Jump to content
Seriously No Politics ×

Covid III: Delta Force


Recommended Posts

On 2/22/2022 at 1:40 PM, JustAnAustralian said:

The point isn't numbers or double counts. It's entries that are should not be in there at all.

 

The count of adverse events that aren't actually adverse events should be zero.

But as the VAERS web site says about its database system, "it's a passive system".  And you are bound to get a small number of kookie entries from the ~15% lay people making entries.  But even counting those in your 2nd listing, the fraction is minuscule and doesn't much effect the thrust of the information about adverse reactions to include deaths, which constitute serious numbers.  Especially when you consider that they are probably under-reported by a factor of at least 5 and possibly much more.

My view is that funds should be allocated to:  1) verify and clean up the reports; 2) seriously address the issue of adverse events reported to include deaths, for which effort autopsies should be performed where possible . . . . . . at least on a percentage of them.

Edited by blarsen
Link to comment
48 minutes ago, blarsen said:

doesn't much effect the thrust of the information about adverse reactions to include deaths,

It does if the death isn't actually an adverse reaction to the vaccination. I'm not saying that no deaths are as a result of the vaccinations. The TTS and Myo/Peri-Carditis are definitely real and causes of death. But things need to be looked at in ways other than tables of numbers (as demonstrated by my examples).

48 minutes ago, blarsen said:

My view is that funds should be allocated to:  1) verify and clean up the reports; 2) seriously address the issue of adverse events reported to include deaths, for which effort autopsies should be performed where possible . . . . . . at least on a percentage of them.

I think if a death is reported in VAERS it should be examined regardless (at a minimum). But yes. Get to work on cleaning up the invalid reports.

Edited by JustAnAustralian
Link to comment
21 minutes ago, blarsen said:

But as the VAERS web site says about its database system, "it's a passive system".  And you are bound to get a small number of kookie entries from the ~15% lay people making entries.  But even counting those in your 2nd listing, the fraction is minuscule and doesn't much effect the thrust of the information about adverse reactions to include deaths, which constitute serious numbers.  Especially when you consider that they are probably under-reported by a factor of at least 5 and possibly much more.

My view is that funds should be allocated to:  1) verify and clean up the reports; 2) seriously address the issue of adverse events reported to include deaths, for which effort autopsies should be performed where possible . . . . . . at least on a percentage of them.

 

Has there been a relatively large amount of reported deaths to VAERS in the year 2021 as compared to other vaccines?  Yes.  I will point out however that with the 547 MILLION doses administered in the US the reported incidence of death is at a rate of 0.0022%  In other words, even if these deaths were all caused by the vaccine (which they aren't) you are taking a greater risk with the disease than from the vaccine.  

You will likely counter that side effects are under reported in VAERS by at least a factor of 5.  I don't think you can say that with deaths, which are MUCH more likely to be reported than sore arm, or headache, or fatigue, or fever... 

The numbers reported deaths to VAERS are quite a bit higher than other vaccines.  Fact.  Is this evidence of a causal link?  Lets think about it.  What factors might lead to higher reported deaths with Covid vaccines than other vaccines? The only one you are considering is that the vaccines are higher risk for death than other vaccines.  Ok that is one way you might interpret the data.  Another factor that might be influencing it is the age of those receiving the vaccine.   Think about it, blarsen, almost all vaccines given today are in young healthy children.  They are not suffering from the age related diseases that so often cause death in people over 65.  Very few vaccines are routinely given to anyone over 65 (seasonal flu and pneumonia - shingles at 50), and not everyone over 65 gets these vaccines during the exact same year.  

Let me tell you what I saw with the Covid vaccine working in different mass vaccination clinics when Covid was first released to the public and only to those over 65.  Our clinic took over the entire Sandy convention center.  It was PACKED lines with elderly people waiting HOURS in lines for a shot.  I have never seen anything like it.  I would personally give shots, non-stop, no breaks, working 60+ hour weeks.  It was like old people were on endlessly long conveyer belts.  This went on for months!  You don't see this with other vaccines.  Ever.  Never in history at this rate.  95% of people over 65 have received at least one dose of covid vaccine in the US 95%!!! in a matter of 1 year!!!   How many of those aged 65 to 113 would have coincidentally passed away within weeks or months of receiving the vaccine?  With this being a completely novel vaccine and only having EUA authorization, and with reporting side effects to the CDC being HIGHLY encouraged (much more so than with other vaccines), how much more likely are coincidental deaths going to be reported?

