General Corona Virus Discussion

[Uwe]

I will continue to respectfully invite various folks to introspect upon the statements they make

Sorry, but the question you asked @Fred's Imports was not respectful.

-Uwe-

 

[Uwe]

@Uwe: I note your new signature (not sure of the date of its genesis).

I meant to reply to that portion of your post as well last night, but seem to have neglected it. The signature in question (screen-shotted for posterity) is not new:


I have had it since sometime in the spring of 2020.

However, I am contemplating changing it. The question is, what should I change it to? Two possibilities come to mind:
A simple, "Let's go, Brandon!" or, "15 boosters to flatten the curve .... 'cause we're all in this together".

Which do you like better?

-Uwe-

 

[jyoung8607]

Sorry, but the question you asked @Fred's Imports was not respectful.

-Uwe-

@Fred's Imports: I'm just asking questions!

@jyoung8607: Your question is really a statement. For example, if I asked you this obviously facetious question, wouldn't I really be making a disrespectful statement?

@Fred's Imports: Yeah, I agree.

@Uwe: How dare you be disrespectful!

@jyoung8607: [picard-facepalm.png]

 

[vreihen]

Let's go, Brandon!!!!!

Back-story, for those outside the USA:

https://bgr.com/politics/lets-go-br...s-joe-biden-meme-thats-all-over-the-internet/

.

 

[Uwe]

@Fred's Imports: I'm just asking questions!

No, he did not ask any questions, he encouraged people to ask more questions.

You seem to be doing the opposite.

Why?

-Uwe-

 

[DV52]

The question is, what should I change it to? Two possibilities come to mind:
A simple, "Let's go, Brandon!" or, "15 boosters to flatten the curve .... 'cause we're all in this together".

Which do you like better?

-Uwe-

haha....!! We haven't met - but you certainty do appear to be a man of passion and firm held beliefs (both admirable traits). Alas I am somewhat of a Luddite where social media is concerned (I've never seen any worth in the thing)- so I really can't add value to your (rhetoric) question.

However, I can propose a way forward: My own personal philosophy when faced with decisions between options that have no discernible value-proposition is to trust in fate (it leads the willing and drags along the reluctant)!! The simple flip of a coin is all that's needed - but for such an important decision, you will probably get a better outcome if you use your 1974 "Flowing Hair" silver dollar!!

Don

 

[jyoung8607]

OK, allow me to ask some reasonable questions in the pursuit of some knowledge and understanding:

Please do!

1) What is the all-cause hospitalization and all-cause mortality rate of people who are "fully vaccinated" compare to people who aren't, broken down by matched cohorts (age, co-morbidities, etc)?

I'm not aware of a tool for conveniently visualizing all-causes, all-outcomes, all-vaccination-statuses simultaneously, so you'll need at least two resources.

Tool to visualize all-causes mortality data, COVID included, which can be broken down by age brackets: https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/mortality-dashboard.htm#

Data on hospitalizations and death rates by vaccination status, broken down by age brackets: https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7037e1.htm

Lots of other COVID data visualization tools: https://covid.cdc.gov/covid-data-tracker/#datatracker-home

2) Given the nature of the adverse effects that have been reported,

Let's pause right here, and tackle the premise of this question (and MANY others like it that came from the same keyboard).

• Each and every shot was delivered by a qualified medical professional, required by law to report any possible adverse events to VAERS (or similar for DOD/VA).
• Each and every recipient that needed medical attention after a vaccination, would have seen a medical professional encouraged to report literally anything plausibly connected.
• Each and every recipient was handed a card inviting them, or someone on their behalf, to self-report any possible adverse events to that same place.

Anything a medical professional sees that they even just aren't sure about, just a "hmm I wonder" gets a VAERS report. VAERS reports don't have to be on any sort of known potential side effects list. There is no attempt to show causation or even correlation. In the manner you enjoy phrasing it, I can die of a meth overdose or choking on a cheeseburger with a COVID vaccine earlier that day and that'll get a VAERS report. I can go in there right now, today and report that I personally was struck by lightning due to my vaccination in April.

As of today, we've vaccinated two hundred seventeen million, four hundred three thousand, eight hundred ninety seven (217,403,897) people. And for instant reactions like anaphylaxis, that's not counting half the shots for the two-shot regimen. Also as of today, there are 47,861 VAERS reports connected to one of the COVID vaccines with a classification of "serious", which (oversimplified) is anything involving a hospital visit or worse. That translates to a serious VAERS report filed for 0.02% of vaccinated individuals.

