Categories
Antivaccine nonsense Medicine Movies Popular culture Pseudoscience Quackery

“Died Suddenly”: Resurrecting the old antivax lie of depopulation

Everything old is new again when it comes to antivax tropes. Died Suddenly resurrects the old antivax conspiracy that vaccines kill, the plan being to cause “depopulation” that would allow “global elites” to control the world.

I realize that I sometimes repeat this to the point of annoyance, but it really does need to be repeated over and over: In the age of the pandemic, everything old is new again with respect to antivaccine disinformation. The most recent example is the claims that, thanks to COVID-19 vaccines, huge numbers of people have “died suddenly,” because the vaccines are designed to result in “depopulation” (which the “global elites” apparently want for reasons that are never made coherent). This particular conspiracy theory that’s trending now about COVID-19 vaccines is an echo—hell, a rehash—of old antivax conspiracy theories. The problem is that most people, who hadn’t been paying attention in years past, don’t realize this. Coming out next month is a book pushing a similar conspiracy theory, “Cause Unknown”: The Epidemic of Sudden Deaths in 2021 & 2022. It’s written by Ed Dowd, described as a “former Wall Street analyst and BlackRock portfolio manager”—because that’s who should be doing amateur epidemiology, right?—who:

…examines the epidemic of sudden deaths in America. Throughout his stock picking career, he utilized pattern recognition to get ahead of his peers and the street before his bullish or bearish thesis became consensus. Early in 2021, he noticed a rise of news anecdotes about sudden deaths among very fit athletes and other seemingly healthy young people across the country. His question was simple: What changed in 2021? 

Gee, I don’t know. What changed, Mr. Dowd, besides the amplification of your confirmation bias.?

Unsurprisingly, Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. and his antivax group Children’s Health Defense were involved in writing this book.

"Cause Unknown": "Died Suddenly" in book form, apparently.

Back in the day, when I was learning how to counter antivax disinformation, this claim took the form of antivaxxers claiming that childhood vaccinations were killing children and causing a wave of sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS) and that HPV vaccines (particularly Gardasil) were killing girls and young women. Nor are antivax “documentaries” making such claims new either. For example, I once described such a film entitled Sacrificial Virgins—antivaxxers aren’t subtle with their penchant for comparing vaccines to religion—that blamed Gardasil for killing young women, and the very first times I ever wrote about the antivax conspiracy theory that vaccines are causing “depopulation” was in reference to claims that Bill Gates wanted to use them for that purpose and when Jon Rappoport made the “depopulation” claim over a decade ago, linking it with germ theory denial.

I’ve discussed variations the false idea that vaccines are part of a “depopulation agenda,” be it through mass death or causing infertility (or both). Perhaps the most ridiculous version of this conspiracy theory came from—who else?—Mike Adams, who before the pandemic claimed that vaccines were bioweapons designed to depopulate the planet so that the global elite and aliens—yes, aliens!—could rule. Adams then renamed his “vaccine holocaust” as the Oblivion Agenda, in which COVID-19 vaccine took on the role of the bioweapon that would kill 90% of the global population and leave the survivors to be used by the global elite and their alien overlords as workers to exploit the earth’s resources.

Died Suddenly drops

It’s easy to laugh at the sheer over-the-top ridiculousness of Mike Adams’ conspiracy theories about global “depopulation.” (In one of my posts about it, I even included a poster for The Omega Man, the 1971 dystopian movie in which a plague has wiped out over 99% of the earth’s population and left the vast majority of the survivors photophobic mutants who come out at night to destroy the remnants of the old world, which they blame for the catastrophe that had befallen them and whom Charlton Heston hunts during the day, when they are sleeping.) However, it’s not so easy to laugh at something like Died Suddenly, a pseudodocumentary by Stew Peters that has been going trending on Twitter and going viral on other social media since it dropped a couple of days ago. The basic idea behind Died Suddenly is that COVID-19 vaccines are part of—you guessed it!—a global “depopulation agenda,” with COVID-19 designed to give governments a pretext to impose authoritarian controls. The evidence? Young people supposedly “dying suddenly” without any apparent cause, except that the filmmakers just know that it was the vaccine that caused it.

Showing how Twitter has changed for the worse since Elon Musk took it over, the filmmakers were allowed to post the entire hour-plus video directly onto Twitter:

Twitter slapped as “sensitive content” warning on this? Great strategy, Elon!

And, of course, the documentary is on Rumble:

Perhaps the best retort to the movie was this:

https://twitter.com/the_meghaning/status/1594852220490612737
But what about the Bilderbergs?

Be that as it may, it’s worth looking at this movie, because you need to understand that this is absolutely nothing new for antivaxxers. The idea that vaccines are deadly to the point of causing a “holocaust” or “global depopulation” is a longstanding antivax conspiracy theory. The only people who should be surprised that it has been so effectively repurposed to produce a film like Died Suddenly are those who weren’t paying attention to the antivaccine movement. It’s understandable that most people were unaware of these sorts of antivax conspiracy theories, but unforgivable that apparently our public health leadership either was not or didn’t have messaging ready. In this post, I’ll discuss Died Suddenly and try to relate it to similar prepandemic antivax conspiracy theories.

Before that, however, I feel that I should mention that Stew Peters has been featured on this blog before. Peters is a radio host and podcaster who runs the Stew Peters Network, a network of conspiracy blogs that promote conspiracy theories about COVID-19, vaccines, public health, politics, religion, and just about everything else. His appearance on this blog was related to a claim by a nurse practitioner named Jane Ruby that COVID-19 vaccines are causing massive clots (that kill people), although she is a regular on his network with standard COVID-19 disinformation, such as the false claim that COVID-19 vaccines “permanently alter your DNA.” His last film, Watch the Water, posited that COVID-19 vaccines are a synthetic version of “snake venom” and that evil forces are spreading via the vaccines, remdesivir, and drinking water to “make you a hybrid of Satan.” It’s almost as bonkers as anything Mike Adams has produced. Almost. (Think of Stew Peters as Del Bigtree with a wider range of conspiracy topics that he likes to fear monger about.)

From the advertising materials, it’s obvious that this the conspiracy theory about COVID-19 vaccines causing fatal blood clots features prominently in Died Suddenly:

Died Suddenly
Clots. It had to be…clots.

Prelude: The misinformation didn’t wait for the full movie

Before Died Suddenly was released, it was obvious just how bad it would be just from the social media promotional campaign that launched about a month before its release. Indeed, the trailer alone was full of out-and-out misrepresentations, as noted in this story:

In the film’s trailer, footage of a basketball star collapsing on the court is cited as proof of the vaccine’s dangers. In reality, the footage is from 2020, long before the vaccine became available to the entire public.

As our friend The Real Truther noted:

Regarding the first example, the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine only received emergency use authorization (EUA) from the FDA on December 11, 2020. Regarding the second example, of course this wasn’t the vaccine.

Here are a couple of more examples from just the trailer alone:

You get the idea. It’s an old antivax technique: Blame sudden deaths on vaccines, even if there was no sudden death or, as was often the case in the past, there was not even good evidence of correlation, much less causation. There had been a long run-up to Died Suddenly in the form of conspiracy theories about healthy younger doctors supposedly “dying suddenly” (because of. the vaccine) and young people suffering Sudden Adult Death Syndrome, in which antivaxxers attributed a different name to the acronym SADS, which before the pandemic described a known uncommon syndrome in which cardiac conduction abnormalities led to Sudden Arrhythmic Death Syndrome, a condition first described over 50 years ago. Basically, in the age of the pandemic, the tragic sudden and unexpected cardiac arrests and deaths of young people have been exploited by antivaxxers, who falsely blame them on vaccines, and Died Suddenly does that in spades.

As I was looking at the trailer before the movie was even released to Rumble, I was thinking: If just the trailer contains so many obvious, easily refuted lies, what the hell is the movie like? I was afraid, very afraid. Still, I decided that I had to subject myself to this movie. The things I do for you, my readers. As I watched this, I was grateful that I had written posts about nearly every conspiracy theory referenced in this movie. This post would have been close to book length if I had to write about every conspiracy in depth as I analyzed this movie. Instead, I can just briefly discuss each one and then link to my much longer discussions for interested readers who want more information.

Died Suddenly: Let the conspiracies flow!

It’s been a long time since I’ve subjected myself to such concentrated antivaccine propaganda as Died Suddenly; so I was naturally concerned if my neurons were still resistant to apoptosis from waves of burning stupid emanating from antivaxxers. I needn’t have worried. My neurons remain strong, even though they are older and have been battered as never before. Perhaps the last nearly three years of constant COVID-19 disinformation has hardened them. Even so, in making Died Suddenly, Stew Peters not infrequently approaches Mike Adams territory.

Don’t believe me? Just watch the first few minutes of the movie, which begins with text warning that the film is “not suitable for children,” with the ominous tones of the Pink Floyd song Sheep. followed by a narrator intoning that there has been an “overwhelming and unexplainable increase in all-cause mortality” and deaths among 18-49 year olds, along with an increase in miscarriages and Bell’s palsy. (Again, antivaxxers are not known for their subtlety.) Those of you familiar with the song will recognize that the sheep represent mindless people who just follow the herd and end up as veal cutlets or killed by predators like wolves. Indeed, underlying part of the song is a robotic voice parodying Psalm 23 thusly, “The Lord is my shepherd, He converteth me to lamb cutlets….”

Then the film cuts to a man claiming that there were all these “anomalies” and “abnormalities” in the blood in people who died, going on to say that he feels as though he is seeing something that could be causing their deaths and that “no one will see what I see,” which is, of course, what all conspiracy theorists say. He then speculates that perhaps COVID-19 caused this; that is, until he realized that many of these people had never had COVID-19 and that—of course!—they had been vaccinated. My first guess was that this was Richard Hirschman, perhaps the most famous of the embalmers and morticians who have made misleading claims about finding huge clots in vaccinated people who died, his claims that they are “unnatural” having led people like Mike Adams and Jane Ruby to speculate wildly that the clots are “self-assembling nanostructures.”

Died Suddenly: Richard Hirschman
My, what a strange hobby you have there, Mr. Hirschman!

Sure enough, later in the movie, he’s identified as Richard Hirschman and portrayed looking at vials containing clots on a table with skeletons arrayed in “see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil” poses as he intones about carotid artery clots and clots from veins. I’m not going to discuss the segment featuring Hirschmann much, given that I’ve written about Hirschman’s conspiracy theories in depth and his inability to tell the difference between postmortem and antemortem clots. That a series of other embalmers echo his conspiracy theories doesn’t persuade me in the least, the images of embalmers pulling clots out of corpses notwithstanding. One wonders if any of these embalmers had permission from the loved ones of the deceased to video the embalming process and take pictures. I suspect not. Yet, by 50:30 in the movie, there’s extensive video of an embalmer working on a corpse.

That diversion to further into the movie aside, next the film cuts to the opening credits, as Roger Waters vocals and Pink Floyd’s music swell. (What I wonder is where Peters got the money to afford the royalties for using Pink Floyd music in his soundtrack. That couldn’t have been cheap!) As the credits roll, we’re treated to a montage of images ranging from Big Foot to UFOs to Jeffrey Epstein to President George Bush claiming “weapons of mass destruction” in Iraq, interspersed with images from the COVID-19 pandemic, such as children undergoing nasal swabs, and recent news, such as an image of Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy. They even include the killing of John F. Kennedy’s assassin Lee Harvey Oswald by Jack Ruby while he was in police custody. (More subtlety.) There are also images of Elvis Presley getting vaccinated against polio juxtaposed with President Joe Biden getting vaccinated against COVID-19. Amusingly, a shaky graphic of the words “conspiracy theory” precedes an image of Alex Jones followed by images of the World Trade Towers falling and astronauts driving the lunar rover on the Moon. Truly, Peters checks all the conspiracy boxes. I will, however, admit to some surprise at seeing a clip of Tom Hanks being interviewed on The Today Show about his movie Inferno and discussing Malthusian theory, triage, and overpopulation.

And the was just the first four minutes! Truly Peters knows his audience, especially given that the Dan Brown novels whose movie adaptations star Hanks are some of the most amazing conspiracy-fests I’ve ever seen.

Here come the clots, here come the clots!

What follows is a discussion of Malthusian theory about what happens when there are more people on the planet than the earth can support, including famines, plagues, and shortages. This segment is all very ominous, with frequent references to dire consequences of overpopulation portrayed through video clips of people ranging from Bill Maher to Bill Gates discussing it, and of course the clip of Gates is the famous clip in which he points out that population growth could be slowed through providing better healthcare including vaccines. It’s a clip that antivaxxers love because they misrepresent it as Gates “confessing” in a TED Talk that vaccines are part of a global “depopulation” plot when in reality it’s just Gates pointing out the obvious, namely that populations with access to better health care, including vaccines, and more wealth tend to delay childbearing, not produce as many children, and therefore not grow as fast, as is the case in older, more established wealthy countries such as the US and those in Europe.

Enter a funeral director named Chad Whisnat, whom, oddly enough, I had never heard of before this movie, going on about, “What does that mean?” with respect to decreasing the rate of population growth by 15% “using vaccines,” saying:

Well, common sense would tell you, if you have a man standing in front of you say … he’s going to reduce the world’s population by 10 or 15% using vaccines. What does that mean to you? It means somebody’s gonna die because you put a vaccine in them. It doesn’t mean you’re going to save people. That’s pretty much common sense in my brain.

Let’s just say that Whisnat’s “common sense” is not really “sense.” I gathered right away that he must be one of those conspiracy mongering morticians who have been claiming that vaccines are killing people based on his anecdotal experience as a funeral home director.

Hilariously, he invokes an “argument by Google” by voicing over a montage of Google searches how Googling “died suddenly” brings up a list of stories and web pages about people who—surprise! surprise!—died suddenly! (Google is nothing if not literal that way. when it does a search for a phrase.) There’s even what looks to me like a shot of Hank Aaron getting the vaccine. Of course, Aaron was 86; so his death two weeks later could easily have been coincidence, and, indeed, was attributed to natural causes. (That’s part of the conspiracy in these narratives, of course.) Of course, to the conspiracy theorists making this film, they must have died from the vaccine. However, as Lead Stories noted over three weeks ago:

The montage flashes an article from October 16, 2022, headlined “Dad of two, 46, dies suddenly in his sleep.”

But the article makes no mention of a COVID vaccine. “Edward died in his sleep in the early hours of September 27, having spent some time in hospital while struggling with his mental health,” the article states.

Another article in the montage is headlined: “Actor’s sudden death aged 33,” but the piece itself explains that the actor died as a result of a “tragic fall” and does not mention vaccination.

Another article, the first-person essay of a mother who lost a son, is about his death in a car crash.

This segment then leads into Hirschman’s claims and several conspiracy mongering embalmers and funeral directors, including some with their faces and voices obscured, because, of course, they are “afraid” to identify themselves. Personally, I myself could tell that most of the clots shown look like postmortem clots, but I’d love my readers who are pathologists to take a look. Several close-up images are shown at around 14:20, and the whole segment starts around 8:10 and continues for several minutes, with embalmer after embalmer demonstrating confirmation bias. Of note, none of these embalmers could say whether the corpses that they had embalmed had been vaccinated, had COVID-19, or had an asymptomatic case of COVID-19. In any event, if you’re squeamish, this segment might gross you out, but I’d love pathologists to watch it, especially ones who have a lot of experience doing autopsies.

There are, however, people debunking this nonsense on Twitter:

Seriously, I see only two possibilities. Either these embalmers and some of the doctors parroting these claims about clots don’t understand the difference between postmortem and antemortem clots, or they do and are lying. My take is that, depending on the specific person, one or the other is true.

In any event, by around 17:30, the film shifts to stories of young people who “died suddenly,” the film’s view being, of course, that it must be the COVID-19 vaccines that caused these deaths. Again, almost none of these stories mention whether these people had been vaccinated, and this entire segment consists of, in essence, an appeal to personal incredulity. Just because these people were unaware, for example, that young people sometimes suffer sudden and unexpected cardiac arrest, to the point that they syndrome was described in the 1970s and 1980s, does not mean that vaccines did it.

During a montage of various “whistleblowers” testifying about people who “died suddenly,” there was a recounting of the claim that a military database had shown a huge increase in cancers since the vaccines had started being required for military personnel. I won’t discuss that one in much detail, given that I did so in great detail before in February other than to say this. It is biologically implausible in the extreme that we would see a huge increase in cancers less than two years after the vaccines rolled out because even after exposure to large doses of ionizing radiation from the atomic bombs at Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the earliest that cancers started appearing was two years later, and that was just leukemias. Solid cancers like colon and breast cancers, didn’t show up until ten years later. Of course, Dr. Ryan Cole, whose claims about COVID-19 vaccines and cancer I’ve discussed before, makes an appearance blathering about oncogenes and cancer biology that he clearly doesn’t understand while appealing to “nefarious actors” behind this plot, including, of course, Bill Gates.

Unsurprisingly, the film also invokes Event 201, an October 2019 exercise simulating a pandemic, to imply—no, to say outright—that the subsequent coronavirus crisis as evidence that it was all part of a plan. It’s a conspiracy theory that dates back to the days of Plandemic and Plandemic 2, two conspiracy movies claiming that the pandemic was a plot to cause depopulation and impose absolute authoritarian rule. To bolster this, there’s a montage of pro-vaccine messages and songs from podcasters and TV personalities like Stephen Colbert, followed by people claiming that they will “destroy your life” if you don’t take the vaccine and that we are in a “war,” followed by a montage of conspiracy images of glaciers melting, the World Trade Center, Sean Penn with Volodymyr Zelenskyy (gee, pro-Russian propaganda slipped in?), and more.

Then came Steve Kirsch at about the halfway point, and I nearly had to stop watching. Seriously, Kirsch is about as nutty a COVID-19 conspiracy theorist and antivaxxer as there is out there, as evidenced by his claims that “no one wants to know what’s in the vaccines” and that “no mainstream media” reporter has ever asked “what’s in the vial,” which is nonsense so pure that I really, really questioned whether I could make it through the rest of the movie, particularly his claim that “people don’t want to know what’s in the vaccines” either. What follows is a montage of arguments by package insert, with the risible claim that there are still pages in the package inserts intentionally left blank. If that’s true, I couldn’t find them. Kirsch even invokes VAERS and his “promise” to pay any scientist $1 million to come on his show for a debate. Hilariously, he expresses anger that the CDC is ignoring him. Personally, given his history I’d ignore him too if I were a high-ranking CDC official or the chair of the CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP), so much so that he clearly provided video to the filmmakers of a police officer telling him to leave the chair’s house. It never occurred to Peters or Kirsch that his footage makes him look like a stalker. It really does!

It’s at about this point at the 45:00 mark that there’s the montage debunked above of security camera and smartphone videos showing people fainting, the implication being that they had all “died suddenly,” even though most had not. There were images of some people fainting near moving subway trains and falling into the trains or onto the tracks, where, in the latter case it’s possible that the fainting person was killed by the train. Even if there were any fatalities in these images, these could just be cases of tragically bad timing and locations for fainting. The montage goes on and on, with some people appearing to have seizures and some just fainting and falling. For none of them is it shown that they had had a COVID-19 vaccine, and most did not die.

In fact, as this article shows, most of the people shown fainting in the montage collapsed for reasons unrelated to the vaccine; for example some suffered syncope after not having eaten and drunk anything for a long time. Even more deceptive, at least two of the clips date back to before COVID-19 vaccines were even available (for example, Florida Gators basketball star Keyontae Johnson, who fainted in the middle of a game on December 12, 2020, before the vaccines were even available) and one dates back to 2019, before the first cases of the novel coronavirus disease had even been reported in Wuhan, China (Austrian journalist Rosa Lyon, who collapsed on her show). Apparently, the vaccine is so powerful that it can go back in time to kill people—or at least make them faint.

Then there’s this example, which is even worse, as it shows Peters and crew blatantly misrepresenting the cause of a child’s death to promote their ghoulish message:

Unfortunately, it’s long been known that 13-year-olds do sometimes “die suddenly” of no apparent cause. Such deaths are almost always due to an undetected conduction abnormality of the heart. Now antivaxxers are ghoulishly weaponizing every such death they can find, regardless of whether there’s even any plausible link to COVID-19 vaccines or not.

There are also shots of speculative stories about people who died within days of being vaccinated—or even of people who just died, with no reference to whether they had been recently vaccinated or not—followed by a segment at 50:30 of embalmers working on actual cadavers, again, likely without permission from the family to feature their deceased loved ones in a movie. At one point, they claimed that they weren’t getting “any drainage” over a scene of a clot measuring a few inches (at most) in length being pulled out of a vein. Once the clot is out, fluid literally squirted out of the hole in the vein rather belying the claim that the clot was so extensive. Then there’s an image of a beating heart, followed by a picture of the heart stopped and a surgeon (apparently) incising the pulmonary artery to remove a clot. This is an operation called a saddle embolectomy, a seldom-required surgery to remove a pulmonary embolus (a blood clot that goes to the blood vessels of the lung and that can be fatal) that’s so large that it’s blocking the bifurcation of the pulmonary artery to the right and left and compromising the heart’s function by blocking its pulmonary outflow. No mention is made of whether this patient had been vaccinated, nor is anything else said about him.

In fact, the video in that segment looked suspiciously familiar to several docs on Twitter, including Dr. Eric Burnett, who posted this brief video to Tik Tok and Twitter, in which he not only compares the images of clots from Died Suddenly to images of postmortem clots but also shows a clip from the YouTube video of a saddle embolectomy that the filmmakers appear to have misappropriated for their film and misrepresented as a clot caused by the vaccines:

In case you’re curious, I found a YouTube video of a saddle embolectomy that appears to have been used by Peters and company. At first glance the video appeared to me to be at the very least incredibly similar to the video in Died Suddenly. (Unfortunately, the video’s settings don’t allow me to embed it here; so here’s the link.)

It turns out that you can scratch “at the very least incredibly similar” and just say it’s the same video. The Real Truther did us all a solid and made it very clear that the Died Suddenly director cribbed the footage directly from the YouTube video:

The side-by-side running of the videos is just…perfect.

As an aside, it’s also amusing to point out that one of the “experts” in Died Suddenly, Dr. Ryan Cole, was very unhappy at Dr. Burnett’s debunking of his conspiracy theory about the vaccines causing clots and voiced his unhappiness on Steve Kirsch’s Substack. His “rebuttal” just boiled down to an appeal to authority—his own—coupled with, “Trust me, I’m an expert.” Certainly there was no evidence there. Moreover, Dr. Jonathan Laxton even points out a reason why embalmers might have been seeing more postmortem clots than they did normally prepandemic:

Why might there be more postmortem clots? The longer you store bodies, the more extensive the postmortem clotting of their blood. When the funeral industry was overwhelmed by COVID-19 death, bodies were stored longer before embalming and funeral.

I have to mention another segment with someone named Dr. Gene Posca, an internal medicine specialist, who is shown seeing someone named John, who is stated to have been “injured” by two doses of the Pfizer vaccine. His complaint was leg swelling from a deep venous thrombosis, which is described as “extremely rare.” (Hint: DVTs are not rare.) Dr. Posca did thermography on this patient to claim to show “heat” in the neck lymph node chains and in the involved leg, leading Dr. Posca to recommend bilateral Doppler ultrasounds. Here’s a hint for this quack: If you suspect DVT, just order the Doppler ultrasound. The thermography is completely unnecessary, as I wrote about when I described another quack who advocates thermography for “clotting” from COVID-19 vaccines. It also turns out that Dr. Posca is an antivax conspiracy theorist who is based at the Cleveland Clinic Indian River Hospital in Florida who has testified before that the vaccines are a “dangerous and experimental drug” being imposed by “fascists from D.C.” and that their: “blitzkrieg against our freedom will continue.”

