 - 19:55

              @Ghos7: Who is 'they'?

              I'm sure we're both 'dug in' to our positions, and nothing the other says will persuade us to change our minds. Maybe someone on the fence/unsure might benefit. So in the name of 'doing your own research' and making your own informed opinion (because yes, information sources are heaps unreliable and it is (profanity) annoying to know where to look and who to trust)…I'd suggest looking at vaccine efficacy (how well it works in testing conditions) vs effectiveness (real world). And also how we measure both in different ways 1) Preventing spread of infection / increasing your resistance at catching it 2) Preventing serious illness/death / minimising symptoms - i.e. 'boosting your immune system'.

              If you've taken other vaccines in your life, compare their efficacy to the covid ones. We got lucky, they work very well at #2, less so #1 especially with newer variants. I don't think anything is ever 100% effective, in any field. Except maybe a 20% ebay coupon on ozbargainers.

              • Ghos7 on 05/04/2022 - 20:28

                @JoeSchmogan: I'm not sure which time I used 'they' you're referring to.

                No, they offer almost no protection against serious illness and death after a couple of months. Look at the numbers of hospitalisations and deaths during the last NSW lockdown. The argument is that the unvaccinated are over represented in deaths but that is misleading given the average age of COVID deaths is older than the average lifespan and some elderly people were deemed too fragile to take the vaccine. Until we have accurate age stratification and reasons for people who died not being vaccinated then you can't say they protected against serious illness or death with any authority. That's not even talking about the flawed PCR tests that were run at cycle counts that guarantee false positives. Please don't spew the regime's talking points without doing some research.

          • Rickysupertramp on 05/04/2022 - 01:18
            +5

            @MasterScythe: Perhaps you don't understand that the spike protein is at the heart of the treatment. The mŔNA is only a means to get it there. And thus, subordinate in significance.

            They could develop it for 100 years, however, when they put a 'novel' protein into the mixture, it no longer becomes 'well researched'.

            Even at this point, there is a lot of necessary data which either is not being released under "commercial interests" or is apparently unknown".

            • bio on 05/04/2022 - 09:07
              +1

              @Rickysupertramp: I don't get your point. You will be exposed to the spike protein sooner or later, regardless of whether you are vaccinated or not. They have not created a "novel" protein, the nature did it.

            • MasterScythe on 05/04/2022 - 11:37

              @Rickysupertramp: No its OK I understand, but thanks for checking. The final outcome changes, while the process remains.
              Its extremely clever. Ive been hooked learning about this technology since MERS was resurging years ago.
              Its amazing stuff.

        • Spets on 04/04/2022 - 22:43
          +14

          Applied to 1 or 1 billion, it's still experimental.

          • MasterScythe on 04/04/2022 - 22:46
            +15

            @Spets: But by definition, so is literally anything and everything you're still collecting data on.
            Hell, correctly cooking food is still experimental, lol.

          • MasterScythe on 04/04/2022 - 23:45
            +14

            @scrappydoo: But that's easily countered by anybody who says they know the opposite.
            Thats why statistics matter; because one persons opinion can be skewed by their own experiences.

            If you look at the number of shots given worldwide, and compare that to the number of vaccine injurys worldwide, your experience is atypical.

            • vash5 on 05/04/2022 - 04:02
              +3

              @MasterScythe: Doctors don't want to touch this shit for fear of loosing their licence to practice or being cancelled on social media. They are afraid just like all those who took it to keep their jobs. The "DATA" you speak about is far from honest or accurate for the very reason mentioned before.

              You should find out the process people need to go through to get an medical exemption. In short, the doctor cant do it on their own accord. Instead, they collate various documents and send them off to a gov based organisation for review by staff who a NOT medially trained. How do I know this, because I have family member going through through this disgrace of a system. If you knew the truth, if the media did their DUCKING JOB, you would see this for what this really is.