So, if there's horrible side effects, you can show them to us here, untouched by any possible interpretation you might not agree with: https://wonder.cdc.gov/

If you find backing for your assertions, above and beyond normal daily background occurrences (that's the tricky part!) then by all means let's discuss.

We've known a good bit about the nature of the adverse effects since early this year, yet nobody seems to be willing to do any substantive studies.

I mean, when the vaccine was developed, it seemed like you had the whole planet looking on it and focusing on the data.

But now that the sexy part is over, and we're in phase 4/monitoring, we've only got the CDC (NHSN, VSD), FDA (BEST, Sentinel), HHS (VAERS), VA/DOD (VAERS, VAECS, ADERS), IHS (VAERS), Boston Medical center, Cincinnati Children's, Columbia University, Duke University, Johns Hopkins, Kaiser Permanente, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Harvard Pilgrim Health Care Institute, and Marshfield Clinic Research Institute that have major departments dedicated to this purpose.

I could go on, but it's late, and I'll stop here for tonight. If you believe these questions are unreasonable, please explain why.

Funny story:

There may actually be adverse vaccine side effects with some of the mRNA vaccines. The CDC and FDA are tracking a very slightly elevated rate of myocarditis in young men. It's extremely rare, and it's something that's generally mild and self-resolves. And occurrences of myocarditis are much higher among the COVID infected, so in the end, the vaccine could be considered statistically protective against it. But it does appear to be a real thing, which the worldwide medical community has been tracking and evaluating since back in June...

... and you, as an individual repeatedly concerned with specific outcomes like "blood clots, strokes, heart attacks, and various auto-immune disorders", haven't breathed a word of it. You did just mention the Moderna vaccine being suspended in a few European countries, but you mischaracterized why, and didn't mention it was temporary.

The one problem that actually shows up in the data, and tracked for several months now, just doesn't seem to be on your radar.

That's a weird place to be for someone honestly searching for truth.

Ask all the questions you like. Be willing to hear the answers. Save the non-given "givens".

 

[jyoung8607]

No, he did not ask any questions, he encouraged people to ask more questions.

You seem to be doing the opposite.

Why?

I've made no such statement, and would never make such a statement, and will make no such statement in the future.

I will donate $50 to the tobacco addiction nonprofit of your choice upon receiving a link to a post where I express or even imply someone can't ask questions. I will also reply to that post with an apology and a correction. I'll clarify that "asking questions" in this case means an intent to pursue knowledge or understanding.

I will make that same $50 donation if you decide to retract your statement.

If you provide a link but I don't agree with your characterization of my words, I will accept the judgment of a mutually agreed neutral party. I nominate @DV52.

In short, the only way you can lose is to walk away or refuse to accept the neutral party's judgment.

Default recipient, if you make no selection, is https://www.tobaccofreekids.org/get-involved/ways-to-give.

 

[Crasher]

Cease fire! Put your handbags down ladies…

 

[Fred's Imports]

Can we find data from other sources than the CDC?

 

[jyoung8607]

Can we find data from other sources than the CDC?

How do you feel about Sweden?

I picked them since we were just talking about a couple European countries that temporarily suspended the Moderna vaccine for younger men. They have a very similar reporting system to ours, a very similar definition of a "serious" reportable event, and are getting a comparable adverse event report-rate to what I just showed from VAERS above:

Of 12.5 million vaccine doses given against covid-19 in Sweden (August 2021), approximately 75,000 cases of suspected side effects have been reported. Of these, approximately 5,900 cases of reported suspected adverse reactions are considered serious. That is less than 0.05 percent of the total number of vaccine doses.

You'll need to use Chrome translate or similar to read these:

Sweden's Public Health Agency statement on vaccine safety
Sweden's Medical Products Agency adverse event reporting system and raw data

Their own fully-separate data leads them to the same slight elevation in myocarditis rates, and nothing else of interest at this time.

There's lots more data out there from both public and private institutions. Some of the sources make raw data available for your own purview, some can't due to PII. I don't want to just wall-of-text you with a bunch of stuff, but I'm intrigued by what seems like a non-loaded good-faith follow-up question, and if neither the CDC nor Sweden's equivalent do it for you, maybe elaborate on why, and let's see if we can address the why or find other sources.