These numbers of reported deaths being relatively larger than with other vaccines in the same year is entirely and completely and reasonably predictable! 

The fact is that ALL deaths reported to VAERS are investigated by CDC and FDA clinicians who review death certificates, autopsies, and medical records.  In their investigation they did find a causal relationship with J&J and thrombosis leading to death in 9 people.  That how sensitive and good these people are!  The other primary cause of death would be anaphylaxis.  Anaphylaxis happens at a rate of 4.5/million doses given - similar to other vaccines.  A small fraction of those will die from anaphylaxis.  That is a risk with ALL vaccines.  People die from vaccines. There is no doubt about that.  But we can't pretend that VAERS is a good indicator of causal relationship with death in a novel vaccine with over 500 million doses given in a single year to nearly 100 percent of all people over 65 years old suffering from cancer, heart disease, diabetes, pulmonary disease, etc.  Of COURSE we are going to expect more reported deaths in VAERS.   What would be a careless mistake and a danger to society (if they believe it) is to suggest that deaths from the vaccine are likely 5 times+ greater than what is being reported to VAERS.   

 

Link to comment
On 2/22/2022 at 8:41 AM, pogi said:
  •  

 

 

 

 

 

My understanding has been that it was H.R.5540 - Health Care Quality Improvement Act of 1986, that required physicians to report ‘adverse events’ to include deaths, due to vaccinations.  VAERS was created about 4 years later more as an early warning system, though physicians using VAERS to make their ‘required’ reports is probably the main way they do it now, if they even think to do it.   

Apparently, as “of 2:30 PM CT on July 21, 2021, the CDC's website modified the number of VAERS reports related to COVID-19 vaccination deaths from 12,313 to 6,079, through July 13, 2021”.  (See:   https://www.precisionvaccinations.com/covid-19-vaccine-related-fatalities-updated )

Why did they do this?  According to some of their critics, they did this because they excluded any deaths that occurred within 14 days of a patient getting vaccinated, because they judged it takes that amount of time for the vaccination to take full effect; i.e., up to that time you aren’t considered fully vaccinated.

Then you have the under-reporting of AE’s to include deaths, to the system, anyway.  Can you cite any doctors losing their medical license from a State Board of Health for NOT reporting to VAERS, etc.?  I doubt it.

But it’s not worth head butting about.  I’ve read enough articles documenting the malfeasance and compromised nature of the CDC and FDA in certain respects, not across the board necessarily; particularly via ‘Big Pharma’, to be convinced otherwise.

Based on some of your posted comments, you don’t strike me as someone who has lost their faith in the ‘system’ . . . . yet.

Link to comment
On 2/18/2022 at 11:43 AM, Hamba Tuhan said:

We just received word that all indoor capacity restrictions here will be lifted this weekend. I've already shared with our stake president. I'm looking forward to seeing all the pews back in use in our chapel this Sunday! (For two years, half of the cushions have been stacked in the clerk's office.)

Quick update: no changes were made to our chapels last weekend. The stake president told me that, in consultation with the area presidency, they are trying to assess how to implement changes in the most 'user-friendly' way. We did get an email from our bishop earlier this week foreshadowing that seating arrangements would be altered in line with local guidelines in a way that will cater to members in a variety of situations. Watch this space.

Quote

We still have an indoor mask mandate, but we were told today to expect changes of some kind to be made in that space next week.

Our indoor mask mandate will disappear this Friday from all venues not deemed 'high risk', such as hospitals, aged-care homes, public transport, etc.

The stake president said yesterday that the response to this development is also forthcoming. We do have a member of the area presidency with us this weekend, so I'm assuming things will be clear by then.

Our daily case numbers are soaring again, but hospitalisations are not (yet?).