              My family member is not the only one and it's documented with other peoples plight. If you have time, I can't recommend listing to Betty Pezzimenti story enought.(https://podcasts.google.com/feed/aHR0cHM6Ly9mZWVkcy5idXp6c3B…)

              But even if we put that aside, how do you get past content like this and not think to yourself.. there is something very wrong going on here and why is it not being talked about.

              "The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has lost a court battle, to protect the documents they used to approve the company’s COVID-19 vaccine."

              "During the court process, the FDA argued it would take them 75 years to redact all the personal information contained in the thousands of documents they have on file, related to the Pfizer vaccine."

              https://windsor.ctvnews.ca/data-is-power-experts-weigh-in-on…

              or

              "CDC admits it withheld data from the public because they didn't want to create vaccine hesitancy"

              https://stevekirsch.substack.com/p/cdc-admits-it-withheld-da…

              or

              "Covid-19: Researcher blows the whistle on data integrity issues in Pfizer’s vaccine trial"

              "In August this year, after the full approval of Pfizer’s vaccine, the FDA published a summary of its inspections of the company’s pivotal trial. Nine of the trial’s 153 sites were inspected."

              "Lack of timely follow-up of patients who experienced adverse events"

              https://www.bmj.com/content/375/bmj.n2635

              or

              "Doctor Who Helped Discover Omicron Says She Was Pressured Not to Reveal It’s Mild"

              https://www.theepochtimes.com/doctor-who-helped-discover-omi…

              or

              "Public Health Scotland to stop publishing Covid data due to anti-vax misuse fears"

              https://www.thenational.scot/news/19931745.covid-data-will-n…

              or

              "The NSW government has admitted to falsifying data. Effectively anyone who had Covid in the 28 days prior to entering hospital even if they had recovered, was counted as a Covid case."

              https://twitter.com/SugaryIron/status/1493425888167604224?re…

              Just some of the things going on that are rarely talked about and in the public eye. Why is that and why is it allowed to go on??

              You don't get a chance to see this side because it doesn't effect you or you don't have an interest in it. And believe me, YES, there is plenty of BS around but there is very alarming information that NEEDS to be discussed but is not. Based on that, what makes you think side effects and safety is being recorded or talked about any different should there be an issue.

              As such, in good faith I cant support such a promo because bribing kids to get a drug without ANY long term data is at its heart, against Science and what it stands for.

              • m0tyrider on 05/04/2022 - 12:17
                +10

                @vash5: Not sure why you are being negged - I had a reaction to the Pfizer jab….the amount of bs and mental anguish i need to endure to get a 'temporary' exemption is utter tripe. The system is broken, I have lost all faith in our governments and medical industries.

                How people think all these side effects are 'normal' is also beyond me, when did you take an injection and have - swollen lymph nodes, fevers, joint/muscle pains for days to a week after injection?

                'Oh I just had my booster, its WAY worse then the other two!' - o….k…..You go and put more of that into your body…

                • SJDR on 05/04/2022 - 14:24
                  +10

                  @m0tyrider: I'm 6 months into my adverse reaction from Pfizer.
                  Crazy ear pain, tinnitus, hyper sensitive to noise etc. I'm probably $1000 out of pocket for ENT/Dr/Audiologist appointments and have just had to have an MRI.

                  Never again, especially when healthy kids are not at risk

                  • MasterScythe on 06/04/2022 - 04:03
                    +1

                    @SJDR: A mate of mine in the US nearly died from Pfizer, full body welts, hospital for breathing, etc etc, he had to go Moderna for his 2nd and 3rd shots.
                    Luckily the efficacy seems quite good when mixed and matched still.
                    We're so lucky we have 4 approved ones here.
                    As with any medication, if an allergy is found, people need an alternative.

                    • SJDR on 06/04/2022 - 08:16

                      @MasterScythe: I've no intention of getting another shot unless a more deadly strain appears or a more effective vaccine is developed.
                      I'd take covid any day over what I've been through with this reaction.

