5 Filters

I've earned a medal! Censored by b! (LOL)

Covid
#41

Thanks PP - don’t worry about the rushed format, I’m going to be worse!

I accept what you are saying about undercounting in the developing world. I expect these countries are being deprived of vaccines anyway - until they can jolly well stump up for them full whack - so probably doesn’t change the essence!?

PP: “myocarditis: I remember reading that a young person was 6x more likely to get myocarditis from covid than the vaccine. Ill have to look that up again. Also I remember that we are inly talking about somethibg likr 3/4 cases per 100,000 in the highest risk groups (It’s been a while since ive looked at those numbers) - hence small effect”

That may be an old figure, when myocarditis was in denial. In any case it’s misleading because it applies to people who actually have covid.

There’s a study that told us, I’m sure there have been others.

5/7/22 A study reported in JAMA Cardiology on April 20 carries the eye-popping title of: “SARS-CoV-2 Vaccination and Myocarditis in a Nordic Cohort Study of 23 Million Residents.”

" Specifically, among young men receiving two doses of the same vaccine, between four and seven excess myocarditis and pericarditis events occurred in 28 days per 100,000 vaccinees after the second dose of the Pfizer vaccine, and between nine and 28 excess myocarditis and pericarditis events occurred per 100,000 vaccinees after the second dose of the Moderna vaccine."

Risk increases with dose. Important.

Study here, SARS-CoV-2 Vaccination and Myocarditis in a Nordic Cohort Study of 23 Million Residents - PubMed

Yes I acknowledged you were replying to a claim about more people dying from the vaccine than covid. But we are allowed to use our brains (for the time being :confused: ). So I would like to know what you make of this comparison.

“Are there huge spikes? Above the normal background level?”

Well probably, if you allow for the underreporting. The sampling estimate was 10-100 times. I was avoiding ‘normal background level’ (because due to VAERS underreporting, that’s a bias that I’m sure you would MUCH rather commit to enthusiastically embracing the next prime minister, than knowingly benefit from in your argument :slight_smile: ) but I’ll look at that in a minute.

The HUGE (how do you get a bigger font dammit :slight_smile: ) spike I mentioned actually referred to the jump in the adverse event reports for vaccines. I simply compared the AERs of Covid-19 vaccines to AERs of other vaccines in the same year (2021). The other vaccines combined, on a very quick look, compare in numbers to the covid jabs, if they don’t actually outnumber them. Without knowing actual vaccine totals, it can only be a rough comparison but isn’t unfair to the covid jabs.

So again:

“But on Vaers, what analysis do you need when a new vaccine appears and there are immediately HUGE spikes in several serious adverse events (myocarditis, pulmonary embolisms, pericarditis), all more serious than Covid. These were spikes of 100,1000 times the previous rates associated with vaccines. And they persisted all year so weren’t down to topicality. The spike in vaccine deaths are similar”

Myocarditis reported in VAERS was 80 times higher for covid vaccines than all other vaccine combined, and as I say I think that’s a comparable number of jabs. For Pulmonary embolisms it was 200 times higher. There’s a host of these comparisons.

Even if we don’t have the comparison against ‘background rates’ - these can vary quite a bit depending on the locations, and when the figures were gathered - would you accept this requires explanation?

But on comparison vs background rates, I do have some thumbnail figures, offered with caveat:

" Dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM) is the most common form of cardiomyopathy and cause of cardiac transplantation in children.

…The annual incidence of DCM in children younger than 18 years was 0.57 cases per 100,000 per year overall. The annual incidence was higher in boys than in girls (0.66 vs 0.47 cases per 100,000; P<.001), in blacks than in whites (0.98 vs 0.46 cases per 100,000; P<.001), and in infants (<1 year) than in children (4.40 vs 0.34 cases per 100,000; P<.001)" (2006, US+C, Incidence, causes, and outcomes of dilated cardiomyopathy in children - PubMed)

“0.9 per 100,000 children in 2016”, US again Trends in Acute Myocarditis Related Pediatric Hospitalizations in the United States, 2007-2016 - PubMed

“an annual incidence of 1.24 per 100,000 children younger than 10 years of age”, (Australia 2003) The epidemiology of childhood cardiomyopathy in Australia - PubMed

So that annual incidence of myocarditis for the U18 population - between 0.6 and 1.2 per 100,000?

