Noah, chill dude. Carrying that much anger and stress can decrease your Lymphocyte count, making it harder to fight off infections, from the common cold to herpes. Which in turn opens the door to Myocarditis.
The guy comes on basing his argument, apparently, on a single study? Yet when Sam asks for it, he doesn't even have it ready and has to look for it. I believe Sam was right: this guy was high.
My favorite bit was when he was like "doctors don't care about peer review, instead they *describes the process of peer review*." Incredible stuff really.
That bit kinda proved they're being brainwashed to be knee jerk against certain words, like "peer review". They figured out that whenever they hear "peer review" they;ll lose and look like fools, so their Pavlovian reaction is to DISS it. And of course, it also proves they truly don't know what they're talking about: "I hate ..... vegetables!!! But green stuff you pull from the earth or pluck from plants which has a fresh bittery taste to it, THAT i love! "
Well said. The Rogan simp could have had his citations ready to go..why didnt he?...bc he is a lying Joe Rogan groupie you can hear the caller is strait 😭 crying, just listen to him he sobs as he gets mad.
He's not entirely wrong about that though. I'm in a bioscience Ph.D. program and people do regularly read bio and medrxiv to see work ahead of peer review. It's good for seeing what work is being done as quickly as possible. Knowledgeable scientists have the ability to read that work and understand the flaws prior to peer review because they are peers. This guy however is a moron and I don't trust his interpretation of anything. At the same time, peer review isn't some magical stamp of authenticity. Lots of junk makes it through and not everything in preprint should be dismissed. If you're qualified to judge the merits then there is no problem in considering data from preprint articles.
@@bonscotty67 I'm guessing if we go back in your life we'd see you get upset when you saw Richard Spencer get punched in the face. Your side is all about "facts over feelings" until the facts hurt your feelings.
@@ghostwitch644 Sooo.....everyone is a liar? Sorry. We, Americans, won't allow our country to be united by commonality of the practice and/or concept of "lying".
The author is not "Hoeg." Hoeg is a person who tweeted the article. The guy's source, "Risk of myocarditis following sequential COVID-19 vaccinations by age and sex," is a 1-paragraph news release about a forthcoming article that is under peer review now (lead author: Patone). After all this guy's nonsense about "reading the article," the new data suggests a risk of myocarditis after the booster shot as high as 13 per 1 million vaccinations compared to 7 per 1 million among COVID-19 infections. In other words, we're talking about a .000013% risk compared to a .000007% risk, with the tradeoff being protection from COVID-19. Even if this study survives peer review, the caller has no sense of relative risk or effect size. I think I'll still take the shot.
If that's the same study which originally kicked off this specific antivax talking point, it goes on to state that even with the increased cases of myocarditis among boosted people in the aforementioned age group, the number which resulted in hospitalization or death were still greater among covid positive individuals. So it's no wonder the caller has to outright reject the existence of mild cases of myocarditis, because that's the one detail of the study which makes his focus on the number of cases completely moot.
Spot on that’s precisely what I found when looking this up via the NHS. They claimed a 11 cases per 1 million of myocarditis sounds pretty unlikely, of those 11 few of any have gone on to die!! It’s laughable stuff..
Imagine calling into a show to attempt to debunk a claim/piece of evidence and not having your citations ready. These people go out of their way to prove their own idiocy to the world.
I don't even have an interest in debating but the one thing i know for SURE if i were forced to do it... Have some fucking material to read from on the thing i wanna talk about. But i suspect this caller doesn't see how stupid it is to have to google on your phone mid debate.
I love that his whole thing was "anyone can find an internet article about anything" but immediately melts when he finds out Sam expects them to be peer-reviewed. I imagine that there are tons of studies that doctors rely on that aren't peer-reviewed yet - information moves so fast. But to imagine that they don't care at all? Sounds like this guy needs a new doctor. 😂😂
@@DerAptrgangr If you remember early on he said "You have to have a double blinded prospective study or whatever you are saying is bullshit." then near the end he is crying because Sam wants basic peer review lol.
Standard debate prep involves looking into common counter arguments to your points so you are prepared to deal with them as well as making sure you have your scources and attributions.
@@CMClaudio1989 at a certain point you can’t pander and simplify things for these people. They argue for the sake of arguing, not to improve anyone’s lives or situation; Sam having an impatient and undeniably frustrated attitude is warranted, maybe these people would take a look at how fucking dumb they are every once in awhile.
what pisses me off is, the Proud Boys likely would have never existed, not as the force they became, if not for Joe Rogan. the boost that they got and the members drawn in by Rogan having Gavin McInnes on his show pitching his idea about a group designed to go out and do violence to protesters and just whoever else they know the cops won't extend proper protection to, all while little Joe sat there and "oh wow what a neat idea"d him to death, was THE thing that created their membership boom. Any decent person would be mortified and ashamed after being such a driving force in creating such an evil in the world... but if Joe learned anything at all from it, it definitely didn't change how he operates at all
@@FUNKY_BUTTLOVIN America is a fascist country, as much as rogan had major influence on vaccine hesitancy its because these individuals were already hesitant... the same way "Russian interference" in American elections was the extent of posting memes & the Wikileaks email scandal..... it didnt take much to tip the scales out of Hillary's favour, shes was already very hated. meaning he had some impact but the segments of America that have been waging a culture war for the last 20 years, the persistent indoctrination from the rest of the media & the broader culture, the hostility of those people towards certain activist movements like BLM... definitely had a greater impact bringing people to fascism. People watching Joe Rogan (religiously especially) already have those tendencies, in my humble opinion
@@jordant.teeterson3100 if we are being honest, he is one of the worst mma announcers working today in my opinion. Especially when he’s paired with DC. Such a lack of any technical analysis just bro talk and rogan screaming “Oh, he’s hurt!” with the cringe announcer cam. If UFC wanted to please the long term fans, they would boot rogan, tell DC to stick to analysis and leave the garbage comedy act to Brendan schaub, and have bisping or felder or someone take toe’s spot. Honestly Laura Sanko is doing a legitimately great analyst job (probably because she feels like she needs to prove herself to the Neanderthal sexist mma fanbase) on contenders and I would take her over rogan in a goddamn second.
@@TheBlazersfan22 Rogan told people not to listen to him, but then he continued bloviating. When one doesn't know something about a subject, it is best to remain silent. If stupid people in our society remained silent, we might not be approaching 1 million deaths from the pandemic, and we might have an workable action plan to address climate change. Unfortunately, as the Forrest Gump character said, "Stupid is as stupid does."
@@HeathWatts Its why I say very little when dealing with a topic I'm unfamiliar with, other then to ask general questions so I know where to start with my own basic research. And why its tough to get me to shut up when a topic I'm familiar with comes up. I like to learn and to teach.
@@HeathWatts exactly people should not take the high ground on issues they know nothing about. So out of interest who has the high ground on Covid vaccines🤔
@@jsville5247 What do you mean by high ground? We have a century of evidence that vaccines are safe and effective, evidence that mRNA vaccines are safe and effective, and more than a year of data showing that COVID-19 vaccines are safe and effective. I am not a virologist or immunologist and presumably you aren't either, so we must trust the expertise of those who are.
lmao, that's a great point. Reminds me of their argument about gender reassignment. All the positive effects of transitioning are ignorable but the 1% that detransition are the most important thing in the world.
Google are most people with myocarditis hospitalized. Sam is clearly wrong here. If you are diagnosed with myocarditis you will be hospitalized. Most are dismissed within a day or two but they definitely want to keep you under observation in the hospital. I suppose it could be called mild because most people recover very quickly but its not treated lightly. They want to hospitalize when you get it. The caller is right and sam is wrong. I am no expert but based on a quick google search I am not sure I would call it mild if 96% of people are hospitalized. Sam is simply wrong as far as I can tell.
@@lilstevechan8427 silly comparison that’s totally valid especially when talking about kids transitioning we’ve all seen docs like Transhood. obviously adults can make their own mistakes.
Exactly what I was thinking. He's also probably confused because in the US you only go to the hospital if you're like dying. In other countries you can go to the hospital even for minor things because it's so much more affordable or free.
As a doctor...peer review is better than no peer review....but peer review is not the arbiter of "quality". With reference to the question "is myocarditis in young males greater after vaccine or after Covid-19?" the Nature paper is of much higher quality than the paper referenced by Zepps/Sam. This was covered previous to this call in some detail by Vinay Prasad (a form of informal peer review), which was available to Sam but he chose to ignore it. One year later the consensus is in and the caller and Joe Rogan were in fact right and Sam was wrong - myocarditis is many times greater following mRNA vaccination (especially Moderna) than after Covid-19. Sam chose trying to score cheap debate points over having an honest discussion of the data (which could have included things like peer review) and the result was yet another wrong Covid talking point that I still hear repeated to this day.
@@robbinburns6329 Well, I largely disagree with your opinion that Sam was wrong and the caller was right in any substantial way, and the followup to your statement that peer review isn't really essential with "I saw it on Joe Rogan" also gave me pause for concern. Are you a doctor? Maybe you graduated a long time ago and haven't maintained your licensing requirements properly? To the extent that peer review isn't absolutely essential, you should be consulting highly trusted organizations, exclusively, such as the ama, the apa, the cdc, etc. "Joe Rogan" is the antithesis of that: an editorial sports interview broadcast that dabbles in social issues, has no peer reviewed publications who dropped out of college: “I went to college but I fooled off. I barely paid attention. All I was thinking about was martial arts competition and stand-up.” I think he has his moments of being critical, but Rogan certainly isn't balanced and regularly hosts a culture club of totalitarian conspiracy theorists remnant of jeering early cpc Maoist Boxers. To the extent that what you're saying might have any merit, the study your referencing was actually pulled from print and republished after its peer review was re-tested, which is always a good sign--the type of stuff we see when a study recommends smoking tobacco for gingivitis, for example. Strangely, they did not make their raw data available in the most recent round: it's almost as if they're paying a low-quality journal to peer review and publish their work rather than using a journal that requires a high level of merit such as a mathematical review on top of a simple evaluation of honest citation and formatting. But let's really dig deep into the findings as they relate to your comment and the call: 1. "Many times greater"? Weren't you taught in one of your methods or metrics classes that this is a shady way of summarizing data, and weren't you told to specifically not use multiples in conclusions and headlines in your own publications? Because what's many times more than one? The correct answer is 2.1 or more: this hides the strength of the effect, and that's virtually always dishonest. 2. The caller said that myocarditis is as dangerous as stroke or heart attack. That's ridiculous. If you really are a doctor, which I don't contend, you know that myocarditis is a risk with most vaccines. We monitor patients for an hour, then they leave. We tell them to relax for a few days if they feel tired. Exaggerating the danger of myocarditis is stupid, just like conflating myocarditis by itself with myocarditis caused by an immune response to an illness or a vaccine. 3. In your statement, you suggest that myocarditis is common after the covid vaccine. In fact, it's most common in sinovax, and the majority of myocarditis events were in their earlier iteration of the vaccine which had lower quality standards and was tested on minority populations in places like the Philippines and South America. In fact, myocarditis is extremely rare in the vaccines used in the US. This might come as a surprise to you because you're cherry picking studies that count only one dose and three doses and neglect to mention that almost everyone who got one dose got two whereas only about half got three (for example, >80% of the UK got 2). Strangely people weren't dropping like flies. 4. That's probably because even when we look at the intentionally flawed studies that make no qualms about misrepresenting data with seemingly accidental ellisions of 47-147 million doses, depending on which of their publications you're looking at, temporally. But even if you allow their gross errors, you'd still be looking at less than 18 myocarditis events within 28 days of the vaccine per million people, a lot of which might just be related to the increase in sedentary lifestyle associated with being stuck inside. 5. If we actually look at confirmed cases of myocarditis instead of suspected cases, we're down to 2-6 cases per million people. Compare that to the 450 cases per million comfirmed in people with covid and the many other dangers of the virus, the fact is that the risk profile of the vaccine versus the virus is no contest. Now, I'm not sure if you really are a doctor or not. Maybe a chiropractor? Or a doctor of theology? But in medical academia or research, especially at a reputable school, you need to look through all of the research on a topic to form an opinion, and you need to look at each section to be sure that there are no contradictions and that the methods are done well, and then you're supposed to ask for all the raw data. These are reporters: they may not have time for that. Joe Rogan certainly doesn't: he's citing individual studies based on single search terms on Google--not even using academic search--and mainly reading from abstracts, which is the sensationalist portion of garbage publications. I encourage you to go back for a diversification in research if you're actually a doctor because this type of low quality referencing is very concerning in terms of the risk to your patients. At least within the past 3 years, you should do an exhaustive search of peer reviewed publications and look at all of their findings before you jump into a culture club. It's extremely irresponsible and frankly you're violating your ethical oath if you're getting involved in anti-science cliques like Joe Rogan and Jordan Peterson (or any cliques, really). Do your own research. If you're a doctor, you should be the authority not the appealer.
