Live data from Hacker News

Health minister: Unexplained high death counts in New Brunswick concerning

cbc.ca

121–130 of 130 posts

Re: Health minister: Unexplained high death counts in New Brunswick concerning

#121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Healthy well reasoned skepticism is exactly what leads to "anti-(COVID)-vax sentiment", because the data is not good. If you doubt that, just browse this thread with showdead turned on. The people pointing out that the vaccines could be causing this are all being killed. Probably this comment will be gone within minutes. Yet those comments are also providing evidence and citations. Meanwhile, the "pro-vax" comments a…

Hundreds of thousands of people are dead from vaccine refusal in the US and meanwhile on you talk about an appreciation for science and reason.

You really don't know that at all. Public health makes claims like that, but they distort data and lie with wild abandon, nothing they say can be taken at face value. Even if it were true, exchanging hundreds of thousands of deaths for millions of injuries so severe people can't work anymore is by no means an obvious trade, let alone one that should be forced on people.

Re: Health minister: Unexplained high death counts in New Brunswick concerning

#122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sadly there is lots of evidence that vaccines can kill people. Obviously, there's the primary reports from people saying "the vaccine killed someone I know" and the medical experts denying everything, e.g this 29 year old man: e.g. https://openvaers.com/covid-data/covid-reports/2251260 "On 06-Feb-2022, the patient received the 3rd vaccination with this vaccine. Pyrexia of 39 degrees Celsius developed. The patient too…

Who is allowed to submit reports to VAERS? How many of the 28,000 reports in VAERS are deaths?

All of them are deaths. Total reports in VAERS of all problems including injuries is in the millions (for COVID vaccines). Meanwhile the underreporting rate is enormous, usually estimated at two orders of magnitude based on pre COVID comparison with known incidence rates. If that held now the true number of injuries would be in the hundreds of millions (in the USA).

Who is allowed, in theory anyone but if you browse the database you'll discover most are coming from doctors and pharma firms. The latter are obliged to report events when they become aware of them and awareness of reporting systems outside the medical profession is low. The one I cited was picked semi randomly while writing that post (first report that was of a young person's death with more than a few lines of detail), and it came via pharma.

At any rate, as you just saw, the reports from medical "professionals" are not more professional than ones from average people. They have more detail but are so reluctant to acknowledge the obvious that they'll happily claim deaths that occur days after injection from known vaccine side effects are just coincidences.

Re: Health minister: Unexplained high death counts in New Brunswick concerning

#123
post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I like how you phrased this, I feel like this is how people had to talk in times of heavy censorship and the fact we have to pass messages like this in this day and age is terrifying and makes the future seem bleak.

Vaccines have been in use for hundreds of years. Fear of vaccines isn't rational. https://historyofvaccines.org/

That's like saying:

Medical drugs have been in use for hundreds of years. Fearing experimental drugs isn't rational.

Or

Doctors have been doing surgery for hundreds of years. Fear of surgery isn't rational.

There are at least three entirely rational reasons to "fear" vaccines:

1. They're a category, not a specific product. Safety of one doesn't automatically imply safety of all. See examples above.

2. The history of vaccines is full of failures which ended up injuring or killing healthy people e.g. polio, in more recent times, Pandemrix.

3. Vaccines appear to trigger deeply problematic psychology in which people point blank refuse to believe in any downsides at all, something you don't see in e.g. chemotherapy, surgery, drug treatments and so on. Probably it's the combination of giving them to healthy people and the collective/coercive policies that often accompany them. If anything goes wrong at all, ever, then you've hurt an innocent person who was previously fine and who trusted you, which would be tough for even the coldest most calculating person to handle. And people in public health appear to be the exact opposite of that.

Therefore the sort of people who believe most strongly on vaccines are often poorly informed about them. You gave us a great example of this problem above when you revealed you thought VAERS had only 28,000 reports in it total. This is basic data and you weren't aware of it, so how rational can you really be on the topic? Certainly, vaccines are surrounded by immense propaganda as a topic.

By the way in case you're wondering, before the COVID mandates I never thought about vaccines, had taken my set of shots and held "anti vaxxers" in contempt like a typical HN user. Not anymore. Watching the process of development, testing, rollout subsequent cover-ups of the real data, and blanket censorship has changed me forever. You can't unsee what happened.