Edited by Hamba Tuhan
Link to comment
19 minutes ago, blarsen said:

But it’s not worth head butting about. 

People are needlessly dying from not being vaccinated due to misinformation and faulty assumptions about vaccine safety issues.  It absolutely is worth butting heads about. 

Do you have anything to comment on my response as to why Covid deaths have relatively higher reporting than from other vaccine?

I will address the rest of your comments once you give my comments due attention. 

 

 

 

Link to comment
2 minutes ago, Calm said:

So might be “yet”…here’s hoping they won’t be joining case counts in the elevations.

Same!

A number of people have been using the health department's Facebook page to question the wisdom of ending a mask mandate even as cases are rising. It's interesting to watch. It'll be more interesting to me personally what happens in our Church context.

Link to comment
35 minutes ago, pogi said:

People are needlessly dying from not being vaccinated due to misinformation and faulty assumptions about vaccine safety issues.  It absolutely is worth butting heads about. 

Do you have anything to comment on my response as to why Covid deaths have relatively higher reporting than from other vaccine?

I will address the rest of your comments once you give my comments due attention. 

 

 

 

I meant "head butting" with you.  Nothing I bring up is likely to persuade you to a different view.

My view, as well as many others with expert credentials monitoring the situation, is that "people are needlessly dying" both from alternative therapies for COVID being maligned and ignored, and from mRNA vaccine damage.  So there you are.  A stand off.

Link to comment
On 2/22/2022 at 1:46 PM, pogi said:

Yes, but keep in mind that reported side effects to VAERS only accounts for a tiny fraction of real-world numbers.  I mean, there are probably hundreds of thousands of people suffering from tick bites, etc. as a side effect of Covid vaccine.  

I like your first sentence and agree with it . . . . if you were applying it to adverse reactions to the COVID-19 shots.

My guess is that there are probably millions of adverse reactions to the COVID shots that are not reported, partially because of disbelief, embarrassment, belief they aren't severe enough, etc.  I've known far more people in my circle of family, friends and acquaintances or those they know, who have suffered from these things after COVID shots, than I have of people hospitalized or dying of COVID.

Link to comment
On 2/22/2022 at 8:59 AM, pogi said:

There have been around 3,000 studies done on this.  I wonder what methodology McCullough's used to narrow those results to 250 papers.  Any mention of what criteria he used to exclude around 2,750 studies, and why he used that criteria?  Without a transparent review of his process, it comes off as biased cherry picking without regard to study strengths/weaknesses.  If only 250 out of 3,000 studies show some potential efficacy - that isn't a favorable commentary on the efficacy of hydroxychloroquine.

Here is a systematic review and meta-analysis of those nearly 3,000 studies with the inclusion criteria of of "blinded, placebo-controlled, randomized clinical trials".  In other words, it only selected for the gold-standard trials and did not base their inclusion criteria on results of the studies (unbiased), but on the methodology and excluded all studies that did not meet their strict gold-standards.  The results?

 

 

Oh, the Lancet.  I assume you aren’t aware of the article published in The Lancet May of 2020 claiming that HCQ actually makes the symptoms of COVID-19 worse. Several monitors pointed out the false data/analysis used in the article forcing the Lancet to withdraw if after publication.  If these critics had not stepped up to the plate, the article would probably still be out there hooking in any number of gullible readers.  Here’s just one article on this subject:   https://thefederalist.com/2020/06/04/lancet-formally-retracts-fake-hydroxychloroquine-study-used-by-media-to-attack-trump-inbox/

So, The Lancet is taking a fall-back position that it has no effect, using a metadata analysis.  That’s nice.  And how many articles out of the 3,000 did the authors actually use.  Not many, from my scan of it.  One would have to ask McCullough why he narrowed the field down to 250.  From my experience of the man, he would have a very good explanation for what he did.

I’ve simply learned from fairly long experience to take almost any official position with a grain of salt when the topic is highly, highly controversial and has powerful political implications.

You’re not there, obviously . . . . yet.

