CV19 - Cure Worse Than The Disease? (Vol 19)
Discussion
Carl_VivaEspana said:
andyA700 said:
The BBC's darling Dr Ranj was on this morning, talking about the vaccines and how rare the injuries were, so myself and some others who have been injured, asked some polite questions on his FB page and guess what - the comments were deleted.
No vaccine is perfect, we needed something fast and effective, we got one, the virus mutated faster than expected and people died as a result of the vaccine - it was the best outcome of a bad situation.alangla said:
pavarotti1980 said:
What does an American adverse events reporting portal tell you?
I thought the AstraZeneca vaccine was never used in the US? Or are you talking about reports about adverse reactions to Covid vaccines in general?As Isaldiri pointed out, the Janssen one used similar technology and I assume was used in the US, so it would be interesting to see reports for that & compare to the AstraZeneca one
Carl_VivaEspana said:
I do get the feeling that the energy being directed at people like Dr Ranj would be better spend directed at the Chinese state.
No vaccine is perfect, we needed something fast and effective, we got one, the virus mutated faster than expected and people died as a result of the vaccine - it was the best outcome of a bad situation.
Instead of championing a national achievement to get the vaccine out at the speed they did the anti-vaxx brigade are too involved and hence, comments get deleted.
Facebook is not the place for reasoned debate anyway, you are wasting your time reading it if that's what you expect out of it.
Some of the population might have needed it. Did anyone under the age of fifty and in reasonable heath need it though? Really?No vaccine is perfect, we needed something fast and effective, we got one, the virus mutated faster than expected and people died as a result of the vaccine - it was the best outcome of a bad situation.
Instead of championing a national achievement to get the vaccine out at the speed they did the anti-vaxx brigade are too involved and hence, comments get deleted.
Facebook is not the place for reasoned debate anyway, you are wasting your time reading it if that's what you expect out of it.
jameswills said:
You talking about that “vaccine” which was made in apparently a few weeks by a company created in 2016 and funded by an interesting list of Chinese investors started by a woman who was then made Dame and into a Barbie Doll just when they let us all of lockdown?
Nothing to see here.
Just for the lolz, check out the BBC article on the AZ withdrawal :Nothing to see here.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-68977026
Unreal said:
Those numbers are entirely plausible. 45m people had two or more doses of the vaccines. So lets say total doses are in the order of 110m
11,000 claims / 110,000,000 jabs equates to an adverse reaction rate of around 1 in 10000, which is not altogether unexpected.
Which is why the Govt and public health experts that tried to coerce young healthy people into having the vaccine were absolutely wrong.
Elysium said:
Which is why the Govt and public health experts that tried to coerce young healthy people into having the vaccine were absolutely wrong.
Enough of the "young healthy" nonsense. The vaxxes did the same damage to everyone. It's just that nobody cared about the elderly as "they were in their final years and would have died soon anyway" and doesn't make for sensational headlines like 14 year olds "died suddenly" does.Edited by r3g on Thursday 9th May 00:44
Those 11,000 claims might be the tip of the iceberg. The increase in long term sick is way larger than that -
https://twitter.com/ClareCraigPath/status/17881606...
https://twitter.com/ClareCraigPath/status/17881606...
r3g said:
Just for the lolz, check out the BBC article on the AZ withdrawal :
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-68977026
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-68977026
This is why it’s important to keep talking about it, this is going to be the history past down to the next generation, outright lies. Which is why you have to question everything else you’ve ever been taught. And the wise man would.
r3g said:
Enough of the "young healthy" nonsense. The vaxxes did the same damage to everyone. It's just that nobody cared about the elderly as "they were in their final years and would have died soon anyway" and doesn't make for sensational headlines like 14 year olds "died suddenly" does.