                      • MasterScythe on 06/04/2022 - 11:58
                        +2

                        @SJDR: Yeah, no thanks. Covid symptoms lasted 18 months in me. Never again, I like to be able to walk.

              • Inhmayz on 05/04/2022 - 12:56
                +6

                @vash5: Why did people neg this? Can't handle the real facts?

                • vash5 on 05/04/2022 - 13:20
                  +9

                  @Inhmayz: Good question!!

                  If I had to guess, what is promoted as the narrative is being taken as gospel. As such, any concerns or information to the contrary is discarded because you by definition are anti vaxxer. It's shutting down any meaningful conversation by means of character assignation because person is x or y.

                  It's a confusing landscape and when the truth is being censored, hidden and people are not free to speak without talking in code (eg key words on youtube get your vid pulled or shadow banned), then those without the time or will to seek out what is happening assume you are lying or spreading mis-info. In short, tribal behaviour.

                  I also think it has to do with those who took it, didnt want to take it, and now they just want you do to take it and shut up because they did.

              • MasterScythe on 05/04/2022 - 13:22
                -1

                @vash5:

                Doctors don't want to touch this shit for fear of loosing their licence to practice or being cancelled on social media.

                If your doctor is voicing these concerns, and choosing not to treat their patients because of them, that's a sign of a bad doctor.
                I'd never visit a doctor based on their social media presence; and especially if that popularity was a reason they would misdiagnose me.

                Even online; there are covid made 'celebrities' like Dr. John Campbell, who has both agreed and strongly objected to points throughout the pandemic (especially against the UK government guidelines, aas well as abroad).

                A good doctor treats his patients; they don't worry about cancel culture.

                • vash5 on 05/04/2022 - 13:41
                  +8

                  @MasterScythe:

                  If your doctor is voicing these concerns, and choosing not to treat their patients because of them, that's a sign of a bad doctor.
                  I'd never visit a doctor based on their social media presence; and especially if that popularity was a reason they would misdiagnose me.

                  Treatment? Sorry I'm not sure how this relates to my earlier comment about exemptions. The doctor (actually its a specialist with over 15yr in medicine) is saying "I have my hands tied". This is not because they dont want to help, but the tools to do their job have been appointed to the state.

                  To give you insight. He has had patients who have had anaphylactic reaction from the 1st jab and they can't get an exemption. He advises them not to get another jab but patients can't get / hold a job without jab cert or exemption. Some have no choice and place russian roulette with their health just to be able to survive.

                  My family member has had nerve damage, immunise system has been shot to shit, experiences crippling pain and is currently on 3 different medication just to get out of bed and she can't get an exemption.

                  How would you feel if this happened to your mum? or brother? your son?

                  Until it happens to you, until you experience and see this first hand and speak to people.. you either wont care or even believe its happening because the reality seem so far fetch it must be a bad dream.

                  I plead with you, listen to the podcast.. even just the first 10-15min to see what is happening and a very real crisis.

                  • MasterScythe on 05/04/2022 - 14:07

                    @vash5:

                    The doctor (actually its a specialist with over 15yr in medicine) is saying "I have my hands tied".

                    Then they're lying. I know this first hand.
                    Australian doctors have a very non-specific list of reasons they can give exemptions for.

                    To give you insight. He has had patients who have had anaphylactic reaction from the 1st jab and they can't get an exemption.

                    Thats very incorrect. This doctor sounds like a quack. There are four vaccines approved in this country.
                    Thats specifically why ATAGI approved multiple vaccines, for that exact scenario.

                    If he's not exempting his patients from the brand that they're alergic to, there's something seriously messed up in his training.

                    I'm the same with Antibiotics. I can't take some of them, so I get prescribed the others.
                    Using alternate formulations when an alergy is found should be common knowledge, good lord.

                    Until it happens to you, until you experience and see this first hand and speak to people.. you either wont care or even believe its happening because the reality seem so far fetch it must be a bad dream.

                    Close to me; Non-Hodgkin's lymphoma, near zero immune response. It was a rough ride, but he got through the vaccination in the end.
                    Exemption was granted for 6 months (and could be extended) while studies on the effect on cancer patients was concluded.