Re: Health minister: Unexplained high death counts in New Brunswick concerning

#124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Vaccines are by far the most likely cause. Consider this graph of people claiming disability benefits in the USA vs the vaccine rollout: https://substackcdn.com/image/fetch/w_1456,c_limit,f_webp,q_... Note that it correlates with the start of the vaccine rollout, not the start of COVID. The idea expressed above that it's all "long COVID" doesn't make much sense given that fact. At this point it's very hard to see how…

Would you mind explaining the biochemistry of the following statement: "The vaccines however generate large quantities of the more potent Wuhan 2019 spike." Please including at least a few sentences that precisely describe the differences in the structure and chemistry of what you call the "Wuhan 2019 spike" compared to the Omicron spike protein. It would be great if you could also explain specifically how difference…

"Please including at least a few sentences that precisely describe the differences in the structure and chemistry of what you call the "Wuhan 2019 spike" compared to the Omicron spike protein."

Huh, OK. Odd question though. Isn't this widely covered in the press?

The vaccines code for the spike protein lifted from the original 2019 RNA sequencing reported by China. They were never adapted, all boosters are just more of the original. Omicron is highly mutated compared to both the 2019 strain and Delta. It has something like 40-odd mutations in the spike alone.

Above you claim these are "allegations" but that's really weird. These are well known facts disputed by nobody, as far as I know. It's not some anti-vax talking point. Go read the documents submitted to regulators if you like. The chemistry of the mRNA vaccines is public, there's a good explanation of the microbiology here:

https://berthub.eu/articles/posts/reverse-engineering-source...

"Do you think differences in spike protein structure and chemistry have implications for immune system modulation via signaling molecules? If so, which signaling molecules and which cell lines?"

Well, this feels like a hostile question but whatever, I'll roll with it. At least you're engaging, which is better than most people with stars in their eyes about these things.

Omicron is materially different in ways that make the vaccines ineffective. This is one of at least three known reasons why case numbers in 2022 are much higher than in 2021/2020 despite everyone having taken a vaccine marketed as 95% effective. The three reasons (that I know of) are:

1. Antibodies to Wuhan spike fail to dock properly to Omicron spike, but the vaccine trains us to produce Wuhan spike.

https://www.science.org/doi/full/10.1126/science.abn7760

(this paper also describes the mutations saying there are 37 but the numbers I've seen vary, not sure why)

2. The 95% effectiveness number was most likely never true, as the trials had at least (a) design errors that were guaranteed to create the appearance of effectiveness in literally any substance (even water), and (b) trial fraud which is now only coming to light, in particular for Pfizer at the Argentina site.

3. The vaccines are triggering something called OAS, which is a form of imprinting. Immune systems repeatedly exposed to the vaccine over-train and start producing antibodies to the Wuhan-2019 spike even when challenged with Omicron, delaying the bodies initial response and meaning that people can get repeatedly sick with Omicron, over and over, without building proper immunity. The memory subsystem of the immune system just doesn't seem 100% precise, or maybe it's not meant to be, but whatever the reason it's been proven during the Moderna Omicron vaccine trials that this has happened (previously vaccinated people produced the wrong antibodies when injected with Omicron vaccine, which has delayed approval). This effect has been known about for decades but is poorly understood, and the risk of creating it simply wasn't considered during vaccine design or rollout.

So whilst that's not an explanation at the level of individual signalling molecules, it is an explanation in terms of immune system biology. Hope that satisfies.

Re: Health minister: Unexplained high death counts in New Brunswick concerning

#125
post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’d rather bring under control people who are trying to prevent my children from having normal life. We all had Covid already (likely even twice). We are done with the theater. We don’t want to listen to scaremongering. We want to smile in public. We want to breathe freely. We don’t want or need any more boosters. If you like the restrictions, wear a mask, or just stay home permanently, I don’t care. Just don’t force…

There is a big policy space between "We are done with the theatre" and "literally faceless, anti-social dystopia". Unfortunately many of the policies in that space will negatively effect powerful vested interests (see climate change, see health reform, see food standards, see police training, see banking, see...). Such vested interests have expended vast amounts of effort to convince the 'ordinary person' that nothin…

What do you think would work, exactly?

From where I'm sitting, the large vested interests you're pointing to benefitted enormously from the COVID response, especially the lockdowns which destroyed around a third of small businesses and concentrated that market share upward.

Re: Health minister: Unexplained high death counts in New Brunswick concerning

#126
post #4

The next 5 years could be very interesting and sad if it turns out that COVID has lasting, long term damaging effects on your organs and vascular system, we are just beginning to see the tip of the iceberg. For example, there is an extremely serious post covid multi-system organ inflammation that occurs in children : https://www.cdc.gov/mis/mis-c.html Watch, I bet we will even see a huge jump in rare cancers. Edit: A…

Some of what you wrote is true and some of it is pure speculation. I downvoted you for the unsubstantiated fear mongering in this sentence: > Watch, I bet we will even see a huge jump in rare cancers. People are afraid enough we don’t need that.

