Live data from Hacker News

COVID vaccine injury claims mount, but recourse is lacking for those harmed

reuters.com

41–50 of 63 posts

Re: COVID vaccine injury claims mount, but recourse is lacking for those harmed

#41

It's pretty wild that prior to vaccination, smallpox prevention was done by inoculation with actual live smallpox. That story of Washington forcing his troops to be 'vaccinated' is wrong - he exposed them to actual smallpox . Something like 1% of people receiving inoculation would develop full-blown smallpox. No vaccine courts for those folks. There are going to be a lot of one in a million coincidences with this bro…

Specifically inoculation against smallpox was termed variolation. It was application of the virus to the skin as opposed to infection via the air/lungs. For those curious. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Variolation

Re: COVID vaccine injury claims mount, but recourse is lacking for those harmed

#42
post #38
post #6

I apologize for going out on a tangent, but I jus have to draw some attention to this quote from the article: > McFadden, 44, said she was previously healthy and needed two emergency surgeries to remove massive clots in her lungs, heart and left leg. She spent nine days in the hospital, racking up $489,153 in medical bills, she said. Seriously, US of A. What the hell is this? How is this even possible?

The estimate for the birth of our baby was over $30,000 for a normal, natural birth. It ended up being a c-section, so I can’t wait to see what the actual total is. We don’t have a “healthcare is private” problem, we have a cost problem. Doctors, nurses, medical device companies, prescription drug makers, and everyone else get paid significantly more here than pretty much anywhere else. Now is definitely not the time…

> We don’t have a “healthcare is private” problem, we have a cost problem.

Isn't the problem actually the lack of any public healthcare service compounded by the extensive reliance on private health insurances, which completely eliminates any competition based on cost and actually puts pressure for end-user prices to grow?

The reason why healthcare costs in the US are extremely high is not due to quality at all, but because those selling services can get away with it.

Re: COVID vaccine injury claims mount, but recourse is lacking for those harmed

#43

https://investinganswers.com/articles/10-most-popular-stocks... Top stock owned by members of congress - Pfizer #6 Johnson and Johnson #7 Moderna stock up 387% YoY: https://investinganswers.com/articles/10-most-popular-stocks... Bill Gates invested $55million into BioNTech in October 2019: https://investors.biontech.de/news-releases/news-release-det... Why are people with COVID antibodies from successful recovery for…

> Why are people with COVID antibodies from successful recovery forced to get vaccines?

"Successful recoveries" alone is not an indication that you are now immune to COVID-19 or able to handle a reinfection well. There are reported cases of reinfections, with the second COVID-19 infection being far more serious and even deadly.

Also, it has been observed that vaccination ensures a better antibody response to some variants than a prior infection.

https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7032e1.htm

Even though none of the current batch of vaccines ensure perfect immunity, they all do ensure that the immune response to subsequent infections is good enough to not even warrant any additional care beyond quarantine to avoid transmitting to anyone else.

Anyone can find answers to those questions with a quick Google search. What happened to "I do my own research"?

Re: COVID vaccine injury claims mount, but recourse is lacking for those harmed

#45

https://investinganswers.com/articles/10-most-popular-stocks... Top stock owned by members of congress - Pfizer #6 Johnson and Johnson #7 Moderna stock up 387% YoY: https://investinganswers.com/articles/10-most-popular-stocks... Bill Gates invested $55million into BioNTech in October 2019: https://investors.biontech.de/news-releases/news-release-det... Why are people with COVID antibodies from successful recovery for…

It makes sense that wealthy and powerful people would invest in popular companies. It makes sense that vaccine producers would be popular companies during two years of pandemic.

> It makes sense that wealthy and powerful people would invest in popular companies.

It should also be noted that even in the US, the bastion of economic liberalism and extreme capitalism, only 15% of all families own stock[1].

Also, it was reported a couple off days ago that 89% of all stock are owned by only 10% of americans[2]. So, Bill Gates owning stock is not relevant or meaningful.

Lastly, Bill Gates at most invested 55 million on BioNTech[3]. We're talking about a guy whose fortune is evaluated at around 135 BILLION dollars. To put things in perspective, this is equivalent to a guy who has $1 million investing $350 on a company. Come on.

[1] https://www.forbes.com/sites/teresaghilarducci/2020/08/31/mo...

[2] https://www.cnbc.com/2021/10/18/the-wealthiest-10percent-of-...

[3] https://investors.biontech.de/news-releases/news-release-det...

Re: COVID vaccine injury claims mount, but recourse is lacking for those harmed

#46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually, delta is hospitalizing and killing children at a significantly increased rate relative to the initial virus. Congress is going to hold blue chip stocks..what specious argument are you're trying to make?

source on "significantly increased"? children are more at risk from the flu

> source on "significantly increased"?