                    How would you feel if this happened to your mum? or brother? your son?

                    Unlucky.

                    • vash5 on 06/04/2022 - 01:47
                      +1

                      @MasterScythe:

                      Then they're lying. I know this first hand.
                      Australian doctors have a very non-specific list of reasons they can give exemptions for.

                      Have you actually tried to apply for a exemption under vaccine injury? Do you know how long they even give you?.. hint, it aint forever!!

                      Thats very incorrect. This doctor sounds like a quack. There are four vaccines approved in this country.

                      He is not the only specialist we have seen with similar outcomes. Funny how you attack him with little to no understand of the case.

                      Thats specifically why ATAGI approved multiple vaccines, for that exact scenario.
                      If he's not exempting his patients from the brand that they're alergic to, there's something seriously messed up in his training.

                      Would you want to go another round after your life has been left in a state of chaos and chronic pain? She has already had 2, she felt like she had no option but to take it.

                      Close to me; Non-Hodgkin's lymphoma, near zero immune response. It was a rough ride, but he got through the vaccination in the end.
                      Exemption was granted for 6 months (and could be extended) while studies on the effect on cancer patients was concluded.

                      How many jabs did they have? What was the ride like and do they have any side effects?

                      My family member was for the most part healthy. She had some very minor issues with skin allergies, but beyond that she was fine, good BMI solid diet. Now her world is upside down and quality of life is in the shit and battling to try and get an exemption. Like I said, she is not alone and why I'm asking you to listen to the podcast.. But i suspect you wont.

                      • MasterScythe on 06/04/2022 - 02:50

                        @vash5:

                        Have you actually tried to apply for a exemption under vaccine injury? Do you know how long they even give you?.. hint, it aint forever!!

                        6 months is common; but it can be reassessed.

                        Funny how you attack him with little to no understand of the case.

                        I didn't attack him, I simply stated how you were painting him. I said he SOUNDS like a quack, not that he was one.
                        The examples you gave missed very obvious resolutions; such as using a different formulation\brand when one is found to be badly tolerated; but it's likely you just left out the information.

                        Would you want to go another round after your life has been left in a state of chaos and chronic pain?

                        No, I'd use another brand.

                        How many jabs did they have? What was the ride like and do they have any side effects?

                        6 in total to get the required effect IIRC.
                        Yes, but nothing that didn't resolve after 6 months.

                        Like I said, she is not alone and why I'm asking you to listen to the podcast.. But i suspect you wont.

                        I tried, it says I need a google account.
                        But I'm expecting to hear people talking about 'personal experience' rather than referencing global data.
                        If I'm correct, It's going to carry very little weight for me.

                        • vash5 on 06/04/2022 - 03:34
                          +1

                          @MasterScythe:

                          6 months is common; but it can be reassessed.

                          Correct, good to see know. It's crazy that its only for 6 months before having to go through the process again.

                          I'm tipping you haven't had experience in apply for exemption due to jab injury because you didn't mention it. Which is fair enough, but that's why I make a case to ask.. it's hard mate and it shouldn't be.

                          I didn't attack him, I simply stated how you were painting him. I said he SOUNDS like a quack, not that he was one.
                          The examples you gave missed very obvious resolutions; such as using a different formulation\brand when one is found to be badly tolerated; but it's likely you just left out the information.

                          Fair call, I did assume it was an attack because "sounds like" isn't exactly a flattering comment.

                          She didn't want to try another brand because she is terrified of the potential outcome given her circumstance and she has kids and is also worried about what impact it may effect their lives.. which it already does.

                          No, I'd use another brand.
                          You say that now, but I suspect we would be having a very different conversation if you had the same issues she went through. BUT, I'll assume positive intent.

                          6 in total to get the required effect.
                          Yes, but nothing that didn't resolve after 6 months.

                          Wow 6!!.. i was not expecting that. Will they go again because it wanes and drops off even harder for new variants?

