Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis announced Tuesday that he is petitioning the state's Supreme Court to "impanel a statewide grand jury to investigate any and all wrongdoing in Florida with respect to COVID-19 vaccines." 

 

DeSantis made the announcement while chairing a roundtable focusing on the reported side effects of coronavirus vaccines, with some participants alleging negative health experiences after getting the shots made by companies such as Pfizer and Johnson & Johnson. 

 

"In Florida, it is against the law to mislead and to misrepresent, particularly when you're talking about the efficacy of a drug," DeSantis said. 

 

https://www.foxbusiness.com/politics/desantis-florida-grand-jury-investigate-coronavirus-vaccine-wrongdoing

3 minutes ago, Scott said:

In Florida, it is against the law to mislead and to misrepresent, particularly when you're talking about the efficacy of a drug," DeSantis said. 

Ah the irony…a politician complaining about misleading and misrepresenting, while attacking a vaccine that saved lives, for political purposes. 
 

He has learned well from the orange one. 

The next POTUS. Common sense still prevails.

"....investigate any and all wrongdoing in Florida with respect to COVID-19 vaccines." Given that wording, DeSantis and his nut case vaccine conspirators better watch out. Their misinformation and lies have led to deaths from covid that could have been prevented

4 hours ago, Bluespunk said:

Ah the irony…a politician complaining about misleading and misrepresenting, while attacking a vaccine that saved lives, for political purposes. 
 

He has learned well from the orange one. 

I guess that even for political purposes, it wouldn't be a popular decision when majority of Floridians have been vaccinated and majority favour vaccination mandate in polls. A waste of tax payer money like his publicity migrant stunt. He is still riding on a high after his big win and behaving cocky. 

1 hour ago, Eric Loh said:

I guess that even for political purposes, it wouldn't be a popular decision when majority of Floridians have been vaccinated and majority favour vaccination mandate in polls. A waste of tax payer money like his publicity migrant stunt. He is still riding on a high after his big win and behaving cocky. 

If his administration were a TV show, this episode would be characterized as "jumping the shark".

33 minutes ago, placeholder said:

If his administration were a TV show, this episode would be characterized as "jumping the shark".

He is expected to go for higher office in next 2 years and Florida is just a pathway. He will continue with wasting tax payers money in stunts to appeal to the wider Republicans audience. 

10 hours ago, Scott said:

DeSantis made the announcement while chairing a roundtable focusing on the reported side effects of coronavirus vaccines, with some participants alleging negative health experiences after getting the shots made by companies such as Pfizer and Johnson & Johnson.

Florida is such a litigious state that the big insurance companies will no longer insure homes there. So now he wants to accomplish what by creating more phobias about vaccines?

 

De Santis complains about misrepresentation. It's ironic because he had a 2-hour televised presentation with the three academics promoting the Great Barrington Declaration which advocated that unvaccinated people get infected while isolating old and other vulnerable people. Experience with infected nursing homes, long Covid, and multiple infections of the unvaccinated showed that Great Barrington was bogus, yet De Santis gave these people another opportunity to mislead ignorant Floridians.

9 hours ago, EVENKEEL said:

The next POTUS. Common sense still prevails.

Calling for an investigation and filing suit are different animals.  One is a political stunt and the other is putting donors' money where his mouth is.

11 hours ago, Bluespunk said:

while attacking a vaccine that saved lives, for political purposes.

You are reading from a different play-book to him.

1 hour ago, GreasyFingers said:

You are reading from a different play-book to him.

Yep, my play book consists of sticking to the truth.

I wonder how many Americans this man lead to their deaths all in the name of political theater in the quest for power inexcusable imo hopefully (bloated Ronnie) or bloat for short will be flushed soon

1 hour ago, Bluespunk said:

Yep, my play book consists of sticking to the truth.

Yes, I am sure previous twitter employees , the FBI, the DOJ and the Dems stick to the truth too - or refuse to allow it maybe

Just now, RichardColeman said:

Yes, I am sure previous twitter employees , the FBI, the DOJ and the Dems stick to the truth too - or refuse to allow it maybe

What has that exactly got to do with my post?

 

Please precisely explain how your deflections relate to my post. 

1 hour ago, Bluespunk said:

Yep, my play book consists of sticking to the truth.

Well, the truth is:

 

"mRNA vaccines were associated with an excess risk of serious adverse events of special interest of 12.5 per 10,000 vaccinated".

 

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264410X22010283

 

Serious adverse events were defined as "an adverse event that results in any of the following conditions: death; life-threatening at the time of the event; inpatient hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization; persistent or significant disability/incapacity; a congenital anomaly/birth defect; medically important event, based on medical judgment."

 

So it seems to be worth investigating, don't you think?

 

15 hours ago, EVENKEEL said:

The next POTUS. Common sense still prevails.

