Ask A Broadsheet Reader




Sponsored Link

78 thoughts on “Ask A Broadsheet Reader

  1. freewheeling

    The Irish Media are fully captured by the public “health” agenda of the State – allow no opportunity for vaccine “hesitancy”. Simples.

  2. Your auld wan

    Of course I have a girlfriend. What? She lives the other side of town, that’s why you’ve never met her.

  3. Ronan

    What’s to report?

    You get a jab.
    1/10 get some reaction
    1/100 get a more rare reaction
    1/1000 get a rarer still reaction
    1/10000 get a still rarer reaction
    1/100000 ….

    etc etc

    Why are people expecting to see particular data on this?

    1. MR.T

      Because every person should be made aware of the risks of taking vaccine vs not taking it – and using that info to inform their decision.

      Trying to hide the side-effects from people is some Thalidomide child type stuff

      1. Kdoc

        You just need to read the leaflet that’s distributed to ALL who attend the vaccination centres.

    2. Zaccone

      There should be a government website that very clearly lists the odds of death/serious ilness for age 20-30, 40-50, 50-60 etc from covid. And alongside that the odds of adverse reaction from each vaccine for each age range.

      No other comment, just very clear, proven statistics.

      People could then make their own informed decision.

      It would disprove a lot of wilder anti-vaxx theories, and would really show how life saving the vaccine is for 70+s. But it would also show how unnecessary the vaccine is for under 40s. So I suspect thats why we’ll never see such a thing.

      1. Ronan

        You do not understand vaccines very well, if you believe it’s unnecessary for under 40s.

        I didn’t take my jab because I’m afraid of getting Covid. I took it to protect vulnerable people in my community – including those who cannot get vaccines for medical reasons.

        The best way to protect the 70+s you mentioned is for everyone younger than them to get jabs and be far less likely to be symptomatic and transmissible. That way even those not well protected by the vaccine themselves can have far fewer risk vectors coming at them.

        1. Zaccone

          But thats an overall societal benefit argument rather than a personal risk assessment. Thats an entirely separate discussion.

          A clear, concise presentation of the (well known) data on risk from corona vs risk from the vaccine for each age group would be what an honest government would present, to allow people to make up their own minds. Anything less than that is obfuscation at best, or deliberate, agenda-driven, misleading more likely.

          1. Ronan

            The only driven agendas I’m seeing are herd immunity (governments) and anti-vaccine (various groups and individuals).

            You are presented with an option, take the vaccine or don’t:
            – Governments and health organisations are promoting this for societal health, and to a lesser extent your personal health.
            – Various people, those “just asking questions” such as yourself are promoting an agenda ranging from creating doubt to claiming a conspiracy, depending on the player(s).

            No-one is making you take the vaccine. You’re more worried about individual outcomes than societal outcomes – you’ve made that clear. That’s fine, it’s your free choice. But why not give everyone else the credit to make their own minds up, instead of claiming they are not being given the facts.

            Main Stream Media are reporting regularly on:
            – Side effects (up to and including death from blood clots)
            – Vaccine efficacy
            – Vaccine rollout progress
            – Resistance/Hesitancy in our jurisdiction and others.

            The HSE website then publishes it’s own information, e.g.

            If you read the above link, there’s plenty of info on side effects and risks of same. As to risks by age group, they mention the high-risk groups by health or age status. If you don’t fall into one of those groups, then you’re pretty much not at risk of dying from Covid. It’s then a personal choice as to whether you vaccinate for others, or just catch covid in the next few years and join the herd the old fashioned way.

            All that’s being asked of you, dear healthy citizen, is to take a slightly higher risk of vaccine complications, than risk of covid complications, so that a few less of your neighbours die – either of Covid or of being unable to access services because of too much Covid. You are free to choose accordingly.

            As an aside, you might note that various health departments across Europe either limited (e.g. Ireland) or pulled entirely (e.g. Denmark) those vaccines that had a questionably risk around blood clots. Which actually kindof disproves your theory of obfuscation, in that they made Janssen and AZ a personal choice for those under age who want to vaccinate more quickly for personal reasons, or indeed to protect their grandparents or whatever.

          2. Zaccone

            “But why not give everyone else the credit to make their own minds up, instead of claiming they are not being given the facts.”

            Currently if someone wants to find out for example the statistical risk of death from corona for a 28 year old vs risk of an adverse reaction from AZ for the same 28 year old its on them to find the research papers on this. There is no one, easily accessible, well publicised, resource for this. Which means its a capability beyond quite a large portion of society.