@Richard Rivera literally the first time he complained about being cut off was when he couldn't answer what study he cited. It was totally made up, because he was embarrassed.
The problem is that Joe Rogan misinterpreted his information. It stated that you are more likely to get myocarditis from the vaccine than if you were healthy. Which is true. The problem is that he completely ignored the fact that having covid does not mean that you are healthy and you are even more likely to get it from covid. Joe was using vaccine vs healthy stats to argue against vaccine vs covid stats. He still didn't realise this at the end and he was confused as to why his vaccine vs healthy stats contradicted the vaccine vs covid stats. He didn't understand what he was looking at.
@@Mudflat_Man it sounds like to me the problem is that people want to listen to a cult of personality or some charismatic person because they’ve lost faith in the government and scientists. I can only imagine how politically nihilistic or apathetic towards authorities we should trust you’d have to be to latch onto someone like Joe Rogan and take his word as law.
Totally, there's really no reason to beleive Joe Rogan was acting in bad faith. But people who have been hit in the head a lot should probably be a little reserved about repeating stuff. I'm a jar head, so I speak from experience - shit that makes sense at one time might not actually be right. But 9 million people don't listen to me, thankfully.
Wow.. that guy’s a walking Dunning Krueger effect. Runs with what little he knows about a topic and willing to argue with others as if he’s SO SURE he’s right, with no verifiable basis for his claim. Then gets called out and gets emotional and stumbles over his words while going on the defensive. You’re unwilling to learn dude, stfu sometimes and listen. Be willing to admit you’re wrong or might be wrong, it will serve you right.
The thing that amazes me is how they insist you believe their ideological right wing conspiracy theory, with no cited data or evidence, while also insisting you NOT believe what is right in front of your face. And when you point that out to them. they get as pissed off as this caller.
To be fair severe cases of gas can be mistaken for heart attack just on symptoms. My nurse MIL was afraid she was having a heart attack till they did her vitals and they showed that she wasn't having a heart attack, then they gave her gas treatment and symptoms resolved themselves almost immediately
@@AggressiveLemur To be fair, these people are still morons. A heart attack is like having Alex Jones sitting on your chest. When you have one, you know what it is. Most people I knew who were panicking all the time about getting a heart attack were always big fat slobs who become hyper aware of how at risk they are for one due to poor lifestyle choices and diets. Which is a weird thing, because they are basically constantly aware they are killing themselves and their lifestyle is totally unsustainable, yet continue living it anyways. If I was a doctor or worked in ER, I'd be pretty pissed off that every night some bloated boomer is wasting hospital resources because they ate 16 white castle burgers and are mystified by the sharp cramping pains and gurgling sounds.
@@garysmokesmeat seriously there's always been vaccines. It came out quick because so many people were dying! The vaccine saved my elderly parents their covid was tough but way more mild. I got covid before the vaccine and was literally in bed for a month.
Not defending the guy, cause a couple comments earlier someone did read it and showed that he didn’t read it lol, but I think he meant like read it live. Nevertheless this dude was to angry to even argue his point logically. Sam had to keep the caller on his own tracks 🤣
@@AlchemicMentor As far as I’m concerned, someone who can’t explain how ribosomes are leveraged by mRNA vaccines or protein synthesis isn’t qualified to interpret a study, nor comprehend one.
He won't. He's a canny guy. People at his level do not open themselves up to the risk of complete humiliation. There's no incentive for him at all, and all the incentives for him to refuse.
When questioned or shown facts contradicting his latest quack guest Rogan constantly says he's not a doctor and he just likes talking to different people. That's like his little disclaimer he walks around with.
Sam: “Are you a doctor?” Dude: “Yes.” Sam: “Really?” Dude: “… I have a science background. I don’t want to get into it.” Well, *I’m* convinced! Great way to start off, lying about being a doctor.
I laughed out loud. I'm guessing this dude really just compulsively lied because he thought it might help him, realized the lie couldn't hold up to scrutiny, and immediately backpedaled so hard it left an idiot-shaped hole in the wall behind him.
As a result of being an oversexed teen, I’m pleading that I have a scientific background in gynaecology. No ma’am. I’m not an expert. But I’ll take a look at it for you.
The problem with the caller is that they have an idea in their mind, and they're searching for studies that prove their point, as opposed to going where the facts take them. It's what happens when someone has an agenda.
Which is ironic, since people on that side of the fence accuse us of "having an agenda" for everything that doesn't perfectly fit into their world view.
@@xrogerxrabbitx It's not unusual, though what it is is putting the cart before the horse in that such people -based exclusively on their feelings about whatever - already have reached a conclusion long before they've actually looked at any evidence. Therefore, with an idea in mind from the start, they ignore the tons of information that disputes their argument for the meagre amount that doesn't. Especially with the Internet it's a real problem due to the access to so much information, both valid and invalid.
Having an upbringing in religion does that. It forms how you think: first have an idea, then find supporting data while ignoring and/or attacking any non-supporting data.
You didn't listen carefully. The caller was saying "there is no such thing as MILD myocarditis". Now technically I'm sure doctors may label specific myocarditis cases as mild/moderate/severe. However, the spirit or principle of what the caller was saying is of course true - like saying there is no such thing as "mild" brain cancer or "mild" flesh eating disease. I use the example of an athlete with "mild" myocarditis following vaccination - this isn't just one week's rest and you can go back to running marathons. It's not like a "mild" sprain where the doctor says take a full week off and then another week to slowly re-introduce your sport and you should be good. I believe "this guy's" worldview and my worldview are the same. Myocarditis is indeed more prevalent after vaccination (compared to after Covid) as the scientific literature has now borne out, there isn't really any such thing as "mild" myocarditis, and the risk/benefit of the mRNA Covid vaccines is not positive for all age groups. Sure "this guy" might have been a little angry/emotional and could have comported himself better, but if I view the "debate winner" as "they guy who ultimately was more right", then he won and not Sam. Sam only won the "remain calm and appear rational" award.
@@robbinburns6329it’s funny that the longer the time passes, the more this clip doesn’t age well. It’s pretty clear that Sam doesn’t come out looking good here. More and more info is coming out showing that their is more risk to taking the vaccine vs not, especially among certain age groups/demographics. And yes, the fact that Sam keeps mentioning myocarditis as if it’s just perfectly okay to get is terrifying to me
@@Jordan-fw1gf Can you share some of that evidence that supports the idea that getting the vaccine is more dangerous "than not?" Because I'm not finding anything that supports that.
@@robbinburns6329 you are wrong and delusional if you think getting a vaccine has more dangers than the virus you are preventing. people with that kind of mindset are the people bringing small pox back, look into that if you really want to know what not getting a vaccine causes over time.
Self report data isn't inherently bad, even that stuff. It really depends on what methodology the researcher employs to actually filter all the bullshit and how they use the rest. Of course, that all gets verified in peer review, which these clowns loathe.
@@jaredgreathouse3672 Depends what the point of the data is. For research, this misses the point. The researchers aren't the ones gathering this data. They're using the data because it exists already. This is becoming more and more common in all fields. Its not that the self reporting isn't valid. Its just answers on a page. Its up to the person using the data to establish controls for inclusion into their study. And then they report what the criteria was in their methods. This is very different than saying data is only valid if the caretaker audits it. If that were the case, there'd be no such thing as citizen science, and that's just dumb. For all its issues, citizen science is often all we have to go on for many large scale questions.
All I typed was "Hoeg my" & the 1st result was *["Covid-19: Study that claimed boys are at increased risk of myocarditis after vaccination is deeply flawed, say critics."]* I noticed that these wackos always claim "let me finish...can I finish?" & then proceed to meander off topic again. The finish line is never in sight for these nutjobs. This guy is a hard-headed clown!
"I know how science is done." Excellent, this should go smoothly. "Now let me explain why I ignore the scientific consensus based on one single study I didn't think I'd have to have ready when calling into a show to defend my already-held view. Don't all the smart ones site VAERS data (unverified self-reports)?"
The funniest thing, is that the Vaers site itself has a disclaimer that it shouldn't be used as a data source. Talk about not actually reading your source. People get really pissed off when you mention this, it's how I was permabanned from r/walkaway. That was a fun afternoon.
"You cannot call myocarditis mild. That's like calling a stroke mild." ... Um ... there are mild strokes. Not all strokes are these massive, catastrophic events.
Thing is, a stroke means blood has been cut off to the brain. No blood means no oxygen which means cell death. It is impossible for even a 'mild' stroke to be mild. Now with myo, blood and oxygen supply are mostly undesturbed.
@@kitten8410 There are different kinds of strokes. Strokes can be caused by a clot (cutting off blood flow to the brain), or by a bleed in a blood vessel in the brain. The result is the same because brain cells are deprived of oxygen, but not all stokes are the same. Also, you have TIAs (transient ischemic attack), which are essentially mini strokes. These can be pretty mild and result in no permanent damage. You still need to see a doctor, but they do not result in cell death. So my point still stands. There are mild strokes, just like there is mild myocarditis.
Alphonso Davis a professional soccer player age 21 got Myocarditis from COVID not the vaccine. He wasn't able to play or train for three months then he was back playing professional soccer for Bayern Munich. His biggest concern was not playing. Soccer is a very high cardiovascular activity, even more so being a professional and Alphonso is back to 100 percent. He was never hospitalized, basically just wasn't allowed to train or play in matches until the heart swelling went away.
The exact moment the caller realized he was wrong = when he resorted to the desperate hail mary "you're killing your kids." Even HE wasn't trying to make that point until that moment. Then, in a moment of sheer panic, he said the most inflammatory thing that came to mind in hopes of sparking the same irrational emotional response that worked on him when he got sucked into the right-wing cult.
That tactic is used so frequently be right wingers in debates/interviews. They get debunked point-by-point, in real time, and then it's just "communism" "You hate America" "Wide open border" - as if we haven't heard this s**t hundreds of times already.
He was acting like the crazed and disheveled scientist film trope, where they burst into a room hugging papers and folders, trying to warn the arrogant mayor or governor or president about their discovery, BUT NOBODY WILL LISTEN! I guarantee he watched this vid afterwards, and thinks he "won" the "debate," because aside from his Dunning-Kruger brain rot convincing him he mastered the medical and scientific professions in one afternoon, he's also incapable of understanding his "accomplishment" beyond the optics of "I yelled at him alot and therefore won."
I'm positive he's tried to use this argument against people on Twitter or something and it backfired super hard, so he just starts up super defensive because he's terrified of getting blown out. And then he gets called on it. And then Sam slowly walks through his argument... and he gets blown out.
Wait? Joe Rogan cites VAERS in the conversation this caller has knocked his homeostasis off kilter so hotly debating. The good doctor needs to conflate himself a prescription for something. As you do.
Well technically he didn't really cite VAERS though, he referenced VAERS only to *DISCREDIT* it, in an attempt to discredit the article that cites myocarditis is more common with covid than the vaccine, he said that it used "observational data" which is an *UNRELIABLE* method which VAERS & this other article both use & thus he is in agreement that VAERS is unreliable & he just think it also means the other is too.. so yeah that doesn't exactly count as "citing" VAERS
@@berjanbeen7188 ouch. Did it also make sure to account for those vaers references to growing tails, instant gender transitions and penile enlargement? Vaers is comically good.
@@deviouskris3012 I mean there is value in VAERS data, since you might extrapolate trends that might warrant investigation. That said using it as a primary source seems like a good way of having to make a retraction later.
When I worked in cardiology I saw one person (woman in early 20s) have side effects linked to the booster. All the medical staff were fascinated by her case because it was extremely rare. Patient only needed a couple days in hospital for observation and went home with a short term prescription. I now work in theatres and get to visit ICU where most of the beds are filled with the unvaccinated. Some treatable chest pain vs a month on a ventilator- I know which I'd risk
This is what I live for! There is nothing more entertaining than idiots trying to debate someone and getting shut down because they can’t even muster a cohesive thought. Sam, you are a legend good sir!
I dont know. I googled the question are most people with myocarditis hospitalized and Sam is wrong the guy is right. You will almost certainly be hospitalized with myocarditis. This makes sense. One paper says that the majority are released after a day or two bit Sam is clearly wrong on this.
@@hassanabdaladl lol every libertarian is a snowflake, they love to think of themselves as unique and special but immediately melt away under sam’s breath when he starts debating them.
"You're conflating all sorts of different things" "I'm not conflating anything! I didn't... what do you mean I'm conflating? What does that mean?" "What does conflating mean?" "I know what conflating means! What do you mean by saying I'm conflating it?" Nope, he did not know what conflating means.
Con-Flate. With Flate. As opposed to without Flate. He's got an attic full of Flate's. Don't talk to him about Flates, Con or otherwise. He practically wrote the book on it.
Technically they don't, but only because it's an assumed pre-requisite before the study even enters consideration. Same way doctors don't feel the need to specify cardiologists are doctors, it's an assumed pre-requisite.