Absolutely this. Edited by jameswills on Thursday 9th May 06:10
Elysium said:
Unreal said:
Those numbers are entirely plausible. 45m people had two or more doses of the vaccines. So lets say total doses are in the order of 110m
11,000 claims / 110,000,000 jabs equates to an adverse reaction rate of around 1 in 10000, which is not altogether unexpected.
Which is why the Govt and public health experts that tried to coerce young healthy people into having the vaccine were absolutely wrong.
r3g said:
Just for the lolz, check out the BBC article on the AZ withdrawal :
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-68977026
I'm so confused. Why are they withdrawing it when everyone said we were loons for questioning it, and anti-vax for standing ground and refusing the almost overwhelming coercion?https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-68977026
Still...at least they waited over three years so its too late for any claims to be made, eh?! Don't want to impact those juicy profits.
andyA700 said:
The ADR reports for just the AZ vaccine in the UK are well over the 100K mark and that is from the June 2022 FoI stats. I and many others are not included in those figures, because for some reason, we are unable to register on the yellow card scheme.
You don't have to register on the yellow card scheme (COVID subsection) to submit an ADR report though. Just click on the box that says continue without registeringhttps://coronavirus-yellowcard.mhra.gov.uk/about-y...
jameswills said:
r3g said:
Just for the lolz, check out the BBC article on the AZ withdrawal :
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-68977026
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-68977026
This is why it’s important to keep talking about it, this is going to be the history past down to the next generation, outright lies. Which is why you have to question everything else you’ve ever been taught. And the wise man would.
r3g said:
Enough of the "young healthy" nonsense. The vaxxes did the same damage to everyone. It's just that nobody cared about the elderly as "they were in their final years and would have died soon anyway" and doesn't make for sensational headlines like 14 year olds "died suddenly" does.
Absolutely this. Edited by jameswills on Thursday 9th May 06:10
r3g said:
Elysium said:
Which is why the Govt and public health experts that tried to coerce young healthy people into having the vaccine were absolutely wrong.
Enough of the "young healthy" nonsense. The vaxxes did the same damage to everyone. It's just that nobody cared about the elderly as "they were in their final years and would have died soon anyway" and doesn't make for sensational headlines like 14 year olds "died suddenly" does.What matters is if the person taking the medicine receives a benefit that outweighs that. Elderly vulnerable were at serious risk from COVID. Whereas ironically vaccine harms seem to be more focused in younger healthier people.
The death rate for first exposure to COVID in a 90 year old was around 30%. So for every 10,000 people:
3,000 would die without vaccination
vaccines might save 2,000 lives
Severe vaccine damage might affect 1 person.
In which case the maths very much favours vaccination.
If you are young and healthy the COVID risk is much lower. For kids it’s potentially lower than the vaccine risk.
It’s lower now for everyone that has been infected and recovered from COVID.
andyA700 said:
Elysium said:
Unreal said:
Those numbers are entirely plausible. 45m people had two or more doses of the vaccines. So lets say total doses are in the order of 110m
11,000 claims / 110,000,000 jabs equates to an adverse reaction rate of around 1 in 10000, which is not altogether unexpected.
Which is why the Govt and public health experts that tried to coerce young healthy people into having the vaccine were absolutely wrong.
He has also argued that this is way beyond the adverse reaction rates that have resulted in other vaccines being withdrawn. So potentially we have a double scandal. The general safety of the vaccine being far too low and the public being coerced to take it regardless.
I oppose the coercion in any event. What we don’t know yet is the age where the vaccines stop being beneficial for those without specific vulnerabilities. JCVI certainly felt the benefits were not significant in under 16s. I suspect that they may have caused a net harm in the under 30s and should never have been offered to that group.
No group should have been coerced under any circumstances.
BBC happy to run stories that blame GPs for Vacc Death
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-leeds-68935566
Elysium said:
All medicines do some harm. Read the leaflet in a packet of over the counter painkillers.
What matters is if the person taking the medicine receives a benefit that outweighs that. Elderly vulnerable were at serious risk from COVID. Whereas ironically vaccine harms seem to be more focused in younger healthier people.