            This means they/we aren’t being given the facts. The government should very clearly list the comparative risks associated with corona and each of the vaccines to each age group both at the point of vaccination and in a publicly accessible, clear, website – ideally when you register for the vaccine. This would be completely open and transparent. It would also dispel a lot of the negative conspiracy theories about the vaccines, particularly for older age groups.

            But the government makes a conscious decision not to do this, despite the data being readily available, because that data shows a large % of the population has more personal risk from the vaccines than from corona.

          3. Oro

            “There is no one, easily accessible, well publicized, source for this”

            He literally posted an easily accessible, well publicized source for it in his comment. The rest of your comment fails since it hinges on this paradox.

      1. Blob

        im new enough here and defo seems like it’s Bodger’s personal the sites views. bit worrying.

        1. Joe

          Broadsheet Bodger for months now has been continously spitting in the face of the bereaved, the long covid victims and hospital ICU medical staff that have worked very bravely to fight Covid for some time now by promoting anti public health measures on a daily basis.

          Broadsheet Bodger constantly provides links to tweets/twitter accounts to very unsavoury homophobe/anti-abortion/Anti-Vaxx/Anti-Covid/far right conspiracies/ and anti-semitic groups that to rope in the gullible and easily led promote so called freedom protests or no covid passports protests

          It is probably the main reason why Broadsheet is losing readership and advertising.

          1. Formerly known as

            You are right. I might have better things to do than engage with the muppets that leave those silly comments. As for Ivor, he blocked me on Twitter when I presented him with data.

    1. Blob

      I wouldn’t mind, only it will effect actual lives. The power of media should be treated more carefully.

      BS SEZ: Bodger’s views are his own and do not reflect the views of other contributors to Broadsheet.

      1. Ronan

        Yeah, isn’t that kindof the point of Broadsheet? There isn’t an editorial line, rather there’s a bunch of independent contributors following their own lines.

        It’s nought but an aggregated blog, and stuff gets posted so the rest of us can fight about it.

      2. Skeptik

        Interesting, I’ve been on the site a few years and it appeared to me the anti-vax views were Broadsheet’s view.
        BS SEZ: They’re not. They are Bodger’s own views, as we have pointed out many, many times. Other contributors to the site have different views. All are respected.

        I have to say, it was putting me off the site entirely. I’m sure many more get the same impression.
        BS SEZ: Hope this clears that up for you Skeptik!

        1. General Public

          @ Troll farm..

          Its not working lads. People love this site and won’t leave no matter how much you attempt to shame it.

          Give it up, your failing publicly..

          Thanks BS, please keep it going..

        2. Blob

          then how come there are Bodgers anti-vax articles, but no one posts pro-vax articles? There’s no balance. That’s why people see the site as anti-vax. They’re the only pieces up, and they’re plentiful.

  4. Junkface

    The thing about anecdotal reports from people about anything is, they are unprovable by their nature. Almost entirely useless.
    I know 10 people who have had the Astrazeneca or Pfizer vaccines, 3 of them had under lying health conditions. All are fine, no side effects.

  5. stephen moran

    I saw a black cat & a single magpie this morning in the garden so I have locked myself in the house & will stay at home for the day watching madcap conspiracy theory videos all day.

    Maybe you will get six double yoked eggs in the next box you buy.

    1. freewheeling

      > The issue is there’s no long term data.


      Short term adverse reaction ain’t the same as long term complication/condition

      No data on how frequent, widespread, or severe those are, yet we’re pumping it into the entire population, not just the “at risk” groups. It’s one massive, irresponsible, experiment

      1. millie bobby brownie

        That’s my only issue with the vaccine.

        However, as I am neither a medical professional nor a scientist, so I trust the expertise and superior knowledge of people who have the training and education to understand the vaccine and associated risks in a way that I can’t. I also have to trust that the safeguards put in place to avoid and prevent this kind of thing from occurring are sound enough and that we have hopefully learned from past mistakes, like the thalidomide scandal, for example.

        1. Micko

          Unfortunately Millie, while the work of physicians and medical staff around the world is something to be admired.

          It’s not the first time the pharma industry has tried this.

          This is from Channel 4 – only a decade ago :(

          Profit is their only concern.

          And of course the long term data thing.

        2. Ronan

          Thalidomide did exactly what it said on the tin.

          The problem was the foetal development inside. The missus and I had our family grow early in the pandemic, and both kinda agree that she’d be shielding rather than vaccinating if she were pregnant now, but that’s different.