I have a background in medicine and attempting to tease actual knowledge out of all the nonsense online is often just impossible. My doctor wanted to start me on some cholesterol medicine, and I decided to search this fairly common side effect it can have, leg pain. If there were any good results in those google searches, they were completely buried by the nonsense, most of which were actual doctors spouting complete BS
@@FUNKY_BUTTLOVIN 100% true. Finding actual facts these days is a nightmare. Just imagine if you're just out there looking for "truths" that confirm your delusions... There's literally more of that then there are actual scientific studies... Just a bazillion bloggers spreading trash from their ass.
@@FUNKY_BUTTLOVIN uh have you heard of lexicomp or micromedex? These are what I use as a pharmacy student (and most doctors, nurses and healthcare providers use) to look up all drug info. You can also request a package label from your local pharmacy or type in FDA package label rosuvastatin for example… not that hard
@@Bickle121 sam literally shut up for almost the entire second half, and then he called him out for a "great argument" when sam said he heard the study he gave him
its impossible to reason with these people. they are literally too stupid and fanatical in their medieval psychotic ideology to be reasoned with, its the intelligent thing to regard them as stupid trolls that aren't worth talking to.
Lmfao.. PERFECT encapsulation of a Rogan fan. Doesn't like facts, so screams out his feelings and throws a tantrum. And never once says anything approaching an intelligent or rational thought.
Most Rogan fans. Not every Rogan fan is a clown that hangs off his words. I like his stand-up and I like him from an old show called News Radio. I'm a lefty and I only watch his podcasts with people like Neil degrasse tyson, kyle Kullinski, Ben Burgis and probably another lefty or two I've forgotten about, are on. Rogan has a good evolution bit in his stand up. Humans and apes share 98% of their dna. To deny evolution is stupid. It's like if I gave you a sandwich which was 98% shit, and 2% ham, would you be willing to call that a ham sandwich? I'm just saying, not everyone who likes Rogan is a mouth breathing reich wing clown that follows like sheep. I am a lefty that likes a lot of things that are mostly reich winger clowns activities, so I find myself in this position quite a lot. I grew up in a race car shop in the rural southeast US. As a lefty in the rural south, it's yikesy.
This guy - “you got to read the whole study” Also this guy - “what are you gonna read it?! Thats the problem!” Honestly i dont even know why you bother to continue the moment he suggested Myocarditis is as bad as a stroke.
What about the time where he claimed these were all mild cases of acute myocarditis? Mild ... acute? What is his "science background", Political Science?
The way this dude scoffed at the concept of peer reviews says all you need to know about anything that comes out of this tools mouth. I love it when people who have no idea how science works talk about science with false authority.
Also seems like an example of the “debate bro” kind of people (for lack of a better term). He thinks 2 doctors having a “debate” is more credible than the process of peer reviewing.
When someone claims to be a doctor then instantly switch that to “a background in science” it means the person works at a place where everyone else is a scientists and he is an idiot with a completely different profession.
I love how surface level this guy's thinking is. He reads "heart not pumping as well" and thinks "the heart is important, therefore that MUST be deadly no matter what anyone says". No one tell him that when he goes to sleep his heart rate slows down significantly. Surely that must sound like death to him.
Hé flipped out about heart function reduced. I didn’t do cardio for 6 weeks due to a broken toe. I can tell you my heart function significantly reduced by only cycling to work instead of doing spinning class and CrossFit regularly. I took the stairs 5 floors up at work today, trust me, it sucked 😂
"Decreased function" could mean it goes from 100% to 90%. That isn't Great, or even ideal, but... I mean, I'd need a doctor to tell me if 90% is bad. My knee-jerk reaction is that it isn't though.
I don't think Joe Rogan's fans have the capacity to read anything 🤣 I remember a quote "it's easier to the fool the masses than to convince one person he's wrong" That's Joe Rogan's base in a nutshell.
That's Joe Rogan himself. Look up Joe Rogan v Primatologist. He goes on some wild rant that there's a newly discovered giant primate in the Congo. A short while later, a primatologist calls in and says "yeah, that's bullshit". The way Rogan digs in his heels and attacks the primatologist for being a woman is pretty despicable.
Typical right winger.. The crazy hypocrisy constantly.. "Stop cutting me off and let me talk".. Then continues to interrupt and speak over Sam while also not letting him talk...
Sam's entire show is a gossip hour about personalities he doesn't like and obsesses over these individuals every day making a new video on them while never getting a response back and simultaneously posing as a "news network"...Is Sam clear if this accusation of insanity?
@@coletrickle1775 Yeah and they never respond back, yet he continues leeching off of their content and numbers in order to maintain even the slightest slightest slightest shred of relevance he may have left in hopes they will one day respond, and they never do lmao. The man is in his 50s, yet is a little gossip girl, literally all he does.
@@coletrickle1775 And the fact you follow that with any shred of seriousness shows the type of mindset you have, you like drama, thats the only explanation I could have for someone who follows Sam Sedar. There's not one ounce of importance he brings to ANYTHING else. He's good for a once a year stunt like the Crowder thing, then dissapears into complete irrelevance while plotting how he could leech off someone else's fame and success. A leeching gossip girl is more like the correct term, my apologies for earlier.
I've spent a decent amount of time talking and working in labs with doctors whom were chemists and biologists and I can assure you, when you do a study, it must be peer reviewed. At least five doctors in your respective field must look at your methods, your results, and be able to replicate your experiment with the same conditions and report similar findings. If they can't, you are full of it. This guy just wanted to defend his God and only made himself look like a lunatic in the process.
This isn't quite true. I'm in year 4 of a chemical biology Ph.D. and actually being able to replicate experiments is a big problem in biological sciences especially. There was a recent review in Nature where a group went through trying to replicate highly cited experiments, and I can't remember the number but a shocking amount could not be repeated. This is because the requirements to get into top journals are so high now that it usually requires 10-20 scientists doing specialized work in collaboration making it difficult for anyone else to pull together that much expertise just to check their work. Others replicating your experiments is definitely not a requirement for publication. Also, this caller isn't entirely wrong about peer review. Bio and medrxiv exist so that important work can be put out there quickly prior to peer review. Scientists monitor these websites and read and consider the work. But you do that knowing full well that it still needs review. Scientists well versed in the field can filter a preprint fairly well so it's still valuable. That being said, this caller is an idiot and I doubt his ability to read an scientific paper, reviewed or otherwise.
@@jasjfl I'm not sure why you're bringing up publication as to why the caller wasn't entirely wrong about peer-review. Sam wasn't using publication as credibility, he specifically used peer-review. The person you're replying to clearly wasn't talking about publication either, again they're talking about peer-review. Your comment reads like you're under the impression that peer-review and publication are interchangeable. They are not. Of course peer-review isn't perfect and some things fall through the cracks, but it's the most reliable thing a layman can use. That said, you mentioned a Nature study on replicating experiments without giving any figures. You say "shocking amount" but this can mean anything. Given your misuse of peer-review, we don't even know if said study is relevant, as you did not specify whether or not these experiments are part of peer-reviewed papers.
@@jasjfl The ability to cherrypick non peer reviewed studies to validate your preexisting views is precisely why peer review is essential. When we're talking about general public like this guy, then dumping peer review as a standard and accepting any study that you want to accept isn't at all equivalent to scientific peers using those non-peer reviewed studies in their work.
Yeah this is MR's screening process for callers. "Hi so what is the topic you want to discuss with Sam?" "How the libtard scientists are all wrong about something and I'm right." "Ok do you have any points and are you a moron?" "No I don't have any actual points and yes I'm a moron. I'm really angry though so i want to debate Sam."
I especially didn’t appreciate Sam asking for sources and explaining why they were bad sources, while also giving him plenty of time to prove himself a fool
Realistically, if he wanted to finish those thoughts, he should have finished them before calling in. He should have known he'd get questioned on the details.
Ooooo nonono this guy embarrassed himself so much worse than I could ever imagine! I feel sorry for Sam that he had to put himself through that for the content lol.
He has a full on show. He didn’t put himself through anything to get the content. All he has to do is get the producer to clip it and post it. There done
I was diagnosed with myocraditis after going to an ER. They sent me home with a prescription for extra strength Ibuprofen. I was fine a few days later.
Yep most cases of myocarditis goes down exactly like this. Yeah can it be bad and harmful and leave someone in the hospital for a little while, sure but its extremely rare and usually bed rest for a couple of days is all you need
Common Conservative problem; not really understanding the difference between evidence and assertion; the main reason why the Tobacco lobby and the anti-climate change people even have a constituency of talking parrots like this guy here.
“Is this the way you debate… by calling people names” - said with a straight face after a horrible appeal to emotion using Sams kids. These MFs never get when they cross a line but cry heavily when things are returned.
I like when morons are called out harshly, we've been silk gloving doofballs for fear of being bullies for too long. Idiots have never felt more confident, time to bring out the tough love.
Actually that’s false. Some people think just because they carry the “doctor” title, they are entitled to making assertions such as the one(s) this caller made. If he was an actual medical physician, this call would’ve been much more concerning to hear
@@snoglydox on the matter of vaccines, the only ‘doctors’ actually talking about this should be legally licensed medical physicians. The people who actually administer, research and study these matters.
You mean you're an outrage merchant, eating the low hanging fruit Sam fed you, for profit, on a monopoly corporation's benefit. Yep, you're the American majority, getting your 'report', from a youtube drama queen, cosplaying as 'news'.
Myocarditis is a possible side effect. It needs to be identifies by a medical professional. There is a fact sheet given to you by the Dr at the time the rna vaccination is given which deals with this. It should be reported because untreated it can be complicated and life threatening. It is not a good idea to ignore any symptoms.
@@Dapper_Dean 11 of your tribal cultists loved your triggered response and emotional pictures. ...thanks for proving my point, via demonstration, in outrage.
@@avalynnewilby8150 You will be ignored, as facts that counter the tribe of Sam donors will always be. Just like evolution by creationists, and space flight by flat earrthers. Cults need absolutism, ESPECIALLY in their messiah's they donate to and revere. This capitalist donation channel is just that, evidenced by the cultist's action in their echo chamber. It's like a 'attack the attacker' clause in scientology in here.
Caller: "You don't let people talk! That's why people lose debates to you!" Sam: Let's guy talk and deep-six all of his credibility and look like a complete moron. Wins.
James O'Brien has some fascinating calls that go the same way. One guy in particular called in to complain about his coverage of Brexit and kept accusing him of not letting him talk when James asked him a simple follow up question.
@@sanninjiraiya Ah, yeah I *remember* that caller ...that one was a BEAUTY. 😁 (sometimes I wish discussions like that, and this one here, would last for hours, but then again I also don't want to see Sam or James lose any neurons over these berks.)
@@sanninjiraiya The most important thing I've ever learned about debate was from O'Brien, and it has been an absolute delight deploying it IRL. It's amazing how easy it is to break right-wingers by simply demanding they make a specific point followed with proof, and then holding them to that until they do it, no exceptions. It's sometimes difficult to ignore the bait and the insults they throw out to distract, but it's easier when you keep reminding yourself to make them answer the question. Hard to get upset if you're laser-focused. And yeah, I remember that specific caller, it was fuggin' hilarious. 😂
@@AngeliqueStP If you're okay with a bit of e D g I n E s S, Vaush might be up your alley, here on YT. He's had several longer-form debates that get heated, and it's pretty entertaining most of the time.
@@furiousapplesack I asked a right-winger for a citation and the guy went insane. He made a separate post about me in the specific group and was responding like an irrational nutter. Even other right-wingers were making fun of him. It’s the best way to throw them off.
Why is this caller so angry? He got pissed when Sam asked for the study, he got pissed when Sam simply repeated his own words back to him. Lied about being a doctor then refused to give his credentials. That's a first - an argument from authority while refusing to even demonstrate you are, in fact, an authority.
I loved how whenever Sam referred to the caller as a "doctor", they'd respond with a deeper voice. As if lowering their voice would make them sound more like a doctor.
If this dude is a doctor, I pray he never ends up treating me in a life or death situation. The fact he didn't know that "peer review" meant the article has been vetted by one's professional cohorts is proof enough this guy is no academic whatsoever...let alone a member of the medical field.