Call it 0.9 per 100,000.

How many jabbed are there in the under 18 range? A guess: 335m US population, maybe 85m under-18? I’m looking only at 2021 for the Vaers data.

Without looking them up maybe half of the older kids were vaxed in 2021? Half of the older half…maybe 21 million? (My statistical robustness is going out the window here :slight_smile: )

That’s our 2021 US jabbed population, according to …me. 21 million kids.

…according to the to the estimates, 0.9 per 100,000 of whom would normally get myocarditis in a year. ie about 0.9 x 21 times a million divided by 100,000 = about 189.

This is to be compared to the Vaers. Vaers gives us this table:

image
image1203×537 134 KB

According to the Table there were 451 Myocarditis reports from the covid-19 jabs in 2021.

That’s more than double my estimate of 189. Now that 189 could be an undercount, probably is maybe a factor of two.

But it doesn’t take into account the much greater underreporting in Vaers.

Cheers

1 Like
#42

Here’s how I’d expect to get a bigger typeface.

I’ll only know if it works by posting this though :wink:

Here's how I'd expect to get a <big>bigger</big> typeface.
1 Like
#44

Thanks
There’ll be no STOPPING me now

Edit. It worked.
How do people KNOW these things.

#45

I learned web design the long way, comes in very handy when apps like Dreamweaver or SharePoint bugger up the coding. This forum allows a subset of the HTML tags. Here is an H1

heading

#46

Hi ED

Thanks for the links. Some thoughts.

  • mycarditis: so according to JAMA 4-7/100,000 for Pfizer and 8-20/100,000 for moderna.

Thats not a million miles off my recollection (for pfizer anyway) and still a relatively small effect that was successfully captured. This suggests to me that if the vaccine was responsible (overall) for an increase in mortality of more than 4/100,000 that fact would have been similarly captured by the good folks publishing at JAMA.

I still seem to remember that the risk was much higher from getting the disease than from getting the vaccine. I’ll look into it

The comparison between this vaccine and another (non covid) vaccine is not that compelling to me. Its apples to oranges. I really think that the comparison should be to rates of illness after vaccination compared to background rates of illness.

Which you also do :smile:

I think that there is a good point in your back of the envelope numbers on myocarditis in pre and post vaccinated populations. I would like this to be investigated in more detail, but the essence of what you’re saying here could well be correct.

I linked to a study here on 5F (that ive still not read unfortunately) analysing serious adverse events resulting from vaccination. It looks like a serious effort to try and do the sort of thing you’re doing here.

Anyway. Add all that up, and I think that there are probably a good number of adverse reactions to the vaccine.

But I still cannot see any way that the vaccinations have killed more people than died from covid

Cheers

#47

But, but, but according to the various reporting systems the ‘vaccines’ are killing people at a truly shocking rate - and given that those reporting systems notoriously under-report, heaven knows what the real numbers are. And then there’s the astounding numbers of people damaged by the myriad of known harms caused by these experimental jabs. It’s openly acknowledged that the jabs do not prevent spread and infection - - and it seems certain that no robust case can be made for the speculative notion of a reduced severity of infection.

The experiment should never have been rolled-out in the first place - there never was any data on short/med/long-term effects - given the horrific evidence of the short-term effects, Clapton knows what the long-term may see.

I’m amazed that anybody can still defend the experiment, or seek to downplay the disaster it has assuredly been.

#48

Hmmm

Ok. I’ll do you the courtesy you didn’t do me. I’ll try to actually address your points.

What reporting systems exactly are reporting that vaccines are killing people? What is the actual shocking rate that has been discovered?

My point has been, for a long time now, that if massive numbers of people were dying because of vaccination, that would be easily visible in highly vaccinated countries. The excess mortality would be easily visible. However, try as I might, I can’t see that… if you see it somewhere then please post it here.

I agree that you’re on stronger ground here. I recently posted a study looking at this. This is being actively studied,.and the truth is coming out loud and clear. Its an active area of research right now.

Not as amazed as I am that people can ignore the far, far, far greater preponderance of first class, rock-solid evidence of climate change.