WTF, Cleveland Clinic?

Conspiracies everywhere

By the time I reached the end of this film, I was exhausted, so much so that I think I will take the Thanksgiving Day weekend off from blogging and not post anything new until Monday.. It’s basically a repository of every conspiracy theory out there about COVID-19 vaccines causing clots, miscarriages, and “sudden deaths.” It’s all anecdotes, with no data. For instance, near the end of the movie, there’s a nurse named Michelle Gershon who claims that she is seeing more intrauterine fetal demises than ever before since the vaccines followed by video one of the embalmers saying he had a “run of that” in his funeral home, with five of the six having been vaccinated and the other having had remdesivir. (Cherry picking and confirmation bias, anyone?) Another of these embalmers notes that he has more “fetuses in the refrigerator” than he’s ever seen before. An OB/GYN named Dr. James A. Thorp claims that he’s seeing more “death and destruction” than he’s ever seen before on ultrasound.

This is followed by a highly deceptive graph:

Fetuses "died suddenly"
Hmmm. There’s something…odd…about this graph (captured by screenshot).

Does anyone see the problem with this graph, even if it’s accurate? (And I can’t find any evidence for a phenomenon like this elsewhere.) Look at where the uptick in still births starts. It starts in 2020. Note that COVID-19 vaccines did not get an EUA and start rolling out until December 2020, and they weren’t recommended for pregnant people until well into 2021. This graph is far more consistent with COVID-19 itself causing still births, not the vaccine. Again, this graph just looks made-up. The data that exist show that there is no detectable association between COVID-19 vaccination and still birth. In fact, if anything, COVID-19 vaccines reduce, not increase, the risk of still birth, with a meta-analysis finding that vaccination reduces the risk by 15%, likely due to the decreased risk of the vaccinated catching COVID-19. It also turns out that the story of the “whistleblower” nurse originated in The Epoch Times, an antivax conspiracy site and that Dr. Thorp is full of crap. If you doubt me on this, just look at this one claim by him:

No, fetuses having heart attacks in the uterus is not a thing.

None of this stops another interviewee from describing COVID-19 vaccines as this “evil that is destroying” infants and still another describing the vaccines as a “pure evil in this world.”

The grand finale of the movie features conspiracy theorists calling the vaccine a “bioweapon” being used to depopulate and control the world, because of course it does. This is followed by a stirring call to arms to fight back and a warning that if you don’t resist you are complicit in the atrocities and a counter of how many billions of doses of COVID-19 vaccines have been administered and more images of political leaders, entertainers, and celebrities urging people to get vaccinated and characterizing the unvaccinated, as Howard Stern once did.

Everything old is new again

The idea that vaccines are causing “depopulation” and killing young people is not new at all. I like to refer again to the antivax movie about Gardasil, Sacrificial Virgins. Oddly enough, though, the unfortunate young women who “died suddenly” and whose deaths the filmmakers blamed on Gardasil presented more convincing anecdotal evidence than anything in Died Suddenly, and their stories were not convincing, with their deaths all occurring weeks after the last of a series of three doses of Gardasil and only related to the vaccine by the filmmakers’ imagination. Similarly, The Greater Good promoted a similar narrative, just for infants and children. There are more examples of antivaxxers blaming vaccines for sudden death of infants, children, and young adults than I can easily recount.

The odd thing is, as these films go Died Suddenly is actually remarkably data-free. I had expected way more graphs and appeals to “excess mortality” than I got. What this movie is turns out to be pretty much just interviews with conspiracy theorists, who use cherry picked anecdotes and selective memory to make their cases. Unfortunately, the moviemaking is pretty slick, and if you don’t recognize the fallacious arguments I can see how it might be persuasive to those predisposed to believe COVID-19 vaccines are harmful.

After subjecting myself to Died Suddenly and the tsunami of firehosed misleading anecdotes and imagery it contains, I don’t know if I have the wherewithal to read Cause Unknown. I do know that this movie is pure disinformation in the way that it portrays COVID-19 vaccines as pure evil.

Note: This post has been periodically updated as I learn new information and/or find more examples of lies in the movie. The latest update was 11/28/2022.

By Orac

Orac is the nom de blog of a humble surgeon/scientist who has an ego just big enough to delude himself that someone, somewhere might actually give a rodent's posterior about his copious verbal meanderings, but just barely small enough to admit to himself that few probably will. That surgeon is otherwise known as David Gorski.

That this particular surgeon has chosen his nom de blog based on a rather cranky and arrogant computer shaped like a clear box of blinking lights that he originally encountered when he became a fan of a 35 year old British SF television show whose special effects were renowned for their BBC/Doctor Who-style low budget look, but whose stories nonetheless resulted in some of the best, most innovative science fiction ever televised, should tell you nearly all that you need to know about Orac. (That, and the length of the preceding sentence.)

DISCLAIMER:: The various written meanderings here are the opinions of Orac and Orac alone, written on his own time. They should never be construed as representing the opinions of any other person or entity, especially Orac's cancer center, department of surgery, medical school, or university. Also note that Orac is nonpartisan; he is more than willing to criticize the statements of anyone, regardless of of political leanings, if that anyone advocates pseudoscience or quackery. Finally, medical commentary is not to be construed in any way as medical advice.

To contact Orac: [email protected]

751 replies on ““Died Suddenly”: Resurrecting the old antivax lie of depopulation”

Just for completion (and thanks for going through this) I want to remind people of Stew Peters’ previous documentary, Watch the Water, in which he claimed that COVID-19 vaccines have a secret ingredient, snake venom, that will turn people into demons and that was also in the water, too.

No, I’m not joking.

https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2022/apr/19/watch-water/stew-peters-film-watch-water-ridiculously-claims-c/

https://www.reuters.com/article/factcheck-covid19-snake-venom/fact-check-covid-19-is-caused-by-a-virus-not-snake-venom-idUSL2N2WJ244

I took a look. She has lots of tables and graphs that she came up with somehow based on death data going back for 20 years! It crams the last three years together so its hard to see the timeline of what happened when during the original outbreak, the start of vaccinations and subsequent events like the Delta and Omicron waves.

She does NOT link to any of the websites that show excess mortality based on projected monthly averages which several commenters here and at SBM have posted.

I also noted that one of her graphs which shows deaths by age groups shows the highest death rate for seniors was during the first winter outbreak when the vaccination campaign was just getting started. Many people like me couldn’t get vaccinated until March or April when that peak had already passed. And the same graph shows another peak the next winter during the Omicron wave. Despite vastly higher case numbers, including me(!), the peak number of deaths was less than the first winter peak.

So her own data show that these vaccines save lives!

She gives a link to the CDC Wonder site but with no choices entered to give a result graph. And of course she links to VAERS.

I took a look

You’re braver than I am. As sloppy as she is with numbers, facts, and honesty, I wouldn’t be suprised to find her website is loaded with all sorts of nasty stuff.

I looked at it twice: was not impressed with layout, spelling, grammar, or content.

Actually, the data shows there is something else going on besides the vax. The increase in deaths began in April 2020 and it was mostly among seniors. There were a lot of things going on at that time–lockdowns, isolation, fear, and a treatment protocol that promoted ventilators.

Maybe something else altogether, like 5G.

There’s no way the vaccine is good for anyone–they never are. If people are claiming a million excess deaths are ‘from COVID19’ then they need to explain why a year after the vax came out deaths were higher than ever.

Maybe something else altogether, like 5G.

If we didn’t already have crap-tons of evidence how amazingly stupid you are I’d swear that was just a throw-away troll line.

Maybe something else altogether, like 5G.

Is there any conspiracy theory you are not a fan of, Ginny?

There was something going on from April 2020. It was a global pandemic of a new disease to which no humans had immunity to. It also infected the lungs causing large numbers of deaths.

https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/excess-mortality-p-scores-projected-baseline?country=~USA

Excess deaths for the US match exactly the COVID-19 waves in the US. The original virus, the alpha wave, in late 2020 and early 2021, the delta wave in September 2021 and the omicron wave at the beginning of 2022. What the excess deaths do not track is COVID-19 vaccinations.

Chris Preston said: “Excess deaths for the US match exactly the COVID-19 waves in the US.”

Yes, it appears the vaccines don’t work. Why else would excess deaths (which you say are from COVID) be higher in 2021 than they were in 2020.

It’s obvious you’re an idiot, but at least a million extra deaths since the beginning of 2020 were caused by Covid. It’s amazing how you can ignore a cause that is staring you in the face.

Yes, it appears the vaccines don’t work. Why else would excess deaths (which you say are from COVID) be higher in 2021 than they were in 2020.

For those following along at home wanting to catch up on the anti-vaccine lies, this one works like this:

In the US COVID-19 vaccination began in mid-December 2020. It wasn’t until July 2021 that 50% of the population was fully vaccinated. By December 2021, only 63% of the population were fully vaccinated. The vast majority of COVID-19 deaths in 2021 were of unvaccinated and not fully vaccinated people.

There were also more than 2 and a half times as many cases of COVID-19 in 2021 than 2020, as the more infective variants arrived. Deaths per case were lower in 2021 than in 2020.

Chris Preston neither the CDC nor the FDA has made the claims you did here about why there were more deaths in 2021, post-vaccines, than there were in 2020, post COVID. Why should we believe your hypotheses when no one in a position of apparent authority has?

Dollars to donuts that Gindo is only here in the first place because she has a G–le alert set for Rappoport.

So you’re claiming the reason for the excess deaths, which were higher in 2021 post-vaccine, is that the vaccines don’t prevent deaths from COVID.

You should contact the CDC with your brilliant insights–unlike you, they have no idea what to say about the excess death problem.

No he says thaa the reason for excess deathsis that people were not vaccinated.

You mean the Covid variants that although more transmissible were far less deadly. So no Covid was not the cause and this has been well documented. Try again

So, we’ve confirmed here that no one at the CDC, FDA, or anywhere else has written anything about the massive increase in deaths in the US, which started in 2020 and escalated in 2021.

Everyone here bloviating about the reasons for it is just fumbling around in the dark–yet acts pompously authoritative about it. LOL.

What are you talking about? The CDC’s own data confirms 2021 had the highest death rate by far in their recorded history that goes back to 1999, and that the increase in deaths in 2020-2021 was massive and unprecedented.

CDC said, “The year 2021 saw the highest death rate since 2003…” It’s deceptive, but sounds better than the truth, which is that it’s the highest death rate (by far) in recorded history.

You must check thee vaccination rate, and number of new COVID cases (compare excess deaths to COVID peaks).

It is truly such a vile piece of Anti-Vax propaganda.

As you said, I wonder whether any of the families of the deceased showcased or of the people fainting gave any consent for their stories and deaths to be used and exploited for this disgusting piece of garbage.

I also want to thank you for the part about post mortem clots. It is something Anti-Vaxxers truly do not understand. They seem to think blood clots are just made up of blood cells… never heard of fibrin apparently…

And the justly famous “calamari clots”!
-btw- calamari are tentacles of squid cut into rings.

“calamari are tentacles of squid” and one of my favorite hors d’oeuvres, if they’re done right.

“Person X collapsed suddenly”
“But they didn’t die and they didn’t even got the vaccine”

See? It’s perfectly logical, they didn’t get the vaccine so they didn’t die.
/sarcasm

(for the math geeks, I’m perfectly aware that A = B and non-A = non-B are not the same thing)

For people claiming to have found the Truth ™, they sure seem to propagate a lot of misinformation.

@ Dorit Reiss

Ah, and this is the same guy with the snake venom / papal crown utter nonsense.
I don’t know what he is smoking, and I don’t want it. Seems to lead to very bad trips.

Abusing a track of my favorite Pink Floyd album (and probably my favorite track of it) for this kind of drivel, is sacrilege.

Are they payed, or did the director just decided to use it without paying?

Welcome my troll
Welcome to the vaccine
Where have you been?
It’s alright we know where you’ve been

You’ve been on the internet
Stuffing your head
Provided with lies and infesting RI
You retweeted a lie to punish us all

And you didn’t like school

And you know you’re such a tool

So welcome to the vaccine
Welcome my troll
Welcome to the vaccine
What did you dream?
It’s alright we told you what to dream

You dreamed of a liar
A true conspirator
He was always a hater
He loved to tweet in his underwear
So welcome to the vaccine

I honestly don’t know. I’d be willing to bet that they must have paid, because I can’t see Pink Floyd or Roger Waters not intervening if they discovered the song had been used without permission and without payment.

Judging from some of Roger Waters’ recent political stances (pro-Putin/anti-Ukraine, tipping over from anti-Zionism into antisemitism), it wouldn’t surprise me if he’s a closet anti-vaxxer and gave them the song for free.

Roger Waters re-recorded a Chilean protest song “The Right To Live In Peace”, adding several stanzas of his own including the following:

You can shoot out the eyes of the children
You were always that fucking insane

But you’ll never snuff out the flame.

And in Jaffa, and in Quito
In Bagdad and Delhi and Maine
In Saskatchawan and in Rio
Enough with this living in chains

Hmm, sounds like Roger wasn’t thrilled with Covid-19 restrictions.

Some musicians I admire have ideas I don’t agree with and some got pretty deep in the rabbit-hole.

Some funny fact about rights. I remember a friend of mine made an album with a drummer, who owned a record-store in The Hague, which I frequented. They decided to us a drawing of some British artist for the cover-art, without his permission. Alas the artist decided to move to The Hague and passed the record-store, which had the album with his artwork on display. He didn’t agree with it, so they had to get new art-work for next pressings, which was done by another friend of mine. For the CD-version of the album, they used the original art-work, so I suppose something has been settled.

Well, perhaps his pro-Putin stance might have something to do with David Gilmour, who has an Ukrainian daughter in law and did a song for Ukraine with an Ugrainian artist under the Pink Floyd monniker.

Waters and/or Floyd may or may not control the rights for use of their songs in media. It could be the record company or some other soul-less corporate entity. Legit music licensing is a minefield for indie filmmakers: it’s not cheap, it’s labor-intensive, and there’s no guarantee you can get permission at the end of the road. If Peters did get licenses, that indicates the production had a fairly significant budget. But, depending on how they plan to distribute the thing, they might just have grabbed what they wanted and hoped it flies under the radar, or that they’re too crazy outre for the rights-holder to mess with. There are places they can get to an audience with this (e.g. maybe Twitter?) that won’t act as copyright cops at all, or the process may be slow enough that they get their desired exposure before they’re forced to take it down.

I don’t have time to look into it today, but I wonder about the $$ angle: who funded the production (Kirsch??), and whether they’re trying to monetize it in any way. It could just be a form of advertising to draw attention to Peters so he can raise more cash or sell more stuff through his other ventures.

The rather sparse ending credits say nothing about proper licensing of music from the various artists they’ve likely stolen from.

Now I know where a person with whom I was having a discussion, got that Sudden Adult Death Syndrome was never seen before the COVID (or as he put it “Covid”) vaccine was given. I found a study within seconds, from 2004 looking at cases from the 1990s, but I doubt that will change his mind. I guess those who buy into that would be akin to the woman who once told me that “Shingles” never existed until there was a vaccine for chicken pox.

I watched it too. Like many other woo-fraught films, they incorporate visual Gish Gallops usually accompanied by ominous music and narration that insinuate dangerous outcomes being revealed. A course in these techniques can be acquired by watching Null’s “film library” at Rumble. All “award winning films” too.

Because Elon has opened the gates of TWIT-ville, I expect that many alties/ anti-vaxxers will recycle their earlier films and produce new efforts to “educate” the masses: many of the websites I watch include short clips and longer interviews so I imagine we’ll soon see Del, RFK jr, Mercola, Adams and other frauds adding content because after all, it’s free ( mostly).

Imagery can be used to incite strong emotional reactions that might bias viewers towards accepting the message ( Death and Destruction from vaccines) implied in the content but never adequately explained or supported by evidence. Sick.

There were more excess deaths in 2021 than in 2020. The vaccines came out in December 2020–the highest month for deaths was Jan 2021, followed closely by Jan 2022. What does that say about the vax?

What does that say about the vax?

Nothing. Hardly any one had been vaccinated by Jan 3 2021 when the alpha wave peaked – only 6 million vaccines given. In contrast, more than 300 million vaccines were given between then and July 2021 when excess deaths were falling. There were more excess deaths in September 2021 than in January 2022. Neither tracks with high vaccination numbers.

You failed again.

The fact that deaths exploded the month the vaccines started and the month after, means the vaccines hadn’t had time to work yet. Then, a year later, when deaths exploded, it had nothing to do with the vaccines, because…vaccines. LOL.

When all else fails, go for some revisionist history and hope nobody notices?

The excess death peak due to the alpha wave started 2 months before the first vaccine was given and peaked less than 3 weeks after the first vaccine was given.

Normal people would look at that and conclude that vaccines had nothing to do with the peak of excess deaths. Anti-vaxxers on the other hand conclude that vaccines can reach back in time and kill people before they were vaccinated.

Or maybe the 5G microchip they implant in the vaccines can do it.

Anti-vaxxers like Ginny get ridiculed, because their ideas as shown here are completely ridiculous.

Chris Preston, if your conclusions are so obvious that you feel justified in presenting them with arrogant incivility, why do we have to hear them from you, instead of from someone at the CDC or FDA who ‘officially’ knows what they’re talking about?

It sys that not very many people had gotten the vaccine during the first month it was out. Vaccines don’t magically prevent infection just because they’ve been announced; they have to be distributed and actually administered to folks to work.

Duh.

Thanks, David. That’s exactly the sort of I referred to. But Ginny of course ignores those numbers.

Hmmm. No. That’s also poor reasoning. No one has said the covid vaccines totally prevent death from covid. Just that they make it more unlikely. You’d still expect more deaths than pre-covid since covid will still be killing people.

That’s right, more deaths than pre-covid. Since covid is killing people. Just less deaths than post covid without a vaccine. Which means more lives saved. Wahey!

You’re getting there Ginny.

You’re getting there Ginny.

She’ll be back with more bullshit. You can lead a conspiracy monger to facts but you can’t make them learn a damn thing.

Numberwang, what is your number blockage? There were more deaths POST-vaccine (2021) than during the COVID panic (2020). Yes, that’s way more deaths than “pre-COVID”–but it’s also more deaths than pre-COVID vaccine.

Starting a mass vaccination campaign does not mean that everyone would be vaccinated immediately.

Given, I had already explained to Ginny up the thread with numbers how that worked and how the vast number of those deaths were in unvaccinated people, it is probably time to give this one a rest.

Ginny is impermeable to facts that don’t fit her theories and prefers to lie instead.

“what is your number blockage?”

I’m commenting about your terrible lack of attention to detail. Since detail doesn’t bother you then it’s obvious that whatever you say is a shoddy analysis. Hence, eminently ignorable when it isn’t shared by any real expert organisations.

Chris Preston said, “Given, I had already explained to Ginny up the thread with numbers how that worked and how the vast number of those deaths were in unvaccinated people, it is probably time to give this one a rest.”

Before you fall totally asleep, why don’t you explain why the claim you just ‘explained’ to me contradicts recent news:

“A recent analysis done by Cynthia Cox of the Kaiser Family Foundation for The Health 202 newsletter of The Washington Post found that approximately 58 percent of the people who died of COVID-19 in the United States in August 2022 had been vaccinated or vaccinated and boosted for COVID. Earlier this year, it was estimated that 42 percent of deaths attributed to COVID were among vaccinated or vaccinated and boosted individuals.” https://thevaccinereaction.org/2022/11/most-americans-dying-of-covid-were-vaccinated/

LOL. Goalpost moving as well. My comment was specifically about deaths in 2021, not 2022.

Since someone wants to put words in my mouth but doesn’t seem to have read my comment from Nov 23 and doesn’t think the CDC has anything to say about how well the Covid-19 vaccines protect against death, let’s see what I can find.

A search on Covid-19 mortality vaccine protection turned up this from last March.
https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/71/wr/mm7112e1.htm

Receiving 2 or 3 doses of an mRNA COVID-19 vaccine was associated with a 90% reduction in risk for COVID-19–associated IMV or death. Protection of 3 mRNA vaccine doses during the period of Omicron predominance was 94%.

Another article was published in September
https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/71/wr/mm7139a2.htm?s_cid=mm7139a2_w

In a large cohort of nursing home residents, receipt of a second mRNA COVID-19 booster dose during circulation of SARS-CoV-2 Omicron subvariants was 74% effective at 60 days against severe COVID-19–related outcomes (including hospitalization or death) and 90% against death alone compared with receipt of a single booster dose.

So this was March-July when Omicron was being replaced by BA.4 and .5. And these were the most vulnerable people in our population.

And just last week they published this report on early results for the bivalent boosters.
https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/71/wr/mm7148e1.htm

In this study of vaccine effectiveness of the U.S.-authorized bivalent mRNA booster formulations, bivalent boosters provided significant additional protection against symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection in persons who had previously received 2, 3, or 4 monovalent vaccine doses. Due to waning immunity of monovalent doses, the benefit of the bivalent booster increased with time since receipt of the most recent monovalent vaccine dose.

It’s too early to see how much these will help protect against deaths. And i would like to see a comparison with people who got a booster in the last month or two before the bivalent boosters rolled out. But perhaps that is included in these data.

@ David:

What’s great about those graphs is that seasonal effects are clearly visible: numbers are lower when it’s warmer, higher in winter. You see numbers dip each summer.

Terrible news! FDA VRBPAC advisory committee member Almira Oveta Fuller died suddenly and unexpectedly 4 days ago. Her death was NOT related to Covid, according to the Tennessee Tribune.

Dr Fuller was a tireless advocate of approving Covid vaccines and always voted for their approval during FDA meetings.

That said, I am personally NOT into Stew Peters and I never amplify anything from him. He is a questionable individual.

But Igor’s trying to say that he’s not doing that. Can’t you see that Igor wants to belong to the ‘reasonable’ faction of the anti-vax party?

But he’s not the only member of that camp ‘suddenly’ realizing that there are some crazy people out there… .

Nah, he’s engaging in typical “died suddenly” rhetoric while pretending that a far better known ally is too much for him to stomach.

Some things are hard to resist!!!

Regarding Stew Peters: my opinion of him is very low. I even wrote an article touching upon his previous productions, and explaining that he may be a part of the highly unethical influence trick called “inoculation with weakened misinformation”: Vaccine-like Inoculation of Minds with Weakened Forms of Misinformation

Everything checks out: flashy videos with wrong facts, overall stupidity, mess with all conspiracies mixed like a salad, etc.

Fact checkers love fact-checking Stew Peters — this way you can keep reasonable people from better sources of information.

Spreading misinformation can be tempting for some people, especially those who consider them selves to be ‘critical thinkers’. I hope that you find the strength to resist temptation….

I’m sorry if you feel that you image has been tarnished by people like Peters, Kirsh, Cole, Kennedy etc.

Igor is no different than peters and the others. He’s not concerned about his image being tarnished: he’s upset that he’s been identified for what he is.

When I post my own stuff, I try to fact-check everything to the best of my limited ability and to make sure that whatever I write is true to the best of my knowledge. Do I make mistakes? Sure! But they are not intentional.