@@spacemanx9595 Remember to not reply directly to bots, they get paid a fraction of a nickel for every reply to their nonsense. Just write their name out without the @ or anything, they get nothing then :)
The Abstract of the study by the way: Between 14 June 2021 and 4 September 2021, 33 Chinese adolescents who developed acute myocarditis/pericarditis following Comirnaty vaccination were identified. In total, 29 (87.88%) were male and 4 (12.12%) were female, with a median age of 15.25 years. And 27 (81.82%) and 6 (18.18%) cases developed acute myocarditis/pericarditis after receiving the second and first dose, respectively. All cases are mild and required only conservative management. The overall incidence of acute myocarditis/pericarditis was 18.52 (95% confidence interval [CI], 11.67-29.01) per 100 000 persons vaccinated. The incidence after the first and second doses were 3.37 (95% CI, 1.12-9.51) and 21.22 (95% CI, 13.78-32.28 per 100 000 persons vaccinated, respectively. Among male adolescents, the incidence after the first and second doses were 5.57 (95% CI, 2.38-12.53) and 37.32 (95% CI, 26.98-51.25) per 100 000 persons vaccinated. Conclusions There is a significant increase in the risk of acute myocarditis/pericarditis following Comirnaty vaccination among Chinese male adolescents, especially after the second dose. 33 is a laughable sample size. I'm not sure how they could just a 95% confidence interval with that. Ridiculous. This is also specifically about the Pfizer vacc. It's also pretty much only apparently in males. Seems to me like it's totally random tbh. " All cases are mild and required only conservative management" like, debunks his whole argument right now. I just don't get it. Why did he keep going?
And then when Sam was quiet for a while, the caller was getting irritated too, accusing Sam of not paying attention. He's a quintessential reactionary: no thoughts, just reactions and pure emotion.
My son randomly had myocarditis as a 4 y/o. Not virus caused and he was not admitted to the hospital. He did visit a cardiologist and got a monitor for a couple days and all was cleared and well.
I think my favorite argument ever is yelling at someone telling them that the only reason why they are a good debater is because they yell over the other person. Self-own at its finest. Dude, was definitely a libertarian.
@Scarlett Anne Foxx Libertarianism is the political result of dunning kruger syndrome. They all feel soooo special for having "seen the truth", the truth being whatever the culture warriors at the time tell them is true. Always comes to a screeching halt once they start talking to people outside the bubble.
Yeah and a narcissist like Jesus Christ whatever is in his head is just 100% correct I love his argument about how people with myocarditis it's not mild they have to stay in the hospital for days how about the million people who died from covid? Fuck this guy to hell and back
@Scarlett Anne Foxx " It is always wonderful to hear them try to defend their ridiculous arguments to someone like Sam." It's one of the few things that makes this world worth experiencing. It truly brings me joy.
A tragedy of open science access. People can now read pre-print medical research without ever being exposed to the concepts of levels of evidence and grades of recommendations.
@@khbgkh Of course, but the open access is what created an environment where the illiterate, en masse, can abuse research to suit their delusions. I think open access to scientific journals is on the whole beneficial and incredible (I've been working with a medical researcher to optimize their dPCR protocol, as a computer scientist, and I've only been able to learn and do this because of open access), however it cannot be ignored that it has some negative side effects.
Made it 20 minutes and 35 seconds. Listening to this guy and trying to comprehend him is like injecting stress directly in to your brain through your ears. Hats off to you Sam, I don't know how you do it.
Yeah, I made it almost as long. This guy didn't call in to debate, he called in to preach. And he got very angry when Sam started calling him out for his garbage.
The problem with dismissing peer-review as a significant metric, and then putting more faith in VAERS than in doctors, is that you then HAVE to simply make anecdotal claims the rest of the way. You can't cite friendly studies or "experts" (Hoeg) as evidence of anything, because you discredited the entire concept.
There's few things sadder than an uneducated man who is convinced he is right. This caller is a fool but will go to his dying breath convinced he is a genius.
@@maskedmarauder3278 lol. No. It's called quibbling. The meaning was conveyed despite the misspelling. Correcting on spelling or other minutiae is helpful to no one.
@@christhomas3720 Experts can be distinguished by their attention to detail. Misspelling is a gateway offence. Why so much fuss over quibbling? Everyone has the freedom to ignore.
![Lil Uzi Vert - Chill Bae [Official Music Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/D7F42F_JM3U/mqdefault.jpg)
This caller confirms why defunding education was an exquisitely bad idea.
Bad idea for society, good idea for those seeking to manipulate reactionary dunces
*privatizing
mic drop ^^^^^^^^^^
God. I wish they would read Malone's own studies. He counters everything he says publicly that he himself published in medical journals.
Or a great republican strategy fuck the gop but damn they can execute the long game
Noah, chill dude. Carrying that much anger and stress can decrease your Lymphocyte count, making it harder to fight off infections, from the common cold to herpes. Which in turn opens the door to Myocarditis.
Also raises BP which can cause stroke.
That first minute was a DOOZY
😳🤣I smoke weed. I am impervious to everything. Including a coherent thought.
@@apriljk6557 c . Vfc CNN
😂
“You can’t just cite a study, you have to read it”
Two minutes later
“What, you’re going to read the study? No! Don’t do that!”
and then goes on to offer to read another study he was trying to cite from. Absolutely incredible stuff here.
"No, don't read it! You're going to find the part in the study that shines the light where I'm wrong! 👿"
The guy comes on basing his argument, apparently, on a single study? Yet when Sam asks for it, he doesn't even have it ready and has to look for it. I believe Sam was right: this guy was high.
that truly was mind boggling
I love how he naturally assumes people citing studies haven’t read them. 😂😂😂
My favorite bit was when he was like "doctors don't care about peer review, instead they *describes the process of peer review*." Incredible stuff really.
That was amazing 🤣🤣🤣
As if medicine isn't an evidence based practice 🤣
So in other words they review stuff as if they were peers? 😂
That bit kinda proved they're being brainwashed to be knee jerk against certain words, like "peer review". They figured out that whenever they hear "peer review" they;ll lose and look like fools, so their Pavlovian reaction is to DISS it. And of course, it also proves they truly don't know what they're talking about: "I hate ..... vegetables!!! But green stuff you pull from the earth or pluck from plants which has a fresh bittery taste to it, THAT i love! "
@@firmbase indeed. They are so brainwashed, they probably assume doctors practice medicine like once witches and warlocks were imagined to do it.
The dumbest people are always the most indignant about being wrong.
Very well put.
...and the most wrong.
This is Dunning-Kreuger
Well said. The Rogan simp could have had his citations ready to go..why didnt he?...bc he is a lying Joe Rogan groupie you can hear the caller is strait 😭 crying, just listen to him he sobs as he gets mad.
To be fair to him. Sam should have let him speak on and kept interrupting him, it was a pretty rude exchange. I did not like it
“You mean they review it, as if like they were peers.” He didn’t like that one. Solid burn 9/10.
This dude really tried to argue that doctors don’t care if something is peer reviewed???
😂😂😂😂 his smirk while saying it killed me
Yes, yes, yes! 🤣 That's was great of Sam and was real funny.
Lol timestamp?
@@whitehawk45 @ 20:45
That dude got so mad when Sam pointed out his study wasn't peer reviewed. That tells you all you need to know about his credibility lol
The best part was when he CONTINUED by describing the process of peer review!
@@orionred2489 didn't he also claim he has some kind of scientific background? Dude it cracked.
His voice starts cracking like 10 minutes in and I'm dying laughing.
He's not entirely wrong about that though. I'm in a bioscience Ph.D. program and people do regularly read bio and medrxiv to see work ahead of peer review. It's good for seeing what work is being done as quickly as possible. Knowledgeable scientists have the ability to read that work and understand the flaws prior to peer review because they are peers. This guy however is a moron and I don't trust his interpretation of anything. At the same time, peer review isn't some magical stamp of authenticity. Lots of junk makes it through and not everything in preprint should be dismissed. If you're qualified to judge the merits then there is no problem in considering data from preprint articles.
In that case barely anything is peer reviewed pertaining to COVID...
"I'm not frustrated!" The caller cries in frustration.
In person the caller probably would have punched Sam in the nose. And it would have been well deserved. Sam is nothing more than an antagonist
@@bonscotty67 I'm guessing if we go back in your life we'd see you get upset when you saw Richard Spencer get punched in the face.
Your side is all about "facts over feelings" until the facts hurt your feelings.
@@ManuelGuzmanPhotography I don't use feelings when facts are needed
@@bonscotty67 This is what everyone says, and everybody who says this is a liar
@@ghostwitch644 Sooo.....everyone is a liar?
Sorry. We, Americans, won't allow our country to be united by commonality of the practice and/or concept of "lying".
"Are you a doctor"
"Yes"
"Oh you are a doctor?"
"I dont want to talk about my profession"
I could feel his sweat when that happened
I'll take biggest liars of the 21st century for 1000 ;) The guy was so obviously lying, Pinnochio would lie more convincingly lol
He has a doctorate in BS from Massive Ego University. How dare you question his credentials!
@@kegsofvomitspit Haha I actually lolled at your comment😂👌🏼
🤥
Sam said myocarditis is mild. That's is a utter false opinion. Look at mortality rates. You guys are clowns!
The author is not "Hoeg." Hoeg is a person who tweeted the article. The guy's source, "Risk of myocarditis following sequential COVID-19 vaccinations by age and sex," is a 1-paragraph news release about a forthcoming article that is under peer review now (lead author: Patone). After all this guy's nonsense about "reading the article," the new data suggests a risk of myocarditis after the booster shot as high as 13 per 1 million vaccinations compared to 7 per 1 million among COVID-19 infections. In other words, we're talking about a .000013% risk compared to a .000007% risk, with the tradeoff being protection from COVID-19. Even if this study survives peer review, the caller has no sense of relative risk or effect size. I think I'll still take the shot.
If that's the same study which originally kicked off this specific antivax talking point, it goes on to state that even with the increased cases of myocarditis among boosted people in the aforementioned age group, the number which resulted in hospitalization or death were still greater among covid positive individuals. So it's no wonder the caller has to outright reject the existence of mild cases of myocarditis, because that's the one detail of the study which makes his focus on the number of cases completely moot.
Thanks for doing the legwork you two.
Excellent research
Spot on that’s precisely what I found when looking this up via the NHS. They claimed a 11 cases per 1 million of myocarditis sounds pretty unlikely, of those 11 few of any have gone on to die!! It’s laughable stuff..
Great response
Imagine calling into a show to attempt to debunk a claim/piece of evidence and not having your citations ready.
These people go out of their way to prove their own idiocy to the world.
I don't even have an interest in debating but the one thing i know for SURE if i were forced to do it... Have some fucking material to read from on the thing i wanna talk about. But i suspect this caller doesn't see how stupid it is to have to google on your phone mid debate.
I love that his whole thing was "anyone can find an internet article about anything" but immediately melts when he finds out Sam expects them to be peer-reviewed. I imagine that there are tons of studies that doctors rely on that aren't peer-reviewed yet - information moves so fast. But to imagine that they don't care at all? Sounds like this guy needs a new doctor. 😂😂
@@DerAptrgangr If not a new doctor a new dope connection at least.
@@DerAptrgangr If you remember early on he said "You have to have a double blinded prospective study or whatever you are saying is bullshit." then near the end he is crying because Sam wants basic peer review lol.
Standard debate prep involves looking into common counter arguments to your points so you are prepared to deal with them as well as making sure you have your scources and attributions.
Throwing a temper tantrum isn’t a good way to win a debate. This caller has the temperament of a 5 year old.
"I'm a doctor!"
"I have a scientific background!"
"I'm not gonna give you my whole background!"
"I used to watch House religiously...."
🤣🤣🤣🤣Wait? Is he a scientist or a doctor?
@@beckywiththesharpknife8331 Wait? Is he a scientist or a doctor?
Either way, dude has Lupus.
Hahaha, shit even House would call this guy stupid.
@@beckywiththesharpknife8331 He's a scientific doctor, BOOM! Lol
@@beckywiththesharpknife8331
No
Sam really got under this person’s skin with a simple, “And you are citing what study?”
He started yelling like he'd lit his pants on fire, ironically enough~ 🤣🤣
It’s more Sam’s tone that annoyed the guy.
@@placebojesus5652 that's definitely a big part of it and I would like to see that dropped amongst folks trying to debate and persuade
The guy had a negative tone and so it's interesting that your comment distinguishes Sam.
@@CMClaudio1989 at a certain point you can’t pander and simplify things for these people. They argue for the sake of arguing, not to improve anyone’s lives or situation; Sam having an impatient and undeniably frustrated attitude is warranted, maybe these people would take a look at how fucking dumb they are every once in awhile.
This guy made me angry with myself for ever being a Joe Rogan fan lol
I still like joe rogans commentary on mma. You know, shit hes qualified to talk about.
what pisses me off is, the Proud Boys likely would have never existed, not as the force they became, if not for Joe Rogan. the boost that they got and the members drawn in by Rogan having Gavin McInnes on his show pitching his idea about a group designed to go out and do violence to protesters and just whoever else they know the cops won't extend proper protection to, all while little Joe sat there and "oh wow what a neat idea"d him to death, was THE thing that created their membership boom. Any decent person would be mortified and ashamed after being such a driving force in creating such an evil in the world... but if Joe learned anything at all from it, it definitely didn't change how he operates at all
@@FUNKY_BUTTLOVIN America is a fascist country, as much as rogan had major influence on vaccine hesitancy its because these individuals were already hesitant...
the same way "Russian interference" in American elections was the extent of posting memes & the Wikileaks email scandal..... it didnt take much to tip the scales out of Hillary's favour, shes was already very hated.
meaning he had some impact but the segments of America that have been waging a culture war for the last 20 years, the persistent indoctrination from the rest of the media & the broader culture, the hostility of those people towards certain activist movements like BLM... definitely had a greater impact bringing people to fascism. People watching Joe Rogan (religiously especially) already have those tendencies, in my humble opinion
😂😂😂
@@jordant.teeterson3100 if we are being honest, he is one of the worst mma announcers working today in my opinion. Especially when he’s paired with DC. Such a lack of any technical analysis just bro talk and rogan screaming “Oh, he’s hurt!” with the cringe announcer cam.