We do not need to concern ourselves with how people’s access to information should be restricted.

In fact, there have been published several robust scientific arguments for the possibility that COVID-19 infection can increase the risk of cancer.

Here’s one paper, Cancer as a prospective sequela of long COVID‐19, Geetanjali Saini and Ritu Aneja, both of the Department of Biology, Georgia State University, Atlanta, Georgia. Published April 29, 2021 in the journal Bioessays of the Wiley Online Library. – https://doi.org/10.1002%2Fbies.202000331

“Herein, we propose that long COVID‐19 may predispose recovered patients to cancer development and accelerate cancer progression. This hypothesis is based on growing evidence of the ability of SARS‐CoV‐2 to modulate oncogenic pathways, promote chronic low‐grade inflammation, and cause tissue damage.”

And:

”COVID-19 has been associated with T-cell depletion and activation of oncogenic pathways, including JAK-STAT, MAPK, and NF-κB, potentially increasing the risk of cancer development.[20] Hypoxia due to inflammation or virus-induced angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 depletion can induce oxidative stress and malignant transformation.[21-26] Over time, both chronic inflammation and oxidative stress can lead to DNA damage and subsequent carcinogenesis.[27-31] Moreover, COVID-19 is known to cause multiorgan damage,[32] and extensive tissue damage is an oncogenic driver.”

Etc. etc.; I suggest reading the paper, and others like it.

Re: Health minister: Unexplained high death counts in New Brunswick concerning

#127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>well reasoned skepticism would come naturally for technical professionals. It's not well-reasoned skepticism to question the safety of a vaccine for which every vaccine adverse event reporting database reports two orders of magnitude more adverse events than previous vaccines? https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-022-10928-z would you call Nature an anti-vax journal?

That is one comparison that should be made. The more important one is to compare having covid versus having the vaccine, the outcomes and the outcomes of you get covid while vaccinated.

The "having COVID versus having the vaccine" comparison doesn't make sense because the vaccines do little to prevent infection (and may even be increasing the odds with more recent strains). So the risks are cumulative, not mutually exclusive.

Re: Health minister: Unexplained high death counts in New Brunswick concerning

#128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because we know that Covid kills people (more than a million in the US), and there is very little evidence that Covid vaccines have killed people ( likely fewer than 100 deaths in the US).

Sadly there is lots of evidence that vaccines can kill people. Obviously, there's the primary reports from people saying "the vaccine killed someone I know" and the medical experts denying everything, e.g this 29 year old man: e.g. https://openvaers.com/covid-data/covid-reports/2251260 "On 06-Feb-2022, the patient received the 3rd vaccination with this vaccine. Pyrexia of 39 degrees Celsius developed. The patient too…

Going around vouching for your "dead" comments. People are not very excited to hear the actual inconvenient truth.

Re: Health minister: Unexplained high death counts in New Brunswick concerning

#129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sadly there is lots of evidence that vaccines can kill people. Obviously, there's the primary reports from people saying "the vaccine killed someone I know" and the medical experts denying everything, e.g this 29 year old man: e.g. https://openvaers.com/covid-data/covid-reports/2251260 "On 06-Feb-2022, the patient received the 3rd vaccination with this vaccine. Pyrexia of 39 degrees Celsius developed. The patient too…

Going around vouching for your "dead" comments. People are not very excited to hear the actual inconvenient truth.

Thank you!

Re: Health minister: Unexplained high death counts in New Brunswick concerning

#130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because we know that Covid kills people (more than a million in the US), and there is very little evidence that Covid vaccines have killed people ( likely fewer than 100 deaths in the US).

>Because we know that Covid kills people (more than a million in the US), and there is very little evidence that Covid vaccines have killed people The US VAERS vaccine adverse reporting system reports over ten thousand deaths post covid-vaccine, over two orders of magnitude more than reported for previous vaccines (including the flu vaccines which half of Americans take annually). Now, this does not imply causation,…

> Now, this does not imply causation

Not only does it not imply causation it doesn't even imply correlation. If you got the vaccine and were subsequently hit by a truck you could end up in VAERS.

> found that 30-40% of the deaths following soon after vaccination were indeed caused by the vaccine

No, they didn't.

Post reply on HN