I have serious doubts about who Stew Peters is and his motives and who pays him.

It is natural that some people, myself included, are occasionally mistaken.

An example of a judgment of mine that was possibly wrong and too optimistic, was an expression of hope that fertility declines in 2022, were temporary. I said this last summer and it is already appearing to be a mistaken judgment — fertility in Sweden, Germany, UK etc is not coming back. Still trying to decide on this one. Might write about it soon.

I’m confused – are you saying that we should excuse your ‘not intentional’, or ‘occasional’ mistakes because your incapable of doing any more in-depth research? I was sure it was just an issue of confirmation bias.

It’s funny to see so many antivaxxers trying to distance themselves from Peters. Some have even gone as far as to claim that it’s a ‘false flag operation’ (not to mention those who are angry with Peters for even admitting the existence of a virus…). They are ignoring the contributions of mainstays in the anti-vax movement (such as Kirsch, Kennedy Cole etc.).

@Igor Chudov Perhaps contraception affects fertility rate ? Try to remember that when you write your rant.

“those who are angry with Peters for even admitting the existence of a virus”

It’s useful to keep in mind the hierarchy of woo. People tend to move down the hierarchy (move the goalposts) as they reach an uncomfortable level of discomfort at each level.

There are no viruses!
Okay, there are viruses, but not this one.
This virus does exist but it’s harmless.
The virus only hurts those who are the brink anyway.
Yes, the virus exists and it’s horrible but vaccines are worse.
The virus is taking a toll but at least we have vaccines, and my freedumb is more important than public health measures.
Welcome to reality.

That’s funny. All the points in my list were numbered but WordPress ate them, editing them out of existence! The points in my comment above were numbered from 1 to 7. RI’s comment software also eats leading blanks and other nameless things.

Yes, that’s why I put a couple of dots on the 3rd and 4th lines of limericks to emulate the traditional indentation. This thing with lists was an unexpected quirk and couldn’t be bothered redoing it using a method similar to your suggestion.

Her death was NOT related to Covid,

OMG!!!! Someone died and it was not covid related? When in the world has that happened before the vaccines? It’s gotta be the shots.

God Igor, you just get more and more asinine with every one of your comments.

Kind of off topic, but I wonder when some anti-masker will compare the mask mandates with the protests over hijab’s in Iran. After all aren’t they exactly the same thing? Being forced to wear something?

Throughout his stock picking career, he utilized pattern recognition to get ahead of his peers and the street before his bullish or bearish thesis became consensus.

In related news, a postdoc in string theory is no longer enough to score an easy gig as a Wall Street quant.

Bodies, not tentacles. I’m reminded of a time long ago staying in Madrid when my girlfriend decided to try to make calamares en su tinta. The kitchen wound up looking like the site of a peculiar axe murder.

Narad, you’re right: tentacles would be much smaller.
What I was trying to get across is that calamari are tube-like structures yielding rings when cut across not what alties are representing- blobs or long string-like conglomerates blocking veins/ arteries
( but I managed to get ‘strings’ in).

I think some of this is a confluence of several nutty conspiracy theories prevalent on the right these days, depopulation so the elites can, what, pick their own fruit and plant their own crops and do the drudge work they are now happy to pay others to do. I mean non of these ever stand up to critical thinking.

Though I do think much of this is tied closely to great replacement nonsense, the right are obsessed by sperm counts in white men and often blame vaccines among other things, such as feminisation of men for a lack of (white) babies. Tucker in not the only one tanning his testicles. Anthony Watts often goes on about this stuff – https://wattsupwiththat.com/2022/11/21/spermageddon/ – despite us just passing 8 billion with an expected 10.6 by the end of the centaury.

In particular, Big Pharma hugely increases its profits by killing off most of its customer base.

I’m wondering if the world elite are going to empty their own bins in this utopia they’re creating.

See also “Sea-steaders” who think they will homestead the ocean (international waters). I don’t think they’ve managed more than a week in a shallow bay before the whole thing sank, literally.
They have the practical skills of my elderly, indoor-only, front-declawed cat. (Declawed by a previous human, not me.)

@DB
One of several reasons that argument isn’t the winner skeptics seem to think it is: If the overlords did, for whatever reason, actually have a depopulation agenda, they’d certainly still try to create any profit they could in the process.

@JS
Check out Doug Rushkoff’s piece in the Guardian, “The super-rich ‘preppers’ planning to save themselves from the apocalypse”, drawn from his new book Survival of the Richest. The tech billionaires aren’t trying to depopulate the globe, but they think it’s going to happen one way or the other, and they’re laying plans for it, including who’s going to do the drudge work. If there’s a lack if critical thinking going on here, it’s more on the part of those billionaires imagining how they’ll prosper post-apocalypse than anyone projecting weirdness into the agendas of the super-rich.

[Of course, the nutty CTs don’t stand up to critical thinking generally, as among other things they’re awfully self-contradictory and inconsistent if scratched even a little. But they often spring from justifiable fears, albeit in unreasonable or displaced ways, e. g. in this case the functional depravity of our oligarchs.]

Not to criticise anyone on RI BUT…
regulars should be aware that some frequent trolls are not all-good-in-the-head whilst others are contrarians seeking sport. I have no idea where to draw that line and won’t name anyone BUT..
I think that it’s often apparent. If someone interacts with one of the former, they will probably get nowhere educating them although lurkers and regulars benefit from their information .
Some people persistently resist reality- no matter how well it is represented and explained.

Regulars here try different approaches and that may actually be useful- like Good Cop/ Bad Cop- something might sink in- although that is probably quite a rarity. One person might carefully and respectfully explain errors and another might be rougher and express themself quite roughly but accurately. Some might vary their responses. Notice that Orac does different things. I have no idea which- if any- works. It is possible that there may be merit in labeling the unreal beliefs as unreal. I don’t think it wrong to call bad ideas “stupid”.

Personally, I don’t interact with anyone I believe has serious problems and/ or is vicious or disrespectful. That’s a choice. ( Also therapists usually get paid) Others may find calling these actions out is correct. Fire away.

I heard some of a podcast my better half was listening to; “Offline with Jon Favreau” (the ex-Obama staffer, not the filmmaker) that’s relevant here. The episode was titled “How To Talk Your Uncle Out of QAnon” and the guest expert was Beth Goldberg of Jigsaw, the “misinformation-tackling” group sponsored by Google. Despite the title, it’s not just about QAnon, but conspiracy theories generally: election denialism and antivax also being noted in the elaborating blurb. Nothing she said hasn’t been mentioned in comments here, if not in Orac’s posts, but she seems to have an empirical base of practical expertise, rather than just theorizing.

It’s on Youtube: https://youtu.be/m5HRQ8Y38sc

Signal moment (21:15 in): Favreau asks, “What are some strategies that DON’T work.” And Goldberg immediately says — like it’s the most important thing to understand — “Facts don’t work.” I shall leave the curious to check out her elaboration and follow up comments on what does work at the link. But her remarks are consistent with what I’ve often suggested here: that people embrace conspiracy theories for psychological reasons that have nothing directly/literally to do with the subject — “the facts” — of the issue at hand…

Facts don’t work for those who’ve full-on embraced conspiracy theories. Facts are, however, useful to inoculate those who might be inclined to believe against conspiracy theories as well as those who’ve started to believe but haven’t gone too far down the rabbit hole yet.

I agree. Ridicule doesn’t work with diehard believers, but mocking the ridiculousness of a conspiracy theory can work to dissuade those susceptible to it who consider themselves very reasonable.

Assertion against the available evidence. I haven’t anyone who actually works with CT leaners who may still be persuadable endorse ridicule as a tactic. On the contrary, virtually all of them emphasize empathy/compassion/etc.

As has might observe, YOU might want to avoid ridicule, because you’re generally a rational ‘normie’, but other people operate on different psychological mechanics.

What can be said for pointing and laughing is that used skillfully it can be a useful tool for mobilizing opposition to conspiracy movements, e. g. if you look at the history of war propaganda, the messages used to rally the troops or the homefront are very different than those directed at the enemy troops.

Vax trolls have been doing ridicule for years–it’s the most rudimentary social engineering trick in the book. It’s working so well that opposition to vaccines is proliferating by the minute. When the best argument you can come up with always involves ridicule, people eventually start to notice. Keep up the good work.

You are confused. The ridicule comes after we realize you are immune to facts.

We’ve thoroughly roasted Ginny with a splendid reality sauce, but all she notices is the dash of ridicule.

Poor turkey.

What the hell is a vax troll? Trolls are loons (see likeness in mirror) who are ostracized and expelled from society and lash out as a result.

Vaccines are the NORM.

So what do you call the armies of people paid to defend and promote vaccines online? Surely you’re not claiming pharma companies don’t utilize one of the cheapest and most effective persuasion tactics around.

Lol, ain’t no one paying me, Ginny. At least not to comment here. (I do get paid for my real job, like most people.)

That’s some IMAX-level projection.

So Julian Frost and Justatech ARE claiming the pharmaceutical industry doesn’t utilize one of the cheapest and most effective means of public persuasion there is.

With a claim that preposterous, I think you need to justify it. Why wouldn’t the industry use it? Conscience, maybe–they have an ethical objection to covert manipulation? Lol.

@Ginny Stoner They are saying that people disagreeing with you are not paid by pharma. Are you paid by trial lawyers ? Very simple way to stop thinking.

Personally, I think most of the trolls are best described as attention seekers. Whether that spills into a psychological disorder, I am not willing to guess. There is a difference between thinking patterns that are pathological and motivated reasoning, but that can be hard to separate with the written word.

As such, I tend to give them as little attention as I am able. When I do respond, it is often a single post pointing out the errors in their claims. I try my hardest to not get into long back and forths with them, as that is what they are looking for.

Being in the antipodes (and the way this website currently works) helps as most of the action happens while I am not looking.

Psychologists who interact with the truly delusional- like Xavier Amador- suggest always including realism/ criticism because the person may be silently questioning their unrealistic belief and you’re supporting their doubt, perhaps helping them change rather than going along with their mistaken beliefs or ignoring the issue.

I’m not saying that trolls are delusional but a few I’ve seen may be approaching that boundary.
I ask do they really believe this crap or are they merely trying to save face after being identified with it ?

The point is that belief is irrelevant to the function of the expression. We assume, falsely, that a statement of a conspiracy theory is a secondary outcome of a belief. But the performance of the expression itself — what it DOES, e. g. the social position it evidences, rather than the truth value of any proposition of fact it states – is the central point. Think of it as extreme trolling absorbed into the subconscious rather than cognitively self-aware prankery.

So, I’d say it’s a related yet different phenomena from delusion — which I would define as pathologically false actual belief — though the border between them may be somewhat fluid.

If the CT afflicted are something other than delusional, that might help explain why asserting “reality” backfires with them in ways it may not with the actually deluded. To echo commenter has, performing a CT is about empowerment (where being delusional is about something else), so that results in a different nature of internal and external defense.

Very creative, how you took a derogatory label and had a long pseudo-intellectual conversation with yourself about “what it means.” It’s a label designed to denigrate anyone who believes that particular theory–that’s it.

If you want some deep puzzle of human nature to figure out, ask how so many people could blindly agree to inject their children with a vaccine that’s only been around a few years, based solely on the recommendation of apparent authority, with no independent discernment whatsoever.

The ‘CT’ label is routinely used by people who don’t know squat about whatever particular ‘CT’ they’re denigrating–literally, almost invariably, don’t even know the basic factual claims on which it’s based.

But some masters of manipulation convinced them that putting others down with the label “conspiracy theory” or “conspiracy theorist” makes them look smart, so they run with it.

Oh, but I do know a lot about the various CTs under discussion here, individually and collectively, having examined them for over two decades.

I seem to have struck a nerve with Ginny. despite not addressing her specifically, and despite eschewing any Dr. Joel-type attacks for rather blasé analytical prose. Oh, she’s happy to banter with the regulars on the ‘facts’ of vaccines, because that reinforces her constructed persona as ‘speaker of alternative Truth’. But to suggest, as I have, that this construction has no relationship to Truth whatsoever, but an action serving as elaborate metaphor for addressing some hidden psychological distress — that it’s all a facade – that seems to gnaw at her.

I could point and laugh at her reference to “the basic factual claims” on which CTs are based, or her appearing to argue that using the phrase “conspiracy theory” at all is somehow out-of-bounds – as opposed to averring ‘well that might be true of kooks like flat-earthers or moon-landing truthers, but if you look at my data you’ll see I’M rooted in empirical reality.’ But I see these remarks as ‘tells’. After all, I was responding to Denice’s comment about the psychology of the truly delusional, suggesting that conspiracy theory is different – neither category would necessarily apply to Ginny – so her response indicates she does indeed identify herself as a ‘conspiracy theorist’, merely objecting to the pejorative spin she takes the term to evoke.

I wonder if Ginny might intuit at some level that her antivax obsession is an image like the Great and Terrible Oz, and fears there is indeed some other lost spirit pulling the levers behind curtains in her head, behind which she cannot bear to look.

Sadmar, I sense you have a deep dread that your life has been pointless–which is at odds with your profound sense of intellectual superiority. This conflict has led to a lot of desperate pseudo-intellectual ramblings online about why you are better than everyone else.

Conspiracy theory is that if everybody disagrees with you, it must be a conspiracy. Better explanation would be that you are wrong.CTs iindeed make you look stupid.

The famous Sir Paul Nurse –James Dellingpole interview
text

Dellingpole is a UK journalist and climate change denier. IMHO, he also is a terrible novelist from tho one novel I tried to read.

“with a XXXXXX that’s only been around a few years, based solely on the recommendation of apparent authority, with no independent discernment whatsoever”

Covid denial theories and covid vaccine injury theories have only been around for the same amount of time but you appear to have no problem with those apparent authorities, especially since you think that you are one of them. I spy with my little eye……. a lack of independent discernment.

Ryan Cole, the Idaho pathologist who claimed to see huge increases in cancers in his practice due to Covid-19 vaccination, is highly indignant at Dr. Burnett’s skillful takedown of “Died Suddenly”‘s claims about blood clots. Cole has seen, like, a gazillion blood clots in performing mega-billions of autopsies, and he assures us that the stuff shown in “Died Suddenly” is for real, man!!**

Except it isn’t.

I’ve dissected a shit-ton* of organs and long ago learned to recognize the difference between post-mortem clots and clinically significant ones (if there’s doubt, competent histologic examination should remove it). The ones shown in the video are consistent with post-mortem clots. It’s a basic skill that the average second-year pathology resident should have acquired.

*a shit-ton is less than mega-billions, but still more than ample for the purpose.
**this hilarious point-counterpoint is playing out on Steve Kirsch’s Substack, for the morbidly curious.

Why is a dermatopathologist doing mega-billions of autopsies?

I agree that the clots in question are post-mortem. I saw a “shit-ton” of clots when we had a contract with our coroner’s service to do autopsies. We relinquished the contract with gratitude when the coroner’s service was re-organized.

To be precise, Cole says he’s done “countless autopsies”, which is a lot any way you slice it (or breadloaf* it).

Even more intriguingly, Cole claims to have “diagnosed over 500,000 patients through the microscope, in my extensive career”. Seeing that his CV notes that his career as an “independent pathologist” began in 2004, that would mean that he’s signed out approximately 27,778 cases a year over that time. Note that the average general surgical pathologist might see 2,500 to 5,000 cases annually (!). Even if we’re being unduly generous and counting the years Cole apparently spent in residency and fellowship training, that would mean him diagnosing 20,000 cases annually since getting into pathology, or about four times the signout workload of the busiest surgical pathologists.

One wonders if the stress of such mighty responsibilities (in addition to myriad other job duties) might explain Cole’s, er, _novel_findings of extraordinary increases in endometrial and skin cancers since Covid-19 vaccination began. An alternate explanation is that he’s pulling those case numbers out of his lower G.I. tract.

*inside pathology joke.

CDC says, “The year 2021 saw the highest death rate since 2003…”

It’s higher by far than 2003. 2003 wasn’t even a record year for deaths–death rate was 844 per 100k.

The year 2021 saw the highest death rate ever since at least 1999–I’m not sure about before that. That’s according to the CDC’s own data.

Death rate in 2020 was 1027 per 100,000, and in 2021 it was 1050 per 100,000–the highest it’s ever been. https://www.virginiastoner.com/writing/2022/10/23/a-million-excess-deaths-in-the-us-in-2020-amp-2021

If covid was so deadly why did the vaccine makers need to get immunity from litigation to make the vaccine? Surely if it was that deadly it would be in there best interest to pursue creating one. Why was immunity given to vaccine makers if our government is concerned about the general public? No product produced to the public should ever be given immunity from litigation it’s a license to kill.
If the vaccine is so safe why hasn’t the immunity from litigation been rescinded?

A PREP act declaration was issued for all pandemic countermeasures, not just vaccines. Testing and medications are also covered. The rationale is that without it, manufacturers would hesitate to put products on the market fast enough for the needs of the pandemic – because there’s uncertainty.

But the evidence shows high levels of safety for the vaccines.

What we do need to do is have a better compensation system to accompany the liability protections.

To be a bit cynical, the USA in known to be one of, if not the most, medically litigious country in the world. I don’t know about domestic pharmaceutical companies but foreign ones would likely not want to do any work in the USA under these emergency conditions without that protection.

Unfortunately here in the UK mixed messages circulated on this issue causing all manner of confusion. The NHS material stated that the Oxford Astra Zeneca vaccine had gone through the same level of safety checks etc which all licensed medicines have to go through.

“Like all vaccines, the Oxford AstraZeneca vaccine had to meet strict standards of safety and
effectiveness before it was approved for use in the UK. It has gone through the same
extensive clinical trials and safety checks that all licensed medicines have to complete”.

Members of the public realising that indemnities are not usually routinely given for vaccines might be legitimately puzzled as to why, if the same routine standards of safety, efficacy and efficiency are being maintained, an indemnity or any form of special agreement/undertaking would be necessary for the vaccine.

However, the Participant Information Sheet provided to Oxford Astra Zeneca vaccine trial participants reinforces Dorit Reiss’s point ie due to the emergency situation where speed was essential, some of the tests normally required for a new vaccine were “modified”, something which explains the need for indemnities and /or specialised paperwork/forms of authorisation.

“Due to the urgent
need for a vaccine against COVID-19, with agreement from the MHRA, some of the tests usually
required for a newly manufactured vaccine have been modified, in order to make the vaccine available
more quickly for assessment in this clinical trial.”

What’s not helpful, irrespective of anyone’s outlook or stance on vaccination, is the mixed messages.

I fully endorse Dorit Reiss’s point in that what appears to be needed the world over is better compensation systems to help the unfortunate few who sadly become adversely affected by vaccines, something that should be in place irrespective of the indemnification status (or otherwise) of any vaccine.

Donna, I’m not sure what the legal situation is in the US but here in the UK an indemnity for a vaccine only means that any legal actions brought against the manufacturer/financial losses/penalties incurred etc etc in respect of their product are covered by the Government not the manufacturer.

You can raise a claim in respect of an indemnified product, it’s just the liability for losses/costs incurred which shifts from the manufacturer to the party issuing the indemnity.

One of the problems we have as commenters is knowing who our audience is: are they sceptics ( as in Dr Novella & Co, not “vaccine sceptics”), anti-vaxxers, the unaffiliated or random lurkers who came across an interesting title by Orac?
Many visitors stop reading after the OP. Large numbers** never comment although occasionally one might say ” long time reader, first time commenter”. Anti-vaxxer/ altie leaders portray Orac as a “paid shill” and “know-nothing” so their followers may check in to attack him. The same message won’t affect different readers the same so we have to choose our battles.

I think it’s important to always supply factual information and its sources. Alties/ anti-vaxxers automatically reject Wikipedia and US/ UK/ EU governmental agencies. They are also very suspicious of most media which are “bought and paid for by pharma”.
But convincing them should not be our prime aim whilst informing allies and people ‘not yet sufficiently informed’ IS. I try to explain how alties function- including their backgrounds, methods and business plans- to illustrate their motives and income sources. This is very important because they often masquerade as humanitarians, charities, investigative reporters, educators, whistle blowers, scientists and all-around saviours. Every single person I write about has some sort of charity or works for one.

It is also informative to read comments on altie sites/ hear phoned in testimonials. Of course, critiques are usually filtered out but
the level of adoration and using them as role models is staggering. Probably only the most enthralled are moved enough to comment but followers often seem quite unrealistic.

** Orac has a large number of readers as shown in legitimate sources that I won’t quote for now

They weren’t just “80 Canadian Doctors”, they were “80 Young Canadian Doctors”.

Except that many on the list were in their 50s and 60s.

https://twitter.com/michaelpbreton/status/1584873092009975808/photo/1

Lying about “young” doctors was justified in one Substack brain fart by claiming that since doctors commonly work into their 60s and beyond, it’s legitimate to refer to ones that age as “young”.

You can’t make up shit this dumb, or invent people dumb enough to believe it.

I have no medical/science training and other than never having any so called flu vax had all other vaccinations and so all my children. I never did oppose any vaccinations even so my eldest son in 1990 ended up in a children hospital and the doctors warned my (then) wife and I we may have to prepare for a funeral. He had just been vaccinated. He pulled through and after that we trusted the medical profession nevertheless and never questioned any vaccinations. In October 2019 my wife attended to her heart specialist to find out the results of the (expensive privately paid) test and well he indicated nothing to worry about. Just that 8 days later I held my wife better attend to a hospital and so did. The doctor gave me the understanding that a mere few hours later and she likely would have been death had I not taken her to hospital due to heart failure. She ended up in ICU and was for 10 days in hospital. I was never interested in medical issues before but now my wife’s life depended upon me investigating it. Then covid claims commence and well I held I should investigate. Over time I gained a lot of knowledge albeit it did not in any shape or form make me to be a specialist in medical/science issues. Then my wife’s specialist advised her (and me –even so I was never a patient and he neither knew my health status) to better get vaccinated. I asked him how the vaccination would affect my wife’s heart failure and order comorbidities and he responded he didn’t know. He did claim to be the head of a Department of a major Hospital and so knew what he was recommending even so he didn’t know how it would affect my wife. My wife never again went back to him. She attended to other specialist and they too were making recommendations because of “hospital policies” but when I asked them to explain how it could affect my wife they too made known not to know this as they merely followed “hospital policy”. My wife gave them the mist also. She last week became 90 and well she is glad that despite my lack of training in medical/science I can use “common sense” and kept her alive. I was informed that one of my grandsons ended up with AUTISM after childhood vaccination and now doing my research discovered how deadly some vaccinations can be. I never had a flu vaccination because I just held I did better without and proved to be so. I do not accept this so called covid vaccine to be anything but a scam as Dr Fauci himself in 2019 made clear to use a scaremongering to get the gene therapy as a vaccine. This doesn’t make me to be some anti-vax conspiracy theorist because of simply using “common sense” to decide to accept or not to accept some alleged vaccine. I didn’t use any mask in 2020, 2021 and 2022 and had no fear to communicate with others and view to be better for it. I read a considerable part of your post and well most seems to be mere “your opinion” rather than showing FACTS. Like many “fact checkers” do to give their “OPINION” while claiming to be checking and presenting FACTS.
Let me give you an example that often is misguided by many. As I understand it Pfizer in its material warns against injecting the so called vax into the bloodstream as it must only be injected in to the muscle area. Yet, other than videos of Taiwan I watched numerous videos where you see medical staff not bothering to aspirate (pulling the plunger to see if blood is drawn) and so they may then wrongly inject into the vein instead of the muscle and then can cause immediate problems to the patient. Meaning it is the gross incompetence of injection that may cause a lot of harm rather than had the injection been into the muscle area. Basically see how a medical staff seeks to inject a person. If the medical staff has the thumb on the plunger before injecting the needle then more than likely the medical staff will not aspirate. When people are jabbed while sitting behind the steering wheel and then collapse before being able to drive to the other side of the carpark surely should underline that there is a lack of proper protocol compliance and that can cause a lot of uncalled harm. So much more to state but this should be plenty for now.

