131–140 of 164 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Hopefully you reported to VAERS. People need to report potential events so that the data is present to do statistical analysis on. It's a shame how terrible the data currently is with all the under reporting.
VAERS is garbage in, garbage out. There is no curation since it is self reported, you may as well mine Reddit comments or Twitter to get the same data.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
VAERS is garbage in, garbage out. There is no curation since it is self reported, you may as well mine Reddit comments or Twitter to get the same data.
This is true of COVID "cases" and deaths as well.
Additionally, if someone is pCR positive, symptom positive, and dies from a cytokine storm, that’s pretty strong evidence.
But we don’t even need the latter. Excess deaths tell us approximately how many the virus killed, period, QED. There’s no denying COVID killed 10x more than the worst flu since 1918.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Thanks you for this thoughtful response. I chose to be vaccinated and unfortunately have suffered serious consequences like a very small number of other people will statistically. It's been pretty disheartening to see that sharing anything negative about vaccines, even those warned about by medical officials, leads to very negative reactions from people (being told to shut up, being censored/downvoted online etc). I…
I'm sorry to hear that. We need your voice. There are people who still haven't gotten "vaccinated" and are under pressure to do so. By speaking up you might be able to save someone else from what you're going through. Please don't let people shut you down. Your personal experience is the gold standard of scientific and clinical evidence. Any pushback you get is irrational and based on fear and ignorance.
Exactly how? By not getting vaccinated? By making sure the risk of side-effects from the vaccine is lower than the risk of getting the disease? How can you weigh these risks? You can say, by doing statistics. You need to be able do estimate conditional expectations, the more granular the conditions, the better. For example you start with the unconditional expectation of having a severe outcome from Covid vs from the vaccine. The vaccine wins hands down. Then you do expectation conditional on age. The FDA and CDC did that when issuing their approval, and making the recommendations for various age groups. For more granular conditions, the CDC maintains the VAERS database [1], where every adverse event linked to a vaccine is tabulated. For example, let's say the CDC analyses this data set and concludes that for people with kidney stones the vaccine's side-effects outweigh the benefits. The CDC will issue the appropriate recommendation.
How exactly do you think someone's "voice on the internet" will result in people making better informed decisions, vs people actually listening to the CDC recommendations?
I wish we could have a disclaimer on every article/study about vaccine side effects, something like: "This is not an attack on vaccines, pharmaceutical interventions, associated stakeholders or policy makers. This is not a statistical assessment of risk for specific audiences. Please focus feedback and resources on specific treatments for the living human beings who have been injured. Even one in a million is of litt…
It's honestly quite disturbing that this kind of upfront apologizing is needed.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is true of COVID "cases" and deaths as well.
Not really. Can have all cause mortality data from every year that tells us excess deaths. If we see a spike of 400k excess deaths for 2020 and 2021, then it’s pretty obvious how many to attribute to the virus. Additionally, if someone is pCR positive, symptom positive, and dies from a cytokine storm, that’s pretty strong evidence. But we don’t even need the latter. Excess deaths tell us approximately how many the vi…
Well, sort of for n-order impacts, but not for direct numbers. To do that the other variables have to stay the same, which clearly isn't the case with the affects of lockdown and medical system strains (increased drinking, drug use, mental health strains, etc; less preventative care and access to medical care, etc).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm just an anecdote, but I've had COVID. It was less than a bad case of the flu. To pretend that it affects everyone equally and that they're all the worst thing ever is malpractice. Risk communication should always have been striated by age/comorbidity and let people make decisions from there.
I’ve had it to, after I was vaccinated. The thing is, you don’t know ahead of time how it will affect you. There are lots of examples of 30 something, fit, athletic even, people with no preexisting conditions, getting very sick and hospitalized, dying, or ending up with long COVID. Beyond that, many people who are sick with it won’t quarantine themselves for 10 days or wear masks and end up infecting others —- assumi…
These are anecdotes that stand out specifically because of their rarity. This is why we need what the other poster said - Data striated by age and gender.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Nearly 0.2% of the US has died of COVID, so he can’t be that far off on his estimate, not knowing the age of yourself or other readers.
He said the lower bound was 0.5%. So as a healthy 30 year you’re saying my risk of death is 0.5%? And note the CDC said they’ll be providing data on who “died with covid” versus who “died from covid”.
So, I can't say your risk, since you didn't mention if you are vaccinated. Being vaccinated is statistically the best way to reduce the risk of death or other severe long-term health issues (other than getting younger) relative to your baseline risk, largely independent of age (the trials for very young children are still on-going). My sources for this are talking to doctors and reading the official reports.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not really. Can have all cause mortality data from every year that tells us excess deaths. If we see a spike of 400k excess deaths for 2020 and 2021, then it’s pretty obvious how many to attribute to the virus. Additionally, if someone is pCR positive, symptom positive, and dies from a cytokine storm, that’s pretty strong evidence. But we don’t even need the latter. Excess deaths tell us approximately how many the vi…
"Can have all cause mortality data from every year that tells us excess deaths." Well, sort of for n-order impacts, but not for direct numbers. To do that the other variables have to stay the same, which clearly isn't the case with the affects of lockdown and medical system strains (increased drinking, drug use, mental health strains, etc; less preventative care and access to medical care, etc).
Additionally I think we could look at countries whose health systems are bad or non-existent as a proxy to see excess deaths.
Are you trying to defend the notion that COVID isn’t any worse than the flu?
I’d say that as a balancing effect, the social distancing and masking of anything, has reduced deaths from other viruses in these last two years and so excess deaths might be undercounted. (Flu positivity is way down, and only 700 deaths recorded flu positive in 2020-2021 vs 22,000-39,000 in previous two years)
Injecting every person on Earth with one of only a few, new, vaccines seems dangerous. This has me wondering about two things:
1) Isn't it good to have an unvaccinated control group? 5-10%? Not just based on people who for some reason cannot take any vaccine, but healthy individuals.
2) Shouldn't we only use a single vaccine for every dose per person? To narrow the population affected by potential unknown side-effects.
Has anyone heard any officials/domain experts discuss this?
(I'm not against vaccination per se, and am myself on the third dose already. I'm just worried we're blinded by one danger, and willingly heading into another.)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A good first step might be making sure the population is educated sufficiently to identify and weigh the risks between a 1 in 1,000,000 side effect, the disease the vaccine protects against, and the pure bullshit peddled by fear mongers. Right now, we have people in the US who still believe that Covid is no worse than a bad case of the flu. All the evidence (at least for the pre Omicron variants) suggests that the re…
> All the evidence (at least for the pre Omicron variants) suggests that the reality, as viewed by death rate, is orders of magnitude more bleak. Dr. Rochelle Walensky, Director of CDC was actually in an interview recently where she said 75% of Covid deaths occurred in people with 4 co-morbidities. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pa7N-iNkaUE This statement begs the question of what percentile of deaths occurred with…
https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid_weekly/index.htm?fb...
Most of those sound like they would have been caused by COVID. So, were they probably a fairly normal 41 year old, until they were in the hospitalized for COVID, developed complications, and died. Or is there more to the model here?
Even more confusingly, about half of the US population is obese, but it is only mentioned in a small percentage of death reports (up to about of quarter in the younger populations). Taken naively, this would seem to imply that being obese actually strongly protects from death. But I suspect that it is instead simply not being listed in the causes of death in most cases.