The death rate for first exposure to COVID in a 90 year old was around 30%. So for every 10,000 people:
3,000 would die without vaccination
vaccines might save 2,000 lives
Severe vaccine damage might affect 1 person.
In which case the maths very much favours vaccination.
If you are young and healthy the COVID risk is much lower. For kids it’s potentially lower than the vaccine risk.
It’s lower now for everyone that has been infected and recovered from COVID.
Exactly.What matters is if the person taking the medicine receives a benefit that outweighs that. Elderly vulnerable were at serious risk from COVID. Whereas ironically vaccine harms seem to be more focused in younger healthier people.
The death rate for first exposure to COVID in a 90 year old was around 30%. So for every 10,000 people:
3,000 would die without vaccination
vaccines might save 2,000 lives
Severe vaccine damage might affect 1 person.
In which case the maths very much favours vaccination.
If you are young and healthy the COVID risk is much lower. For kids it’s potentially lower than the vaccine risk.
It’s lower now for everyone that has been infected and recovered from COVID.
Elysium said:
All medicines do some harm. Read the leaflet in a packet of over the counter painkillers.
What matters is if the person taking the medicine receives a benefit that outweighs that. Elderly vulnerable were at serious risk from COVID. Whereas ironically vaccine harms seem to be more focused in younger healthier people.
The death rate for first exposure to COVID in a 90 year old was around 30%. So for every 10,000 people:
3,000 would die without vaccination
vaccines might save 2,000 lives
Severe vaccine damage might affect 1 person.
In which case the maths very much favours vaccination.
If you are young and healthy the COVID risk is much lower. For kids it’s potentially lower than the vaccine risk.
It’s lower now for everyone that has been infected and recovered from COVID.
That is some serious bending of statistics! And actually false, the probability of a 90+ year old dying from anything is 1 in 3, they are near death. They are old, most won’t be well. What matters is if the person taking the medicine receives a benefit that outweighs that. Elderly vulnerable were at serious risk from COVID. Whereas ironically vaccine harms seem to be more focused in younger healthier people.
The death rate for first exposure to COVID in a 90 year old was around 30%. So for every 10,000 people:
3,000 would die without vaccination
vaccines might save 2,000 lives
Severe vaccine damage might affect 1 person.
In which case the maths very much favours vaccination.
If you are young and healthy the COVID risk is much lower. For kids it’s potentially lower than the vaccine risk.
It’s lower now for everyone that has been infected and recovered from COVID.
Here’s the deaths registered stats from 2020 to 2021 by age. It’s nothing like what you say.
Edited to add: the death rate of the elderly spiking has already been done with the disaster that the health care offered to them and end of life treatment protocols, which skews all figures anyway.
Edited by jameswills on Thursday 9th May 10:46
jameswills said:
Elysium said:
All medicines do some harm. Read the leaflet in a packet of over the counter painkillers.
What matters is if the person taking the medicine receives a benefit that outweighs that. Elderly vulnerable were at serious risk from COVID. Whereas ironically vaccine harms seem to be more focused in younger healthier people.
The death rate for first exposure to COVID in a 90 year old was around 30%. So for every 10,000 people:
3,000 would die without vaccination
vaccines might save 2,000 lives
Severe vaccine damage might affect 1 person.
In which case the maths very much favours vaccination.
If you are young and healthy the COVID risk is much lower. For kids it’s potentially lower than the vaccine risk.
It’s lower now for everyone that has been infected and recovered from COVID.
That is some serious bending of statistics! And actually false, the probability of a 90+ year old dying from anything is 1 in 3, they are near death. They are old, most won’t be well. What matters is if the person taking the medicine receives a benefit that outweighs that. Elderly vulnerable were at serious risk from COVID. Whereas ironically vaccine harms seem to be more focused in younger healthier people.