@G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B.:

Your age (you mentioned that your wife is 90 so I suppose you are close to her in age) definitely brought you a lot of wisdom!!! Your comment is the best comment in this entire thread. Thank you for your opinion. Stay healthy and keep on learning!

Also thanks for mentioning flu vaccines. Unlike you, I took the flu vaccine once, which made me sick initially, but a few weeks later I had the worst flu of my life. At least I learned my lesson. No more flu vaccines and no more flu for me for years thereafter. I actually miss having a normal flu.

The flu vaccine experience I had was what initially opened my mind to the possibility that “vaccines” need to be treated with suspicion. Promotion of profitable, but utterly useless and harmful flu vaccines would not happen had our vaccination authorities been honest.

Now the CDC presentation for Oct 20 ACIP meeting showed that “hospitalization prevention effectiveness” of flu vaccine was MINUS three percent for over-65, and very close to zero for younger ages! Despite that, crooks like “Ashish Jha” and “Rochelle Walensky” continue pushing their flu vax while illogically scaring people with RSV, for which no vaccine exists, but I guess suckers are not paying close attention.

The flu vaccine experience I had was what initially opened my mind to the possibility that “vaccines” need to be treated with suspicion. Promotion of profitable, but utterly useless and harmful flu vaccines would not happen had our vaccination authorities been honest

No set of lies to low for you eh Igor?

“Your age (you mentioned that your wife is 90 so I suppose you are close to her in age) definitely brought you a lot of wisdom!!!”

And his oldest child was born in 1990, which would have made her 58 years old when she gave birth to him. That is quite remarkable!

I have no medical/science training

something quite apparent from use of the phrase “gene therapy as a vaccine.”
As a virtual sign I saw, perhaps originally hereabouts, said “Those who think that the COVID-19 vaccine will modify their DNA should see it as an opportunity.”

The mRNA vaccines are not “gene therapy.” Getting vaccinated will result in a change in a tiny amount of the recipient’s DNA through a process called somatic hypermutation. That’s a good thing. It is a feature of the adaptive immune system that allows B cells to “learn” and “remember” how make highly specific antibodies without the heritable genome of the recipient having contain the code for each potential antibody. It happens with every new antigen to which the adaptive immune system responds, no matter where that antigen came from. “Common sense” does not make up for a lack of requisite fundamental knowledge.

By the way, SARS-CoV-2 essentially is mRNA and when it infects cells it makes those cells make 10 more subgenomic mRNAs that are required to make the proteins the virus needs to replicated.
Vaccine – one mRNA coding for one protein
SARS-CoV-2 – a total of 11 mRNAs coding for 29 proteins

@Lucas: The link I posted has COVID death rate graphs by vaccination status for the USA, Switzerland and Chile. The one for the USA is for ages 50+, but the other two are for all ages. All three show the same pattern and the death rate in all of the graphs is far higher overall for the unvaccinated.

Here’s the link again, in case you missed it:
https://ourworldindata.org/covid-deaths-by-vaccination

@ Igor Chudov

You write: “Now the CDC presentation for Oct 20 ACIP meeting showed that “hospitalization prevention effectiveness” of flu vaccine was MINUS three percent for over-65, and very close to zero for younger ages!”

As usual you display your IMMENSE IGNORANCE. The -3 is followed by a 95% Confidence Interval of -54 to 31. Quite simply the “true value” could be anywhere in that range, which includes up to 31, a positive outcome, thus, the -3 is totally statistically insignificant and, thus, meaningless. For the younger ages:

18, 11 is given together with a 95% Confidence Interval of -19 to 33, thus actually more on the positive side.

18-64, 26 is given with a 95% Confidence Interval of -14 to 52, thus again more on the positive side.

So, in essence no one who understands science can make such ludicrous claims as you do.

KEEP MAKING A FOOL OF YOURSELF

@Joel A. Harrison, PhD, MPH

Thank you for looking at the ACIP presentation! There were numerous presentations of various vaccines for that ACIP meeting — and all highlighted huge failings of vaccines, from Covid vax in pregnancy, to flu vax, to the developing “chikungunya” vaccine.

Going back to the flu vaccines, for all ages the adjusted effectiveness was STATISTICALLY INDISTINGUISHABLE FROM ZERO (and negative for old people).

That’s a huge fail!

Promoting such non–working, unproven treatments like flu vaccine is called medical quackery by definition of medical quackery (quackery is promotion of untested and non-working treatments)

Now you can take a look at Slide 32 and 33 of CDC presentation for the same meeting, titled: COVID-19 in pregnant people and infants ages 0-5
months

Please explain to me why miscarriage rate for Moderna injected pregnant women is 43% higher than for Pfizer injected women, and infant death rate is 93% higher for Moderna injected pregnant women?

The answer is obvious: Moderna is higher dose and we are seeing a dose-response relationship.

I worked out all the P values for two-sample tests, huge statistical significance

Going back to the flu vaccines, for all ages the adjusted effectiveness was STATISTICALLY INDISTINGUISHABLE FROM ZERO (and negative for old people).

Small sample sizes aside (which contribute to wide CIs), if you claim the effectiveness was indistinguishable from 0 you cannot, with any claim of knowing WTF you’re doing, say they were negative. You clearly have no understanding of statistics (and don’t give the bullshit that you “worked out p-values, you’re clearly not capable of that).

One more comment, slide 34:

No increased risk of
spontaneous abortion (SAB)
after COVID-19 vaccination
during pregnancy.

Your abilities with reading are as crappy as your general honesty igor.

@Igor Chudov You notice the error interval. It is so huge that you should say that we have no data.

But we do have data. Based on 1,175 patients! That’s a lot more than 8 mice for the Covid bivalent trial.

The data shows that flu vaccine effectiveness is statistically indistinguishable from zero, and for over 65, is negative (and also indistinguishable from zero).

The data shows flu vaccine does not work and is therefore a QUACK TREATMENT. People promoting medical quackery and quack treatments are called charlatans.

Why should I trust these quacks and charlatans? Of course I do not trust them. That’s your basic critical thinking right here for you.

Igor:

<

blockquote>The data shows that flu vaccine effectiveness is statistically indistinguishable from zero, and for over 65, is negative (and also indistinguishable from zero).

<

blockquote>

You are showing your lack of understanding once again. If the CI contains zero that is equivalent to a two-sided test where the null hypothesis (with parameter = 0) isn’t rejected. You cannot say, and expect to be taken seriously, that a CI shows non-significance and then say “but it has negative values”.

Take an effing year 1 stat class.

Igor reminds me of someone who commented quite a lot on COVID articles on the CBC website. He like to pretend he was very adept at math. I once suggested that he frequently left the i out of some term in his calculations. His reply was that he didn’t understand why -1 should be included. Ψ

You should give a opy to your link. There is mine:
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34670062/
.” Among women with miscarriages, the adjusted odds ratios for Covid-19 vaccination were 0.91 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.75 to 1.10) for vaccination in the previous 3 weeks and 0.81 (95% CI, 0.69 to 0.95) for vaccination in the previous 5 weeks (Table 1). The results were similar in an analysis that included all available vaccine types (Table S5)”
One paper CDC referred

@ Donna

You write: “If covid was so deadly why did the vaccine makers need to get immunity from litigation to make the vaccine? Surely if it was that deadly it would be in there best interest to pursue creating one. Why was immunity given to vaccine makers if our government is concerned about the general public? No product produced to the public should ever be given immunity from litigation it’s a license to kill.
If the vaccine is so safe why hasn’t the immunity from litigation been rescinded?”
Going back five decades to a lawsuit brought claiming that a polio vaccination caused paralysis, Reyes v. Wyeth laboratories (1974). On average each year around 20,000 cases of permanent paralysis was caused by polio with absolutely no treatment. A number of experts testified that it was a case of natural polio; but the jury decided differently and awarded million of dollars to the plaintiff. Even if one believes the vaccine was responsible, a few such awards would put a vaccine manufacturer out of business and given literally millions of doses of polio vaccine were given preventing 20,000 or more cases, a very few lawsuits would end vaccinations and the result would be 20,000 cases from natural polio vs maybe at most 5 or less from the vaccine. Another example is smallpox vaccine. During a smallpox epidemic 25% or more of population would die. It was found that the smallpox vaccine actually killed between 1 and 2 per million vaccinations and caused around a dozen cases of generalize or progressive vaccinia, extremely unpleasant week or so with lifetime scarring. So, for every one million vaccinations, 250,000 lives were saved vs 1 or 2 deaths and dozen cases of suffering. Given population at time, would have meant around 150 to 200 deaths. Lawsuits would certainly have put the companies out of business. The bottom line lawsuits would result in exponentially more deaths and suffering without vaccinations. No company could stay in business and, nope, raising the costs of the vaccines would have significantly reduced their usage.

However, while lawsuits are not generally allowed against the manufacturing companies, the US government created the vaccine court. Anyone who believes they were harmed by a vaccine can bring a case before the court. In addition, the court pays for the plaintiffs lawyers and witnesses. Though if they win the lawyers just get their hourly reasonable fees rather than percentage of payment, resulting in a number of law firms specializing in such cases. The Vaccine Court has a list of adverse outcomes that if they occur automatically accept from the vaccine even if not the case. However, plaintiffs can still bring a case based on adverse events not on the list. The payments are quite generous.
In addition, one can directly sue the manufacturer if they deviated from the vaccine manufacturing protocol accepted by the FDA; e.g., contamination, improper storage, etc. And after first going through the vaccine court one can still then sue the manufacturer.
So, while direct lawsuits not allowed, compensation for vaccine adverse events does exist. Given that vaccines are given to large segments of population and even the safest best medicines can on rare occasions affect a few individuals, the current program is quite logical, simply save many lives, many from suffering, many hospitalizations, etc with the rare risk of adverse events being compensated for.
Of course for antivaxxers, despite overwhelming evidence from around the world, vaccines don’t do much if anything and cause harm far outweighing the actual diseases. Given that antivaxxers have shown over and over their lack of knowledge of immunology, thus how vaccines work and their lack of knowledge of the history of vaccine-preventable diseases, nothing will sway them.
Just one example. As mentioned smallpox killed 25% or more of a population. The WHO began around 1968 a program to end smallpox since it only has a human reservoir. It went from country to country with its vaccinations and smallpox ended in each country. We are talking about extremely poor nations in Africa and Asia as smallpox vaccination had already ended smallpox in Europe, North and South America. Nothing else changed in these nations; e.g., cleaner water, better nutrition, etc; but smallpox ended. Up to the WHO campaign an estimated 300 million people in the Third World died from smallpox in the 20th Century alone.
References:
Wikipedia. National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program
Wikipedia. National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act
Robyn Correll, MPH (2021 May 2). What Is the Vaccine Court? Verywell health.

Skeptical Raptor (2022 Nov 3). Vaccine court myths – instead, here are facts about the NVICP

@ Ginny Stoner

You write: “f you want some deep puzzle of human nature to figure out, ask how so many people could blindly agree to inject their children with a vaccine that’s only been around a few years, based solely on the recommendation of apparent authority, with no independent discernment whatsoever.”

“No independent discernment???”

First, a while back I did a search of PubMed, National Library of Medicines online database. I found more than several hundred thousand articles on Messenger RNA going back to its discovery in 1960s. I also found more than 70 articles on development of mRNA vaccines going back to 1990s, including one developed for SARS. It was successful in animal, phase 1 and phase 2 trials; but since SARS disappeared a phase 3 clinical trial could not be carried out; but they did give the vaccine to several different animal species known to be susceptible to SARS and then gave them a massive deadly dose and all survived. The current mRNA vaccines went through all phases of clinical trials with minimum of two months follow-up, given that all we know about vaccine adverse events is they will occur in less than two months following vaccination. The clinical trials for Moderna and Pfizer were published in New England Journal of Medicine, December 20 and 31st 2020. Since then there have been clinical trials, cohort studies, adverse events studies conducted by nations around the world.

So, what do you mean by “no independent discernment???” That people like you who don’t understand immunology, virology, etc haven’t been consulted? As usual, delusions of grandeur. You are amusing???

@ Igor Chudov

You write: “Going back to the flu vaccines, for all ages the adjusted effectiveness was STATISTICALLY INDISTINGUISHABLE FROM ZERO (and negative for old people).”

I guess you don’t understand that the sample size was far too small to arrive at a valid conclusion. And you ignore that the negative for old people had such a wide confidence interval that it was meaningless.

You write: “Promoting such non–working, unproven treatments like flu vaccine is called medical quackery by definition of medical quackery (quackery is promotion of untested and non-working treatments)”

Actually studies of flu vaccine go back many decades. The effectiveness of the vaccines depended on how close to the actual strains of current flu the vaccine were. Some years effectiveness was quite good. Given your level of ignorance you certainly don’t understand that the vaccines are based on usually southern hemisphere flu, given it occurs usually six months prior to northern hemispheres. And in many instances the northern vaccine is close enough to reduce severe disease percentages, hospitalizations and deaths; but flu vaccine is not one of the most effective vaccines; but reducing risk is still better than nothing.

You write: “Please explain to me why miscarriage rate for Moderna injected pregnant women is 43% higher than for Pfizer injected women, and infant death rate is 93% higher for Moderna injected pregnant women? The answer is obvious: Moderna is higher dose and we are seeing a dose-response relationship.”

The miscarriage for Pfizer was 3.3% and for Moderna was 4.7%; but what you fail to understand, given your immense ignorance, is that:

“Research suggests that between 10% and 20% of women with a medically confirmed pregnancy will end in miscarriage. Eighty percent of these will occur during the first trimester. The further along a pregnancy is, the lower the risk of miscarriage. Since many women who get pregnant do not track their periods, they may already be a few weeks along—possibly more than halfway through the first trimester—by the time the pregnancy is confirmed. Since the majority of miscarriages occur within the first 12 weeks of gestation, the risk of pregnancy loss after 12 weeks drops dramatically, to between 3% and 4%.”
[Krissi Danielsson (2022 Oct 25). Making Sense of Miscarriage Statistics: What Conflicting Research Really Means. verywell family.]

So, we don’t know how far along the women were; but between 10 and 20% will have miscarriages, far higher than either Pfizer or Moderna and even if they were after 12 weeks, both close to between 3 and 4%. You just don’t understand that any small sample such as those in clinical vaccine trials will vary, so that neither the Pfizer nor the Moderna exhibit more than a chance variation.

I could refute with logic and science everything you write; but it would be a waste of time given your lack of understanding of vaccines, vaccine-preventable disease history, statistics, etc. It is obvious what your rigid bias is. And you’ve never answered my simple question as to your education. What is it? If not immunology, microbiology, etc. have you actually read any undergraduate textbooks on the subjects?

@Joel A. Harrison, PhD, MPH

I understand the thing about Southern hemisphere — but in the end the flu vax does not work and the CDC just confirmed it — and yet they still push it for no reason other than greed, wanting to keep vaccine production continued nonstop, and institutional inertia.

Re: miscarriages. The rates of miscarriage are tricky to calculate and by definition miscarriages occur only in the first 20 weeks. The risk of miscarriage drops quickly as pregnancy progresses. The 3 or 4% numbers in the CDC presentation are miscarriages for ALL pregnancies, even if women were vaxed in third trimester. It is a wrong denominator.

The presentation was compiled by inexperienced people who did not realize the damning nature of Slide 32 and 33.

So Moderna is much more dangerous for pregnant women that Pfizer, due to higher dose. No surprise here to see a dose response relationship.

The presentation was compiled by inexperienced people who did not realize the damning nature of Slide 32 and 33.

Right. People employed by the CDC with access to statisticians and scientists don’t understand the results, but you, some dishonest uneducated schlub, do. You are really pathetic.

@Dangerous Baconsays:
“Any more goalposts you’d like me to shift for you?”

What I’d like to look into is the data on (weekly or monthly) mortality by vaccination status (no base rate bias). I’m most interested in recent data (april 2022 up to now), no doubt it’s there.
I want to mainly see if there’s any significant difference between both statuses.
I’m not really into vaccine related subjects lately, whilst it seems you guys rise and go to bed with it. I haven’t been following the endless debates here, so I might ask a question already asked and answered.
I ask no more then to whip up the data for me (link).

@prl
“Here’s the link again, in case you missed it:”

Thanks for the link, didn’t miss it. I’m not so much interested in these covid death rate graphs, certainly not related to this topic “died suddenly” etc.
‘More in particular I want to be informed on the ‘excess deaths’ phenomenon we keep hearing about. This may or may not be related to vaccination status. Therefore my request for a link to recent data on (weekly or monthly) mortality by vaccination status (no base rate bias). You agree with me that there should be no significant difference between both groups?

Since you admittedly don’t care about “Died Suddenly” and claim you’re “not really into vaccine-related subjects”, why do you want someone else to “whip up” data for you?

Get off your butt and stop being such a lazy antivax troll.

@ Lucas

As the rate of vaccination of senior citizens and/or those with comorbidities goes up then the number of vaccinated who die will also go up. Why? Because the vaccines don’t confer perfect protection and those who are at most risk, who probably would have died without the vaccine, some will die; but some who otherwise would have died will survive. It isn’t as simple as people think and antivaxxers can misuse any statistic.

What’s more, we worked to vaccinate the most vulnerable first. These folks are the closest to death on any given day pandemic or not. These folks love to ignore this fact.

E.g.- the 88 y/o guy with copd and esrd failing dialysis who was likely to die in the next several weeks gets vaccinated. Eight days later, his potassium goes through the roof (again) this time his heart can’t take it. The vaccine had nothing at all to do with it but the “do your own research” crowd on here would probably argue otherwise.

Among non vaccinated there would be more COVID deaths. There is data for you
ttps://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/deaths/datasets/deathsbyvaccinationstatusengland
It was not difficult to find

@ Igor Chudov

You write: “I understand the thing about Southern hemisphere — but in the end the flu vax does not work and the CDC just confirmed it — and yet they still push it for no reason other than greed, wanting to keep vaccine production continued nonstop, and institutional inertia.”

As I wrote and you dishonestly ignore, the effectiveness of the flu vaccine has varied over the years; but even in years where it was less effective, it still reduced some suffering.

You write: “So Moderna is much more dangerous for pregnant women that Pfizer, due to higher dose. No surprise here to see a dose response relationship.”

Bull shit. Once more you dishonestly ignore what I wrote that it was within the known range of small sample variation, etc.

You are a despicable excuse for a human being. Someone who ignore what others write and/or twists it. Someone who despite no real understanding of immunology, microbiology, epidemiology, history of vaccine-preventable diseases, continues with his warped sick biased antivax position.

@ Igor Chudov

You write: “Re: miscarriages. The rates of miscarriage are tricky to calculate and by definition miscarriages occur only in the first 20 weeks. The risk of miscarriage drops quickly as pregnancy progresses. The 3 or 4% numbers in the CDC presentation are miscarriages for ALL pregnancies, even if women were vaxed in third trimester. It is a wrong denominator.”

As usual your dishonesty is incredible. As I wrote: “Since the majority of miscarriages occur within the first 12 weeks of gestation, the risk of pregnancy loss after 12 weeks drops dramatically, to between 3% and 4%.” And the slide presentation gives “Timing of first eligible COVID-19 vaccine as:

Peri-conceptional 10%, First trimester 28%, Second Trimeter 40%, Third Trimester 23%

And Pfizer and Moderna had the exact same number of stillbirths 0.2%.

So, risk of miscarriage after 12 weeks is between 3 and 4% and it is highly unlikely given the distribution of trimester subjects that only a very few were in the Third Trimester.

@Joel A. Harrison, PhD, MPH

There is no such thing as a “third trimester miscarriage” by definition

There is no such thing as a “third trimester miscarriage” by definition

Word games igor. Your comment is as stupid as someone saying “No, Fred didn’t die, he passed away.”

@Dangerous Bacon

So I “admittedly don’t care about “Died Suddenly”” because “I’m not really into vaccine related subjects lately”? Makes no sense, why twisting words?
Fyi I do care about what’s also going on here small scale: in my circle of acquaintances many more die than before, most of them at old age (and all vaxxed btw). Just coincidence? May be, may be not.

“Why do you want someone else to “whip up” data for you?” So why not? Since you must be a specialist on the topic, incessantly studying all vaccine related issues. Why don’t you simply help when asked?

“… stop being such a lazy antivax troll.” First, why don’t you quit this overly childish expression? Then tell me, would you change camps (pro- to antivaxx) if data revealed that this mortality has relatively been way higher in the vaccinated?
Well I would get vaxxed to infinity and beyond if data showed that excess mortality is in the unvaccinated. I’m not really antivaxx yet, just like you will not be provaxx as long as you don’t know what you’re really talking about. If you think you do, please be so kind to share the data I asked for – I need recent data.
Would you convert based on just lies or fear or shame for being labelled ‘antivaxxer’? So we need relevant data.

You call me a troll, but first think before you copy the word; ask yourself why would I want to be one? What’s there to gain?
And let’s get serious, aren’t you perhaps the troll? I mean, who wastes so much of his time and energy here if not for some dubious purpose that you don’t tell us? What’s in it for you and is that the reason why you’ve so aggressively been defending (equivalent of promoting) these vaccines from day 1?
I guess the reason – and this goes for your companion boys and girls at this forum too – has to be money related in some way, it always is. If so, it’s beyond me how one can be so amazingly foolish instead not to grab the millions that have been around since march 2020? Do ‘they’ pay you that much?

You call me a troll

You are lucas, since you toss out false concerns and fail to accept the explanations you’ve been offered.

Add to that your lack of knowledge of history (you did claim that the nazis were on the left of the political spectrum despite no evidence of that) and the clear conclusion is that you have no interest in facts, only your foolish assertions about the “undocumented dangers” and ‘coverups about those dangers’ of vaccines.

I guess the reason – and this goes for your companion boys and girls at this forum too – has to be money related in some way, it always is.

Or, you know, it’s that people here understand medicine, science, and statistics, and see through the lies you push. That, and your complete lack of integrity. Those are the actual reasons.

@ Lucas

You write: “What’s in it for you and is that the reason why you’ve so aggressively been defending (equivalent of promoting) these vaccines from day 1?”

Yep, we aggressively promote vaccines because we understand immunology, microbiology, etc, so we understand how our immune systems work and, thus, how vaccines work. And we know the history of vaccine-preventable diseases, which include protecting individuals as well as others. We also defend pasteurized milk, etc. Quite simply what you in your rigid biased ignorance call aggressive is simply anyone who relies on the science.

It is you who continue to post your idiotic dishonest position.

“I need recent data.”

Then look it up yourself, lazy troll.

“I mean, who wastes so much of his time and energy here if not for some dubious purpose that you don’t tell us?”