If UFC wanted to please the long term fans, they would boot rogan, tell DC to stick to analysis and leave the garbage comedy act to Brendan schaub, and have bisping or felder or someone take toe’s spot. Honestly Laura Sanko is doing a legitimately great analyst job (probably because she feels like she needs to prove herself to the Neanderthal sexist mma fanbase) on contenders and I would take her over rogan in a goddamn second.
Bro’s voice is shaking and near tears while Sam is talking to him calmly like a therapist something the caller desperately needs.
Malone 😅
😂
I'M NOT FRUSTRATED
I feel bad for him. We need better mental health funding and health funding in general.
Do you all still support the vaccine mandates?
Just confirms that anti-vaxxers are nuts
Yea. Pretty.much. they are sooooooooooo. Dumb. Joe rogan literally said. Do not listen to me.
@@TheBlazersfan22 Rogan told people not to listen to him, but then he continued bloviating. When one doesn't know something about a subject, it is best to remain silent. If stupid people in our society remained silent, we might not be approaching 1 million deaths from the pandemic, and we might have an workable action plan to address climate change. Unfortunately, as the Forrest Gump character said, "Stupid is as stupid does."
@@HeathWatts Its why I say very little when dealing with a topic I'm unfamiliar with, other then to ask general questions so I know where to start with my own basic research. And why its tough to get me to shut up when a topic I'm familiar with comes up. I like to learn and to teach.
@@HeathWatts exactly people should not take the high ground on issues they know nothing about. So out of interest who has the high ground on Covid vaccines🤔
@@jsville5247 What do you mean by high ground? We have a century of evidence that vaccines are safe and effective, evidence that mRNA vaccines are safe and effective, and more than a year of data showing that COVID-19 vaccines are safe and effective.
I am not a virologist or immunologist and presumably you aren't either, so we must trust the expertise of those who are.
I bet this guy describes Covid as a "mild" disease but this guy in nearly in tears about myocarditis being described as "mild"
Literally lmao he's fucking crying so hard and yelling like a chimp
lmao, that's a great point. Reminds me of their argument about gender reassignment. All the positive effects of transitioning are ignorable but the 1% that detransition are the most important thing in the world.
Google are most people with myocarditis hospitalized. Sam is clearly wrong here. If you are diagnosed with myocarditis you will be hospitalized. Most are dismissed within a day or two but they definitely want to keep you under observation in the hospital. I suppose it could be called mild because most people recover very quickly but its not treated lightly. They want to hospitalize when you get it. The caller is right and sam is wrong. I am no expert but based on a quick google search I am not sure I would call it mild if 96% of people are hospitalized. Sam is simply wrong as far as I can tell.
@@jlrinc1420 Mild cases generally get treated with medication and rest, at home. Hospitalization is for severe cases...
@@lilstevechan8427 silly comparison that’s totally valid especially when talking about kids transitioning we’ve all seen docs like Transhood. obviously adults can make their own mistakes.
The ONLY reason those children were kept in the hospital was literally because they were STUDYING those children, FOR myocarditis.
Yes, thank you.
Exactly what I was thinking. He's also probably confused because in the US you only go to the hospital if you're like dying. In other countries you can go to the hospital even for minor things because it's so much more affordable or free.
Some more facts the caller was too ignorant to look up.
I got it from the vaccine and just didn't go out for my runs. For most people it is that easy
As a doctor.... Yes, we absolutely expect literature to be peer reviewed.
As a doctor...peer review is better than no peer review....but peer review is not the arbiter of "quality". With reference to the question "is myocarditis in young males greater after vaccine or after Covid-19?" the Nature paper is of much higher quality than the paper referenced by Zepps/Sam. This was covered previous to this call in some detail by Vinay Prasad (a form of informal peer review), which was available to Sam but he chose to ignore it. One year later the consensus is in and the caller and Joe Rogan were in fact right and Sam was wrong - myocarditis is many times greater following mRNA vaccination (especially Moderna) than after Covid-19. Sam chose trying to score cheap debate points over having an honest discussion of the data (which could have included things like peer review) and the result was yet another wrong Covid talking point that I still hear repeated to this day.
@@robbinburns6329
Well, I largely disagree with your opinion that Sam was wrong and the caller was right in any substantial way, and the followup to your statement that peer review isn't really essential with "I saw it on Joe Rogan" also gave me pause for concern. Are you a doctor? Maybe you graduated a long time ago and haven't maintained your licensing requirements properly?
To the extent that peer review isn't absolutely essential, you should be consulting highly trusted organizations, exclusively, such as the ama, the apa, the cdc, etc. "Joe Rogan" is the antithesis of that: an editorial sports interview broadcast that dabbles in social issues, has no peer reviewed publications who dropped out of college: “I went to college but I fooled off. I barely paid attention. All I was thinking about was martial arts competition and stand-up.”
I think he has his moments of being critical, but Rogan certainly isn't balanced and regularly hosts a culture club of totalitarian conspiracy theorists remnant of jeering early cpc Maoist Boxers.
To the extent that what you're saying might have any merit, the study your referencing was actually pulled from print and republished after its peer review was re-tested, which is always a good sign--the type of stuff we see when a study recommends smoking tobacco for gingivitis, for example. Strangely, they did not make their raw data available in the most recent round: it's almost as if they're paying a low-quality journal to peer review and publish their work rather than using a journal that requires a high level of merit such as a mathematical review on top of a simple evaluation of honest citation and formatting.
But let's really dig deep into the findings as they relate to your comment and the call:
1. "Many times greater"? Weren't you taught in one of your methods or metrics classes that this is a shady way of summarizing data, and weren't you told to specifically not use multiples in conclusions and headlines in your own publications? Because what's many times more than one? The correct answer is 2.1 or more: this hides the strength of the effect, and that's virtually always dishonest.
2. The caller said that myocarditis is as dangerous as stroke or heart attack. That's ridiculous. If you really are a doctor, which I don't contend, you know that myocarditis is a risk with most vaccines. We monitor patients for an hour, then they leave. We tell them to relax for a few days if they feel tired. Exaggerating the danger of myocarditis is stupid, just like conflating myocarditis by itself with myocarditis caused by an immune response to an illness or a vaccine.
3. In your statement, you suggest that myocarditis is common after the covid vaccine. In fact, it's most common in sinovax, and the majority of myocarditis events were in their earlier iteration of the vaccine which had lower quality standards and was tested on minority populations in places like the Philippines and South America. In fact, myocarditis is extremely rare in the vaccines used in the US. This might come as a surprise to you because you're cherry picking studies that count only one dose and three doses and neglect to mention that almost everyone who got one dose got two whereas only about half got three (for example, >80% of the UK got 2). Strangely people weren't dropping like flies.
4. That's probably because even when we look at the intentionally flawed studies that make no qualms about misrepresenting data with seemingly accidental ellisions of 47-147 million doses, depending on which of their publications you're looking at, temporally. But even if you allow their gross errors, you'd still be looking at less than 18 myocarditis events within 28 days of the vaccine per million people, a lot of which might just be related to the increase in sedentary lifestyle associated with being stuck inside.
5. If we actually look at confirmed cases of myocarditis instead of suspected cases, we're down to 2-6 cases per million people. Compare that to the 450 cases per million comfirmed in people with covid and the many other dangers of the virus, the fact is that the risk profile of the vaccine versus the virus is no contest.
Now, I'm not sure if you really are a doctor or not. Maybe a chiropractor? Or a doctor of theology? But in medical academia or research, especially at a reputable school, you need to look through all of the research on a topic to form an opinion, and you need to look at each section to be sure that there are no contradictions and that the methods are done well, and then you're supposed to ask for all the raw data. These are reporters: they may not have time for that. Joe Rogan certainly doesn't: he's citing individual studies based on single search terms on Google--not even using academic search--and mainly reading from abstracts, which is the sensationalist portion of garbage publications.
I encourage you to go back for a diversification in research if you're actually a doctor because this type of low quality referencing is very concerning in terms of the risk to your patients. At least within the past 3 years, you should do an exhaustive search of peer reviewed publications and look at all of their findings before you jump into a culture club. It's extremely irresponsible and frankly you're violating your ethical oath if you're getting involved in anti-science cliques like Joe Rogan and Jordan Peterson (or any cliques, really). Do your own research. If you're a doctor, you should be the authority not the appealer.
@@robbinburns6329this comment gave me multiple strokes
@@robbinburns6329
@@jermsbestfriend9296 wow what a brilliant comment, thank you doctor !
This guy is probably telling everyone about how Sam wouldn’t “let him finish” lol
What do you mean? He and his positions are clearly finished. ;-)
Sam is such a selfish lover lol
@Richard Rivera literally the first time he complained about being cut off was when he couldn't answer what study he cited. It was totally made up, because he was embarrassed.
And that he "owned" Sam.
I read this as the caller was attempting to interrupting Sam explaining what the moron caller is conflating.
The problem is that Joe Rogan misinterpreted his information. It stated that you are more likely to get myocarditis from the vaccine than if you were healthy. Which is true. The problem is that he completely ignored the fact that having covid does not mean that you are healthy and you are even more likely to get it from covid.
Joe was using vaccine vs healthy stats to argue against vaccine vs covid stats. He still didn't realise this at the end and he was confused as to why his vaccine vs healthy stats contradicted the vaccine vs covid stats. He didn't understand what he was looking at.
Perfectly said
@@Mudflat_Man it sounds like to me the problem is that people want to listen to a cult of personality or some charismatic person because they’ve lost faith in the government and scientists. I can only imagine how politically nihilistic or apathetic towards authorities we should trust you’d have to be to latch onto someone like Joe Rogan and take his word as law.
@@Mudflat_Man The issue is people like this who do listen to him. Unfortunately people take what he says seriously.
@@d3l3tes00n given the crisis in science and politics what do you expect?
Totally, there's really no reason to beleive Joe Rogan was acting in bad faith. But people who have been hit in the head a lot should probably be a little reserved about repeating stuff. I'm a jar head, so I speak from experience - shit that makes sense at one time might not actually be right. But 9 million people don't listen to me, thankfully.
Wow.. that guy’s a walking Dunning Krueger effect. Runs with what little he knows about a topic and willing to argue with others as if he’s SO SURE he’s right, with no verifiable basis for his claim. Then gets called out and gets emotional and stumbles over his words while going on the defensive. You’re unwilling to learn dude, stfu sometimes and listen. Be willing to admit you’re wrong or might be wrong, it will serve you right.
Rogan's fanbase shares many characteristics with Rogan, including everything you mention here.
You can tell by this interaction that he isn’t the type to listen. I bet you he didn’t even know what the word “contention” meant
Because knowledge and intelligence intimidate the caller, and the more exposed he was, the louder he screamed.
The thing that amazes me is how they insist you believe their ideological right wing conspiracy theory, with no cited data or evidence, while also insisting you NOT believe what is right in front of your face. And when you point that out to them. they get as pissed off as this caller.
This is the kind of guy that goes on WebMD for gas and comes away thinking he's having a heart attack and calls the ambulance.
🤣🤣🤣🤣
To be fair severe cases of gas can be mistaken for heart attack just on symptoms.
My nurse MIL was afraid she was having a heart attack till they did her vitals and they showed that she wasn't having a heart attack, then they gave her gas treatment and symptoms resolved themselves almost immediately
@@AggressiveLemur To be fair, these people are still morons. A heart attack is like having Alex Jones sitting on your chest. When you have one, you know what it is. Most people I knew who were panicking all the time about getting a heart attack were always big fat slobs who become hyper aware of how at risk they are for one due to poor lifestyle choices and diets.
Which is a weird thing, because they are basically constantly aware they are killing themselves and their lifestyle is totally unsustainable, yet continue living it anyways. If I was a doctor or worked in ER, I'd be pretty pissed off that every night some bloated boomer is wasting hospital resources because they ate 16 white castle burgers and are mystified by the sharp cramping pains and gurgling sounds.
WebMD isn’t wrong symptoms can mean different things that’s why we have human Drs who rule out things.
Caller: "You can't call myocarditis mild!"
Also caller: "Covid is mild, no need for vaccination nor hospitalization"
more like mild-ocarditis AMIRITE?! ayyyy I'll be here all week
@Zwerker That Caller is covering all the bases.