 

[Uwe]

Tool to visualize all-causes mortality data, COVID included, which can be broken down by age brackets: https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/mortality-dashboard.htm#

Is there a way to see vax'd vs. unvaxed? If so, I'm missing it. I suppose there isn't since the data there is only current through Q1 of this year, when vax rates were still very low.

Tool to visualize all-causes mortality data, COVID included, which can be broken down by age brackets: https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/mortality-dashboard.htm#

It's mid-October now and the latest data there is from mid-July, i.e. before vaccine-induced immunity had much time to decline.

Sorry, but the data at the above links does not answer the question posed because it's far from current.

Lots of other COVID data visualization tools: https://covid.cdc.gov/covid-data-tracker/#datatracker-home

I'd have to spend more time with that one before I could respond.

Each and every shot was delivered by a qualified medical professional, required by law to report any possible adverse events to VAERS (or similar for DOD/VA).

Somehow their "qualifications" seem to have skipped the once standard practice of aspirating the syringe when giving an intramuscular injection to ensure that the serum doesn't go directly into the bloodstream. Heck, they didn't even do this for Joe when he got his booster shot on a fake White House stage, and that despite very credible evidence that letting an MRNA vaccine into the bloodstream leads to myopericarditis.

Yes, I'm aware that it's a legal requirement to report adverse reactions, and I'm confident they do that for reactions that happen on the spot, i.e within minutes. Those would primarily be anaphylactic reactions and are indeed quite rare. However, it's far too easy to dismiss adverse reactions that happen in the following days, weeks, or months as "coincidental" and thus not reportable. If someone has a stroke or a heart attack a week or two after their shot, did the shot cause it? We honestly don't know, which is why we need to compare rates for the vax'd and un-vax'd.

Anything a medical professional sees that they even just aren't sure about, just a "hmm I wonder" gets a VAERS report.

No, that's patently false. There numerous accounts from health care workers who wanted to make VAERS reports and were explicitly told not to by their management. Some were threatened with being fired if they did.

As of today, we've vaccinated two hundred seventeen million, four hundred three thousand, eight hundred ninety seven (217,403,897) people.

Right, so about 50% more than the number of flu shots that are given annually. Add in the number of childhood vaccines that are given in a normal year and you're in the same ballpark of two hundred and a few million. How many VAERS reports are filed in a normal year?

Furthermore, until a year or so ago, it was widely accepted in the medical community that VAERS data under-reported the actual incidence of adverse events by at least an order of magnitude. But now suddenly, the establishment has turned this around and is claiming that VAERS data is over-reported?

I can go in there right now, today and report that I personally was struck by lightning due to my vaccination in April.

Indeed you could, but it would illegal for you to do so. My understanding is that it's a criminal offense, and I doubt many people are willing to risk that.

There may actually be adverse vaccine side effects with some of the mRNA vaccines. The CDC and FDA are tracking a very slightly elevated rate of myocarditis in young men. It's extremely rare, and it's something that's generally mild and self-resolves.

Indeed, that one has been in the news quite a bit lately, so I didn't think I needed to bring it up. But since you did, I'll ask: How under-reported is this? Someone gets shots and has some of the typical symptoms a few days later. What portion of those folks will actually go see a doctor? Remember, we've all been told that feeling bad for a while after getting the shots, especially after the second one, is normal and it just means that the vaccine is working. What portion of doctors will actually run the tests necessary to diagnose it?

Oh, and it self-resolves? Yeah, most people who experience it will feel better again, at least for a while, but people who've had myocarditis have a statistically signficant increase in their risk of cardiac complications for the rest of their lives.

You did just mention the Moderna vaccine being suspended in a few European countries, but you mischaracterized why, and didn't mention it was temporary.

For something to be considered "temporary", doesn't that generally mean there's a known end date?

You know, like "15 days to flatten the curve"?

-Uwe-

 

[Uwe]

Cease fire! Put your handbags down ladies…

You don't understand; we're both Americans. We enjoy shooting.

Realistically though, he's not going to convince me, and I'm not going to convince him. So I'll just summarize where I'm coming from:

It is my opinion that the current crop of vaccines is nowhere near as safe, and nowhere near as effective (at least after a period of say, six months) as they were "advertised" to be.

It is my opinion that the benefit/risk ratio is highly questionable for many people. In fact, it is probably unknowable for most at this point in time, and won't be knowable for another year or two, possibly longer.