Yeah attacking Disneyland is so common.

1 hour ago, Tug said:

I wonder how many Americans this man lead to their deaths all in the name of political theater in the quest for power inexcusable imo hopefully (bloated Ronnie) or bloat for short will be flushed soon

He's a shameless demagogue. A trump without the entertainment value he used to have.

15 hours ago, EVENKEEL said:

The next POTUS. Common sense still prevails.

More likely Tim Scott.

 

https://www.politico.com/news/2022/12/12/trump-gop-senators-tim-scott-presidential-00073280

10 minutes ago, edwardandtubs said:

Well, the truth is:

 

"mRNA vaccines were associated with an excess risk of serious adverse events of special interest of 12.5 per 10,000 vaccinated".

 

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264410X22010283

 

Serious adverse events were defined as "an adverse event that results in any of the following conditions: death; life-threatening at the time of the event; inpatient hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization; persistent or significant disability/incapacity; a congenital anomaly/birth defect; medically important event, based on medical judgment."

 

So it seems to be worth investigating, don't you think?

 

The truth is the vaccine saved lives. 

10 minutes ago, edwardandtubs said:

Well, the truth is:

 

"mRNA vaccines were associated with an excess risk of serious adverse events of special interest of 12.5 per 10,000 vaccinated".

 

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264410X22010283

 

Serious adverse events were defined as "an adverse event that results in any of the following conditions: death; life-threatening at the time of the event; inpatient hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization; persistent or significant disability/incapacity; a congenital anomaly/birth defect; medically important event, based on medical judgment."

 

So it seems to be worth investigating, don't you think?

 

Not really. 

https://fullfact.org/health/WHO-study-covid-hospitalisations/

Basically, the study only address short term events from the vaccine. But the study didn't last long enough to probe the issue of long term protection from  covid because of the vaccines. 

*Deleted post edited out*

 

One thing to take into account is the agenda of people who promote misinformation about covid booster. For instance the claim that there's only 70 days of extra protection from a booster.

 

Booster longevity: Data reveals how long a third shot protects

Indeed, the study from the U.K. found that the booster offers more robust protection against severe disease than against infection. Specifically, the researchers found that after a third shot of Pfizer, protection against hospitalizations starts out above 95% (two weeks after the shot) and remains around 80% even after four months.

By comparison, with only two shots of any vaccine, protection against severe disease declines to 40% after six months.

https://www.npr.org/sections/goatsandsoda/2022/01/19/1071809356/covid-booster-omicron-efficacy

 

The 70 days that you cite is about protection against infection and minor symptoms. Not about protection against serious illness.

1 hour ago, placeholder said:

One thing to take into account is the agenda of people who promote misinformation about covid booster. For instance the claim that there's only 70 days of extra protection from a booster.

 

Booster longevity: Data reveals how long a third shot protects

Indeed, the study from the U.K. found that the booster offers more robust protection against severe disease than against infection. Specifically, the researchers found that after a third shot of Pfizer, protection against hospitalizations starts out above 95% (two weeks after the shot) and remains around 80% even after four months.

By comparison, with only two shots of any vaccine, protection against severe disease declines to 40% after six months.

https://www.npr.org/sections/goatsandsoda/2022/01/19/1071809356/covid-booster-omicron-efficacy

 

The 70 days that you cite is about protection against infection and minor symptoms. Not about protection against serious illness.

I don't know what 'people who promote misinformation' you're talking about. I got the information from Sir John Bell, who is an eminent Oxford University immunologist and Britain's covid tsar. His user-friendly explanation is in this video:

 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-11485347/Britain-didnt-need-boosters-says-Covid-tsar-Sir-John-Bell.html#v-6924036316642691317

 

Or if you want to research the science, here is the article he co-wrote:

 

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2022.11.29.22282916v1

 

It's true that the immunocompromised benefit from the third jab (it's not really a booster for them) because they are at risk of severe disease if they catch covid. But the immunocompetent are not at such risk so these are the people who may want to think carefully before taking the risk of another mrna jab.

3 hours ago, edwardandtubs said:

Well, the truth is:

 

"mRNA vaccines were associated with an excess risk of serious adverse events of special interest of 12.5 per 10,000 vaccinated".

 

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264410X22010283

 

Serious adverse events were defined as "an adverse event that results in any of the following conditions: death; life-threatening at the time of the event; inpatient hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization; persistent or significant disability/incapacity; a congenital anomaly/birth defect; medically important event, based on medical judgment."

 

So it seems to be worth investigating, don't you think?

 

Which is why many NZ nurses refused to be vaccinated with pfizer ( which was the only vaccine on offer at the time ) and were sacked as a result.

https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/456395/over-100-nurses-sacked-after-refusing-vaccine

Just over 100 nurses, 14 midwives and 10 doctors have been sacked from District Health Boards for refusing to be vaccinated against Covid-19.