How often does Covid cause myocarditis? How often does a cold turn into deadly pneumonia?
@@garysmokesmeat seriously there's always been vaccines. It came out quick because so many people were dying! The vaccine saved my elderly parents their covid was tough but way more mild. I got covid before the vaccine and was literally in bed for a month.
@@hannah3146 yeah I know, the vaccines are great. I just don’t want to force people to take them. That’s how I treat my cows.
Some guy: "You can't just say you found evidence and have everyone accept that as fact."
Same guy: "You're going to READ the study?!"
That was delicious.
Not defending the guy, cause a couple comments earlier someone did read it and showed that he didn’t read it lol, but I think he meant like read it live. Nevertheless this dude was to angry to even argue his point logically. Sam had to keep the caller on his own tracks 🤣
@@AlchemicMentor As far as I’m concerned, someone who can’t explain how ribosomes are leveraged by mRNA vaccines or protein synthesis isn’t qualified to interpret a study, nor comprehend one.
*Sees title and grabs popcorn*
Same
Lol yup. Was great to catch live during my workday
Yes. This was awesome 😄
🙌
Volume up to 11
I want Joe to finally make the mistake of debating Sam so bad.
I'd donate my left ass cheek to see that
Unlikely. Dude’s not an intellectual and he knows it.
He won't. He's a canny guy. People at his level do not open themselves up to the risk of complete humiliation. There's no incentive for him at all, and all the incentives for him to refuse.
When questioned or shown facts contradicting his latest quack guest Rogan constantly says he's not a doctor and he just likes talking to different people. That's like his little disclaimer he walks around with.
That would be so fun. Sam would obliterate him
Sam vs someone who's arrogant, emotional, and unprepared?
I love to see it.
The YT example of bringing a knife to a gun fight.
Check out James O'Brien's show, you'll love the content.
They’re the same idiots who claim that Ukraine wasn’t even a country until the Soviet Union collapsed. Dopes.
Sam: “Are you a doctor?”
Dude: “Yes.”
Sam: “Really?”
Dude: “… I have a science background. I don’t want to get into it.”
Well, *I’m* convinced! Great way to start off, lying about being a doctor.
I laughed out loud. I'm guessing this dude really just compulsively lied because he thought it might help him, realized the lie couldn't hold up to scrutiny, and immediately backpedaled so hard it left an idiot-shaped hole in the wall behind him.
Well, even in America, people with Ph.D are doctors.
He read a science book, therefore hes got a science background.
@@russellward4624 He failed high school science, therefore he's got a science background.
As a result of being an oversexed teen, I’m pleading that I have a scientific background in gynaecology. No ma’am. I’m not an expert. But I’ll take a look at it for you.
The problem with the caller is that they have an idea in their mind, and they're searching for studies that prove their point, as opposed to going where the facts take them. It's what happens when someone has an agenda.
I've fallen into that trap before sadly
Which is ironic, since people on that side of the fence accuse us of "having an agenda" for everything that doesn't perfectly fit into their world view.
@@xrogerxrabbitx It's not unusual, though what it is is putting the cart before the horse in that such people -based exclusively on their feelings about whatever - already have reached a conclusion long before they've actually looked at any evidence. Therefore, with an idea in mind from the start, they ignore the tons of information that disputes their argument for the meagre amount that doesn't.
Especially with the Internet it's a real problem due to the access to so much information, both valid and invalid.
Researching to prove your point is supposed to be done PRE debate, buddy...
Having an upbringing in religion does that. It forms how you think: first have an idea, then find supporting data while ignoring and/or attacking any non-supporting data.
"Mild myocarditis is not mild." Yep, that sums up this guy's whole worldview.
You didn't listen carefully. The caller was saying "there is no such thing as MILD myocarditis". Now technically I'm sure doctors may label specific myocarditis cases as mild/moderate/severe. However, the spirit or principle of what the caller was saying is of course true - like saying there is no such thing as "mild" brain cancer or "mild" flesh eating disease. I use the example of an athlete with "mild" myocarditis following vaccination - this isn't just one week's rest and you can go back to running marathons. It's not like a "mild" sprain where the doctor says take a full week off and then another week to slowly re-introduce your sport and you should be good.
I believe "this guy's" worldview and my worldview are the same. Myocarditis is indeed more prevalent after vaccination (compared to after Covid) as the scientific literature has now borne out, there isn't really any such thing as "mild" myocarditis, and the risk/benefit of the mRNA Covid vaccines is not positive for all age groups. Sure "this guy" might have been a little angry/emotional and could have comported himself better, but if I view the "debate winner" as "they guy who ultimately was more right", then he won and not Sam. Sam only won the "remain calm and appear rational" award.
@@robbinburns6329it’s funny that the longer the time passes, the more this clip doesn’t age well. It’s pretty clear that Sam doesn’t come out looking good here. More and more info is coming out showing that their is more risk to taking the vaccine vs not, especially among certain age groups/demographics. And yes, the fact that Sam keeps mentioning myocarditis as if it’s just perfectly okay to get is terrifying to me
these replies are the same person.
@@Jordan-fw1gf Can you share some of that evidence that supports the idea that getting the vaccine is more dangerous "than not?"
Because I'm not finding anything that supports that.
@@robbinburns6329 you are wrong and delusional if you think getting a vaccine has more dangers than the virus you are preventing. people with that kind of mindset are the people bringing small pox back, look into that if you really want to know what not getting a vaccine causes over time.
I just typed in Hoge and myocarditis, and the study used VAERS data. VAERS data=disqualified, desk rejection
Omg that’s hilarious, especially since he conceded that VAERS isn’t reliable😂😂😂😂
Self report data isn't inherently bad, even that stuff. It really depends on what methodology the researcher employs to actually filter all the bullshit and how they use the rest. Of course, that all gets verified in peer review, which these clowns loathe.
@@cjohnson3836 I agree. Self reporting is only valid if it goes through extensive checking by professionals
@@jaredgreathouse3672 Depends what the point of the data is. For research, this misses the point. The researchers aren't the ones gathering this data. They're using the data because it exists already. This is becoming more and more common in all fields. Its not that the self reporting isn't valid. Its just answers on a page. Its up to the person using the data to establish controls for inclusion into their study. And then they report what the criteria was in their methods. This is very different than saying data is only valid if the caretaker audits it. If that were the case, there'd be no such thing as citizen science, and that's just dumb. For all its issues, citizen science is often all we have to go on for many large scale questions.
All I typed was "Hoeg my" & the 1st result was *["Covid-19: Study that claimed boys are at increased risk of myocarditis after vaccination is deeply flawed, say critics."]*
I noticed that these wackos always claim "let me finish...can I finish?" & then proceed to meander off topic again. The finish line is never in sight for these nutjobs. This guy is a hard-headed clown!
"I know how science is done."
Excellent, this should go smoothly.
"Now let me explain why I ignore the scientific consensus based on one single study I didn't think I'd have to have ready when calling into a show to defend my already-held view. Don't all the smart ones site VAERS data (unverified self-reports)?"
😂😂Excellent summary of the yelling "scientist" call👏👏👏
And then I get REALLY PISSED when Sam calls me out on my ignorance and unpreparedness.
The funniest thing, is that the Vaers site itself has a disclaimer that it shouldn't be used as a data source. Talk about not actually reading your source. People get really pissed off when you mention this, it's how I was permabanned from r/walkaway. That was a fun afternoon.
I'm high af right now and just wanted to say I thoroughly enjoyed your comment~ xDD
"I know how science is done."
Damn, this dude should be on the frontline and tackling every infectious diseases.
"You cannot call myocarditis mild. That's like calling a stroke mild." ... Um ... there are mild strokes. Not all strokes are these massive, catastrophic events.
He means level of scary
I had a spicy case of the shits, maybe that's why he keeps getting upset about mild? Lol.
Thing is, a stroke means blood has been cut off to the brain. No blood means no oxygen which means cell death. It is impossible for even a 'mild' stroke to be mild. Now with myo, blood and oxygen supply are mostly undesturbed.
@@kitten8410 There are different kinds of strokes. Strokes can be caused by a clot (cutting off blood flow to the brain), or by a bleed in a blood vessel in the brain. The result is the same because brain cells are deprived of oxygen, but not all stokes are the same. Also, you have TIAs (transient ischemic attack), which are essentially mini strokes. These can be pretty mild and result in no permanent damage. You still need to see a doctor, but they do not result in cell death. So my point still stands. There are mild strokes, just like there is mild myocarditis.
@@floepiejane ok. He's still wrong.
I've had Myocarditis from the flu and the covid vaccine. It was mild and I rested at home. Sam's 100% right
And your heart is permanently scarred. Stop believing big pharma
Alphonso Davis a professional soccer player age 21 got Myocarditis from COVID not the vaccine. He wasn't able to play or train for three months then he was back playing professional soccer for Bayern Munich. His biggest concern was not playing. Soccer is a very high cardiovascular activity, even more so being a professional and Alphonso is back to 100 percent. He was never hospitalized, basically just wasn't allowed to train or play in matches until the heart swelling went away.
The exact moment the caller realized he was wrong = when he resorted to the desperate hail mary "you're killing your kids."
Even HE wasn't trying to make that point until that moment. Then, in a moment of sheer panic, he said the most inflammatory thing that came to mind in hopes of sparking the same irrational emotional response that worked on him when he got sucked into the right-wing cult.
That tactic is used so frequently be right wingers in debates/interviews. They get debunked point-by-point, in real time, and then it's just "communism" "You hate America" "Wide open border" - as if we haven't heard this s**t hundreds of times already.
You know you're correct when you're in a state of panicked defense right out of the gate
He was acting like the crazed and disheveled scientist film trope, where they burst into a room hugging papers and folders, trying to warn the arrogant mayor or governor or president about their discovery, BUT NOBODY WILL LISTEN! I guarantee he watched this vid afterwards, and thinks he "won" the "debate," because aside from his Dunning-Kruger brain rot convincing him he mastered the medical and scientific professions in one afternoon, he's also incapable of understanding his "accomplishment" beyond the optics of "I yelled at him alot and therefore won."
This made me laugh
Or he was just too nervous to appear calm
I'm positive he's tried to use this argument against people on Twitter or something and it backfired super hard, so he just starts up super defensive because he's terrified of getting blown out. And then he gets called on it. And then Sam slowly walks through his argument... and he gets blown out.
The moment you cite VAERS as a source, you've lost all credibility.
Wait? Joe Rogan cites VAERS in the conversation this caller has knocked his homeostasis off kilter so hotly debating.
The good doctor needs to conflate himself a prescription for something. As you do.
Well technically he didn't really cite VAERS though, he referenced VAERS only to *DISCREDIT* it, in an attempt to discredit the article that cites myocarditis is more common with covid than the vaccine, he said that it used "observational data" which is an *UNRELIABLE* method which VAERS & this other article both use & thus he is in agreement that VAERS is unreliable & he just think it also means the other is too.. so yeah that doesn't exactly count as "citing" VAERS
@@ar4203
I checked the article. It uses VAERS data for it's myocarditis numbers, using keywords to find the instances.
@@berjanbeen7188 ouch. Did it also make sure to account for those vaers references to growing tails, instant gender transitions and penile enlargement? Vaers is comically good.
@@deviouskris3012
I mean there is value in VAERS data, since you might extrapolate trends that might warrant investigation. That said using it as a primary source seems like a good way of having to make a retraction later.
When I worked in cardiology I saw one person (woman in early 20s) have side effects linked to the booster. All the medical staff were fascinated by her case because it was extremely rare. Patient only needed a couple days in hospital for observation and went home with a short term prescription. I now work in theatres and get to visit ICU where most of the beds are filled with the unvaccinated. Some treatable chest pain vs a month on a ventilator- I know which I'd risk
Hope y'all are still masking. Disabled people can't get healthcare any more because no one is masking and ventilation sucks. The pandemic isn't over
@@humanwithaplaylist🤦♂️
This is what I live for! There is nothing more entertaining than idiots trying to debate someone and getting shut down because they can’t even muster a cohesive thought. Sam, you are a legend good sir!
You need to watch James obrien videos
Tell us all what a peaceful warrior might be peaceful about, Jeff.
@@scotthullinger4684 You haven't read "Way of the Peaceful Warrior? It's a good read.
I dont know. I googled the question are most people with myocarditis hospitalized and Sam is wrong the guy is right. You will almost certainly be hospitalized with myocarditis. This makes sense. One paper says that the majority are released after a day or two bit Sam is clearly wrong on this.
@@jlrinc1420 , interesting
"I should have checked if this dude was a libertarian" - Sam Seder 2022
little sammy has never debated a true libertarian.
@@AliensAnonymous lol hahaha says every libertarian ever, right before they get embarrassed.
@@hassanabdaladl live and let live... That's too deep for you? -- "Haha lol." Next time use emojis, halfwit
@@hassanabdaladl lol every libertarian is a snowflake, they love to think of themselves as unique and special but immediately melt away under sam’s breath when he starts debating them.