So why are you spending so much time JAQing off here? What’s your ulterior motive? Can Pharma be paying you that much to cast FUD on vaccines, so that they profit way more off the sick and terminally ill? Makes sense, since the average hospital charge for treating complex Covid-19 cases runs from about $240,000 to over $450,000, much of that spent on prescription drugs and other Pharma products.

http://beckershospitalreview.com/finance/average-charge-for-covid-19-hospitalization-by-state.html

Meantime, reimbursements to Covid-19 vaccine makers are only a tiny fraction of those amounts, and soon to go down much further (Moderna anticipates a $60 Medicare reimbursement for its shot in the near future).

Do the math. Big Pharma needs lots of vaccine-avoidant people who disproportionately get severely ill, boo$tiing Pharma profits. Is that why you’re on the payroll? 😉

@ Igor Chudovv

You write: “There is no such thing as a “third trimester miscarriage” by definition”

From one of several websites:

“Third Trimester Miscarriages
A miscarriage usually refers to the spontaneous loss of a baby developing within the mother’s wombm The main cause for a miscarriage is chromosomal defects in the developing baby, right from fertilizationo The working of the human body is astonishing as it has the ability to differentiate between normal babies and babies with deformities or abnormal growth patternsn Most babies with genetic disorders are expelled by the body itself, as early as the initial weeks of pregnancyc However, in a few cases, the pregnancy progresses and the body expels the baby at a much later gestational age, resulting in a miscarriage in the third trimester. Symptoms of Third Trimester Miscarriage
Third trimester miscarriages are usually referred to as stillbirths or preterm deliveries that result in the loss of the baby due to its inability to survive outside the mother’s body.”

[Pregnancy Baby Care. Symptoms, Causes, and Tips to Avoid Third Trimester Miscarriages]

So, while they may be called stillbirths or preterm deliveries, according to several websites they are also considered miscarriages. Notice the title of the article!

You just keep MAKING A FOOL OF YOURSELF, SOMETHING YOU ARE AN EXPERT AT! ! !

@ Igor Chudov

Definitions:

Miscarriage: “The spontaneous, premature expulsion of a nonviable embryo or fetus from the uterus’

Stillbirth: “The birth of a dead infant” “The birth of a lifeless thing; also, a still-born child”

So, while the majority of websites use stillbirth for third trimester, a few also use miscarriage and “nonviable” vs “lifeless” just slightly different. Good example of your mentality, rather than actually looking at issues, looking for minor details that don’t really play a role.

It is people like you who are partly responsible for our over one million deaths. Other nations who practiced masking, physical distancing, etc at onset of pandemic and then mass vaccinations experienced far fewer deaths. Had we done the same our deaths would have been probably less than 200,000 as opposed to over a million. While vaccines don’t confer complete protection if everyone is vaccinated then fewer virions will be transmitted and especially vaccinated seniors and/or those with comorbidities would be less at risk. Studies find that those vaccinated transmit fewer virions and also that some of the virions are either dead or damaged. Someday you may have to look in the mirror and wonder how many suffered and died who listened to the likes of you.

@ Joel A. Harrison, PhD, MPH

Thanks for your reply.

“As the rate of vaccination of senior citizens and/or those with comorbidities goes up then the number of vaccinated who die will also go up. Why? Because the vaccines don’t confer perfect protection and those who are at most risk, who probably would have died without the vaccine, some will die; but some who otherwise would have died will survive. It isn’t as simple as people think and antivaxxers can misuse any statistic.”

Agree on what you say about the misuse of statistics. When it is used to suggest something not true, it can be qualified as a lie. Even silence in the face of truth may be qualified as a lie.

Talking about lies, look at what your physicians made your president say:

“You’re not going to get COVID if you have these vaccinations.”
“This is a pandemic of the unvaccinated.”
“There’s no other way to beat the pandemic then to get the vast majority of Americans vaccinated.”
“Those who have been vaccinated cannot spread it to you.”

Today’s speech is tomorrow’s lie. In order to avoid being victim of such lies we need relevant reliable raw data.

Now that we know the above statements are mostly false, at least these vaccines a. should offer some protection against severe illness and death and b. do not and never will result in large scale severe side effects or death.
I don’t question a. here. Perhaps you can help me find the answer to b. It’s been a while now since the start of the pandemic, so there should be much more data available.

I need recent weekly or monthly numbers on overall mortality by vaccination status (no base rate bias, so f.e. mortality per 100.000 per age group).
The number of overall deaths per 100,000 vaccinated vs 100,000 unvaccinated for all age groups showing roughly the same results in the period from let’s say april this year up to now, is what I would expect if the vaccines hardly do any harm.
But don’t we have a problem if those numbers significantly deviate in the disadvantage of the vaccinated? What other possible reasons, other then that these vaccines sooner or later in one way or the other kill people and may be responsible for the present excess mortality, can we think of then? That question, I think, is relevant when looking into numbers.
Please give me your thoughts given such significant deviation.

“Perhaps you can help me find the answer to b. It’s been a while now since the start of the pandemic, so there should be much more data available.”

lucas, Since we don’t see severe side effects from the vaccine you already have your answer to ‘b’. It isn’t that you don’t have an answer, it’s that you don’t have the answer a liar like you wants.

This is again if it is not 100%,,it is 0%.Add “most” or similar word to the sentence

@Joel A. Harrison, PhD, MPH

“While vaccines don’t confer complete protection if everyone is vaccinated then fewer virions will be transmitted and especially vaccinated seniors and/or those with comorbidities would be less at risk.”

Just a sec. The vaccinated are supposed to become less ill from Covid. What do people do when they’re not feeling really sick, perhaps not even being aware that they have been infected?
They don’t stay in bed or even at home, something they would do if they did feel miserable and / or knew that they’re sick. Is it so true that in the end “seniors and/or those with comorbidities [are] less at risk”?

We all got Covid here five months ago. Always washed hands, wore medical face masks, kept distance, didn’t let anyone in except one triple vaxxed first degree relative. He infected all of us. When asked, he told us he had no idea he was ill.
I shouldn’t forget to mention that he had extensive direct contact with lots of other people too while infected, mostly old and indoors. I guess he must have infected quite a few of them as well. Only when we asked to test him, which turned out positive, he stayed at home.
I think he is no exception by any means, do you?

You forget that tramsmission probability is down, too. Vaccinated people are less proale to infect people.

@ Lucas

You write: “Talking about lies, look at what your physicians made your president say:

“You’re not going to get COVID if you have these vaccinations.” [Depends on what you mean by COVID. One can become infected by a microbe; but not sick or odds of severe, hospitalization or even death reduced significantly]
“This is a pandemic of the unvaccinated.” [unvaccinated transmit at much higher rates than vaccinated. In addition, viral mutations occur much more quickly or more varied in unvaccinated]
“There’s no other way to beat the pandemic than to get the vast majority of Americans vaccinated.” [Yep, other nations beat the pandemic prior to development of vaccines by lockdowns, masks, physical distancing, etc, especially lockdowns. Look at China today, mass demonstrations against lockdowns; but a low rate of covid cases]
“Those who have been vaccinated cannot spread it to you.” [vaccinated can spread; but lower amounts and if those around them also vaccinated then probability of getting sick very low]

It is you who are the liar. All of the above are true, though perhaps slightly exaggerated.

I should also mentioned that vaccinated transmit when they have been reinfected by someone else and usually their immune systems clear the virus from, for instance, nasopharyngeal, so they only transmit mainly for a short time

@ldw56old

“lucas, Since we don’t see severe side effects from the vaccine you already have your answer to ‘b’. It isn’t that you don’t have an answer, it’s that you don’t have the answer a liar like you wants.”

And you’re just as sure as your president was? Don’t talk bs, we do see severe side effects from the vaccine and no one except you denies it. Question is the scale; instead of empty words why don’t you show proof of your statement in the numbers I asked for. Statistics don’t lie.
I told you in the past I belong to a (international) group that has promoted these vaccines to its members out of concern; so I prefer to prove them right if possible. But the small-scale serious side effects people in my surrounding told me about as related to the vaccines, were not encouraging at all. You read my detailed description on that. Meanwhile we must have data that should be able to clear the picture.

Furthermore I don’t need your silly accusation. I have never lied here, not even once; basically I prefer not to lie. Like I told you then: no need to, have no specific ties to whatever has to do with vaccines – and don’t need money (have that already) or power (don’t want to); how about you? Why don’t you give us some transparency, what is behind your wall of coarseness; start with why you are at this forum literally always. I cannot imagine that a mathematician (or statistician what were you?) has nothing better to do, unless he has some serious mental problem; so what’s in it for you?

I suggest that you give a citation. I am afraid that you indee lie. Antivaxxer usually do.

@Ldw56old

“You are [a troll] lucas, since you toss out false concerns and fail to accept the explanations you’ve been offered”

Ld56old, you’ve never answered any of my questions asked. Still you claim a lot. Remarkable guy you are.
So If I have concerns – what’s it to you? And no, I still haven’t heard any explanation for the vaccine victims I heard about (second hand info) in my surrounding and the ones I experienced first hand (a couple of acquintances, a neighbour and a reasonably good friend). Not that I asked for an explanation – what’s there to explain?
In an early stage I just said that an extrapolation would mean lots of casualties around the globe.
And that apparently makes you mad and is reason enough to accuse me of having lied about them, which is clearly nonsense. But I gave the subject a rest.

Then there was the report of those statisticians and the research of this German professor that brought to light that after each round of vaccination you see a sharp rise in deaths during 14 days, with a peak after a week, in the corresponding unvaccinated group. No explanation as a statistician from you. Disturbing and an outright fraud if you ask me, but I gave that a rest too.

And now again no substantial input from you when I ask for recent weekly or monthly numbers on overall mortality by vaccination status (no base rate bias, so f.e. mortality per 100.000 per age group). What’s your problem? Is there something to hide here? Is there?

“Add to that your lack of knowledge of history (you did claim that the nazis were on the left of the political spectrum despite no evidence of that)”
Oh yes, I did motivate. Shall I post it again for you?
Don’t fool around with history if you don’t want to pay a high price a next time. In my opinion your generation is brain washed by leftists that took over the education system. True or not, fact is you have no damn clue what the war was really about, nor what were its real roots.

“and the clear conclusion is that you have no interest in facts, only your foolish assertions about the “undocumented dangers” and ‘coverups about those dangers’ of vaccines.”
Bla-bla-bla. Show me statistics instead of empty words.

, I still haven’t heard any explanation for the vaccine victims…

Beause, lucas, there is no evidence
a) they existed (giving your history it’s 50/50 that those people exist and yo made them up)
b) if they exist any issues were caused by the vaccines.

Re your lies about nazis:

Shall I post it again for you?

no — they were lies the first time you posted them, they’d still be lies today. The fact that you have no grasp of history is just another of your deficiencies.

This

and the clear conclusion is that you have no interest in facts, only your foolish assertions about the “undocumented dangers” and ‘coverups about those dangers’ of vaccines

Still stands. You are manufacturing issues and distorting observations to make a claim that isn’t supported: why it isn’t supported has been explained to you numerous times and you repeatedly ignore it. Dont pretend you’re asking honest questions when it’s clear you are not.

Why is this troubling? It’s bothersome that you make no effort to hide your essential dishonesty, but it’s more concerning that you are saying things that, if people “on the fence” were to take as valid points and follow your aversion to vaccines, would put them at increased health risk.

So no, you’re not a good person looking for answers, you’re simply another troll, dishonest to the core, with no clue about a variety of things from history to science and statistics, too lazy to put any work in to learning, but who wants to seem important.

In my opinion your generation is brain washed by leftists that took over the education system.

lucas, your opinion on education (at which you’ve clearly completely failed) is not worth any more than your thoughts on vaccines and those aren’t worth a dried cow pile

@ Lucas

You claim you were infected by relative. Well, how did you know you were infected? How sick did you get???

I guess you are too stupid to realize that at all times we are inundated with microbes. On our skin, in our nasal cavities, in our throats, in our foods, in our eyes, etc. and some are potentially pathogenic; yet, for the most part we don’t even know it or suffer minor discomforts.

Given you have been responded to; yet keep making claims, you are obviously a sick TROLL

@Joel A. Harrison, PhD, MPHsays:

“You’re not going to get COVID if you have these vaccinations.” [Depends on what you mean by COVID. One can become infected by a microbe; but not sick or odds of severe, hospitalization or even death reduced significantly”
Yeah well, in my country quite a bunch of the vaccinated got moderately to seriously ill when infected, some even died of covid. The latter ss an exception, but still. Whatever, let’s give it a rest.

“This is a pandemic of the unvaccinated.” [unvaccinated transmit at much higher rates than vaccinated. In addition, viral mutations occur much more quickly or more varied in unvaccinated]”
So fact is that both transmit and as such the phrase ‘a pandemic of the unvaccinated’ is what it is: mood-making and a factual lie. And like I explained in another post to you is that perhaps the vaccinated are the real superspreaders because they don’t even know they are infected or simply don’t care and thus get in contact with others instead of staying home (since they don’t feel so sick). I don’t know how strong of an effect this is related to the somewhat ‘higher rates’ you mention, I guess most of the unvaxxed stay home when infected because they do feel sick. Whatever, let’s give it a rest too; not relevant.

“There’s no other way to beat the pandemic than to get the vast majority of Americans vaccinated.” [Yep, other nations beat the pandemic prior to development of vaccines by lockdowns, masks, physical distancing, etc, especially lockdowns. Look at China today, mass demonstrations against lockdowns; but a low rate of covid cases]”
China shows nothing more then that you cannot beat a pandemic just by these measurements. They keep on beating there obviously. And ofcourse people are getting tired of those measurements. Not that I’m against them an sich, but you had better keep in mind that the economical and thus social damage of those lockdowns will result in much higher casualties in the end compared to without them; lockdowns twill turn out to be a wrong decision, I’m afraid. Perhaps you had to be an economist to foresee this but certainly a fool to deny this meanwhile. Again: whatever. Not the point.

“Those who have been vaccinated cannot spread it to you.” [vaccinated can spread; but lower amounts and if those around them also vaccinated then probability of getting sick very low]”
So it was a lie.

“It is you who are the liar. All of the above are true, though perhaps slightly exaggerated. I should also mentioned that vaccinated transmit when they have been reinfected by someone else and usually their immune systems clear the virus from, for instance, nasopharyngeal, so they only transmit mainly for a short time”

If that is what makes you feel good, call me the liar here. Nothing to gain or lose.
I believe you when you say that a reinfected vaccinated only transmit for a short while. But I guess it’s not the whole story; here in my country the vaccinated seem to transmit for many days when (re)infected and got moderately to badly ill. God knows why it’s different where you live. Again: whatever; that was not my point!

As I wrote to you I have this request. I need recent weekly or monthly numbers on overall mortality by vaccination status (no base rate bias, so f.e. mortality per 100.000 per age group). Have you looked into these numbers?
The other questions were:
“…But don’t we have a problem if those numbers significantly deviate in the disadvantage of the vaccinated?
What other possible reasons, other then that these vaccines sooner or later in one way or the other kill people and may be responsible for the present excess mortality, can we think of then?” I can think of only one reason and that is that the ones that took the vaccine were already in a worse physical shape compared to the ones that didn’t.

Please give me your thoughts, I’m not your enemy (that is as long as you are sincere).

I need recent weekly or monthly numbers on overall mortality by vaccination status (no base rate bias, so f.e. mortality per 100.000 per age group). Have you looked into these numbers?

Why are you too lazy to find them yourself?

@ Lucas

You are a dishonest liar. Your country? So what is your country and give websites that give the stats you claim

YOU ARE FULL OF SHIT

I did give you a link you wanted,check it. And give a citaio if you clam something. Antivaxxers do indeed lie.

Actually … No.

The “typical” post-mortem “chicken fat” clots don’t look anything like the amyloid fibrin clots that are being removed by embalmers. Can’t you see that? They are not yellow-tinged & puffy; they are white & elastic appearing.

Amyloid fibrin clots form when prolonged exposure to the sars-cov2 spike protein causes structural changes to β and γ fibrinogen, complement 3 and prothrombin. They are “misfolded” clots & don’t respond to anticoagulants. This finding wasn’t published until 9 months after the vaccine rollout had begun. The vaccines should have been pulled immediately.

Spike proteins from the mRNA vaccines remain in the body for up to 8 weeks, versus spike proteins from infections that clear the body within days.

There’s no two ways to look at this.The entire spike protein genome is in the vaccines.

@ coschristi

You write: “Spike proteins from the mRNA vaccines remain in the body for up to 8 weeks, versus spike proteins from infections that clear the body within days. There’s no two ways to look at this.The entire spike protein genome is in the vaccines.”

Are you totally delusional. Explain the difference in time in body between vaccine spike protein and that from natural infection. Give a reference and/or URL to article. You don’t understand that mRNA also creates the virus with the Spike protein. And the vaccine spike protein is modified so it can’t actually both attach to receptor and change conformation to enable a hole for viral entry into a cell.

So nice to have you back, one more nutcase for amusement.

You talking about this? ->
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8380922/

We’ve known about this since well before this paper and anticoagulated most patients admitted with covid. Guess what? It worked. Like all things in physiology, you can usually overcome an imbalance by adding more to the other side of the equation.

That 8 week number seems to be something you pulled out of your ass. It’s completely made up.

The “typical” post-mortem “chicken fat” clots don’t look anything like the amyloid fibrin clots that are being removed by embalmers.

Who, exactly, has determined that the embalmers are removing “amyloid fibrin clots?” The paper from which you directly quote, notably failing to note that you are so doing, is talking about microclots, not macro globby goop that some embalmer would notice.

“The “typical” post-mortem “chicken fat” clots don’t look anything like the amyloid fibrin clots that are being removed by embalmers.”

And how would you (or they) know that they’re “amyloid fibrin clots”?

Missing from “Died Suddenly” is any indication that microscopic examination with amyloid staining was performed. You can’t look at something with the naked eye and say “Aha, amyloid.”

Amyloid tends to have a suggestive microscopic appearance with routine H&E stains, but the existence of amyloid needs to be confirmed with special staining and sometimes with fluorescence microscopy, tools these embalmers don’t have.

Many pathologists have initially been led to wrong conclusions at autopsy when examining blood clots, but realized they were dealing with postmortem clots upon microscopic examination. A few embalmers who are pumping god knows what into dead bodies and concluding that what they find in blood vessels is pathological, are not equipped with the technology to realize their errors. Those predisposed to find something they can blame on vaccines are even more unreliable.

@ cochristi

You write: “Amyloid fibrin clots form when prolonged exposure to the sars-cov2 spike protein causes structural changes to β and γ fibrinogen, complement 3 and prothrombin. They are “misfolded” clots & don’t respond to anticoagulants. This finding wasn’t published until 9 months after the vaccine rollout had begun. The vaccines should have been pulled immediately. Spike proteins from the mRNA vaccines remain in the body for up to 8 weeks, versus spike proteins from infections that clear the body within days. There’s no two ways to look at this.The entire spike protein genome is in the vaccines.”

I did a web search and found the amyloid fibrin clots from the natural covid infection. Give a reference to the publication you found. And even if it is “true” it would be more than likely like myocarditis, a few rare cases from the vaccine vs exponentially more from the actual virus.

As for the vaccine spike protein remaining up to 8 weeks vs natural clearing within days. Wow! The same antibodies recognize both, so why would it take them so much longer to clear the vaccine spike protein? In addition, the “entire spike protein genome” is actually not in the vaccines. It is a modified spike protein, that is, the real spike protein has two parts, one that attaches and one that then changes comformation to enable a “hole” to allow the actual virus enter a cell. However, the vaccine spike protein has been modified so the second part doesn’t work. In addition, the mRNA from the vaccine only lasts a few days, so it only creates a limited number of spike proteins whereas as long as the virus keeps invading cells they in turn produce millions of viruses including their spike protein.

And you ignore that the spike protein doesn’t enter cells, so at best antibodies clear it; but certainly can’t do anything close to the harm that an entire virus does when it enters a cell and hijacks it machinery to churn out millions of virions.

So nice to have you back, one more mentally disturbed antivaxxer making absurd claims, sometimes with some minute trace of truth in them but grossly exaggerated or more often than not, totally wrong.

@ Joel,

I’m glad you’re happy to see me.

Re: “Give a reference to the publication you found.”

I have several. Here’s one: https://portlandpress.com/bioscirep/article/41/8/BSR20210611/229418/SARS-CoV-2-spike-protein-S1-induces-fibrin-ogen

Re: “The same antibodies recognize both, so why would it take them so much longer to clear the vaccine spike protein?”

The mRNA degrades after a few days. The spike proteins they generate can last up to 8 weeks. This is covered in a paper titled “Immune imprinting, breadth of variant recognition, and germinal center response in human SARS-CoV-2 infection and vaccination.” Published:January 24, 2022

But almost every source available will say “a few weeks”.

Re: “In addition, the “entire spike protein genome” is actually not in the vaccines”

Yes it is. Orac even said that earlier this year in a reply to a comment on his article about DNA Damage Repair inhibition, also caused by the spike protein.

Were you to actually read and comprehend the paper “Immune impirinting …” you would note that the spike found at 8 weeks was in germinal centres. If you knew what germinal centres are all about you would know this is expected.

Germinal centres are where the process of affinity maturation of antibodies, produced by B cells, occurs. They are where DNA actually does get changed through the process of somatic hypermutation. Affinity maturation takes a good deal of time (which is why a second dose of vaccine should come a few months, not 3 or 4 weeks after the first dose, for optimal results) and GCs are known to retain “samples” of antigen, which can be intact protein but mostly peptides (*), during affinity maturation. Just how long these samples are retained has apparently not been comprehensively studied. It is known that they are retained for at least a few weeks but there is suspicion that they may be retained for many months. It is no surprise whatever that they would be found 8 weeks after vaccination. RETAINED. Not floating around in circulation.

Exactly the same thing will happen with proteins and peptides that are part of the actual virus. However, it is known that severe COVID-19 can result in destruction of germinal centres.

learn about proteasomes, peptides, MHC, antigen presenting cells

@ Doug,

So what is your understanding of how long the spike protein stays in the body after vaccination?

I have seen various sources state anything from “several weeks” to 90 days.

I don’t think it matters if it is “retained” vs “circulating”. If it’s in contact with your cells; it’s dangerous.

You of course can post a link. Your previous attempt was not very good. Spike protein in lymph nodes is not circulating in the body. Actually lymph nodes will remove foreign antigenes from circulation. An RN does not know that ?

@ Joel,

I just replied but I included a link & now it’s not showing up. I’ll rewrite it if I don’t see it soon.

@ Cochristi

You write: First quoting me: “In addition, the “entire spike protein genome” is actually not in the vaccines”, then your response: “Yes it is. Orac even said that earlier this year in a reply to a comment on his article about DNA Damage Repair inhibition, also caused by the spike protein.”

First, give the title of Orac’s article. I’m not going to go through everyone of his articles this year.

However, as I wrote, the entire spike protein is NOT in the vaccines!

“there is ‘one key difference,’ in that the spikes encoded by the
vaccines “contain 2 amino acid changes that help stabilize the spike in its initial conformation and help prevent the spike from undergoing a conformational change that is required to facilitate membrane fusion.” (Jaramillo, 2021)

Jaramillo (2021 Jul 1). COVID-19 Vaccine-Generated Spike Protein is Safe, Contrary to Viral Claims. FactCheck.org

“Both constructs include the two stabilizing mutations in S2 (K986P and V987P) that were shown to prevent the conformational change of the pre-fusion into the post-fusion structure of S” (Heinz, 2021)

Heinz FX, Stiasny K (2021 Aug 16). Distinguishing features of current COVID-19 vaccines: knowns and unknowns of antigen presentation and modes of action. http://www.nature.com/npjvaccines

You write: First, quoting me: “The same antibodies recognize both, so why would it take them so much longer to clear the vaccine spike protein?” Then your response“ The mRNA degrades after a few days. The spike proteins they generate can last up to 8 weeks”

First, you missed a major point, that is, antibodies recognize both natural s-spike protein and vaccine created in same amount of time, so no difference in dealing with s-spike protein by our immune systems.

