Posted on 06/10/2021 5:40:59 PM PDT by MNDude
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention announced Thursday that it will convene an "emergency meeting" of its advisers on June 18th to discuss rare but higher-than-expected reports of heart inflammation following doses of the mRNA-based Pfizer and Moderna COVID-19 vaccines.
(Excerpt) Read more at cbsnews.com ...
One wonders if there is other subclinical (not causing obvious symptoms) inflammation going on in other organs.
Its not so much being emotional, other than noting that many of the people potentially getting harmed by this experimental concoction had a nearly nil chance of being taken out by the CoVid (particularly if the CDC/Government had allowed the use of HCQ and Ivermectin) - so yes, one is too many.
The number you posited are fair - sure, if you have a disease killing 25+% of those infected, then yes - it is worth taking the risk.
But I agree - let everyone make their decision. I just wish that we had data that we could all trust to base our decisions.
Ivermectin does have a very long record for safety. But for COVID patients it is clearly an experimental concoction and has a small benefit in studies like this: https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2777389/
It is pure insanity to get a vaccine for a virus that has a near zero death rate. Why is the gummit stopping common cures?
Serious, if I had the choice of getting infected with Covid (symptomatic or not) vs getting some experimental vaccine, I’d much rather get my immunity from the actual bug.
It’s only right for others if you actually believe the data that claims 550,000 dead in the US. However, look at some of the research that said 90% of those were false positives and died from another cause, you are now looking at the same numbers as the annual flu. And, if you look at Pfizer’s own study they say it reduces the risk by .7% vs no shot.
Send out Baghdad Bob.
That's the absolute risk reduction ARR. That's low because few people get COVID. The RRR is how effective the vaccine is and the RRR is in the 90's. That means the shot itself is very effective. But the shot might not be necessary and is certainly not necessary for everyone or for anyone in particular. Needs to be individual case by case.
Explanation of ARR and RRR: https://www.wusa9.com/article/news/verify/absolute-risk-reduction-formula-covid19-vaccine-versus-relative-risk-reduction-formula/65-e3b7a521-f2f6-46b9-a3cb-450765b49863 Their bottom line: Our Verify researchers spoke with the author behind the scientific paper going around. He believes that the public has a right to know both numbers
Would be helpful if the ARR was presented for age groups.
Though any positive ARR is good.
I guess you got the injection. Ivermectin is much safer and gets rid of the virus. Getting the spike protein nano particles in other parts of the body will lead to health problems.
An EMERGENCY 🚨 🚨meeting not scheduled for another 8 days in the mean time kids continue to be vaccinated OMG!!!
But ehat was their death rats. I don’t care about infection rate. It isn’t deadly to most people.
Let's state up-front, "cases" in terms of this this field usually are not just a positive test BUT with symptoms. With COVID19 we only had a positive test. That's big for horizontal comparisons.
In addition, about 94% of all fatalities with COVID19 on the death certificate have comorbidities. Now, that's not unusual for comorbidities to be present. But there was a financial incentive to put down COVID19 as The cause. So we got that issue.
I posted the CDC case and fatality data by age and we see a 1.79% case fatality rate across all people (or people with a positive test result survive 98.21% of the time), with the fatalities per 100,000 people basically tripling by age bracket after 17. Anyone over 64 has a higher than average chance of dying if they get this bug, but everyone under 65 has a 99.59% of survival if they get the bug.
Moderna...they had about 14,000 test subjects and 14,000 placebo subjects. During Nov 2020, 14 days after the second vaccine 5 of the vaxxed subjects had COVID19 vs 90 in the placebo group. But 96% of the vaxxed group felt terrible after the second vaccine, which could have led to self-sequestration/staying home (vs 56% in the placebo) and impacted the infection rate. And none of the 28,000 subjects died of COVID19...after a few weeks of observation...that's part of why the vaccine was released under an Emergency Use Authorization approval because the FDA usually waits for a 2-3 year observation period.
I think that is PLENTY of data and facts for a normal person to make an informed decision about getting vaccinated and whether or not the past 16 months was worth it.
Strange how know it all FR docs stay away from certain threads.
Well, of the 285 confirmed cases of myocarditis after vaccination, 270 have already fully recovered. Maybe they’re waiting to see if those last 15 in-progress cases wrap up before they meet.
However, by increasing the cycle counts to insure lots o f positives (90% more than actual), the need for the shot is dramatically reduced. The risk for most is very small for most vs injecting an experimental jab.
You are wrong. The vaccine is much safer than getting COVID and taking any treatment. Ivermectin gets rid of some virus. Please read the actual studies. Just one example chosen randomly: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/03000605211013550 It's better than a placebo but not a lot better.
As for the spike protein created by the vaccines, the levels are less than 100 pg/ml and those levels will not lead to health problems.
Are you including data from last spring before people were given better treatments? The current CFR is 1% at most.
Your allegations about cycle counts are easy to dismiss. The deaths from COVID in all vaccinated people are 535 total. The deaths from COVID in the general population were 44,000 since April 1. That means that 98 or 99% of the deaths since then could have been avoided by being vaccinated.
That percentage will decrease as COVID wanes (thanks to natural immunity plus vaccination). That's because the chance of getting COVID is dropping dramatically. Anyone considering the vaccine now should take into account the latest data showing a reduced need tor anyone in particular to take it. Their own risks should determine their choice.
Are they at risk of getting and spreading the disease? For example, I think most nursing home staff should choose vaccination, But all of them don't need to, especially if their lifestyle gives them little or no chance of COVID.
I have also always favored making discrimination illegal: https://www.huschblackwell.com/newsandinsights/50-state-update-on-pending-legislation-pertaining-to-employer-mandated-vaccinations#linktojump21 Call your state rep.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.