@@allyabernathy4098 Seder is smug and pompous. You should listen to Kulinski or Pakman instead of this guy.
"You're conflating all sorts of different things"
"I'm not conflating anything! I didn't... what do you mean I'm conflating? What does that mean?"
"What does conflating mean?"
"I know what conflating means! What do you mean by saying I'm conflating it?"
Nope, he did not know what conflating means.
Con-Flate. With Flate. As opposed to without Flate. He's got an attic full of Flate's. Don't talk to him about Flates, Con or otherwise. He practically wrote the book on it.
Sam's level of patience needs to be studied by professionals for future generations to admire.
He just thinking caaa ching 😂😂😂😂😂
Not really, he does do lots of shouting and talking over people.
"Doctors don't talk about whether or not it was peer reviewed." Lmfao.
That caller is not a doctor.
Nah they get their info off Joe Rogan. Isn't that what they mean by peer review?
Technically they don't, but only because it's an assumed pre-requisite before the study even enters consideration. Same way doctors don't feel the need to specify cardiologists are doctors, it's an assumed pre-requisite.
When the internet gave birth to Google, crazy people thought they have the power to be medical experts all of a sudden.
I have a background in medicine and attempting to tease actual knowledge out of all the nonsense online is often just impossible. My doctor wanted to start me on some cholesterol medicine, and I decided to search this fairly common side effect it can have, leg pain. If there were any good results in those google searches, they were completely buried by the nonsense, most of which were actual doctors spouting complete BS
@@FUNKY_BUTTLOVIN 100% true. Finding actual facts these days is a nightmare. Just imagine if you're just out there looking for "truths" that confirm your delusions... There's literally more of that then there are actual scientific studies... Just a bazillion bloggers spreading trash from their ass.
Such a great point...
Medical experts, geopolitical experts, financial experts, nutritional experts, fitness experts, etc.
@@FUNKY_BUTTLOVIN uh have you heard of lexicomp or micromedex? These are what I use as a pharmacy student (and most doctors, nurses and healthcare providers use) to look up all drug info. You can also request a package label from your local pharmacy or type in FDA package label rosuvastatin for example… not that hard
"Your side is afraid to debate!" Angry Rogan guy confidently asserts without irony as Sam spends a half an hour debating him. 🤦🏻♀️
He kept getting annoyed when he wasn’t allowed to talk for the whole show
@@Bickle121 sam literally shut up for almost the entire second half, and then he called him out for a "great argument" when sam said he heard the study he gave him
@@humblenugget I was talking about the caller
its impossible to reason with these people. they are literally too stupid and fanatical in their medieval psychotic ideology to be reasoned with, its the intelligent thing to regard them as stupid trolls that aren't worth talking to.
This is a guy you can tell never admits when he’s wrong 😂
Sam never admits to being wrong either, your point?
@@drrydogIve seem him admit to being wrong live so many times. You making stuff up
@@drrydogwhy do you lie ?
Lmfao..
PERFECT encapsulation of a Rogan fan.
Doesn't like facts, so screams out his feelings and throws a tantrum. And never once says anything approaching an intelligent or rational thought.
Most Rogan fans. Not every Rogan fan is a clown that hangs off his words. I like his stand-up and I like him from an old show called News Radio. I'm a lefty and I only watch his podcasts with people like Neil degrasse tyson, kyle Kullinski, Ben Burgis and probably another lefty or two I've forgotten about, are on.
Rogan has a good evolution bit in his stand up. Humans and apes share 98% of their dna. To deny evolution is stupid. It's like if I gave you a sandwich which was 98% shit, and 2% ham, would you be willing to call that a ham sandwich?
I'm just saying, not everyone who likes Rogan is a mouth breathing reich wing clown that follows like sheep.
I am a lefty that likes a lot of things that are mostly reich winger clowns activities, so I find myself in this position quite a lot. I grew up in a race car shop in the rural southeast US. As a lefty in the rural south, it's yikesy.
good one. claiming that everyone of a particular group is exactly the same.....
@@coletrickle1775 yeah same, until recently. He sold out to the alt reich fan bois for $100 million. I can't watch him anymore.
This guy had me laughing each time he lost his cool!!! 😂
Sad part is that people with this guys intelligence level think he won the debate.
"Sad part is that people with this guys intelligence level think he won the debate." See Forbs Breaking News for proof!
I'm sitting next to three cardiologists.... Myocarditis is not anywhere near the same danger as stroke or heart attack. Usually requires no treatment.
Myocarditis has a 20 percent five year fatality rate.
It's really not something you want.
This guy - “you got to read the whole study”
Also this guy - “what are you gonna read it?! Thats the problem!”
Honestly i dont even know why you bother to continue the moment he suggested Myocarditis is as bad as a stroke.
What about the time where he claimed these were all mild cases of acute myocarditis?
Mild ... acute? What is his "science background", Political Science?
@@jcspoon573 He has a children's chemistry set at home.
Yeah ss a child of a stroke victim that offended me to no end
@@mechanomics2649 eyes and ears
God, grant me the patience that you have also granted to Sam Seder.
Wow, hey there everyone.
@@Cussy69_420 🤣🤣
“Myocarditis is equivalent to a stroke!”
It’s rare someone is more irrational than an ancap caller
You're assuming he isn't also an ancap. This could be the Libertarian assassination guy.
That comment tells me that he doesn't know anyone who has ever had a stroke.
@@GrahamBarth That was my first thought too.
Well, he’s wrong about everything else but Myocarditis is actually quite serious and rare. You do HAVE TO go to a hospital immediately.
@@charliekowittmusic is it possible to have Myocarditis, recover and never even know it?
i’m NOT conflating!!!!! what does conflating mean?!? comedy gold.
The way this dude scoffed at the concept of peer reviews says all you need to know about anything that comes out of this tools mouth. I love it when people who have no idea how science works talk about science with false authority.
Also seems like an example of the “debate bro” kind of people (for lack of a better term). He thinks 2 doctors having a “debate” is more credible than the process of peer reviewing.
When someone claims to be a doctor then instantly switch that to “a background in science” it means the person works at a place where everyone else is a scientists and he is an idiot with a completely different profession.
Not just science
I love how surface level this guy's thinking is. He reads "heart not pumping as well" and thinks "the heart is important, therefore that MUST be deadly no matter what anyone says".
No one tell him that when he goes to sleep his heart rate slows down significantly. Surely that must sound like death to him.
You think being unconscious for several hours and experiencing vivid hallucinations is *NORMAL* ?
Hé flipped out about heart function reduced. I didn’t do cardio for 6 weeks due to a broken toe.
I can tell you my heart function significantly reduced by only cycling to work instead of doing spinning class and CrossFit regularly. I took the stairs 5 floors up at work today, trust me, it sucked 😂
"Decreased function" could mean it goes from 100% to 90%. That isn't Great, or even ideal, but... I mean, I'd need a doctor to tell me if 90% is bad. My knee-jerk reaction is that it isn't though.
I don't think Joe Rogan's fans have the capacity to read anything 🤣
I remember a quote "it's easier to the fool the masses than to convince one person he's wrong"
That's Joe Rogan's base in a nutshell.
That's Joe Rogan himself. Look up Joe Rogan v Primatologist. He goes on some wild rant that there's a newly discovered giant primate in the Congo. A short while later, a primatologist calls in and says "yeah, that's bullshit". The way Rogan digs in his heels and attacks the primatologist for being a woman is pretty despicable.
@@farminstoltzfus I'm aware! Joe completely lost his shit 🤣
"I'm not frustrated" as he's yelling at Sam. Hahaha, get your feelings in check and your facts checked
Typical right winger.. The crazy hypocrisy constantly.. "Stop cutting me off and let me talk".. Then continues to interrupt and speak over Sam while also not letting him talk...
"Are you a doctor?"
"Yes"
That's when I knew this would be ridiculous, and I was all in.
These people are insane. Sam did a good job.
Sam's entire show is a gossip hour about personalities he doesn't like and obsesses over these individuals every day making a new video on them while never getting a response back and simultaneously posing as a "news network"...Is Sam clear if this accusation of insanity?
@@curiosityl.6261 Lol, ok. Sam makes outgoing calls to these loons, right? You're adorable.
@@coletrickle1775 Yeah and they never respond back, yet he continues leeching off of their content and numbers in order to maintain even the slightest slightest slightest shred of relevance he may have left in hopes they will one day respond, and they never do lmao. The man is in his 50s, yet is a little gossip girl, literally all he does.
@@coletrickle1775 And the fact you follow that with any shred of seriousness shows the type of mindset you have, you like drama, thats the only explanation I could have for someone who follows Sam Sedar. There's not one ounce of importance he brings to ANYTHING else. He's good for a once a year stunt like the Crowder thing, then dissapears into complete irrelevance while plotting how he could leech off someone else's fame and success. A leeching gossip girl is more like the correct term, my apologies for earlier.
@@curiosityl.6261 Just keep asserting it over and over, that's definitely how things become true to reality.
As a cardiac nurse for 15 years… myocarditis is not a serious illness… not in the same way a stroke is.
I've spent a decent amount of time talking and working in labs with doctors whom were chemists and biologists and I can assure you, when you do a study, it must be peer reviewed. At least five doctors in your respective field must look at your methods, your results, and be able to replicate your experiment with the same conditions and report similar findings. If they can't, you are full of it. This guy just wanted to defend his God and only made himself look like a lunatic in the process.
This isn't quite true. I'm in year 4 of a chemical biology Ph.D. and actually being able to replicate experiments is a big problem in biological sciences especially. There was a recent review in Nature where a group went through trying to replicate highly cited experiments, and I can't remember the number but a shocking amount could not be repeated. This is because the requirements to get into top journals are so high now that it usually requires 10-20 scientists doing specialized work in collaboration making it difficult for anyone else to pull together that much expertise just to check their work. Others replicating your experiments is definitely not a requirement for publication. Also, this caller isn't entirely wrong about peer review. Bio and medrxiv exist so that important work can be put out there quickly prior to peer review. Scientists monitor these websites and read and consider the work. But you do that knowing full well that it still needs review. Scientists well versed in the field can filter a preprint fairly well so it's still valuable. That being said, this caller is an idiot and I doubt his ability to read an scientific paper, reviewed or otherwise.
@@jasjfl does peer review necessarily mean or require replication?
@@adinakruijssen3056 Yes, that is why we can believe it. We can replicate at anytime and get the same results....IF its science.
@@jasjfl I'm not sure why you're bringing up publication as to why the caller wasn't entirely wrong about peer-review. Sam wasn't using publication as credibility, he specifically used peer-review. The person you're replying to clearly wasn't talking about publication either, again they're talking about peer-review. Your comment reads like you're under the impression that peer-review and publication are interchangeable. They are not.
Of course peer-review isn't perfect and some things fall through the cracks, but it's the most reliable thing a layman can use. That said, you mentioned a Nature study on replicating experiments without giving any figures. You say "shocking amount" but this can mean anything. Given your misuse of peer-review, we don't even know if said study is relevant, as you did not specify whether or not these experiments are part of peer-reviewed papers.
@@jasjfl The ability to cherrypick non peer reviewed studies to validate your preexisting views is precisely why peer review is essential. When we're talking about general public like this guy, then dumping peer review as a standard and accepting any study that you want to accept isn't at all equivalent to scientific peers using those non-peer reviewed studies in their work.
This guy was on the brink of crying far to often
he was/is clearly unstable
@jcorb the Dragon of Chaos is a cruel mistress 😔👌🏿
It's no fair how sam keeps making points and the caller doesn't make any.
The caller has PLENTY of chances to give some points.
@@mikecourt13 I think OP is being sarcastic 😅
Yeah this is MR's screening process for callers.
"Hi so what is the topic you want to discuss with Sam?"
"How the libtard scientists are all wrong about something and I'm right."
"Ok do you have any points and are you a moron?"
"No I don't have any actual points and yes I'm a moron. I'm really angry though so i want to debate Sam."
I especially didn’t appreciate Sam asking for sources and explaining why they were bad sources, while also giving him plenty of time to prove himself a fool
@@mikecourt13 He really didn't. Most callers are concise wordsmiths like Sam.
A major theme with this guy is "I didn't finish my thought" which is seems to be a constant with him lol.
He seemed incapable of finishing a thought which is why I think Sam said he was high. Maybe a bit too much adderall that day.
Realistically, if he wanted to finish those thoughts, he should have finished them before calling in. He should have known he'd get questioned on the details.
Ooooo nonono this guy embarrassed himself so much worse than I could ever imagine! I feel sorry for Sam that he had to put himself through that for the content lol.
I could go to work naked and not embarrass me that bad!!!!
Sam was in heaven don't worry lol
Sam loves it
He has a full on show. He didn’t put himself through anything to get the content. All he has to do is get the producer to clip it and post it. There done
I thought I was never going to say this, but I miss the libertarians.
They were more fun
I laughed hard at this. Thanks!