                          I tried, it says I need a google account.
                          Ahh ok.. easy fix, ill get you two dif links

                          YT - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-qA0wZD0iPw&t
                          Apple Podcasts - https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/bret-weinstein-darkhor…

                          The podcast was done Late NOV 2021.. so it still has relaxant's.

                          Back story start
                          11:20min exemption

                          • MasterScythe on 06/04/2022 - 04:33

                            @vash5:

                            Correct, good to see know. It's crazy that its only for 6 months before having to go through the process again.

                            With close ties working in medicine, I'm quite aware of the process, and if the conditions are unchanged, it's an easy extend.

                            She didn't want to try another brand because she is terrified of the potential outcome given her circumstance and she has kids and is also worried about what impact it may effect their lives.. which it already does.

                            There's no way to put this without sounding rude, but that's illogical.
                            I've been given medication that has hospitalised me before. I switched to another formulation.
                            In the case of this vaccine, we have 4 here, and only 2 are similar.

                            I already pointed out in another comment, but If someone reacted that badly to empty spike proteins, imagine what live ones might do.
                            I can accept the answer is 'we don't know for sure', but studies of infected people are telling; and the way vaccines 'cure' long-covid in many previously unvaccinated cases reinforces the likelyhood the answer is going to be negative.

                            Wow 6!!.. i was not expecting that. Will they go again because it wanes and drops off even harder for new variants?

                            I hope so. Pre-covid he almost died from the common cold rhinovirus.
                            A month in the cleanroom to recover from a booster again, I imagine, will be totally acceptable. Nobody wants to die in their 30's, and he means a lot to me.

                            YT - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-qA0wZD0iPw&t

                            I watched that, the takeaways I got from it were that: The GP was irrationally scared, it's likely they had 'pushed the limits' for a few patients a bit too often. It's a sign of a caring doctor, but it does risk a very heavy handed slap on the wrist. There's no need to be scared of liability when a patient plan has supporting evidience.
                            As I said, a very close friend got one, it was as simple as "I have cancer and no immune system, I dont want to yet, until the cleanroom is available" and he got one written in minutes.

                            I learned the public immunology sector is under funded and has long wait times, the private sector was only 11 months; so that needs work so public can match private.
                            My immunologist wait was only 8 months in Brisbane, so perhaps it's also a state issue.

                            That said, the patient admitted she didn't outright demand anything and was 'too nice' about it; never a winning combo in the public sector. (which sucks, but is factual).

                            That whole scenario all falls apart at the GP who didn't just aknowledge the risk, and write the exemption.
                            While my experience is 2nd hand, it's very close to home.

                            And almost completely unrelated, holy SHIT that Bret Weinstein fellow is infuriating.
                            He does that typical American thing where he needs to 'restate' what someone just said, because… I don't know, he's worried his audience can't follow? It's the exact same thing that Dr Phil does, and lordie it degrading to his audience, and rubs me the wrong way.

              • WhiskeyTangoFoxtrot on 06/04/2022 - 11:28
                +2

                @vash5: Also, "At a meeting of the Committee for Economic Development of Australia (CEDA), the prime minister of the state of New South Wales, Dominic Perrottet, declared that “there was no science behind” the measures taken by the government to control the pandemic, for example, such as the massive testing of Covid-19."
                https://theblindspot.pt/en/2022/04/05/australian-politician-…

                • SBOB on 06/04/2022 - 11:37

                  @WhiskeyTangoFoxtrot: do you often read articles that misquote.. that comment was in no way related to 'massive testing'

                  The actual quote should contain the actual words prior to the 'there was no science behind it' line… and was from 25th Feb
                  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W0MxQGNCPkg&t=1672s

                  "We brought QR codes back when we weren't even tracking and tracing. There was no science behind it at all."

                  confirming that quality piece of data would have taken you about 10 seconds on your preferred search engine
                  perhaps you need to find better news sources

                • vash5 on 06/04/2022 - 15:04

                  @WhiskeyTangoFoxtrot: Not surprised.. These morons don't know their ass from their elbow. It will be interesting how this all plays out.

