Posted on 03/31/2021 9:42:49 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
“The covid vaccines adverse reaction reports are running 1.65-1 over prevnar, and the deaths are running 5.18 over prevnar, in just five months!!”
That is significant and indicates some probability that there may be a problem.
Adverse events recorded in VAERS include both reactions AND events which are NOT reactions. That’s the point.
If somebody gets vaccinated, then slips on some ice two weeks later and breaks their hip, that’s recorded in VAERS. One had nothing to do with the other, but it’s recorded because it’s an adverse event occurring some time after a vaccination. It is dishonest to misrepresent all events in VAERS as reactions to vaccines. VAERS itself says so explicitly.
Not really. It’s cherry-picking data.
Diphtheria vaccines are given most commonly to young children who then typically live for decades after. The COVID-19 vaccines have been prioritized for the elderly and those in terrible health before everyone else. You could give gummy bears to a few million 90 year olds and some of them would be dead in a few days, weeks, or months. Did gummy bears kill them? No.
VAERS is a collection system for reports of events that happen after vaccination. Reports in VAERS do NOT indicate that the vaccine CAUSED the event. That’s not the point of VAERS.
Read here for more info: https://vaers.hhs.gov/data/dataguide.html
What’s more telling is that out of over 98 million Americans who have received a COVID-19 vaccine, there are ZERO cases where a medical investigation has shown that someone died because of a COVID-19 vaccine. Not a single one. Out of nearly 100 million people.
https://vaers.hhs.gov/data/dataguide.html
Guide to Interpreting VAERS Data
Evaluating VAERS Data
“VAERS collects data on any adverse event following vaccination, be it coincidental or truly caused by a vaccine.”
VAERS does not.
You’re posting VAERS report data. You’ve been talking about VAERS.
Now you want to switch to MHRA because VAERS isn’t working out for you?
"Part of our continuous analysis includes an evaluation of natural death rates over time, to determine if any specific trends or patterns are occurring that might indicate a vaccine safety concern. Based on age-stratified all-cause mortality in England and Wales taken from the Office for National Statistics death registrations, several thousand deaths are expected to have occurred, naturally, within 7 days of the many millions of doses of vaccines administered so far, mostly in the elderly.
The MHRA has received 259 UK reports of suspected ADRs to the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine in which the patient died shortly after vaccination, 326 reports for the Oxford University/AstraZeneca vaccine and 9 where the brand of vaccine was unspecified. The majority of these reports were in elderly people or people with underlying illness. Usage of the AstraZeneca has increased rapidly and as such, so has reporting of fatal events with a temporal association with vaccination however, this does not indicate a link between vaccination and the fatalities reported. Review of individual reports and patterns of reporting does not suggest the vaccine played a role in the death."
Yet again, the thing you reference says you're wrong. Your own references state that your claim is FALSE.
Why are you such a zealot about covid vaccines?
People under 70 have a .05% chance of dying from it. CDC says 94% of covid deaths are with an average of nearly three comorbidities - conditions that can kill you - only 6% die from covid alone.
Why are you fear mongering for the vaccines? Are you a pharma rep?
Exactly, that is how objective, rational people should see it.
“this does not indicate a link between vaccination and the fatalities reported. Review of individual reports and patterns of reporting does not suggest the vaccine played a role in the death.”
Again it does not indicate there IS NOT a link between vaccines and the deaths reported, and does not suggest that vaccine DID NOT play a role in the death.
What you claim about my claim is FALSE.
I haven’t done any “fear mongering for the vaccines”. It’s not fearmongering to point out YOUR fearmongering against the vaccines. Particularly when your own sources contradict your statements.
You are posting misleading and inaccurate information in an attempt to scare people into changing their decisions about their own personal health. That is the very definition of fearmongering. It’s no better than what the Democrats and the media have done about COVID-19 for over a year. Now you’re using their same tricks and tactics to scare people away from the vaccines.
All I ask is to be honest. If you’re honest and provide accurate information with proper context, then we’ve got no problem.
Also, CDC didn’t say that “only 6% die from COVID alone.” What CDC stated was that 6% of death certificates listed only COVID-19 in Section 32 Part I, which means those death certificates are incomplete since they’re missing the immediate cause of death. This - again - is a case where somebody states something and you distort it into something that is untrue.
You are living in a dream world.
The health bureaucracies and politicians have found a sweet spot within which to exercise their power and they are never going to give it up. There will always be "one more thing".
Instead of "counter-revolutionaries, fascists, and wreckers" it will be "anti-maskers, anti-vaxxers, and the social saboteurs" who are responsible. This will give the public and governments a target and allow them to keep their boots on our necks and a focus on "the enemy".
It will be all in the name of "common sense public health", of course.
Stalin (and Tito) are probably roasting in Hell and wishing they had thought up such a clever scheme.
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.