Link to comment
On 2/22/2022 at 5:45 PM, Tacenda said:

My poor MIL, has been sick with Covid going on her second week. The retirement community she lives in won't let her be among the other residents, she's so lonely in her room. When we spoke with her on Sunday and asked if she went to church, because she hadn't answered her phone, we thought maybe they let her out of her room, she said she didn't know. Like she didn't know if she went to church? I wonder if Covid is making her have brain fog, because she kept saying she didn't know, on some other simple questions..she's 93. :(

A clear example of the tragedies resulting from the official narrative.

Link to comment
On 2/21/2022 at 11:42 PM, The Nehor said:

So you are not going to defend the last paper and instead pivot to an already rebutted attack you have used what? Twice now?

 

Sorry.  I've been very busy of late.  Actually, I don't recall that you rebutted much.  You said something like the papers and evidence McCullough's is using supporting HCQ effectiveness dealt with only small numbers of people in the studies.  Nice assertion, but you would have to do a pretty close survey of McCullough's position for that one to stick.  You also made a rather snide comment about my positive direct experience with using alternative therapies with my family and others being only a placebo effect.

Link to comment
On 2/22/2022 at 12:04 AM, The Nehor said:

I don’t care about your “strongly held view”. You value economic prosperity over human life but mass death means we got neither. The “vaccine passport” hysteria is stupid.

The Canadian trucker movement’s literal goal from there funding site was to force the nation’s leadership to dissolve the recently democratically elected parliament. The word for that is “treason”.

I encourage you to look into the funding of the Canadian trucker movement. This working class protest somehow had an average donation value near $1000. Their funding is unprecedented in Canada. Looking into it most of the funding came from the US and overseas in large values. The actual turnout to the protest was small compared to their self-reported numbers and for a trucker protest there weren’t that many truckers. Plus truckers have a high vaccination rate. Despite the protest there were almost no supply disruptions so where did all the trucks delivering supplies come from? Also take a look at all the photos of the trucks involved. Most don’t look like working trucks. They are way too new and have little wear and tear and many are identical models. Almost as if someone just bought a bunch of them.

How would you react if you were the leader of Canada and you find out that a movement that is purportedly grassroots is funded by citizens of foreign governments and their stated goal is to overthrow the government. Despite that the Ottawa protest in particular was treated with kid gloves for weeks. Finally the police and residents had had enough of an illegal campout blockading a large portion of the city waging psychological warfare (trucks honking all day and night is basically torture) and terrorizing the citizens. Finally enough was enough and those that didn’t leave were arrested. It took them weeks to break out the riot gear and the tear gas while the protesters were building a fuel dump right outside Parliament. It was also a severe fire hazard to other surrounding buildings. Then when the police moved in the protesters tried to form a shield of CHILDREN to keep the police from moving in. Yeah, real heroes copying the heroic actions of rogue states and terrorist organizations in using human shields. At least most terrorists have the decency not to use their own children as the shields.

It was an idiotic protest with incredibly vague demands. It did not win hearts and minds. It did not bring converts to the cause.

Other Canadian cities did a much better job of shaming and driving off the protesters.

Now we are seeing a similar trucker protest movement in the US protesting non-existent lockdowns. Since they were on guard there was a lot more tracking done on how these were formed. Social media accounts built up (mostly overseas) by posting standard right-wing talking points and run primarily by bots are purchased on the darknet. These accounts are repurposed for the movement and since they come pre-built with followers it creates the illusion of a large degree of support.

I worry about what is going to happen in DC if the convoys get there. The blockade tactics used in Canada to shut down whole blocks won’t be tolerated and the police are unlikely to be polite to this group of protesters after what happened last time. For good or ill the American police all along their route are quasi-militarized and much more aggressive than the Canadian police. This doesn’t end well.

Spoken like a true Trudeau supporter.  You're welcome to it.

Link to comment
On 2/22/2022 at 3:03 PM, Bob Crockett said:

I'm telling you, this is craziness.  An MD can prescribe all these alternative theories.  Hydroxchloroquine and/or ivermectine.  But the MD knows that these alternative theories are horse **** instead and don't prescribe them at all.  But I am aware of one or two who do prescribe these things.  I had a friend with a severe case of Covid.  The fight for a particular therapy (here, hydrochloroquine) is between doctor and patient. 