The death rate for first exposure to COVID in a 90 year old was around 30%. So for every 10,000 people:
3,000 would die without vaccination
vaccines might save 2,000 lives
Severe vaccine damage might affect 1 person.
In which case the maths very much favours vaccination.
If you are young and healthy the COVID risk is much lower. For kids it’s potentially lower than the vaccine risk.
It’s lower now for everyone that has been infected and recovered from COVID.
Here’s the deaths registered stats from 2020 to 2021 by age. It’s nothing like what you say.
Edited to add: the death rate of the elderly spiking has already been done with the disaster that the health care offered to them and end of life treatment protocols, which skews all figures anyway.
Edited by jameswills on Thursday 9th May 10:46
I think this is the paper where the 1/10000 figure came from -
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/...
eta: the adverse event reporting systems have always been shown to under report so this would also decrease the odds.
Edited by cliffe_mafia on Thursday 9th May 11:04
Rollin said:
jameswills said:
r3g said:
Just for the lolz, check out the BBC article on the AZ withdrawal :
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-68977026
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-68977026
This is why it’s important to keep talking about it, this is going to be the history past down to the next generation, outright lies. Which is why you have to question everything else you’ve ever been taught. And the wise man would.
r3g said:
Enough of the "young healthy" nonsense. The vaxxes did the same damage to everyone. It's just that nobody cared about the elderly as "they were in their final years and would have died soon anyway" and doesn't make for sensational headlines like 14 year olds "died suddenly" does.
Absolutely this. Edited by jameswills on Thursday 9th May 06:10
CDC very definitely stated you were 'unvaccinated' until two weeks after your injection:
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines...
but even this seemingly pro-injection article seems to note confusion on timelines:
https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2021/03...
The Atlantic said:
And yet, many news outlets and public-health authorities, including the CDC’s own vaccination tracker, are putting people in the “fully vaccinated” count as soon as they receive their second shot of the Moderna or Pfizer vaccine, or their one-and-done dose of Johnson & Johnson. (The agency acknowledges in a footnote at the bottom of its tracker that it is using fully vaccinated in two different ways.)
The ONS appear to be using / to have used different criteria:https://www.ons.gov.uk/aboutus/transparencyandgove...
ONS FOI response said:
We have produced analysis on deaths involving COVID-19 or deaths from all causes after receipt of the COVID-19 vaccination, available via the following link: Deaths by vaccination status, England. This is an analysis of deaths involving COVID-19 by vaccination status that occurred between 1 January and 31 October 2021 in England.
In this analysis, following values are used when defining whether the deceased is vaccinated:
Unvaccinated
Vaccinated with the first dose only, date of death/last day of week is within 21 days of vaccination
Vaccinated with the first dose only, date of death/last day of week is 21 days or more after vaccination
Vaccinated with both the first and second dose, date of death/last day
Therefore, our definition for deaths in the 'unvaccinated' category would be any death that does not fall into the other three categories. This would be deaths where someone has not received any doses of the COVID-19 vaccination.
The other three categories used are:
Deaths where the person was vaccinated with only the first dose and the date of death is within 21 days
Deaths where the person was vaccinated with only the first dose and the date of death exceeds 21 days
Deaths where the person was vaccinated with the first and the second dose
In this analysis, following values are used when defining whether the deceased is vaccinated:
Unvaccinated
Vaccinated with the first dose only, date of death/last day of week is within 21 days of vaccination
Vaccinated with the first dose only, date of death/last day of week is 21 days or more after vaccination
Vaccinated with both the first and second dose, date of death/last day
Therefore, our definition for deaths in the 'unvaccinated' category would be any death that does not fall into the other three categories. This would be deaths where someone has not received any doses of the COVID-19 vaccination.
The other three categories used are:
Deaths where the person was vaccinated with only the first dose and the date of death is within 21 days
Deaths where the person was vaccinated with only the first dose and the date of death exceeds 21 days
Deaths where the person was vaccinated with the first and the second dose
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff