Unfortunately, I don't think any additional evidence will convince vaccine skeptics of the safety of mRNA vaccines
Yeah maybe forcing people to get them triggered some kind of skepticism, how about that
Covid-19 mRNA Vaccination and 4-Year All-Cause Mortality
131–140 of 360 posts
Re: Covid-19 mRNA Vaccination and 4-Year All-Cause Mortality
#132Unfortunately, I don't think any additional evidence will convince vaccine skeptics of the safety of mRNA vaccines
FDA is imposing stricter vaccine protocols due to children deaths linked to Covid-19 vaccine-related myocarditis [1]. [1] https://www.the-independent.com/news/world/americas/us-polit...
The political appointees pushing this new policy have not presented any evidence of these deaths beyond a vague assertion in a leaked internal email. They have not provided that evidence to career staffers either.
Re: Covid-19 mRNA Vaccination and 4-Year All-Cause Mortality
#133Unfortunately, I don't think any additional evidence will convince vaccine skeptics of the safety of mRNA vaccines
Unfortunately, one of the only things that is proven to convince vaccine skeptics is when someone from their community dies of a preventable illness.
This is a great book on this topic: https://www.amazon.com/Anti-vaxxers-How-Challenge-Misinforme...
Re: Covid-19 mRNA Vaccination and 4-Year All-Cause Mortality
#134I found the intro very confusing, tbh. Particularly the "no increased risk of all-cause mortality". I mean, if we assume the vaccines worked, we'd certainly expect a decreased risk of all-case mortality (because "all-case mortality" certainly includes "covid mortality"). Reading "no increase" seems to imply "it doesn't change anything". Yeah, technically, the sentence does not say that ("no increase" can mean "no dec…
Because this whole paper is bullshit and is a bias confirmation report It assesses persons "who were alive on November 1, 2021" That tantamount to saying "for people alive January 1st 1950, the Second World War was not a significant cause of mortality" Can you see how ridiculous that sounds?
No, because the same conditional is applied to both participant groups. Its good to specify a time frame.
Re: Covid-19 mRNA Vaccination and 4-Year All-Cause Mortality
#135One thing I don’t get: the study excludes the first 6 months after vaccination to avoid immortal-time bias. But if people died right away due to the vaccine (hypothetically), wouldn’t this design exclude those deaths?
> But if people died right away due to the vaccine (hypothetically), wouldn’t this design exclude those deaths?
Yes. That's what we have plenty of other studies for, including the clinical trials that led to the vaccines being approved in the first place.
Re: Covid-19 mRNA Vaccination and 4-Year All-Cause Mortality
#136Earlier quoted context omitted.
Unfortunately, this is an observational study and when you get to the confounding part, they kind of shrug their shoulders and say “well, we included a bunch of covariates that should reduce make the bias go away”, but there’s no causal diagram so we have no idea how they reasoned about this. If you’ve read even something layman friendly like Pearl’s Book of Why you should be feeling nervous about this.
Are there really antivax people that would know the word "covariate?" That's gotta be a small Venn diagram overlap.
Antivaxers surpisingly know quite a lot of lingo. What they lack is an understanding of experimental methods.
Re: Covid-19 mRNA Vaccination and 4-Year All-Cause Mortality
#137I found the intro very confusing, tbh. Particularly the "no increased risk of all-cause mortality". I mean, if we assume the vaccines worked, we'd certainly expect a decreased risk of all-case mortality (because "all-case mortality" certainly includes "covid mortality"). Reading "no increase" seems to imply "it doesn't change anything". Yeah, technically, the sentence does not say that ("no increase" can mean "no dec…
Because this whole paper is bullshit and is a bias confirmation report It assesses persons "who were alive on November 1, 2021" That tantamount to saying "for people alive January 1st 1950, the Second World War was not a significant cause of mortality" Can you see how ridiculous that sounds?
[deleted]
Re: Covid-19 mRNA Vaccination and 4-Year All-Cause Mortality
#138Unfortunately, I don't think any additional evidence will convince vaccine skeptics of the safety of mRNA vaccines
[flagged]
> MRNA technologies are not "vaccines" per se.
Define vaccine for us.
> The results would likely have been much better had they gone with more traditional vaccine formulations.
Several non-mRNA vaccinations were produced (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Novavax_COVID-19_vaccine remains available, if you want). They did not have better apparent efficacy.
Re: Covid-19 mRNA Vaccination and 4-Year All-Cause Mortality
#139Earlier quoted context omitted.
Frame it as the safety of the vaccine, not the efficacy of it. If it was about efficacy, it would lead with the 25% lower risk because of COVID safety. But, these days, there are people who think vaccines are dangerous just because, so saying that taking the vaccine or not has equal mortality puts that to rest (or at least does for those who find science real).
The reduction in all-cause mortality was independent of covid deaths. Which seems to suggest that there was big differences between the groups other than the vaccination. This of course does not change that the vaccine seems mostly safe, but it definitely calls in to question whether the protection against covid death was vaccine-mediated or due to some other difference between the groups. Therefore this paper is mod…
There was a study that showed that cancer patients who receive a MRNA COVID vaccine live longer. This could also be for extrinsic reasons, but IIRC the study considered the reason to be a pronounced immune response that also attacked cancer cells.
So there's a chance that the vaccine provokes a general immune response that's protective against a number of mortality-causing issues.
Re: Covid-19 mRNA Vaccination and 4-Year All-Cause Mortality
#140Unfortunately, I don't think any additional evidence will convince vaccine skeptics of the safety of mRNA vaccines
I can understand skepticism, notably from a woman I know that had many unwanted bleeding and it seems she was not alone : https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12407584
Although from this study the global vaccine output is positive, the personal one seems negative for a lot of people. Many still got COVID19 and the bleeding issue, but they can't compare to what would have happened without the vaccine.
Notably many for whom the basic understanding of "25% lower risk of all-cause mortality" doesn't mean anything.
- "What is it ? I had 1 chance to 1 million to die but with the vaccine it's 0.75 to 1 million ?"
- "No, out of 22 million vaccinated, 0.4% died but out of 6 million unvaccinated, 0.6% died !"