“Spike protein was detected in the plasma of 96% of the vaccinees at days 1–2 (median spike concentration of 47 pg/mL) and in 63% at day 7 (median spike concentration of 1.7 pg/mL)”

Röntgen K et al (2022 Mar 17). Immune imprinting, breadth of variant recognition, and germinal center response in human SARS-CoV-2 infection and vaccination. Cell; Vol 185, Issue 6: 1025-1040.

So, notice the difference between 47 pg/mL and 1.7 pg/mL. I hope you understand how infinitely small a picogram is? So, yep, some remain after 7 days; but the article you refer to doesn’t say the spike protein lasts up to 8 weeks; but “spike antigen up to 8 weeks postvaccination in some cases.” Antigen refers to smaller recognizable segments of something, not the entire thing. In other words, the “whole” s-spike protein had already been broken up.

Collins F (2021 May 18). Human Antibodies Target Many Parts of Coronavirus Spike Protein. NIH Director’s Blog.

Jagtap S (2021 Oct). Evaluation of spike protein antigens for SARS-CoV-2 serology. Journal of virological methods; 296:114222.

One other by Orac should be of interest:

Gorski D (2021 May 24). The “deadly” coronavirus spike protein (according to antivaxxers). Science-Based Medicine.

I have other things to do, so I may get to the Grobelaar article later today?

And nope, when I wrote “So nice to have you back, one more nutcase for amusement.” I was being facetious.

Also, read what Doug wrote above about being in germinal centers, not in blood! ! ! Germinal centers are where antigens are brought to stimulate immune cells.
THANKS DOUG. I MISSED THAT ONE. GUESS AT 76 I’M GETTING OLD???

So Cochristi, you didn’t get anything right. Typical of you

@Joel
I was kind of prepared for the geminal centre thing and Christine actually did me a favor by citing a paper that confirmed what I’d suspected.
In the past couple of months I saw a few comments on COVID articles on the CBC website talking (the comments, that is) about the spike protein being found long after what had previously been claimed – coupled with the claim that the US CDC had removed some line from its site about spike being gone in a short time. I speculated in replies that it was quite conceivable that minute amounts of protein or peptides thereof could be found in germinal centres. Of course none of the people making the claims could cite a credible supporting source and I doubt if a single one had the slightest clue what a germinal centre is. (In unrelated comments one person pointed out that bits of this horrible toxic protein were found in “limp nodes.” In spite of the real harm these antivaxxers do, they are amusing at times.)

Gentlemen: ( Joel PhD, MPH, Dr Yeti, doug, Idw56old, Aarno)

You do an excellent job debunking misinformation with data and your experience as usual but I ‘d like to address the motivated reasoning spectacularly demonstrated here that provoked your responses. Why do people venture into areas outside their knowledge base contradicting actual experts and scientific consensus especially when better educated commenters- and Orac himself- are around?

I follow alt med and anti-vax as well as hi/aids denialism ** and it amazes me how blatantly alties lie and mispresent simple facts and established research- even about life threatening conditions like these. I see similar contortions concerning Covid and treatments, So, I’ve come to divide denialists into three non-exclusive groups based upon their ultimate motivation-
— to deny the SB aetiology of a stigmatised condition in order to save face
— to deny the value of SBM/ PH treatments presenting alternatives in order to earn money
— to deny the expertise of SBM/ PH advocates and to gain attention or fame
Examples might be ( respectively) an anti-vax mother who believes vaccines caused her child’s autism, an alt med provider who sells “informational” products, foods, supplements as substitutes for SBM and a contrarian “who knows it all” writing on Substack.

As Covid persists, all three groups find research or news that they can twist to suit their needs and advance their causes. Some of those I survey fill more than one category. Unfortunately, the general public are not as astute as Orac’s commenters and fall prey to these manipulations of reality. Covid is especially a target because the science is very complex and very new.

** probably because I worked with hiv+ clients and had to study hiv/ aids in detail

This is a bit tangential to your point, but I would like to expressly thank these people for explaining the issues with the clots claim and the spike protein, since that’s a highly specialized area where the lay debunkers among us especially benefit from that.

I also really liked your three-category framework.

@ Dorit:

Thanks.
One thing I’ve noticed in the past two years is that alties/ anti-vaxxers, in their attempts to scare potential followers, is to make Covid vaccines sound as though they were retroviruses – able to integrate into and change the host cell DNA .
Covid viruses and vaccines incorporating spike proteins are not retroviruses.
But what real retroviruses actually do is extremely frightening.

@Joel A. Harrison, PhD, MPH

“You claim you were infected by [a] relative. Well, how did you know you were infected? How sick did you get???”

Such rash and irrelevant questions. And however none of your business how sick I got: light to moderately, enough to go and test.
And that’s the problem with the vaccinated, apparently often not even knowing – or simply don’t care – they are spreaders. It is not so black and white as you said.

“I guess you are too stupid to realize that at all times we are inundated with microbes.”

Why do you denigrate? What is the relevance whether or not I’m “too stupid”?
Listen Joel, you have to live out your life at some hospital. I cash the money you lose by inflation, perhaps even by your financial transactions. You earn a regular income, I’ve made your annual income in a couple of hours over the last two years. Who is too stupid, Joel?
Why do you and your companions here start to denigrate and curse when you don’t feel like giving an answer, not even to some simple questions?
No need to teach me on microbes, what’s your point?

On our skin, in our nasal cavities, in our throats, in our foods, in our eyes, etc. and some are potentially pathogenic; yet, for the most part we don’t even know it or suffer minor discomforts.

Thanks for the lesson, so what? That triple vaccinated relative was infected, he infected us. No doubt about that.

“Given you have been responded to; yet keep making claims, you are obviously a sick TROLL”

The same sick trick as your companions use when refuse to answer.
The only claim I made was no more then a sidenote; in order to avoid more lies, I reminded you of the bs already told by your authorities. You might consider taking class on how to distinguish head from side issues, Joel.
My question was about the link for recent data. No answer from you.
The other two questions: no answers.

Why do you behave like an empty bag? Iow: what makes you so scared to answer?
This “sick TROLL” is looking for answers on excess mortality. Only cowards that hide something are dancing around like you do. For what reason? To keep your job?
Worst case for you: overall mortality in the vaccinated is way higher than in the unvaccinated and we find that the vaccines do kill, what’s it to you? Lots of you doctors make mistakes by the dozens anyway; only a minority is good at what they do, no matter in the medical field or elsewhere. This explains why most of you are better lawyers then doctors. I know your kind.
But better half turned then completely lost.

“Why do you and your companions here start to denigrate and curse when you don’t feel like giving an answer, not even to some simple questions?”

You’ve been given plenty of answers. The fact that they aren’t what you want them to be (they don’t support your lies) is the issue you have.

Your claimed income gains (which, given your history of failing to tell the truth about every other topic you preach about) are, even on the microscopic chance that they are true, are of no relevance here [they would simply indicate you’re able to con suckers out of money]. Your repeated lies and false assertions are the issue, as they’ve always been.

Listen Joel, you have to live out your life at some hospital. . . . Who is too stupid, Joel?

That’s a keeper.

@ldw56old

“I need recent weekly or monthly numbers on overall mortality by vaccination status (no base rate bias, so f.e. mortality per 100.000 per age group). Have you looked into these numbers?
Why are you too lazy to find them yourself?”

‘Why are you too lazy’ is a conclusion. Why do you draw premature conclusions?
“To answer before listening – that is folly and shame.”

“Why are you [lucas] too lazy to do it?”

Have you done it? If so, present results and your take. If you haven’t — you’ve had plenty of time to post other lines of lies, you should have had time to do your own search.

I will modify it: Are you too lazy or not really interested?

@ Joel A. Harrison, PhD, MPH

“You are a dishonest liar. Your country? So what is your country and give websites that give the stats you claim YOU ARE FULL OF SHIT”

Dear Joel, can you stop using pleonasms?

Any country with excess mortality will do, be it your country, the UK, Germany. The cause of excess mortality might well be the same wherever this disturbing phenomenon shows up. I found data, however not that recent.

Next I asked you 2 additional questions that need to be answered in order to avoid hasty conclusions. Too much work apparently.

What are you talking about with “the stats I claim”? What stats, where? Or do you mean the stats I mentioned in my post to ldw56old? If so, I posted the links to these stats several times in the past, but that’s a different subject. Fyi: fraud to cover up deaths of the vaccines is what these stats show. Why else would you count deaths whithin 2 weeks after vaccination in the unvaccinated? Cheaters.

Perhaps hard for you to grasp, I much like to see these vaccines to be safe. Unfortunately they’re not as much as claimed. To what extent is statistics, not the words of some stroman.
Like I said I want to know what is going on. What may be the (most likely) cause of this excess mortality. Why do you have a problem with that?

Fyi: fraud to cover up deaths of the vaccines is what these stats show

Amazing: one sentence to show all of
– your lack of understanding of statistics
– your lack of understanding of vaccines
– your willingness to lie

Brilliant, in a traditional troll lying way.

If you do not post a link,it is a claim. I is too difficult to cut and pase a link ?

The idea of tainted blood through Covid vaccination seems to have reached New Zealand. Sadly, this time it’s not the actual patient who is refusing the blood.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/nov/30/new-zealand-parents-refuse-use-of-vaccinated-blood-in-life-saving-surgery-on-baby

“In the interview the parents say their baby has severe pulmonary valve stenonis, and that he needs surgery “almost immediately”, but that they are “extremely concerned with the blood [the doctors] are going to use”.

“We don’t want blood that is tainted by vaccination,” the father said. “That’s the end of the deal – we are fine with anything else these doctors want to do.””

I too, am acutely aware about anti vaxxers propensity to lie, perhaps I should have kept quiet in a face to face discussion recently. Nevertheless whilst partaking in a nice latte on a recent Christmas shopping trip, another customer joined me outside. At first conversation was sparse and polite. Then they started talking about the vax. Short story, he claimed vax kills, I claimed no evidence, he claimed 13 fit and healthy family and friends died shortly after vax, I said don’t believe you, he punched me, latte got spilt, police were called, he got arrested.

Sorry to hear that. Makes you wonder about the cause of death of those vaccinated family members. Perhaps it was trauma delivered from the hands of their violent relative.

At my most recent vaccination there were placard carrying protesters across the street from the clinic. I was tempted to go over to learn more, since I’m curious sort of short alphabetic sequence. But you just never know who you’re dealing with.

I hope you’re OK Vicintheshed. You have one more unfortunate data point pointing to how high tensions are.

he claimed 13 fit and healthy family and friends died shortly after vax, I said I don’t believe you

Nope, unless he had an immediate family in the hundreds (perhaps thousands) there’s no more reason to believe that than there is to believe the tales of woe told by lucas and the other clowns who post here.

Actually, it’s well known that being a relative or friend of an antivaccine activist or people antivaccine activists meet is very dangerous to your health.

It’s amazing how many unlikely tragedies happen to people in that situation.

Actually it was quite profitable, he missed his aim, knocking the1/8 th of left latte, cafe gave me a FULL large latte free of charge.

Another link for you:

https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/country-singer-jake-flint-dead-wedding-day-211600864.html

Surely the only reason a man in his late thirties might die on his wedding night is prior Covid-19 vaccination.

/sarcasm

*I remember an autopsy case I had involving a man in his thirties with no significant medical history, who was found dead in his bed. I felt it should have been a medical examiner’s case but they pawned it off on us. The cause of death turned out to be a straightforward M.I. in the setting of severe coronary artery disease.

It happens.

http://sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0002914921001570

Perhaps his dead is related to his marrying? Dieing a few hours after being married. If that is no tell-tale sign that marrying is bad for your health and can kill you, I don’t know what is.
Why should it be the vaccine?

@ldw56old

“Fyi: fraud to cover up deaths of the vaccines is what these stats show
Amazing: one sentence to show all of
[a.] – your lack of understanding of statistics
[b.] – your lack of understanding of vaccines
[c.] – your willingness to lie
Brilliant, in a traditional troll lying way.”

Let me help you.

[c.] Willingness to lie – a lie: to make an untrue statement with intent to deceive (Websters)
Seen your presumption of my lack of understanding [a.] statistics and [b.] vaccines, your statement [c.] makes no sense. Due to the lack, the intent isn’t there and thus it’s no lie.

Perhaps it’s you that has a similar understanding of statistics as you do of language. How did you get your supposed degree anyway? If so, your ability to analyse seems to have left you, ldw56; I noticed this more often, seriously.

Think about your phrase “understanding vaccines”. It is so vague that it just makes no sense.
Let me ask you something similar. Do you understand hammers?
A hammer can be understood as a tool to get a nail in a piece of wood. But just as well as a piece of wood and steel connected together.
Now, before you start yelling that you understand hammers, how about your knowledge of the iron atoms or wood molecules of a hammer?
Perhaps you’re still yelling, good for you. Then tell me what’s the smallest particle of an iron atom. Now if you’re smart you’re silent. This silence suggests that you do not understand hammers.

How about you, ldw56? Do you understand vaccines as well as you do hammers?
With your illogical accusations, who is the troll here?

I wonder who does understand ‘vaccines’ anyway.

Sorry lucas, your wordplay doesn’t erase the fact that

you’ve repeatedly lied about the dangers of vaccines
you’ve repeatedly lied about the lack of effectiveness of vaccines
you’ve repeatedly ignored the explanations people have given you about why what you say is pure bullshit
you’re intentionally misrepresenting the message, which is that you have no idea what you’re talking about when you run on with your stories about the problems with vaccines and the health problems they pose

You’ve demonstrated preference for falsehoods concerning vaccines because — i don’t know, you want to seem to be important and worried about people, bucking against some mythical world-wide conspiracy of companies, scientists, statisticians — you prefer to spread bullshit rather than try to learn anything.

Based on your history of spewing your lies about covid, covid vaccines, and other vaccines [as well as your absolutely massive lack of knowledge of history] it’s safer to assume your personal stories are just as much bullshit: it’s probably 99%/1% possibility of more bullshit to fact

@ Lucas

So, the lying troll is back again. You said your country had a high number of serious adverse events to the vaccine, so I simply requested you name your country and give a credible link to the stats, which you refused.

As for who understands vaccines, well, I do and so do many others. To understand vaccines one must understand basic immunology, innate and adaptive immune system, microbiology, epidemiology, and the history of vaccine-preventable diseases, all of which I have devoted more than 40 years to and still keep up with the latest, which includes numerous studies of the current mRNA covid vaccines, including both US and International Data from numerous nations that have done their own studies and have their own adverse events reporting systems; but, according to you, any and all who report positive stats on the current vaccine are liars; but you, in your infinite ignorance and dishonesty know better

Once again, GO TO HELL YOU DESPICABLE TROLL

@Joel A. Harrison

“Go to HELL you friggin troll! ! !”

“dishonest liar, sick troll, too stupid to realize, full of shit, go to hell, friggin troll” – Joel, who the hell do you think you are? How dare you talk to me like that, or anyone else for that matter?
Has someone ever told you you’re a shameless, arrogant asshole? Ask them.

@ Lucas

For someone who can’t even after claiming his country has a high number of adverse reactions to mRNA vaccine then refusing to name his country and a link to the stats, you are both hilarious and stupid.

You write: “Joel, who the hell do you think you are? How dare you talk to me like that, or anyone else for that matter?
Has someone ever told you you’re a shameless, arrogant asshole? ”

Who do I think I am? Someone who has devoted his life to trying to help others, including a regular blood donor, and who basis his help on thorough understanding of vaccines. People like you contribute to antivaccinationist and, thus, to unnecessary suffering, hospitalizations, and death. So, there is a classic defense mechanism in psychology called projection, that is projecting ones own faults onto others, so it is you who is “a shameless, arrogant asshole”; A FULL OF SHIT TROLL.

Lucas, I feel for you.

You should have run when the very first capital letter appeared…………..it only goes seriously downhill from there!

I’ve had it all said of me …and worse!

The irony is, neither side in the pro vax/ anti vax debate are 100% correct in any of their arguments or their science. Vaccines have undoubtedly saved lives and contributed in a positive way to the fight against disease but they are not infallible, they are not 100% safe, and in some cases they have caused serious adverse events in a small number of recipients. Vaccine manufacturers, UNICEF/the WHO, all of whom are the most ardent supporters of vaccination concede that they are not safe for all of the people, all of the time, so why do some posters on here argue otherwise and deny the existence of the vaccine injured? Millions have benefited, but some have not and I cannot understand why it is so abhorrent to some of the posters on here to acknowledge the vaccine injured.

Much has been said re ‘clots’ and wherever the rights and wrongs lie in that particular debate, the UK VDPS is now providing awards to claimants for that ADR following a Covid 19 vaccine. In addition Coroners have issued a number of “Regulation 28 : Report to Prevent Future Deaths” notifications where they have determined that the individual has died of a rare complication associated with Covid 19 vaccine.

Evidence for the fact that vaccines cause injuries on rare occasions in a small number of people exists in just the same way as the science in support of vaccination ( heavily relied on by some posters) does.

Sadly vaccine induced injury exists and not just in the mind of anti vaxxers, unless of course, you consider the legal, medical/scientific experts and Coroners in the UK to be anti vax also.

At the end of the day it should be possible to debate vaccination without it descending into a foul rant.

And once again, Wendy jumps into the fray to stand up for the oppressed. First it was Igor Chudov, now Lucas, who’s an obvious troll to boot.

As noted before, identifying with and defending blatant antivaxers is a bad look for someone who pretends to be a reasonable middle-ground sort of person.

“(vaccines) are not safe for all of the people, all of the time, so why do some posters on here argue otherwise and deny the existence of the vaccine injured?”

Since no posters here make such arguments, this statement is a ludicrous strawman.

Maybe if these extremely rare occurrences weren’t trumpeted as a reason to stop all vaccination…..

Maybe if anti-vaxxers didn’t inflate these rare occurrences to the level of depopulation…..

Maybe if anti-vaxxers stopped lying about scientists saying that vaccines have no side effects….

@Aarno Syvänen

“As I said before, I give your thelink. Check it,”

Aarno, it is convenient to mention for whom your post is ment.

@Aarno Syvänensays:

“Antivaxxers do indeed lie.”

Aarno could you briefly describe what in your opinion is an ‘antivaxxer’ and how to recognize one.
Perhaps also why an ‘antivaxxer’ would want to lie. I usually think in terms of financial benefit; in what way does the usual ‘antivaxxer’ benefit, unlike some ‘provaxxers’?

For what it’s worth and overdrawing it a bit, but the typical ‘provaxxers’ (pro mRNA jab) without financial benefit that I know of, you could even inject petrol – don’t ask, don’t tell.

“could you briefly describe what in your opinion is an ‘antivaxxer’”

I keep my respirator on. Checkout guy I’ve seen for years was hawking his left lung out. I was not skeerd but did feel bad for him.

I like the Tal;king Headads because I’ve got autism. You should to.

For what it’s worth and overdrawing it a bit, but the typical ‘provaxxers’ (pro mRNA jab) without financial benefit that I know of, you could even inject petrol – don’t ask, don’t tell.

Wow, you’re growing in size as an asshole by the minute.

“Perhaps also why an ‘antivaxxer’ would want to lie”

That’s quite easy. To be an anti-vaxxer you have to inhabit a world where all the people who advocate vaccines are stupid or evil. You have to be rock solid in your conviction of your own intelligence over that of everyone you talk to. You have to believe in anecdote and superficial correlation over any official data.

That lack of scientific integrity means that they’ll tweak the truth of anything if it makes it fit their narrative. After all, it’s not really lying if you pick the data that show what you already know to be true. It’s not really lying if you tell everyone about all the vaccine injured children that you know personally, because your sure that they actually do exist, somewhere. If you’re really fanatical, you’re not really lying because anything you say is for the good of the sheep that you are talking to.

And, when you get to the top of the tree. Money. Lots of it.

Perhaps also why an ‘antivaxxer’ would want to lie.

To be an anti-vaxxer, you have to lie about vaccines. The answer you are after defines itself.

Antivaxxr is like a stalinist,no fact can change his opinion. Everyone that disagrees are part of conspiracy (including blog commenters!)
If antivaxxer actually post a link (you never did) it is easy to see that link does not support his claim at all. Because he shoul know the content, this would be a lie.
“Pro vaxxers” actually post data,have younot noticed that ?

@ Lucas

You write: “why an ‘antivaxxer’ would want to lie. I usually think in terms of financial benefit;”

Start with Joseph Mercola who sells alternative medicine and is estimated to be worth $100 million dollars, even donated $1 million dollars to antivax National Vaccine Information Center. Others with good incomes selling alternative medicines and books include Neil Z Miller and Mike Adams. And Robert F. Kennedy Jr, though he inherited a fortune, has a salary more than $400,000 per year for running Children’s Defense Fund. And Andrew Wakefield who lost his medical license lives quite well because he gets large fees to attend antivax meetings, etc.

And others are antivaxxers for a number of reasons, including not understanding infectious disease and how vaccines work, thus victims of antivax website lies, many subscribe to paranoid conspiracy theories and/or simply anti-government, thus, can’t discriminate between positive things governments do, etc. People who focus on their individual rights, ignoring that rights only exist in communities and, thus, one has to balance individual rights with responsibility to community. I doubt you understand that or, more likely, you could care less.

But I realize you aren’t really wanting answers to your questions as you just post comments to annoy, irritate people because you are a DESPICABLE EXCUSE FOR A HUMAN BEING, A TROLL.

@ Wendy Stephen

Every credible website I have visited, government, non-profits, include the rare risks from vaccines. As an extreme example, smallpox killed 25% or more of a population, leaving the rest almost all suffering more than a week of hell on earth, burning inside, mucus membranes, and outside skin, some ending blind or deaf. The vaccine caused 1 to 2 deaths per million doses, so 250,000 deaths vs 1 or 2 per million, plus a dozen or so who suffered progressive or generalized vaccinia, basically suffering same way as those who survived natural infection. However, it is possible that those who died and/or suffered from the vaccine had some genetic predisposition so that they would have had the same result either way.

So, yep, compared to literally 10s of millions of doses of mRNA vaccines for covid, an extremely small number have suffered; e.g., clots, myocarditis. Again, also possible that they had a genetic predisposition so that if exposed to natural virus, same result, especially given exponentially higher number who in fact did suffer the same from natural infection.

What you ignore or fail to understand is that the antivaxxers don’t discuss the above, that is, the rare serious side-effects but claim they are not rare and many also claim the vaccines don’t work or the disease is less serious, that pharmaceutical companies exaggerate in order to make a profit.

You write: “At the end of the day it should be possible to debate vaccination without it descending into a foul rant.”

So, we have experts supporting vaccines who do mention rare side-effects, supporting them because they both protect individual and community, especially those who can’t be vaccinated and/or vaccine didn’t take vs antivaxxers who grossly exaggerate the risk, so how do you believe one could have any type of reasonable debate? I should also point out that many antivaxxers promote unscientifically validated treatments, etc., others subscribe to paranoid conspiracy theories, and many believe that their individual rights, rights that only exist in a community, owe no responsibility to others. And finally, polls have shown that many basically are either anti-government and/or don’t believe in science. So, for the latter who don’t believe in science, how would you debate them?