:wink:

Cheers

#49

Come now, PP - you’re not saying that you are unaware of UK Yellow Card / USA Vaers / and Euro Eudravigilance…are you?

The 2k plus deaths associated with jabharm in the UK alone would have been sufficient in saner times to have seen these experimental procedures withdrawn pronto.

That great numbers of people - expressly visible amongst the sporting fraternity - ‘suddenly’ expiring all over the world is impossible to deny at this point. I can’t explain why you are not seeing what it is that’s going on.

…and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it…

#50

Hi NewSi

I’ve spoken at length about the yellow card system, VAERS etc. Do you have a comment on any of the hundred or so posts I’ve made about it?

Do you have a thought or comment about the absence (or otherwise) of excess deaths?

Do you have a comment on what the shocking rate of deaths actually is?

Yeah - such a good argument. One of us is following actual evidence here.

Its not you.

Please feel free to comment on any points I’ve actually made.

What’s happened to 5F? @Evvy_dense can you see how frustrating it is to try and have a discussion with people who simply ignore every point you make?

PP

#51

Let’s not get petulant now, PP.

Not lending credence to your points, or for that matter failing to engage with something that you might write is not evidence of your input being ignored. Rather, I’ve come to different conclusions. True, you write at length, and show you workings. I’m terse near to the point of silence - but there is wealth of observation and ‘research’ that informs my conclusions. Pretty much all of the observations/comments etc that I might make are way better propounded by more talented 5Fers.

And about 5F - nothing has ‘happened’ to it - it remains a solid source of robust debate and useful info / link etc etc

I am sorry if my style of contribution annoys you - I will try to be more thoughtful when I engage.

Best Wishes

1 Like
#52

Hi PP

“But I still cannot see any way that the vaccinations have killed more people than died from covid”

Can’t you really? From the study that you cited:

“Study from Senior Editor of the British Medical Journal Peter Doshi, et al, finds the absolute risk of serious AE from mRNA vaccines exceeds the absolute risk reduction of serious covid-19 infection.”

So, if this tudy stands up, all that would take for vaccinations to kill more people than covid would be for the two entities in the study, i.e.

‘serious AE from mRNA vaccines’, and ‘serious covid’

to equate to each other.

Ie for serious (something) to just equate to serious (something else).

PP my friend, I’m not sure you’re clocking all the things that are floating past you. On the big spikes in covid jab AERs compared to all other vaccines, you say:

“The comparison between this vaccine and another (non covid) vaccine is not that compelling to me. Its apples to oranges. I really think that the comparison should be to rates of illness after vaccination compared to background rates of illness.”

Why is it apples to oranges? The other vaccinees are a population in which the levels of these illness reports are also available. What’s different about them - a lot of them are flu, which spans all the ages. How do you know that the hackneyed phrase ‘other things being equal’ doesn’t apply - shouldn’t you be trying to find reasons for this gigantic (I’ll spare you the biggest font, but I warn you that I am armed :smiley:) difference?
Could it be that they appear like apples and oranges to you precisely because there are vastly more effects with the covid jabs? Like, for you it’s simply got to be different…

BTW in reponse to this earlier post:

"A huge spike in mortality (“more than from covid”) would be visible. Its not. Not anywhere that I’ve been looking, anyway. I tried to look for excess mortality spikes in the UK and found none. "

check this out:

Nearly 8,000 non-COVID excess deaths in UK traced to COVID-19 vaccines and booster shots
"The latest data from the Office for National Statistics (ONS) has revealed that there were 1,540 excess deaths in England and Wales in the week ending June 24. The ONS data showed that the figure is 16.6 percent higher than the five-year average. Of these deaths, 285 were registered with Wuhan coronavirus (COVID-19) and 166 had COVID as the underlying cause. That left 1,374 cases from a different underlying cause. Will Jones of the Daily Sceptic said: “It is doubly concerning as following the 138,000 excess deaths since March 2020, a reduced number of deaths would now be expected due to the mortality displacement of people dying earlier than they ordinarily would.”

by @planettoday #PlanetToday: Nearly 8,000 non-COVID excess deaths in UK traced to COVID-19 vaccines and booster shots

Cheers

#53

I’m trying to stay out of this.