          I only see the thalidomide question as valid concern for a pregnant woman taking the vaccine. I doubt an mRNA vaccine is going to stop a child’s arm from growing, but I’d understand someone having concern for non-adults too, as understanding DNA, RNA and complex cellular/molecular biology is beyond most people – myself included. But that’s where I’d bring in the more traditional vaccines – here’s a modified bit of the disease and let your body learn to respond.

        3. freewheeling

          You should check out what Dr Robert Malone has to say about it. An insider expert (along with many others) who disagrees with the widespread indiscriminate use of this EUA therapies this way. Unfortunately, it appears some of the usual regulatory safeguards were bypassed in rushing these mRNA gene therapy vaccines into use, and the bio-mechanisms are not behaving as even the designers intended them too. Would love to believe we learn from past mistakes … but human nature and all that.

          1. Stephen

            I would question the credability of any doctor who goes on Fox News and has Tucker Carslon interview and agree with them.

  6. millie bobby brownie

    Bang of the aul climate change denier off this lad too, going by his tweets. Apparently the absolutely insane weather, such as the floods in Germany, are nothing to worry about because there are lines marking previous floods in one town in Germany. Incontrovertible proof!

    I know absolutely no one who has suffered an adverse reaction to the vaccine. And for that matter, what exactly constitutes an adverse reaction, in peter’s opinion? Or is he being guided by the medical/scientific community on this or is he going off people who term having a headache as an adverse reaction, as seen on the thread? Or is it more vague prophecies, along the lines of this tweet also from the same thread:

    I am, of course, just asking questions.

    1. Aon Duine

      Noticed that too. Why does Bodger feel it’s helpful to his audience to share the views of a photographer, who also happens to be a climate change denier? Do you share his views Bodger?

    2. Slave to the Rhythm

      I know one person who was advised not to take the second dose as the reaction was so severe.

      1. millie bobby brownie

        My goodness, that sounds unpleasant indeed. I do hope they were okay, and (as yet) have not suffered any further side effects?

      1. Nigel

        Oh Christ here we go.

        ‘Follow the money appear a to be beyond you people.’

        The millions spent by fossil fuel industries to suppress and counter scientific and media reporting on clmate change seems to fly right over your head.

        ‘but because authority espouses it’

        Wow you really dug into the scientific case for anthropogenic climate change there.

        Edit: Huh. Guess climate change denial is a bridge too far for editorial.

      2. millie bobby brownie

        E’Matty, you’ve projected an awful lot of your (entirely incorrect) assumptions about me into that comment.

        I won’t return the favour because it will likely be very unflattering to you, and probably incorrect.

        The rest of your comment is just a rehash of the same point I’ve seen you make countless times on similar threads, and I disagree with the majority of the arguments positied by you on this topic.

  7. des


    Irish media is government controlled, hence to reporting of any unfavourable news, not limited to Covid unfortunately

    “Holohan and Cervical Screening”
    “aontu nursing home deaths”

  8. E'Matty

    We’ve had numerous personnel out of work anything from 2 days to 2 weeks post vaccination. Some have refused to go back for their second vaccination. One guy had Covid and said his first vaccine’s after effects were far worse.

  9. Daniel

    Seeing as their are so many crackpots on the internet, how exactly do you pick which ones to share Bodger?

      1. General Public

        Troll farm all over this topic Bodger. Please ignore and keep it coming it’s very much appreciated.

          1. General Public

            Strong familiar whiff coming from several first name only accounts.

            I’m sure you’re aware of it too.

  10. ian-oG

    I see this guy is now retweeting Marcus de Brun?

    He (Peter) says that he knows 7 people with adverse reactions.

    So what. He can say anything he likes, doesn’t make it so.

    Hitchen’s Razor: “What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence.”

    So I am dismissing this as being nothing more than something someone said with no evidence to back it up.

    1. General Public

      And so what if he is retweeting MdB, what’s your point?

      The only thing I take from your comment is your own veiled bias.

      1. millie bobby brownie

        Yes, because you’re not biased at all, you little hypocrite.

        Careful, my dear pot, lest you find yourself compared with the kettle.

  11. SB

    Those Twitter (& other social media threads) are infuriating, spreading a lot of disinformation. One of the responses links the vaccine to the death of a 20 year old: “Hadley Huffman, the 20-year-old pre-med student at Wayne State University in Michigan who died unexpectedly June 15th, two months after her last vaccine dose”.

    At least there’s some solid info to go on there – a name. A little bit of googling reveals that she died from an overdose:
    I suppose they’re “only asking questions”.

Comments are closed.

Sponsored Link