@Joel Harrison

“What you ignore or fail to understand is that the antivaxxers don’t discuss the above, that is, the rare serious side-effects but claim they are not rare and many also claim the vaccines don’t work or the disease is less serious, that pharmaceutical companies exaggerate in order to make a profit.”

Joel, the rarity of a serious adverse event in association with a vaccine can start off as extremely rare. Some, with the best of checks, clinical trials and studies (for one reason or another), go undetected prior to marketing. Sometimes it is only in the post marketing era that “rare but serious adverse- effects” even start to become apparent.

Pandemrix and the link with narcolepsy/cataplexy in children and young people would be an excellent example of this. What started off as a few reports spread over several nations suddenly gathered momentum until the “rarity” of the event suddenly wasn’t nearly so rare resulting in something of an emergency and the withdrawal of the licence for it’s use in that cohort.

Actually, it was your favourite subject ie the science, not anti vax interpretations which determined the increased risk of narcolepsy/cataplexy and how it was not nearly so rare after all.

Pluserix was the same. In the beginning there were a few cases of mumps meningitis reported with the ‘guesstimated’ rate of one case per 100,000 doses ultimately being determined by scientists here in the UK to be one case in 4,000 doses. That, without the mind set of any anti vaxxer significantly altered how “rare” mumps meningitis (MM) was associated with Pluserix vaccine.

Once again it was the science that determined an increased risk of MM not the anti vaxxers and reported on how it wasn’t as “rare” as previously reported (by the scientists).

The ‘clots’ being reported in association with the Covid vaccine likewise ie what was initially confined to a very small number of people is now the subject of hundreds of excellent reliable papers, with ever growing numbers of people affected and being compensated. Only time will telly (sadly) how “rare” that serious ADR ultimately is in connection with Covid vaccine.

The reality is, that without any involvement/influence from anti vaxxers ADR’s (in some situations) are not as rare as initially stated in the initial science.

One doesn’t have to be an anti vaxxer to suggest that the rarity of some ADR’s aren’t as rare as initially stated.

And as for……

“many also claim the vaccines don’t work or the disease is less serious,”

Do you really, really want me (again) to write up (with references) how the rate of mumps meningitis in association with Urabe vaccine in Japan was greater than that being reported on with naturally occurring mumps?

Didn’t think so.

Which of these “hundreds of excellent reliable papers” supports the claims made in “Died Suddenly”? This recent systematic review, for instance?

“Despite the incidence of thromboembolic events noted after COVID-19 vaccination, the benefits associated with vaccination are many folds higher than the risk. Moreover, the risk of developing thrombotic events after COVID-19 vaccination is almost similar to the risk of thrombosis in the general population. Therefore, administration of COVID-19 vaccines should not be hampered due to the minimal risk of thromboembolism, mainly associated with the AstraZeneca vaccine.”

http://ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9093198/

Well, maybe not that one.

Based on the “excellent reliable” evidence you’ve seen, do you agree with the statement “administration of COVID-19 vaccines should not be hampered due to the minimal risk of thromboembolism”? Or do you think the vaccines should be shunned due to the likelihood of future vindication of embalmer Hirschman et al?

@ Dangerous Bacon

“Based on the “excellent reliable” evidence you’ve seen, do you agree with the statement “administration of COVID-19 vaccines should not be hampered due to the minimal risk of thromboembolism”? Or do you think the vaccines should be shunned due to the likelihood of future vindication of embalmer Hirschman et al?”

I don’t believe that the roll out of Covid vaccines should be hampered “due to the minimal” risk of thromboembolism but I do believe that the true rate of the risk needs to be continuously monitored and conveyed to the consumer.

The point I make is that with the passage of time just how “minimal” that risk may be is in question as more and more evidence of the problem emerges.

One possible reason why the risk might not be as “minimal” as you state lies in the fact that there is no “standard case definition for VITT accepted for use in all countries”. (1)
In 2021 the Brighton Collection previously made the point that “there is currently no standard case definition (CD) for TTS accepted for use by all countries”.(2)

The absence of a standard case definition and the fact that different places are using different definitions/inclusion/exclusion criteria and time frames in the diagnosis of VITT/TTS raises the possibility of underreporting.

If in essence everyone is using different algorithms how can we know what the real risk of ‘clots’ actually is. In an April 2022 Post Authorisation safety study of the Astra Zeneca vaccine the timeframe for the conditions listed below is 1-42 days yet others are using 5 to 30 days (and there are many other variations)!

Thrombosis With Thrombocytopaenia Syndrome (Risk Window: 1 to 42 Days)
Thrombosis Without Thrombocytopaenia (Risk Window: 1 to 42 Days)
Thrombocytopaenia With Associated Bleeding (Risk Window: 1 to 42 Days)
Thrombocytopaenia (Risk Window: 1 to 42 Days) (3)

“Vaccine-induced immune thrombotic thrombocytopenia (VITT) is a rare but serious adverse
syndrome occurring 5 to 30 days after adenoviral vector COVID-19 vaccination”. (4)

And no, I don’t think that covid vaccines should be shunned in anticipation of any embalmer being vindicated in the future but I do think that keeping up to speed with the possibility that the risk of thromboembolism isn’t as minimal as first thought, is essential.

(1)Phenotype Algorithms for the Identification and Characterization
of Vaccine Induced Thrombotic Thrombocytopenia in Real World Data:
A Multinational Network Cohort Study

Azza Shoaibi1 et al
Published onl;ine june 29022

(2) Brighton Collaboration
May 18, 2021 v 10.16.2

Updated proposed Brighton Collaboration process for developing a standard case definition for study of
newclinical syndrome X, as applied to Thrombosis with Thrombocytopenia Syndrome (TTS)
Robert T. Chen MD MA, Scientific Director, Brighton Collaboration

(3) Post-Authorisation Safety Study of AZD1222
AstraZeneca
AZD1222, EMEA/H/C/005675 1.0, 21 April 2022

(4) The clinical and laboratory diagnosis of vaccine-induced immune
thrombotic thrombocytopenia
Anna-Lise Bissola et al 26th july 2022

@Wendy

“Lucas, I feel for you.”
– Thanks for the warm blanket.

“You should have run when the very first capital letter appeared…………..it only goes seriously downhill from there!”
– “The first capital letter” – lol
No need to run, I know this kind.

“I’ve had it all said of me …and worse!”
– The bright side is it has taught you about our species. You might be better prepared when you find yourself in a next snake pit – often the case when in a position of dependence. What to expect in a hospital setting where such folks work? Here you find the answer.
There are some exceptions in this forum. And you cannot deny some actually do take time; time is always valuable. Leads me to the conclusion that some are too suspicious by nature.

“The irony is, neither side in the pro vax/ anti vax debate are 100% correct in any of their arguments or their science. Vaccines have undoubtedly saved lives and contributed in a positive way to the fight against disease but they are not infallible, they are not 100% safe, and in some cases they have caused serious adverse events in a small number of recipients. Vaccine manufacturers, UNICEF/the WHO, all of whom are the most ardent supporters of vaccination concede that they are not safe for all of the people, all of the time, so why do some posters on here argue otherwise and deny the existence of the vaccine injured?”
– The ‘why’ is not always the easiest question to answer.
It’s obvious that many people at any level in society show a diversity of self-destructive behaviour, mostly depending on some provoking factor. The why has to do with a combined shortterm gain and bad mentality. Many such people are eager to hate. They even hate themselves, as strange as that may sound.

“Millions have benefited, but some have not and I cannot understand why it is so abhorrent to some of the posters on here to acknowledge the vaccine injured.”
– They’re not ignorant. So tell me are they liars or is this weird psychological group behaviour? Perhaps a mix of both.

“Much has been said re ‘clots’ and wherever the rights and wrongs lie in that particular debate, the UK VDPS is now providing awards to claimants for that ADR following a Covid 19 vaccine. In addition Coroners have issued a number of “Regulation 28 : Report to Prevent Future Deaths” notifications where they have determined that the individual has died of a rare complication associated with Covid 19 vaccine.”
– Interesting.

“Evidence for the fact that vaccines cause injuries on rare occasions in a small number of people exists in just the same way as the science in support of vaccination ( heavily relied on by some posters) does.”
– I realised these likely injuries after the roll-out. I mentioned them here too, but none of our friends showed interest. Some denied with cursing in capital letter words. Fine with me, cursing is wining, not winning.

Then at the organization I mentioned in a recent post, the vaccines were used in a group of 60.000 healthy people aged 20 – 65. I don’t remember for how long the participants were followed. Non died, 4 were ‘injured’; so 1 in 15.000. The vaccines were then promoted. I should mention that there was a relatively high number of casualties already in the entire group of about 10 mln. and this worried the ‘management’ of course. Nevertheless, it’s the most vulnerable that die and these were not included in the control group. Had that been the case, we had to add quite a few of them to the injured and death list. I’m afraid the decision to promote the vaccines, except to the vulnerable, was perhaps wrong.
In the end it will only be overall mortality that tells us to what extent the vaccines kill; whether or not it can be hard proven, remains to be seen.

“Sadly vaccine induced injury exists and not just in the mind of anti vaxxers, unless of course, you consider the legal, medical/scientific experts and Coroners in the UK to be anti vax also.
At the end of the day it should be possible to debate vaccination without it descending into a foul rant.”
– That’s apparently impossible seen the interests. Perhaps a century later.

Why ? Have you thought a simple explanation ? Vaccines prevenet infectious diseases. This is why WHO and governments like them.
You shoud link to that present trial. This mine
https://www.fda.gov/media/144416/download
Go to table 5. People over 60 and with comoriitis were not excluded. A lie,is it no ?

@ Wendy Stephen

You write: “Lucas, I feel for you. You should have run when the very first capital letter appeared…………..it only goes seriously downhill from there!
I’ve had it all said of me …and worse!”

WOW! Congratulations. You’ve identified with a troll. Either you are really dense, didn’t actually carefully read what he wrote and mine and others responses or he actually does resemble your approach/comments. In any case, you really are making a fool of yourself.

@ Lucas

RETURN OF THE TROLL. As usual, you make claims without any links to valid websites/medical journal articles, etc. And once again, since you claim your country had a high number of serious adverse reactions to mRNA covid vaccines, give the name of your country and link to a credible website/paper???

And you have given absolutely no indication you understand the basics of the immune system, nor how vaccines actually work, same with Wendy Stephen, you two deserve each other.

@ldw56old

“Fixed it for you, you serial liar.”

You do have some issues, ldw56. Why don’t you ask for a dose increase?

I’m fine. I’m just always astonished how someone like you, who has demonstrated you have no understanding of science or statistics, feel comfortable making up lies about the dangers of vaccines. Even more, I’m boggled that you expect people who aren’t as scummy as you to take you seriously.

@Joel A. Harrison, PhD, MPH

“The vaccine caused 1 to 2 deaths per million doses, so 250,000 deaths vs 1 or 2 per million, plus a dozen or so who suffered progressive or generalized vaccinia, basically suffering same way as those who survived natural infection.”
Mind sharing your reliable source?
Good for you causes of excess deaths are not being paid attention to.

“However, it is possible that those who died and/or suffered from the vaccine had some genetic predisposition so that they would have had the same result either way.”
Sure, these bastards deserved to die anyway.

@ Lucas

“Based on past experience, it is estimated that 1 to 2 people out of every 1 million people vaccinated could die as a result of life-threatening reactions to the vaccine.” CDC (2017 Jul 12). Side Effects of Smallpox Vaccination
And I could give more sites.

You write: “However, it is possible that those who died and/or suffered from the vaccine had some genetic predisposition so that they would have had the same result either way.” Sure, these bastards deserved to die anyway.

What a stupid thing to say. Nope, they wouldn’t deserve to die; but anyone who understands genetic predispositions and immunology would understand that certain people are at extremely high risk if infected by certain microbes. And given the smallpox vaccine was really just a weakened version of smallpox, that is, a close relative, then if a weakened version would kill them the risk would be quite high from the full strength virus.

You really are one dishonest sick moron

As far as I’m aware, the original smallpox killed seventy odd percent of the children who caught it. But sure, offering such a dangerous vaccine (or the previous inoculation methods) must have been an evil act furthering the global depopulation agenda.

@Joel A. Harrison, PhD, MPH

“WOW! Congratulations. You’ve identified with a troll. Either you are really dense, didn’t actually carefully read what he wrote and mine and others responses or he actually does resemble your approach/comments. In any case, you really are making a fool of yourself.”

Game of divide and conquer, Joel?

@ Lucas

When I write: “And you have given absolutely no indication you understand the basics of the immune system, nor how vaccines actually work, same with Wendy Stephen, you two deserve each other.”

You write: “Game of divide and conquer, Joel?”

How is saying two people deserve each other divide and conquer? Just one more example of your asinine trolling, just writing idiotic things to irritate.

@Joel A. Harrison, PhD, MPH

“As usual, you make claims without any links to valid websites/medical journal articles, etc. And once again, since you claim your country had a high number of serious adverse reactions to mRNA covid vaccines, give the name of your country and link to a credible website/paper???”

Clearly you did not get the message. It’s called irony.
The name of my country is where our WEF puppet government removes the farmers that feed the world.

“And you have given absolutely no indication you understand the basics of the immune system, nor how vaccines actually work, same with Wendy Stephen, you two deserve each other.”

Got your message, compared to the King of epidemiology we’re the ignorant.

@ Lucas

As usual you write absurdities. Nope I’m not the “king” of epidemiologist; but, yep you are ignorant having not displayed one ounce of knowledge of immunology, thus how vaccines work, ignoring overwhelming world-wide data of almost two years that the vaccines work, etc. But, of course, according to you all the papers from nations around the world are lies and you know better.

@ Joel

“And you have given absolutely no indication you understand the basics of the immune system, nor how vaccines actually work, same with Wendy Stephen, you two deserve each other.”

I can’t and won’t speak for Lucas but it is indeed true that I have limited knowledge of the immune system and the biochemical background to how vaccines work but none of that impacts on one’s ability to read up on papers from reputable journals and sources on the problems a small number of people experience with vaccines. ( are you saying that the authors of many scientiffic papers on vaccine induced ADR’s lack these attributes and qualifications)

Time and time again I have recognised the invaluable contribution vaccines have made to the spread of disease but it still remains the case that a number of very unfortunate individuals have lasting and debilitating injuries because of them. It doesn’t follow that every single ADR complained of has been caused by a vaccine and I agree I’ve witnessed some pretty crazy stuff myself in this regard but neither does it mean that every single person who alleges a vaccine induced injury is wrong, a liar and/ or an anti vaccinationist.

The science isn’t always right. Nothing is entirely safe and vaccines are no different and it follows (irrespective of numbers) that some individuals will not fair well because of them. Why can you not just concede that? Don’t you think that your very divisive, non negotiable, no concession giving approach to vaccination safety and science might, as well as lacking scientific support , is fuelling the anti vax argument?

The 2021 APBI Code of practice in the UK states that “the word “safe” must not be used without qualification” in respect of medicinal products something Astra Zeneca recently fell foul of in this complaint……

https://www.pmcpa.org.uk/cases/completed-cases/auth3518521-member-of-the-public-v-astrazeneca/

Interesting to know the country here WEF puppet government removes farmers. But you are really deepin it.

“So, yep, compared to literally 10s of millions of doses of mRNA vaccines for covid, an extremely small number have suffered; e.g., clots, myocarditis.”

So, yep, it’s just that sporters collapse by the dosens. And we have an excess deathrate that screams for explanation. And etcetera. Stop lying.

@Joel A. Harrison, PhD, MPH

You write: “why an ‘antivaxxer’ would want to lie. I usually think in terms of financial benefit;”

“Start with Joseph Mercola who sells alternative medicine and is estimated to be worth $100 million dollars, even donated $1 million dollars to antivax National Vaccine Information Center. Others with good incomes selling alternative medicines and books include Neil Z Miller and Mike Adams. And Robert F. Kennedy Jr, though he inherited a fortune, has a salary more than $400,000 per year for running Children’s Defense Fund. And Andrew Wakefield who lost his medical license lives quite well because he gets large fees to attend antivax meetings, etc.”

Quite well true, but this is what I already suggested.
Question to Aarno was in what way the usual antivaxxer would benefit.

“And others are antivaxxers for a number of reasons, including not understanding infectious disease and how vaccines work, thus victims of antivax website lies, many subscribe to paranoid conspiracy theories and/or simply anti-government, thus, can’t discriminate between positive things governments do, etc. People who focus on their individual rights, ignoring that rights only exist in communities and, thus, one has to balance individual rights with responsibility to community. I doubt you understand that or, more likely, you could care less.”

Well I doubt if you understand the word “lie”. A lie is a ‘false statement made with the intention of deceiving’.
Not understanding something does not make one a liar.
Looking at antivaxx websites, true or not, doesn’t make one a liar.
Paranoid conspiracy theories don’t turn a normal human being into a liar.
Not being able to discriminate doesn’t turn one into a liar.
Focussing on individual rights doesn’t turn a person into a liar.
People telling me stories of what happened soon after a relative received the jab are no liars.

My question hasn’t been answered yet. I still don’t see the benefit of the usual antivaxxer.

“But I realize you aren’t really wanting answers to your questions”

Then why did you give this question a try?
I asked you 3 simple questions before. Please answer those questions if you want to be of help.

“ Question to Aarno was in what way the usual antivaxxer would benefit.”

So what do you get from telling lies Lucas? You do it so much and with so much fluidity it must be a life-long endeavor for you.

“People telling me stories of what happened soon after a relative received the jab are no liars”

PEOPLE telling you stories about a RELATIVE? How many people? Why hasn’t the relative told you directly? Are they local relatives or do they conveniently live elsewhere? You’re only one step away from ‘a friend of a friend was told about a relative of a work-mate’.

I fully expect that everything you’ve been told is second hand, third hand or rumour and at least one order of magnitude worse than actually happened.

You don’t want to hear why anti-vaxxers might lie, but what else would you call it when they continue to use absolute number of deaths (vax vs unvaxxed) as a talking point, after having base rate explained to them? The truth doesn’t matter to them, only the message.

So what is your question ?
How a stalinist benefitted when he spreaded stalinism (outside Stalin’
s empire). He thought it is his responsibility to lie for party. This apply to the foot soldiers. Big shot antivaxxers earn a lot.

@ Lucas

You just keep making it obvious that you are a FRIGGIN TROLL WITH KNOW REAL KNOWLEDGE JUST POSTING TO IRRITATE PEOPLE.

One of the definitions of lie: ” Something meant to deceive or mistakenly accepted as true” Notice the second half “mistakenly accepted as true”. The antivaxxers who continue, ignoring any science presented to them, just as you, are liars. Orac, myself and others have explained and sometimes linked to websites, articles, etc. that support what we write and your response is they are the liars. YOU ARE FULL OF SHIT

And you still refuse to give your country and link to a credible website that backs your claim of high number of serious adverse events. YOU REALLY ARE ONE SICK SOB

@Joel Harrison

“WOW! Congratulations. You’ve identified with a troll.”

Good try Joel!

To be clear, I identified with the foul list of ‘descriptive titles’ Lucas has been subjected to on here, having had most of them applied to me previously (and worse).

That’s a stand alone issue and has nothing to do with the content of the posts. Subjecting someone to a relentless barrage of childish but insulting names with ever growing ferocity and vitriol is unacceptable, full stop!

But, if faced with a choice in identifying with a troll or someone who goes around stating that Andrew Wakefield isn’t really anti vaccines…………….there’s no competition!

I’m not that stupid and from what I’ve seen, neither is the troll!

@ Wendy Stephen

You write: “I’m not that stupid and from what I’ve seen, neither is the troll!”

So, you see Lucas as not stupid; but ignore that he continues to call others liars, that when he requests links, etc. and they are given, he ignores them, or claims that virtually all such websites, articles, etc are lies, and that he wrote about me: “Has someone ever told you you’re a shameless, arrogant asshole?”

And you continued with post after post about your daughter’s unilateral hearing loss from the urabe mumps vaccine; but you came across mainly angry that government accepted was caused by vaccine; but since only 20% handicap, didn’t pay you the 120,000 british pounds. I wonder what you would have done if you had received the money??? I also pointed out that about 5% of kids who got mumps, almost all, suffered partial or even complete unilateral hearing loss, which means your daughter had a high risk from actual mumps. And I discussed that governments should fund better support for all families with handicapped children. Do you think that unilateral loss of hearing less a problem if from natural mumps? No response from you. I’m convinced it is the money that drives you! While I am truly sorry for her loss, I asked you how she is doing. Does she drive? Did she get a good education? Does she have a good job, etc. etc? If I had to accept one handicap, unilateral hearing loss would be mine. I would still have learned to play guitar and piano, still drive a car, still attained my PhD, etc. I would, of course, had to adjust certain behaviors to compensate. In any case, yep, you are stupid, stupid because you obsessed with the urabe mumps vaccine for 10 years, even ignored that there were, though fewer, cases of hearing loss from the Jeryl Lynn mumps vaccine. And you displayed no compassion for kids who suffered unilateral hearing loss from actual mumps.

You don’t like what I call Lucas; but ignore or are too stupid to understand that he is not posting comments to enter into a dialogue; but just to irritate people, to provoke, to anger. He is a genuine troll and calling him and you stupid are understatements.

And you wrote: “The irony is, neither side in the pro vax/ anti vax debate are 100% correct in any of their arguments or their science. ”

Which I tore to shreds. Maybe provaxxers not 100% correct, but based on real science and understanding; but overwhelming majority of antivaxxers are just plain wrong, displaying mainly total lack of understanding of science and, like you, ignoring when refuted. And Lucas asked for reasons, I gave them and he ignored them, asking the same question again. That is what he does, ask questions, then when answered, continues to ask same question, no answer good enough, all lies according to him. This is what a troll does. And you are just too stupid to understand this.

So, how is your daughter doing???

@Joel A. Harrison, PhD, MPH

“You just keep making it obvious that you are a FRIGGIN TROLL WITH KNOW REAL KNOWLEDGE JUST POSTING TO IRRITATE PEOPLE.
One of the definitions of lie: ” Something meant to deceive or mistakenly accepted as true” Notice the second half “mistakenly accepted as true”. The antivaxxers who continue, ignoring any science presented to them, just as you, are liars. Orac, myself and others have explained and sometimes linked to websites, articles, etc. that support what we write and your response is they are the liars.”

Are you shopping definitions now, Joel?
Before posting one that seems to fit your ridiculous views, please analyse before you paste. Again you’re wrong; let me assist you.
The second half “mistakenly accepted as true” does indeed imply that what is accepted may be a lie. It does however explicitly not mean that the one repeating the lie is a liar.

Why don’t you open this link: https://differencebtw.com/lie-vs-mistake/
– “Lie: A false statement deliberately presented as being true; a falsehood.”
– “Lie: Something meant to deceive or mistakenly accepted as true.”
– “Mistake: part of a statement that is not correct”
– “Mistake: an understanding of something that is not correct”

You do not seem good at reading comprehension, Joel; no matter how much you curse.
And you don’t even seem to understand the difference between a lie and a mistake.
Leaves the question unanswered what you do at this forum? Aren’t you more then a simple clown?