I'm sure they've missed you too.
There's no way this guy wasn't a libertarian LOL
I was diagnosed with myocraditis after going to an ER. They sent me home with a prescription for extra strength Ibuprofen. I was fine a few days later.
Sounds serious.......thoughts and prayers.
AND YOU'RE STILL ALIVE?!?!
I have a good friend with the same issue.
Bro, pretty sure according to Molly Malone ( or something idk) you were supposed to be in the hospital these last months.
Yep most cases of myocarditis goes down exactly like this. Yeah can it be bad and harmful and leave someone in the hospital for a little while, sure but its extremely rare and usually bed rest for a couple of days is all you need
I love how mad anti vaxers get when you laugh at them
Common Conservative problem; not really understanding the difference between evidence and assertion; the main reason why the Tobacco lobby and the anti-climate change people even have a constituency of talking parrots like this guy here.
Sam: myocarditis is usually mild
Caller: no it isn’t
Also caller: most cases are asymptotic or mild symptoms…
“Is this the way you debate… by calling people names” - said with a straight face after a horrible appeal to emotion using Sams kids. These MFs never get when they cross a line but cry heavily when things are returned.
🤣😂🤣😂
There is no 'mild' myocarditis in the sense of that it is not serious and there is ALWAYS permanent damage since the heart can not repair cells.
Sam making the quick decision to go from "a-hole" to just straight up calling him an "asshole" was the highlight of this debate
I like when morons are called out harshly, we've been silk gloving doofballs for fear of being bullies for too long. Idiots have never felt more confident, time to bring out the tough love.
@@vgaportauthority9932 he was literally emotionally breaking down when he was crying about the definition of "mild" lmao.
Right?! I loved that!
yeah, always a good argument hurling out slurs.
@@kongvinter33 people arguing in bad faith deserve it
Caller: Yes, I’m a doctor
Also caller: did Science to grade ten.
This dude should know (as a doctor) peer reviewed studies are more valuable then screaming assertions.
Yeah, he’s not a doctor. Doctors don’t often use fallacious appeals to authority either.
hes a Dr in Bullshitology
Actually that’s false. Some people think just because they carry the “doctor” title, they are entitled to making assertions such as the one(s) this caller made. If he was an actual medical physician, this call would’ve been much more concerning to hear
@@RV3G4 :
*It depends on what kind of doctor he was.*
@@snoglydox on the matter of vaccines, the only ‘doctors’ actually talking about this should be legally licensed medical physicians. The people who actually administer, research and study these matters.
One of the best open discussions between Sam and an "enthusiast" I have heard for ages.
You mean you're an outrage merchant, eating the low hanging fruit Sam fed you, for profit, on a monopoly corporation's benefit.
Yep, you're the American majority, getting your 'report', from a youtube drama queen, cosplaying as 'news'.
@@kennethc2466 and yet you're triggered a$$ is here. 🤣😂
Myocarditis is a possible side effect. It needs to be identifies by a medical professional. There is a fact sheet given to you by the Dr at the time the rna vaccination is given which deals with this. It should be reported because untreated it can be complicated and life threatening. It is not a good idea to ignore any symptoms.
@@Dapper_Dean 11 of your tribal cultists loved your triggered response and emotional pictures.
...thanks for proving my point, via demonstration, in outrage.
@@avalynnewilby8150 You will be ignored, as facts that counter the tribe of Sam donors will always be. Just like evolution by creationists, and space flight by flat earrthers.
Cults need absolutism, ESPECIALLY in their messiah's they donate to and revere. This capitalist donation channel is just that, evidenced by the cultist's action in their echo chamber.
It's like a 'attack the attacker' clause in scientology in here.
Caller: "You don't let people talk! That's why people lose debates to you!"
Sam: Let's guy talk and deep-six all of his credibility and look like a complete moron. Wins.
James O'Brien has some fascinating calls that go the same way. One guy in particular called in to complain about his coverage of Brexit and kept accusing him of not letting him talk when James asked him a simple follow up question.
@@sanninjiraiya Ah, yeah I *remember* that caller ...that one was a BEAUTY. 😁
(sometimes I wish discussions like that, and this one here, would last for hours, but then again I also don't want to see Sam or James lose any neurons over these berks.)
@@sanninjiraiya The most important thing I've ever learned about debate was from O'Brien, and it has been an absolute delight deploying it IRL. It's amazing how easy it is to break right-wingers by simply demanding they make a specific point followed with proof, and then holding them to that until they do it, no exceptions. It's sometimes difficult to ignore the bait and the insults they throw out to distract, but it's easier when you keep reminding yourself to make them answer the question. Hard to get upset if you're laser-focused. And yeah, I remember that specific caller, it was fuggin' hilarious. 😂
@@AngeliqueStP If you're okay with a bit of e D g I n E s S, Vaush might be up your alley, here on YT. He's had several longer-form debates that get heated, and it's pretty entertaining most of the time.
@@furiousapplesack
I asked a right-winger for a citation and the guy went insane. He made a separate post about me in the specific group and was responding like an irrational nutter. Even other right-wingers were making fun of him. It’s the best way to throw them off.
Why is this caller so angry? He got pissed when Sam asked for the study, he got pissed when Sam simply repeated his own words back to him. Lied about being a doctor then refused to give his credentials. That's a first - an argument from authority while refusing to even demonstrate you are, in fact, an authority.
I loved how whenever Sam referred to the caller as a "doctor", they'd respond with a deeper voice. As if lowering their voice would make them sound more like a doctor.
"Oh shit, right, I'm supposed to be a doctor."
Luke, I am your doctor!
It’s like when a couple of kids get dressed into a big coat to make them seem like they look like an adult
Elizabeth Holmes Syndrome.
If this dude is a doctor, I pray he never ends up treating me in a life or death situation. The fact he didn't know that "peer review" meant the article has been vetted by one's professional cohorts is proof enough this guy is no academic whatsoever...let alone a member of the medical field.
He probably washes dishes in the hospital cafeteria..........so in his mind he's in the medical field.
@@teetermeeter 🤣🤣🤣🤣
@@teetermeeter you're joking, yet somehow I doubt you're wrong. 🤣
This guy is a doctor just like I'm a professional basketball player in the NBA (hint, I'm not in the NBA)
If this caller is a doctor, then it’s in a non-medical or non-hard-science field.
God I live for this. TMR has gone through ups and downs since I've begun watching back in 2016, and segments like this remind me why Sam is the best.
what are the downs?
Sadly, the loss of Michael Brooks.
@Gabriella Tambini and here you are, a paid troll from Mumbai I bet, getting paid pennies per reply. Is that a great life? Lmao
@Gabriella Tambini I am not sorry about your miserable life. You clearly deserve it "Gabriela".
@@spacemanx9595 Remember to not reply directly to bots, they get paid a fraction of a nickel for every reply to their nonsense. Just write their name out without the @ or anything, they get nothing then :)
The Abstract of the study by the way:
Between 14 June 2021 and 4 September 2021, 33 Chinese adolescents who developed acute myocarditis/pericarditis following Comirnaty vaccination were identified. In total, 29 (87.88%) were male and 4 (12.12%) were female, with a median age of 15.25 years. And 27 (81.82%) and 6 (18.18%) cases developed acute myocarditis/pericarditis after receiving the second and first dose, respectively. All cases are mild and required only conservative management. The overall incidence of acute myocarditis/pericarditis was 18.52 (95% confidence interval [CI], 11.67-29.01) per 100 000 persons vaccinated. The incidence after the first and second doses were 3.37 (95% CI, 1.12-9.51) and 21.22 (95% CI, 13.78-32.28 per 100 000 persons vaccinated, respectively. Among male adolescents, the incidence after the first and second doses were 5.57 (95% CI, 2.38-12.53) and 37.32 (95% CI, 26.98-51.25) per 100 000 persons vaccinated.
Conclusions
There is a significant increase in the risk of acute myocarditis/pericarditis following Comirnaty vaccination among Chinese male adolescents, especially after the second dose.
33 is a laughable sample size. I'm not sure how they could just a 95% confidence interval with that. Ridiculous.
This is also specifically about the Pfizer vacc.
It's also pretty much only apparently in males.
Seems to me like it's totally random tbh.
" All cases are mild and required only conservative management"
like, debunks his whole argument right now. I just don't get it. Why did he keep going?
This guy is like the biggest clown who's called in for YEARS.
I don't know, the Men's Rights Activist guy was pretty bad.
Reminds me of the clip of the caller yelling "hey hey hey!" On the fun half montage.
@@eljoel89 oh i may have missed that one, surprisingly. Maybe have to find it now.
Caller: screams that he doesn't have the chance to talk and Sam interrupts constantly.
Also caller: "Great rebuttal. Whispering." 😂 What a douche.
And then when Sam was quiet for a while, the caller was getting irritated too, accusing Sam of not paying attention. He's a quintessential reactionary: no thoughts, just reactions and pure emotion.
My son randomly had myocarditis as a 4 y/o. Not virus caused and he was not admitted to the hospital. He did visit a cardiologist and got a monitor for a couple days and all was cleared and well.
No, see he was monitored. That counts as being hospitalized!
I’m all seriousness, glad he was cleared
@@pinkdragon6281 he wore the monitor home.. He was never at the hospital more than 2 hrs
@@bridgetweaver2542 she was joking. It was a sarcastic comment based off the guest.
A friend's teen kid got myocarditis from the vaccine. It was exactly as Sam said: a few days rest and he was back to football practice.
He comes to the show unprepared. Then expects Sam to be calm and understanding. 🙄
I think my favorite argument ever is yelling at someone telling them that the only reason why they are a good debater is because they yell over the other person. Self-own at its finest. Dude, was definitely a libertarian.
@Scarlett Anne Foxx Libertarianism is the political result of dunning kruger syndrome. They all feel soooo special for having "seen the truth", the truth being whatever the culture warriors at the time tell them is true. Always comes to a screeching halt once they start talking to people outside the bubble.
Yeah and a narcissist like Jesus Christ whatever is in his head is just 100% correct I love his argument about how people with myocarditis it's not mild they have to stay in the hospital for days how about the million people who died from covid? Fuck this guy to hell and back
@Scarlett Anne Foxx " It is always wonderful to hear them try to defend their ridiculous arguments to someone like Sam."
It's one of the few things that makes this world worth experiencing. It truly brings me joy.
"And you are citing what study?"
*Crumbles*
And yells because he’s exposed.
Lost all credibility for me when he said “doctors don’t go “oh is it peer reviewed ‘“
Lolol I see Sam debating some chud and I click right away
I don't know how much the term debating applies here.
@@GTA-qv8pk good point
A tragedy of open science access. People can now read pre-print medical research without ever being exposed to the concepts of levels of evidence and grades of recommendations.
This is a tragedy of illiteracy, not access
@@khbgkh Illiteracy and imbecility.
@@khbgkh Of course, but the open access is what created an environment where the illiterate, en masse, can abuse research to suit their delusions. I think open access to scientific journals is on the whole beneficial and incredible (I've been working with a medical researcher to optimize their dPCR protocol, as a computer scientist, and I've only been able to learn and do this because of open access), however it cannot be ignored that it has some negative side effects.
@@hoodedferret I don’t think the access is nearly the problem that conscious manipulation is
Made it 20 minutes and 35 seconds. Listening to this guy and trying to comprehend him is like injecting stress directly in to your brain through your ears. Hats off to you Sam, I don't know how you do it.
Impressive. I’m at 9 min and I think my brain is starting to bleed.
The call ended legit 22:05 🤣 so so close... and you missed a great exchange
Yeah, I made it almost as long. This guy didn't call in to debate, he called in to preach. And he got very angry when Sam started calling him out for his garbage.
The dude is a God.
Nothing Sam said was correct.
"Myocarditis is mild and nothing to worry about." What a liar.
@@Cussy69_420
Since when did Democrats get into bed with Big Pharma? It's disgusting.
The problem with dismissing peer-review as a significant metric, and then putting more faith in VAERS than in doctors, is that you then HAVE to simply make anecdotal claims the rest of the way. You can't cite friendly studies or "experts" (Hoeg) as evidence of anything, because you discredited the entire concept.
There's few things sadder than an uneducated man who is convinced he is right. This caller is a fool but will go to his dying breath convinced he is a genius.
"Most cases of myocarditis are self resolving"- John-Hopkins
Johns, not John. Johns Hopkins.
@@lawsonj39 Yes. Great. You've made quite the contribution.
@@christhomas3720
I like to thank the people who stop me from making errors. He did you a favor.
@@maskedmarauder3278 lol. No. It's called quibbling.
The meaning was conveyed despite the misspelling. Correcting on spelling or other minutiae is helpful to no one.
@@christhomas3720
Experts can be distinguished by their attention to detail. Misspelling is a gateway offence.
Why so much fuss over quibbling? Everyone has the freedom to ignore.
“I have a scientific background..” Bachelor of science in business administration