Perhaps the New York Times newspiece from a couple months ago.

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/08/09/health/coronavirus-childr...

Re: COVID vaccine injury claims mount, but recourse is lacking for those harmed

#47
post #9
post #5

2.2M+ adverse reactions in the WHO database. Of course Google, the corporate press, and "independent fact checkers" are saying it lacks context. Most people I know, know at least a few people that had adverse reactions already; let alone ADE or long-term consequences. http://www.vigiaccess.org/

The WHO essentially says it lacks context. Read the "Important points to consider" heading in your link. Namely "VigiAccess cannot be used to infer any confirmed link between a suspected side effect and any specific medicine."

Correlation doesn't imply causation but causation always implies correlation.

The claim that national databases of reports of symptoms occurring just days after a vaccination "cannot be used to infer" anything is just obviously not true. Of course they can be used to infer things. That's the justification for collecting the data in the first place, to enable such inferences. To believe nothing can be inferred from these databases requires you to believe that almost all the reports are spurious noise. Some are spurious for sure, just like some COVID deaths aren't really deaths from COVID. But a lot won't be, especially given that it takes quite some work and dedication to file an AER, and some databases like VAERS are moderated (that's why reports turn up in huge batches).

What's happened here is that the medical establishment has decided that vaccines are going to be considered safe no matter what, but, they have the problem that in the past there were problems and thus such databases are written into law in many parts of the world (like the USA). So they're trying to convince everyone that the databases are useless and so dominated by noise no conclusions can be drawn at all, even though in the past, that wasn't true. Additionally, no evidence for this claim is presented. So people outside the establishment go looking at the reports and this freaks out TPTB, who then insist that the public shouldn't look. It's not very convincing.

Re: COVID vaccine injury claims mount, but recourse is lacking for those harmed

#48
post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 2.2M+ adverse reactions in the WHO database. That's a big stretch. Take everything on the site with a block of salt, given that that's exactly what they tell you to do : > The information on this website, therefore, does not reflect any confirmed link between a medicinal product and a side effect People have been abusing the validity of VigiAccess to make specious claims about adverse effects and it's already been…

You can't argue with anything that comes out of the corporate press. I personally think the WHO has been comprised and don't trust them, but I used data associated with them since a lot of people do trust them still. If you won't trust this data what will you trust? The most trustworthy source is anecdotal but I know that's not accepted in arguments either. The censorship is so bad you can't even Google anything anym…

> You can't argue with anything that comes out of the corporate press.

Your comment is very disingenuous. You name-drop the WHO while making an outstanding and frankly unbelievable claim, but instead of citing the WHO you point to a conspiracy theory site.

Then you have the gall to repeat the old conspiracy loon trope of the press not being trustworthy when asked to provide a source to support your claims.

Well, no one asked you to quore the press. Why not quote the WHO, for example? Or is the WHO also not trustworthy to backup claims made regarding WHO's data?

Re: COVID vaccine injury claims mount, but recourse is lacking for those harmed

#49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The same is not necessarily true for a healthy 19 year old without comorbidities who is forced to get a Covid vaccination to attend college. True, if you only narrowly focus on the immediate benefit to the individual there are head-spinning number of laws and rules that don't make sense in civilization.

What other sort of benefit is there supposed to be? The reduction in infection and transmission risk for Delta from the vaccines is marginal at best, wanes quickly, and might well be defeated completely by future variants. If we're acknowledging that the immediate risk tradeoff might be negative, these would be the first vaccines in history that people were widely expected to take on those terms.

> The reduction in infection and transmission risk for Delta from the vaccines is marginal at best, wanes quickly, and might well be defeated completely by future variants.

In case you are unaware, reducing the spread of a virus also lowers the odds of sparking new variants, not to mention the fact that limiting or eliminating the spread of a virus also contains and limits the risk posed by new variants.

Re: COVID vaccine injury claims mount, but recourse is lacking for those harmed

#50
post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The WHO essentially says it lacks context. Read the "Important points to consider" heading in your link. Namely "VigiAccess cannot be used to infer any confirmed link between a suspected side effect and any specific medicine."

Correlation doesn't imply causation but causation always implies correlation. The claim that national databases of reports of symptoms occurring just days after a vaccination "cannot be used to infer" anything is just obviously not true. Of course they can be used to infer things. That's the justification for collecting the data in the first place, to enable such inferences. To believe nothing can be inferred from th…

The medical establishment is not trying to convince everyone that systems like VAERS are useless. That might be a hyperbolic talking point in some circles on Twitter. The issue is misusing the systems. They exist to generate evidence of possible correlations between adverse events and vaccines, for further investigation. Not so that anyone can infer the real rate of events or causation.

>reports of symptoms occurring just days after a vaccination

To be clear: these systems are not limited to reports of events occurring just days after vaccination.

Post reply on HN