                  Thanks for sharing the info mate. Much appreciated!!

            • Ghos7 on 05/04/2022 - 20:34

              @MasterScythe: Given the amount of misinformation shared by proponents of the injections, why would anyone trust these numbers?

              • MasterScythe on 06/04/2022 - 03:11

                @Ghos7: Because they're peer reviewed. This almost guarantees honesty in times of competition.
                Why, you're probably wondering? Because whoever is right, wins.

                Moderna wants to 'beat' pfizer, and vice versa.
                Pfizer wants to discredit the not-for-profit AstraZenica vaccine so they can sell to the UK.
                Novavax wants to enter as a dark horse and steal future contracts.
                Meanwhile, other companies like synairgen are wanting to prove their treatments are better than the vaccine.

                Why is this relevant? Because whoever doesn't 'win', loses, and loses big.
                Credibility, future contracts, profit, and potentially even grants and resources.
                Governments also risk losing face if they back something incorrectly.
                Not to mention, Military troops in China and the US were some of the first to be innoculated. No country willingly weakens their army.
                Especially those two, with the POTUS at the time being vocally anti China.

                Anyway, the point is, in the world of 'big pharma' nobody is a friend to each other.

                During closed trials, they can rely on marketing spin, and it's now known several did, but once it's in the wild, and widely used, then the company is no longer able to filter the data, since the global population isn't under NDA.

                If company 1 was able to window-dress facts during development, that falls over spectacularly once it's public.
                Company 2 will be out for blood in minutes.

                As of now, the fact that the only 'sales pitch' any of the competitors have is 'ours is marginally better' is extremely telling.
                If company 1 can crush company 2, I assure you, especially in pharma, they will.
                They haven't because they can't.
                Consider the OxyContin controversy for example; or perhaps the Pregabalin crysis?

                I'm not sure what experience you have with assisiting in developing treatments and medical trials, but if you've ever had test data in your hand, you might as well be god while you decide whom to provide it to. I've helped develop 3 different procedures, I can tell you that first hand.

          • scrappydoo on 05/04/2022 - 10:48
            +9

            @scrappydoo: What a joke. My negative vote on the post was revoked by ozbargain because of "too many negative votes" on my comment based on real experience and serious concerns about whether this is appropriate for children

            • vash5 on 05/04/2022 - 11:11
              +8

              @scrappydoo: Same.. 😒

              Pruning the truth has become a popular trend.

          • Ghos7 on 05/04/2022 - 20:31

            @scrappydoo: Negged for having a bad experience. I thought the left weren't into victim blaming.

        • reactor-au on 05/04/2022 - 03:15
          +15

          Not for the 5-11 age group though, they don't need it, more likely to get heart inflammation from the vaccine

        • vid_ghost on 05/04/2022 - 07:52

          Try 1 billion people. Its not the most tested and prooven vacines on earth and tin foil hat nut jobs are still going on about it.. 50 years from now they will still harp on about side effects.. vs long covid thats a real issue.. there are more side effects from the drugs on store shelves

          • s2230011 on 05/04/2022 - 10:11

            @vid_ghost: I am not sure the point here is … yes there are drugs with more side effects out there.

          • MasterScythe on 05/04/2022 - 11:55
            +3

            @vid_ghost: The nut jobs focus on data that suits their narrative. The logical folks learn.

            You never hear them use long-covid statistics, because using exclusively death statistics draws them a better narrative.

            There were times I'd have preferred to be at peace than suffering from those effects.

            Meanwhile, the science learns things (such as the small inflammation risk), and informs everybody how to watch for symptoms.

            Propaganda is always easy to spot.

            When one side is updating the public, including when its bad news; and one side has a rigid narrative, its an easy spot.