 

Which is why I refused to be vaccinated with pfizer.

Posts making false, misleading or unsubstantiated claims have been removed.  

 

DeSantis has surrounded himself with sycophants who have no qualifications in virology. They seize on small factoids like there can be complications from vaccines and weave them into a false narrative. The fact is that the same side effects are a magnitude more common and worse from the virus itself.

 

This anti-science rhetoric is a ploy to attract the dimwits for political advantage at the cost of many lives. Evil personified.

 

source: BBC cable TV news.

2 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

DeSantis has surrounded himself with sycophants who have no qualifications in virology. They seize on small factoids like there can be complications from vaccines and weave them into a false narrative. The fact is that the same side effects are a magnitude more common and worse from the virus itself.

 

This anti-science rhetoric is a ploy to attract the dimwits for political advantage at the cost of many lives. Evil personified.

 

source: BBC cable TV news.

Yes, he really is very horrible in so many ways.

DeSantis is using taxpayer money to fund a publicity stunt "investigation" in order to appeal to his base.  It's similar to the laws he passed that he knew would get bogged down in court challenges and his illegal flying of migrants from Texas to Massachusetts using money designated to remove illegal immigrants from Florida.

 

He's had to go quiet on the illegal immigrant bashing because so many are being employed in the clean-up and rebuilding of south Florida after hurricane Ian.  He's looking for something new to keep his name in the news and his face on Fox.

9 hours ago, edwardandtubs said:

Well, the truth is:

 

"mRNA vaccines were associated with an excess risk of serious adverse events of special interest of 12.5 per 10,000 vaccinated".

 

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264410X22010283

 

Serious adverse events were defined as "an adverse event that results in any of the following conditions: death; life-threatening at the time of the event; inpatient hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization; persistent or significant disability/incapacity; a congenital anomaly/birth defect; medically important event, based on medical judgment."

 

So it seems to be worth investigating, don't you think?

 

Yours is an early study based on preliminary data.  For something more current:

 

"Reports of adverse events to VAERS following vaccination, including deaths, do not necessarily mean that a vaccine caused a health problem. More than 657 million doses of COVID-19 vaccines were administered in the United States from December 14, 2020, through December 7, 2022. During this time, VAERS received 17,868 preliminary reports of death (0.0027%) among people who received a COVID-19 vaccine."  https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/safety/adverse-events.html

 

Keep in mind that the 0.0027% death reports (death reported but not necessarily caused by the vaccination) represent about 3 deaths per 100,000 people vaccinated.  The death rate from Covid infections is over 1% (one million dead and 99 million infections).  https://covid.cdc.gov/covid-data-tracker/#datatracker-home

 

Nothing in life is without risk, however since you are more than 300 time more likely to die from a Covid infection than from the vaccination, vaccinations are clearly the smart choice.

9 hours ago, edwardandtubs said:

I don't know what 'people who promote misinformation' you're talking about. I got the information from Sir John Bell, who is an eminent Oxford University immunologist and Britain's covid tsar. His user-friendly explanation is in this video:

 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-11485347/Britain-didnt-need-boosters-says-Covid-tsar-Sir-John-Bell.html#v-6924036316642691317

 

Or if you want to research the science, here is the article he co-wrote:

 

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2022.11.29.22282916v1

 

It's true that the immunocompromised benefit from the third jab (it's not really a booster for them) because they are at risk of severe disease if they catch covid. But the immunocompetent are not at such risk so these are the people who may want to think carefully before taking the risk of another mrna jab.

Sir John Bell says nowhere that there are  70 days of protection from a booster.  There are not just 70 days of protection. That is a falsehood as I've already pointed out.

And nowhere does Sir John say the risks of getting vaccinated outweigh the risk of coming down with covid. And basing your contention in a disputed paper is dodgy.

2 hours ago, heybruce said:

DeSantis is using taxpayer money to fund a publicity stunt "investigation" in order to appeal to his base.  It's similar to the laws he passed that he knew would get bogged down in court challenges and his illegal flying of migrants from Texas to Massachusetts using money designated to remove illegal immigrants from Florida.

 

He's had to go quiet on the illegal immigrant bashing because so many are being employed in the clean-up and rebuilding of south Florida after hurricane Ian.  He's looking for something new to keep his name in the news and his face on Fox.

DeSantis is positioning himself for the next elections. Trump can never outwardly say he is anti vaccine since "his" claims to warp speed covid vaccination development.

 

Yet Republicans are still among the biggest demographics that are hesitant or refuse to get vaccinated. 

 

With this strategy Desantis will be after those voters who previously voted for Trump, but wished Trump was anti vaccine, now they have their alternative.

 

Its nothing to do with science, its to do with personal gain.