However, three big red flags that I’d be interested in PP’s view on:

No.1: these vaccines are all still in the trial stage (this is indisputable).

No.2: after taking the initial shot, the psychos started telling us that we’ve got to take further booster shots. This has never happened before in a vaccination programme, not on this scale. The ‘booster shots’ have actually done a lot to wake people up to what’s going on.

No.3: the psychos then started telling us that you can mix and match different brands of vaccines (all still in the trial stage). This has never happened before in medical history.

3 Likes
#54

Oh, and I could add No.4

You are all going to jail, or worse…

#55

Morning NS

That’s great. And in your new found spirit of thoughtfulness, and based on the wealth of research, perhaps you could actually answer one of the questions I’ve asked you?

  • where is the excess mortality data showing a huge increase in deaths due to the vaccine? Deaths over the baseline mortality, I mean.
  • what is the rate of deaths due to the vaccine that has been discovered?

Let’s start with those two very basic questions. They should be the easiest…

Looking forward to your answers

PP

#56

Hi Rob

I’m actually sympathetic to your points that these vaccines were rushed through without proper testing, and you’re right - they are experimental.

Actually I think all three of your points are good ones. I’m not arguing with you.

I’m disagreeing with the claim that the vaccines are killing more people than covid. And, actually, now that I’ve looked into it again, that there are huge numbers of vaccine related illnesses happening.

Everyone here seems to believe that VAERS and similar systems are definitive proof of those two statements.

I don’t. And I don’t see evidence in the recorded research to support these specific claims.

That’s the issue I’m raising. Nothing else.

I’m sorry to hear that. I don’t think I’ll like being in jail.

Cheers
PP

#57

Hi ED

As it happens, I finally did get around to reading the study I posted that you cite. Unfortunately (or perhaps fortunately, I guess, for people’s safety) it looks like it had some serious methodological issues, and the conclusions are probably wrong.

I’ll post more details in the thread beneath the paper itself, but it will be interesting to see if this paper gets through review without major changes.

Its possible. I try to look at what I can, but there’s only 1 of me and lots to do…if you suspect that I’ve missed something compelling then do re-emphasise it.

Because the criterion for getting a covid vaccine wasn’t whether you had another different vaccine. Those populations are selected differently. Once you start comparing populations you need to try and make them as homogeneous as possible. The criteria for getting a covid shot was how much money big pharma could make I mean primarily age. Everyone went to get it in tranches due to age. The only real comparative population is the actual population… hence the best comparison is to baseline level in the population at large.

Not even the flu vaccine is comparable because the level of self selection for that is very high. For better or for worse there was a much more aggressive campaign of coercion for the covid vax.

Similar populations is the minimum you need for comparisons.

I’ll have a look at the link on the 8000 excess deaths and let you know what I think. Maybe not today though. (see edit below)

Incidentally, I spent some time looking at data from Norway and Finland yesterday. They are excellent petri dishes for vaccine side effects, as

1 - they had very low covid rates,
2 - extremely high vaccine rates and
3 - some of the best public health surveillance in the world. They scan through their equivalent of VAERS and investigate every case. More do-able as they have a relatively small population.

This is the standard to which we should all be reaching. So what is the result?

Very low excess mortality in general. Almost zero reported fatalities from the vaccines, very rare reports of SAEs. And millions upon millions of vaccinations jabbed into willing arms.

If the vaccines are causing deaths and SAEs in anything like the hysterical numbers that Rhis and NewSi are claiming, why is that not visible in countries that are looking hardest to find them? This question should be considered by everyone who believes the vaccines are causing harm.

I’m sorry, but I’m very far from convinced about the vax causes deaths story. I’m 99% sure that the vax causes more death than covid story is just nonsense. I’m more sympathetic to the vax causes SAE story, but even there its not as clear cut on how frequently these SAEs occur.

Cheers

Edit: so out of respect for your point that I might be missing things, I decided to take a quick look at the 8,000 deaths link before I forget. It seems that we are in some kind of raised period of excess mortality at the moment (I’ll have to look at their data sources more closely) and they simply assume that this must be the booster programme (did we even just go through a booster programme?) That’s it. The assumption seems to be based on “a paper published in the BMJ”, by which they mean the unreviewed, unpublished preprint that I’ve posted here by Doshi et al. It very much looks to me like just another attempt to jump to a conclusion without actually doing the investigation.