        • abctoz on 05/04/2022 - 08:08
          +2

          check the vaers data 1m reported adverse affects in the us

          • jv1988 on 05/04/2022 - 13:29
            +1

            @abctoz: Just so you're aware anyone can "report" an adverse affect on Vaers.

            Don't believe me. Try it yourself.

            You can say that the vaccine gave you Hulk super powers if you want to.

            It literally says the following on the front page:

            VAERS accepts reports from anyone, including patients, family members, healthcare providers and vaccine manufacturers.

            VAERS is not designed to determine if a vaccine caused or contributed to an adverse event. A report to VAERS does not mean the vaccine caused the event.

            VAERS is a passive surveillance system, meaning it relies on people sending in reports of their experiences after vaccination.

            • abctoz on 05/04/2022 - 13:35
              +1

              @jv1988: ok… i just tried…

              https://vaers.hhs.gov/esub/index.jsp

              Warning: Knowingly filing a false VAERS report with the intent to mislead the Department of Health and Human Services is a violation of Federal law (18 U.S. Code § 1001) punishable by fine and imprisonment.

              no thx

              • MasterScythe on 05/04/2022 - 14:10
                +2

                @abctoz: Most of us are in Australia.
                But thats OK, you can read the doctor who already did it.
                https://web.archive.org/web/20130419004549/http://neurodiver…

                hehe Hulk powers.

              • jv1988 on 05/04/2022 - 14:51

                @abctoz: Yes, a "warning", but still doesn't actually restrict anyone whatsoever.

                A copy/paste from the link above:

                "The chief problem with the VAERS data is that reports can be entered by anyone and are not routinely verified. To demonstrate this, a few years ago I entered a report that an influenza vaccine had turned me into The Hulk. The report was accepted and entered into the database.

                Because the reported adverse event was so… unusual, a representative of VAERS contacted me. After a discussion of the VAERS database and its limitations, they asked for my permission to delete the record, which I granted. If I had not agreed, the record would be there still, showing that any claim can become part of the database, no matter how outrageous or improbable.

                Since at least 1998 (and possibly earlier), a number of autism advocacy groups have, with all the best intentions, encouraged people to report their autistic children—or autistic children of relatives and friends—to VAERS as injuries from thimerosal-containing vaccines. This has irrevocably tainted the VAERS database with duplicate and spurious reports."

                In my opinion, VAERS is incorrectly used by certain people/companies as 100% accurate US Government research data to "truly" show how deadly vaccines are.

                Where I feel that it was set up as free honesty system to report side effects. Which has obviously been manipulated for certain agendas.

                Unfortunately there's going to be people/companies that take advantage of the crappy situation that we're all going through.

                One of them I've experienced would be "health" and "vitamin" sites that showcase this VAERS info with a convenient "health/vitamin" pill advertisement within a few clicks of it.

                • abctoz on 05/04/2022 - 15:02

                  @jv1988: I mean I guess, but I don't think I would do it given the warning

                  • jv1988 on 05/04/2022 - 15:17
                    +1

                    @abctoz: All good. Unfortunately us honest ones are often seen as easiest to take advantage of.

                    Anyways, stay safe and well :)

        • s2230011 on 05/04/2022 - 10:06
          +10

          FYI the fact that it has been applied to millions of children does not in any way not make it experimental.

        • RocketSwitch on 05/04/2022 - 11:19
          +10

          Prove that it's saving the lives of children vs how many heart inflammation cases are being reported by the TGA for those under 17!

          Prove COVID kills children 5-11, PROVE IT!

          Then show me the evidence for the clear efficacy and safety for children, 1-2 years of clinical data should be enough.

        • cfuse on 05/04/2022 - 12:14
          +1

          "Most doctors recommend Camels" /s

        • grasstown on 05/04/2022 - 13:09
          +2

          😱 you made that up!

          when you don’t know the side effects and long term effects, it is experimental.

    • AustriaBargain on 04/04/2022 - 21:54
      +42

      Some of these comments here, I'm amazed that some of these OZBargainers can hold a job.

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join