It is my opinion that the people at the public health agencies who pushed aside research into virtually every other treatment (particularly early treatment) in favor of vaccine development and deployment, and who held those vaccines out as completely "safe and effective", do not under any circumstance want to be perceived as having been wrong, and they will do whatever they possibly can to ensure that this doesn't happen.

It is my firm conviction that coercing people to take these vaccines is in no way morally justifiable.

-Uwe-

 

[Crasher]

You don't understand; we're both Americans. We enjoy shooting.

It is like in the UK armed forces, everyone hates being tail end Charlie as you are the first the enemy hits, when there is a yank around you want him in front to avoid the shoot first and ask questions later approach

 

[Fred's Imports]

You don't understand; we're both Americans. We enjoy shooting.


-Uwe-

Is it ok to ask more questions or will we be silenced by big tech and the MSM?

Is something bigger looming?

 

[Crasher]

There is something awful looming, from my amateur historical interest in WWII I feel we are sleep walking into a nightmare, completely obsessed with man made CO2 but ignoring the real threat that is the CCP.

 

[DV52]

You don't understand; we're both Americans. We enjoy shooting.

@Uwe: Don't get me wrong - I don't suggest that America's gun culture is not appropriate for America (notwithstanding my suspicion that carries with it both good and bad consequences). BUT of all of the pursuits/obsessions that I find fascinating and unfathomable about your country, this is undoubtedly the most interesting!!

We will both agree that every country has the right to determine its own gun culture, and I know from your past responses that you are not impressed with Australia's gun law's - which we have retained over successive government elections (notwithstanding the efforts of the Australian shooters party). But for me, America's approach to this topic is utterly captivating and perhaps more than anything else, it defines the uniqueness of your society - IMHO, of course!!

Realistically though, he's not going to convince me, and I'm not going to convince him.

I too suspected that neither had the belief that their argument would convince the other - but I have thoroughly enjoyed the deft swordplay of words and the occasional passion which confirms a conviction to firmly held views!! So thank you both and I look forward to reading many more similarly motivated posts!!

Don

 

[Sebastian]

For those of us who believe in science...

Pfizer/BioNTech submit data to EMA for COVID-19 vaccine in young children

Pfizer Inc and German partner BioNTech SE said on Friday that they had submitted data supporting the use of their COVID-19 vaccine in children aged between five and less than 12 years to the European Medicines Agency.

www.reuters.com

 

[Uwe]

For those of us who believe in science...

Pfizer/BioNTech submit data to EMA for COVID-19 vaccine in young children

Pfizer Inc and German partner BioNTech SE said on Friday that they had submitted data supporting the use of their COVID-19 vaccine in children aged between five and less than 12 years to the European Medicines Agency.

www.reuters.com

Yes, I'm confident it produces antibodies in children, like their data says it does.

But what their data doesn't show is that it actually prevents anyone in that age group from getting sick, or that it's a net health benefit, either on an individual or "public health" basis.

But while we're talking about science, what does the latest (September) excess mortality data out of Germany show?
https://www.destatis.de/EN/Press/2021/10/PE21_481_12.html

Even after removing the ~1500 or Covid deaths, the death rate is substantially higher than expected. Could be anything, right? Except of course it can't possibly be people dying as a result of adverse reactions to the vaccines, right?

-Uwe-

 

[Sebastian]

Take the time to read the notes regarding methodical inaccuracy due to incomplete/not-plausibility checked source data. You're interpreting raw data in an absolute way, which is - simply put - an inadequate way to look at this, with the mere goal to point out that your, and only your, logic is right and everybody else knows nothing compared to you.

Die vorläufigen Sterbefallzahlen beziehen sich auf den Sterbetag, nicht auf das Meldedatum. Da die gemeldeten COVID-19-Todesfälle vom RKI nach Sterbedatum derzeit bis zur 37. Kalenderwoche 2021 veröffentlicht werden, ist ein zeitlicher Vergleich mit den vorläufigen Gesamtsterbefallzahlen aktuell bis zu dieser Woche möglich. Fälle, für die keine oder unplausible Angaben zum Sterbedatum übermittelt wurden, sind nicht enthalten. Diese Ergebnisse sind noch nicht für den Meldeverzug korrigiert und werden sich voraussichtlich durch Nachmeldungen noch weiter erhöhen. Weitere Hintergrundinformationen zu diesen Daten gibt es im Internetangebot des RKI.