#58

How many covid deaths have there been, P? In Britain; in the US; worldwide? How do you know? Deaths which were known to be really covid, I mean. Known how? Via PCR? Really? Any actually-reliable measure, not bent by any interested playerz? Reported where? Guaranteed untampered data?

I honour your highly-trained analytical skills, bro (truly, no snark! :slight_smile: ), but they’re going to lead you straight into a ditch if you put too much trust on sources that can’t really be trusted. As you say: GIGO.

Fwiw, I don’t consider that I or anyone I know has much in the way of reliable, certain facts. I only have hunches to go on, and must constantly self-remind: don’t be dogmatic about any of it; you don’t really know…

As I’ve said before: one death after a jab: coincidence; two, intriguing; thousands: enemy action. Are ALL those anecdotals flooding about, of deaths, permanent maimings, injuries, all closely following stabs, simply to be dismissed as inadequate evidence…? Well into the category of enemy action, in my estimate.

Having followed this protracted dissension here at 5F, somewhat in the background, a have to say - as delicately as a clod like me can manage - don’t you think it just possible that you might have got a bee in your bonnet over this…?

Affectionate respect in any case, whatever! :slight_smile:

PS: My birthday approaches… :wink:

#59

Morning RG

I dont know how many covid deaths there have been. I believe based on a few different pieces of research that there were many more covid deaths than have been recorded so far. My dad was one of them, so thats easy for me to believe, perhaps.

However, consider Norway or Finland, as I mentioned above. We do know with much greater certainty how many covid deaths there were in those countries - a small handful. Almost none by comparison with, say, Sweden.

So. Very few covid deaths in Norway.

How many vaccinations? Millions. Several millions.

In this example there is no confounding spike of covid illness, long covid, hospital overwhelm, or covid mortality. Its a very clean data set.

How many vaccine related illnesses and deaths have they found in Norway, or Finland?

You’re a smart cookie and you know how to research… go and have a look.

On the birthday thing, I am super excited for you :slightly_smiling_face:. Ill drop you an email…

Cheers

PS, it may be that analytical thinking will lead me astray. I do try and temper it with intuition etc where I can. And I’m much less certain about some things than others -covid stats vs climate for example. But, as with a sinking ship, some situations are so clear cut that its dangerous to close your eyes to whats actually happening in front of you. Now is such a time…

#60

PP, I’ve acknowledged that I may have been somewhat short with you - please quit the condescension. As I said, I have nothing more to add to that which has been posited by other 5Fers.

#61

Hi NewSi

Ok, I’ll have another go at responding reasonably.

So you don’t know the details of what you were stating as obvious fact above? That’s fair enough - I don’t know them either, which was why I was asking.

No one here on 5F or anywhere else that I’ve looked can answer those very simple questions.

Why do you think that is?

I can answer those questions about covid in about 30 seconds.

Where are the norwegian vaccine related deaths? They used Pfizer and Moderna.

It might seem sarky or churlish on my part when I ask people “what evidence would change your mind?” (usual answer: “none”) but I can be clear about that too.

A clear signal in a country like Norway that shows a ramped up line of excess deaths as the vaccine rollout progresses would change my mind.

That’s still not proof, mind you, but that’s very compelling data, and enough for me to think that something very bad has happened.

I had thought that I had found an alarming piece of research that contradicted my position on vaccine caused side effects and I posted it here on 5F. Few people actually looked at it. I am ready to look at the evidence when it comes up. After looking in detail through the paper on harmful side effects it became clear that it has some serious flaws, and I’m not sure it will stand. However, I did post it.

Incidentally the same is true for climate change. I am open to data showing global cooling - refreezing of the arctic, data showing a drop in co2, a clear cooling trend lasting a number of decades, weather patterns returning to a long running average. Etc.

I have very high standards for scientific research. For quantitative and statistical questions, I think its by far the best approach.

I wish more people had higher (or indeed any) standards when it comes to scientific questions.

Cheers
PP