What a hospital protocol says would be meanless. The MD just tells the patient to show up in his office.

Anecdotal evidence, generally in a case like this, is not admissible in a court of law.

You're correct when you say "The fight for a particular therapy is between doctor and patient", but I would insert:  "should be" for the "is" in this statement.

Unfortunately (in my view and the view of my RN wife), most doctors are under the thrall of hospital protocols, especially those working directly for a hospital, and in the case of a physician working outside of a hospital, they are constrained by the protocols of a hospital they may refer a patient to for surgery, etc.   The power of the hospital administration is largely driven by money . . . . they don't follow the protocols, especially those put forth for COVID treatment, they don't get the money.

And actually, there are many doctors who are prescribing sequential multi-drug therapies that may or may not include hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin, and with excellent results.  Unfortunately, the majority fear the consequences for doing so.

Link to comment

I see that Raingirl remains my inveterate supporter😉  Not.

Link to comment
On 2/22/2022 at 8:20 PM, The Nehor said:

It is also worth noting that many service workers wish they could continue wearing masks. They find it weirdly liberating not to have to paste on a fake smile while dealing with the ridiculous demands of stupid customers. You can even stick your tongue out at them.

It also has lessened the frequency in which men try to badger women into smiling for them. We shouldn’t just focus on the negatives.

It’s also helps hide my annoyed expressions over some of the talks at church, lol. 

Link to comment
1 hour ago, blarsen said:

You're correct when you say "The fight for a particular therapy is between doctor and patient", but I would insert:  "should be" for the "is" in this statement.

Unfortunately (in my view and the view of my RN wife), most doctors are under the thrall of hospital protocols, especially those working directly for a hospital, and in the case of a physician working outside of a hospital, they are constrained by the protocols of a hospital they may refer a patient to for surgery, etc.   The power of the hospital administration is largely driven by money . . . . they don't follow the protocols, especially those put forth for COVID treatment, they don't get the money.

And actually, there are many doctors who are prescribing sequential multi-drug therapies that may or may not include hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin, and with excellent results.  Unfortunately, the majority fear the consequences for doing so.

Docs are not "in thrall" to the hospitals in the US.  So, a doc coming off his residency seeks a job in Loveland Colorado..    He never goes to the hospital, because hospitals do not employ docs.  He finds the right medical group and signs up.  But he still needs patients, so he seeks admission privileges at a Loveland hospital.   The hospital may or may not have rules against a particular therapy.   The docs still has the power to get it  There are any number of pharmacies around his hospital who can help.  But if the doc actually administers discourged therepy, he risks losing his privileges.

So, it really isn't the hospital's fault.  It is the docs' fault for administering it or not administering the therapy.

Edited by Bob Crockett
Link to comment
2 hours ago, blarsen said:

Spoken like a true Trudeau supporter.  You're welcome to it.

That is where everyone’s brain has broken. They have this weird dualist take on everything:

If you think the truckers are idiots you must support Trudeau. If you don’t like Republicans you must worship Biden. Since Biden is bad and is opposed to Putin I am now legally obligated to back Russia over Ukraine.

It is sheer lunacy but it is accepted as fact since your mind assumes I must be a devotee of someone. Why does your brain do that? Is that really how you process the world?

Link to comment
13 hours ago, The Nehor said:

That is where everyone’s brain has broken. They have this weird dualist take on everything:

If you think the truckers are idiots you must support Trudeau. If you don’t like Republicans you must worship Biden. Since Biden is bad and is opposed to Putin I am now legally obligated to back Russia over Ukraine.

It is sheer lunacy but it is accepted as fact since your mind assumes I must be a devotee of someone. Why does your brain do that? Is that really how you process the world?

Unfortunately, that is how it works.  I questioned the mask mandate on this forum and was accused of supporting mass shootings in parkland.  I also get accused of being anti vax for questioning mask mandates (you can be pro vax and anti mask mandate)

It is why I try not comment too much on this forum. Everyone has to pick a team. If I oppose in one thing, I am against everything. 

Welcome to the internet. 

Link to comment
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...