Now that we’re talking definitions, be so good to describe what is an ‘antivaxxer’. I’m afraid you will avoid that question as well.
Next of course to the questions already asked but not answered: “Perhaps also why an ‘antivaxxer’ would want to lie. I usually think in terms of financial benefit; in what way does the usual ‘antivaxxer’ benefit, unlike some ‘provaxxers’?”

“Orac, myself and others have explained and sometimes linked to websites, articles, etc. that support what we write and your response is they are the liars. YOU ARE FULL OF SHIT”

Unless you show me where I wrote that there are liars behind the “links to websites, articles, etc. that support what [you] write”, you are the liar here. No chance and you know that. Look in a mirror, Joel. There you see one with capital letters.

“And you still refuse to give your country and link to a credible website that backs your claim of high number of serious adverse events.”

Which means you don’t follow the news. And more worrying: that your media hides it from you.
Again: “The name of my country is where our WEF puppet government removes the farmers that feed the world.” Anyone else?
The other part of you remark: irony, told you so already.

Yes, our farmers produce for the world and import a lot of stuff in order to do so. And they harm the environment.
I’m defenitly not a fan of Dutch farmers and give them the middle-finger if they protest. They can do as they please with heavy equipment, without the police bothering them, but environmental activists are removed as soon as they start blocking a road. And if people against black Pete are protesting and some people from the country, who are also in favour of the farmers, start molesting them, the molesters get a free pass and the protest is canceled by the local authorities.
If you protest with tractors, you can do as you please.

@Lucas Why you cannot give us name of the name of the country ? Or link to the source ? Perhaps it it is your media that is lying ?
About your lies: you spoke about present trial, that only healthy under 60 year were include into he trial. Actual shows otherwise.

@ Wendy Stephen

You focus on my name calling which composes less than 5% of any comment. It is your excuse for not carefully reading what I write and/or not understanding. What I write clearly refutes/explains what is wrong in other comments, including sometimes links to credible websites and/or articles. So, yep, very stupid to focus on name calling; but typical of you. And my name calling doesn’t usually start with my first response to someone else’s comment; but when, as with you and Lucas, they ignore what I write and/or twist/distort, etc.

@ldw56old

“”Question to Aarno was in what way the usual antivaxxer would benefit.”
So what do you get from telling lies Lucas? You do it so much and with so much fluidity it must be a life-long endeavor for you.”

Thanks for the fluidity compliment.
What do you get from avoiding answers to questions asked?

Me? You’ve been asked

for references for your assertions about deaths — nothing
for papers supporting your statements — nothing
for information about where you are so your claims about excess deaths where you are can be checked — nothing
repeated about why you choose to lie about covid and the vaccines — nothing other than more lies

If you won/t [since your assertions aren’t based in any fact, that really means “can’t”] support your comments, you deserve all of the disdain and feedback you get.

nothing for information about where you are

The bit about farmers strongly suggests the Netherlands.

@Joel A. Harrison, PhD, MPH, Wendy Stephen

“So, you see Lucas as not stupid; but ignore that he continues to call others liars, that when he requests links, etc. and they are given, he ignores them, or claims that virtually all such websites, articles, etc are lies, and that he wrote about me: “Has someone ever told you you’re a shameless, arrogant asshole?””

Why should you demean yourself by stooping to the practices of hateful, blatant nonsense, Joel?
One evil slippery eel you are. Just not smart.

To all: I asked for just a link on recent overall mortality. No one here has provided me such link. So, anyone?

“Has someone ever told you you’re a shameless, arrogant asshole?”
That was just a question, Joel. That’s why I added: “Ask them.”
So what did you find out?

@Joel A. Harrison, PhD, MPH, @Wendy Stephen

“You don’t like what I call Lucas; but ignore or are too stupid to understand that he is not posting comments to enter into a dialogue; but just to irritate people, to provoke, to anger.”

No need repeating how stupid everyone else is in order for you to shine, Joel. We know that meanwhile, so give it a rest.
And no, the ‘dialogue’ will follow after we agree on using the same database. Then I might ‘kill’ you and your Orac clowns with the results on vaccine safety. But you know that, hehe.
Irritated for not wanting to hear the truth.

@NumberWang

“People telling me stories of what happened soon after a relative received the jab are no liars”

“PEOPLE telling you stories about a RELATIVE?” – Yes, does that sound strange to you?

“How many people?” – I made a rather detailed list of these people already half a year ago or so. If you haven’t read it or you cannot find it, I will have a look for you.

“Why hasn’t the relative told you directly?” – Because the death don’t talk. And the injured are not the ones I met, saying so. One example of what I mentioned in this previous post concerned a young woman behind the counter (probably Moroccian) in the nearby shopper hall. I asked for 1kg of Nigella seed there. The next time I bought the same, she asked me what I use this for. I told her it is to help avoid getting severely ill from covid as an unvaccinated. Then she said that she wasn’t vaccinated either and told me she didn’t trust the vaccines. When I asked her for motivation, she told me about an uncle losing sight in one eye shortly after vaccination and a grandfather (thought it was her grandfather, please read back for the details) that died according to her due to / shortly after vaccination. I don’t remember whether these relatives live(d) in my country or in Morocco, but that’s not relevant.
I invited the physician in that forum who denied that someone can get blind in an eye due to the vaccine (obviously he had no idea what he was talking about, as this is one of the side effects specifically mentioned by Pfizer), to get in contact with her for verification and ask for her story. He didn’t respond. I said I might ask one of the others I mentioned as well, no answer. Still the offer is there. So Joel or another doctor her, your chance: show us you’re interested to find out about side effects.
One other clear case of vaccine injury that I wrote about is a woman I have known all my life. She’s the one that got the double pulmonary embolism right after vaccination. Firsthand.
These vaccines cannot be safe at all if only half or a quarter of the cases mentioned, were indeed due to the vaccine. Ldw56 as a statistician should be able to verify this would be impossible.

“Are they local relatives or do they conveniently live elsewhere? You’re only one step away from ‘a friend of a friend was told about a relative of a work-mate’.”
Most live in my country. I am aware about the risk of the ‘friend of a friend’. I never said that this is the ultimate proof of the vaccines’ dangers. Overal mortality might tell you.

“I fully expect that everything you’ve been told is second hand, third hand or rumour and at least one order of magnitude worse than actually happened.” The mother of an optician in his shop, the relatives of the woman in the shop, the parent of a dietitian are examples of second hand. What reason would you have to doubt them? Let one of the doctors here get in contact with them and verify. Next to this I saw what I saw in the couple of other cases.

“You don’t want to hear why anti-vaxxers might lie, but what else would you call it when they continue to use absolute number of deaths (vax vs unvaxxed) as a talking point, after having base rate explained to them? The truth doesn’t matter to them, only the message.”
Why would I not want to hear why anti-vaxxers might lie? I basically trust no one, unless. Period.
I’m not interested in people making money with stories; and this goes for provaxxers just as well. This world has become a lie, so I’m completely aware I have to be careful drawing conclusions.
Don’t forget the cases mentioned are just people. No agenda.
Fyi, I am not interested in just absolute numbers, these are meaningless. Please read back what data I asked for.

I’m rather curious as to why you talk about overall mortality (an official data collection) whilst, simultaneously, taking the story of the lady at the checkout at face value?

Was the blindness permanent? How old was the grandfather? How well off was the family? Were there any previous health issues? Did they have the same vaccine and was it Pfizer?

You stress that you know to be careful about drawing conclusions but when are you going to walk the walk?

What reason would you have to doubt them?

It’s safer to doubt you, since the most likely thing is that you made up those stories.

But on the very small chance at least one of the stories you relate comes from an actual event: they should be doubted because there is no evidence linking them to the vaccine. Saying bad things happened after something else does not mean causality.

@Narad

“The bit about farmers strongly suggests the Netherlands.”

Correct. Lots of demonstrations here and it has been going on for a while now. Thousands of tractors jammed up traffic by up to 700 miles during rush hour in protest, last October.
Farmers hanging the flag upside down on their land as a protest, which is funny. With regards to (the thread of) food shortages around the globe, I find this a strange phenomenon even more. Could there be an agenda behind the demonisation of the farmers other then nitrogen emission? Shut down Tata steel here and you can leave the farmers in peace. Never.
Why at the same time we see commercials we should drink less milk because of misused cows and we should eat less meat? So obvious, such nonsense.
Just curious, did the ‘official’ media in your country tell you about this? If not, why not.

@Lucas So it was not removing the farmers, it was originally proposal to reduce cattle. It as not WEF, it was environmentalists Difficult to speak truthfully,is it not ?

ldw56old

“You’ve been asked:
for references for your assertions about deaths — nothing”
for papers supporting your statements — nothing”
for information about where you are so your claims about excess deaths where you are can be checked — nothing
repeated about why you choose to lie about covid and the vaccines — nothing other than more lies”

Why don’t you cut your crab and just give me the data asked for. Let’s first agree on using specific raw data, then we’ll see. You seem afraid of being exposed or something. Hmm.

Sorry dickhead (lucas): you were asked for those things long before you began your tactic of distraction by asking questions you don’t care about. Fill in what you were asked for, with citations: that would at least be a small sign that you’re interested in honest discussion (something you’ve never done before).

@Lucas I did give you the raw data, why do you not check it. or jus goolg for it.

@Renate

“Yes, our farmers produce for the world and import a lot of stuff in order to do so. And they harm the environment.
I’m defenitly not a fan of Dutch farmers and give them the middle-finger if they protest. They can do as they please with heavy equipment, without the police bothering them, but environmental activists are removed as soon as they start blocking a road. And if people against black Pete are protesting and some people from the country, who are also in favour of the farmers, start molesting them, the molesters get a free pass and the protest is canceled by the local authorities.
If you protest with tractors, you can do as you please.”

The Netherlands is even the second largest exporter in the world in this field. That explains in my opinion the WEF’s focus on our farmers (our puppet government did not come up with the idea themselves).
I don’t like the WEF / UN at all – especially because of it’s wish for a return to the old feudal system with a small rich upperclass (they), and a large poor underclass (you). Unrolling their agenda will lead to a decline in well-being, welfare and personal freedom without a doubt. This has become visible meanwhile. Problems are deliberately being created and this will continue.
Advantage of the agenda though, would be the decline in welfare. We spill so much in many aspects. I would like to see that come to an end. No need to fly around the world, no need to take your car for small distances, no need to buy the latest gadgets, etc.
But no need to discuss all that now.

Btw, wouldn’t you protest if your government takes away your means of subsistence?
The Police didn’t do a thing too in Amsterdam after the Moroccians won some soccer play; the group is simply too large.
And about Black Pete, isn’t that a huge issue?

<

blockquote>I don’t like the WEF / UN at all – especially because of it’s wish for a return to the old feudal system with a small rich upperclass (they), and a large poor underclass (you). Unrolling their agenda will lead to a decline in well-being, welfare and personal freedom without a doubt.

There is just no conspiracy too stupid for you to buy into is there? God you’re an idiot.

@NumberWang

“I’m rather curious as to why you talk about overall mortality (an official data collection) whilst, simultaneously, taking the story of the lady at the checkout at face value?”
Question is not relevant.

Your other questions are not relevant either, as no hard conclusion is based on one such story. Feel free however to ask her yourself in case you’re a doctor or investigator.
But combined and with a couple of cases, like the double pulmonary embolism after vaccination (firsthand), definately gives a worrying signal. I’m sure you agree on that.

Actually, all those questions are relevant. If you’re interested in separating genuine serious adverse events from the blizzard of shite, coincidence and conspiracy, that is.

It would appear that you have tucked yourself into the niche labelled JAQ.

@Renate

“our farmers harm the environment.”

Yes, and so do our industries. Or your car. Or you for that matter.

Hello Aarno,

How are you?
Ofcourse many vaccines are useful, not all are necessary and some turned out te be harmful.
Question is in what category the mRNA vaccines should be categorized. All biased sources or sources where the underlying data are questionable aside, the only source that might be useful is one with recent data on weekly or monthly excess mortality by vaccination status (excl. base rate bias). Deaths don’t lie, data is according to reality. No underreporting / overreporting / scam here.
Table 5 you refer to does not provide this data.

“Have you thought a simple explanation?”
Regarding to what specifically do you mean?

Let’s agree on the database first, then see what it shows us, then discuss possible explanations in case the two groups show significant differences. Agree with that?
I would much like not to see differences. I’m very sure provaxxers as well, unless the unvaccinated show a relatively higher number of deaths (wouldn’t they love that?)

Table 5 was answer to your claim that there was a clinical trial purposefully
excluded vulnerable people.1
Link I posted says that next dataset on vaccinated/unvaccinatd was postponed because
a) booster data is needed
b) 2021 population data would be included

Wendy Stephen: “One possible reason why the risk (of thromboembolism) might not be as “minimal” as you state”

I haven’t made any such statement.

Nor am I one of the imaginary posters you’ve conjured up who supposedly deny the existence of any injury due to vaccination.

Do you think that the premise of “Died Suddenly” (huge numbers of unexplained deaths/depopulation due to Covid-19 vaccines) is valid? Have the film’s makers been unfairly criticized and attacked?
Based on current knowledge, if medical guidelines call for Covid-19 vaccination (initial or booster) for a person, would you recommend that they follow that advice?

My answers to the above questions are no, no and yes.

@ Dangerous Bacon

I’ve already answered a couple of your questions so how about you now answer a couple of mine?

That’s reasonable, huh?

(a) Given that there is no standard case definition /algorithm to diagnose VITT/ITT etc etc, and numerous variations are being employed, would you agree that there is huge potential for under reporting and the real tally may be significantly higher than currently acknowledged?

(b) Given the differing post vaccination timeframes being used to diagnose VITT/ITT etc (ie 5-30 days in some instances, 1 -42 days in others) do you think that a number of cases might be being missed due to earlier cut off times in some definitions being followed?

And as for your questions…………. I do not support “Died Suddenly” at all but I do have concerns, (as I think most rational people would) over the large numbers of sudden and unexplained deaths occurring. Scotland alone has 14% excess deaths as of 3rd November 2022 and that’s positively something worthy of investigation/explanation.

I do think that the criticism of “Died Suddenly” is valid.

As to the third question…………….I’ve answered this before (funnily enough for Joel ..several times over in fact)…….If medical guidelines advise initial vaccination and/or boosters for an individual I take no issue with that but I would never personally advise someone on any aspect of vaccination. (And you know my reasons for that).

Nothing you’ve posted indicates a “huge potential” for significant under-reporting of vaccine-associated thromboembolism. Nor do those “hundreds of excellent reliable papers” (as you put it) support such a scenario.

What these tip-of-the-iceberg claims suggest is a belief in the fallacy of future vindication, to which antivaxers are strongly prone. Handwaving about excess deaths (they’ve GOTTA be due to the vaccines!) is typical of the stuff flung out of the FUD-mobile you drive through these discussions, with time taken out for identifying and sympathizing with blatant antivaxers for being unfairly abused.

“I would never personally advise someone on any aspect of vaccination. (And you know my reasons for that).”

Yes. Acknowledging support for vaccines (especially Covid-19 vaccination) risks severely compromising your street cred with fellow antivaxers. Can’t have that. 😉

Sorry you don’t like the answers, but you can hardly pretend I didn’t respond to your (just asking) questions.

Did you ever consider that non-uniformity in case definitions for vaccine-associated thromboembolism might result in the number of cases being overestimated?

A well-known side-effect of contracting antivax syndrome is tunnel vision.

@ldw56old

“blockquote>I don’t like the WEF / UN at all – especially because of it’s wish for a return to the old feudal system with a small rich upperclass (they), and a large poor underclass (you). Unrolling their agenda will lead to a decline in well-being, welfare and personal freedom without a doubt.
There is just no conspiracy too stupid for you to buy into is there? God you’re an idiot.”

Conspiracy? No, policy.
You make ignorance an art.
When will you start learning macroeconomics? I told you to do so in the past. Still you have no clue where we’re heading, especially / to begin with here in Europe.
That makes you a victim and me a winner, apparently that’s what you want.
I’ll get back to the subject after some days of holiday and tell you what has changed for the worse meanwhile. I’ve made some clear predictions here in the past, time to evaluate. So hold your horses until then please.

Conspiracy? No, policy

No, your asinine take on policy. And there’s no more reason to believe anything you say about economics than there is anything you say above covid and the lack of safety of vaccines. As I’ve said, you’ve blatantly lied about so many things the safest (by far) position is to take everything you say as a lie. Same for your bullshit about “winners” and “losers” (although you’ve already lost at “being a decent person”).

@Lucas Conspiracy theory is ha WEF and UN are thing and they have some power.You did not mention EU, interesting

@ Wendy Stephen

You write: “The science isn’t always right. Nothing is entirely safe and vaccines are no different and it follows (irrespective of numbers) that some individuals will not fair well because of them. Why can you not just concede that? Don’t you think that your very divisive, non negotiable, no concession giving approach to vaccination safety and science might, as well as lacking scientific support , is fuelling the anti vax argument?”

I have on a number of occasions discussed serious adverse events to vaccines; but also pointed out that they were rare and often the same, at higher levels, occurred from the natural microbe. As I wrote, 1 or 2 per million smallpox vaccines died from the vaccine and I also pointed out that if they died from the vaccine which was made from a related but not dangerous strain, then the chances they would die from smallpox, which killed better than 25% of the population, was high. However, I have also written that in a world of 8 billion people the possibility that a few will have some weird genetic predisposition and/or exposure to some chemical/toxins is possible, so I have always supported programs to compensate said individuals; but I also have supported my entire life programs to support ALL people with disabilities. However, if people start thinking that something quite rare could happen to them, then more and more people will refuse vaccinations and a significantly much higher number will suffer. So, by grossly exaggerating my positions, you once again demonstrate your unscientific biased approach to vaccines. And, yes, the science is almost always right because the science doesn’t claim 100%; but often close and is always open to new findings; but antivaxxers, as I wrote, are not. And, for instance, one can go to CDC, FDA, and other valid websites where one can find the serious adverse events found and validated for vaccines. Just one analogy. Seatbelts reduce deaths and serious injury by about 50%; but there has been a couple of cases where the seatbelt sliced thru someone and killed them and dozens of cases where people had bruised ribs, bruised kidneys, etc. and one can read up on this, so I always wear my seatbelt, comparing literally over the decades millions of lives saved vs a couple of deaths, and many more millions of serious injuries prevented; but a few bruised or damaged kidneys. All one can do is objectively look at the odds and with both seatbelts and vaccines the odds are exponential in favor of using them.

You write: “it is indeed true that I have limited knowledge of the immune system and the biochemical background to how vaccines work but none of that impacts on one’s ability to read up on papers from reputable journals and sources on the problems a small number of people experience with vaccines. ( are you saying that the authors of many scientiffic papers on vaccine induced ADR’s lack these attributes and qualifications)”

First, I would bet you don’t have the ability to understand various nuances of published papers; e.g., research methodology, statistics, often qualifications, that is, why results may not be valid, etc. Second, I don’t rely on a few papers; but if it is something I think important I will search, find, and read literally dozens of articles.

If you want to understand how vaccines are followed up for adverse events, which includes a number of different programs, a good starting point is:

A. Patricia Wodi, MD and Tom Shimabukuro, MD, MPH, MBA (2021 Aug). Vaccination Safety. Pinkbook. https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/pubs/pinkbook/downloads/safety.pdf READ IT. YOU MIGHT ACTUALLY LEARN SOMETHING AND I HAVE STUDIED, LEARNED MORE OR LESS ALL THE DISCUSSED PROGRAMS

In fact, you might find of interest the entire CDC Pink Book, actually official title “Epidemiology and Prevention of Vaccine-Preventable Diseases (2021).divided into informative chapters for all current vaccines. You can read online or download complete book for free. https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/pubs/pinkbook/index.html

@Joel

“However, if people start thinking that something quite rare could happen to them, then more and more people will refuse vaccinations and a significantly much higher number will suffer ”.

It’s got nothing to do with “thinking”, the reality is that something quite rare COULD happen to them (doesn’t mean it definitely will) hence the data released in PIL’s, Product Monographs and Pharmacopoeias under “Adverse Events” by the manufacturers and regulatory authorities.

I’m confident that they are only too aware of the point you make but still publish lists of ADR’s irrespective of severity and rarity so why do you have an issue with this?
Stating the obvious I know, but some unfortunate individual(s) has developed the condition before it’s even included as a rare event in the list of possible ADR’s.

Just because an ADR is “rare” (and bear in mind that something which starts of rare doesn’t always stay that rare throughout it’s time on the market…Pandemrix/narcolepsy/cataplexy) it doesn’t follow or seem at all reasonable that potential vaccinees should be denied knowledge of it to protect vaccine uptake.
Your graphic tutorial on smallpox vaccines and seatbelt usage is much appreciated but merely allows you to avoid discussing the here and now. How about staying on topic ie Covid vaccines/clots etc etc the severity of which, and the rate at which they occur may, due to the absence of a standard case definition, be under estimated.

As a scientist does the absence of diagnostic continuity for VITT etc not concern you?

@ Wendy Stephen

When someone gets a vaccine in US they are first given a Vaccine Information Sheet that explains the disease, etc., the mild and severe adverse events, and who to contact if they believe they suffered an adverse events; e.g., phone number, fax, e-mail. They are required to read the two-sided sheet and sign that they read and understood before getting the vaccine. And, nope, the sheets don’t include: 1 case per 2 million doses, etc.

You can find at: CDC. Safety Information by Vaccine. at: https://www.cdc.gov/vaccinesafety/vaccines/index.html READ A COUPLE

And the actual Vaccine Information Sheets at: https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/hcp/vis/current-vis.html READ A COUPLE

I walk my dog twice daily about a mile. I could be struck by lightening. A car could run up on the sidewalk. Has happened, either drunk driver or heart attack, etc. A few weeks ago I was almost hit by a bicyclist, breaking law, and bicycling at high speed on sidewalk. A mugger could rob me. And, in US, a crazy person could just shoot people at random, has happened. And I don’t think about such rare events, otherwise I would stop living, so mentioning extremely rare serious adverse events would be counterproductive; however, they can be found at CDC website, Vaccine Safety

@ Wendy Stephen

One more point. As we gain evermore knowledge of the immune system and genetics we will be able to decide who will be at risk from vaccines. Either we can give at later age, space out, or not give at all. This reduces; but doesn’t eliminate all possible extremely rare serious adverse events. And we can practice cocooning, simply if someone can’t be vaccinated or it is delayed we ensure as best as possible that those around the person are vaccinated. We don’t live in a perfect world; but your need to overemphasize extremely rare events, claiming that I ignore them, quite dishonest, indicates that despite your claim to not be antivaccine, that either you are or just aren’t very intelligent. As I wrote, I walk my dog twice daily and extremely rare events could occur; but if I were to focus/think about them, my life would be a nightmare

And I reiterate that I believe with strong evidence that your 10 years of posting comments on your daughter’s unilateral hearing loss due to urabe mumps vaccine was more because you were denied the compensation of 120,000 british pounds. I doubt you would be posting if you had received it. And I’ve asked over and over how your daughter is doing; but no reply. I know people with unilateral hearing loss and though I am sincerely sorry, they do fine and I believe I would to. I could still play guitar and piano, still drive a car, still watch movies and attend concerts, etc. So how is Katie doing? And was it even total hearing loss or could a hearing aid or cochlear implant work?

“We don’t live in a perfect world; but your need to overemphasize extremely rare events, claiming that I ignore them, quite dishonest, indicates that despite your claim to not be antivaccine, that either you are or just aren’t very intelligent.”

Good try again, Joel.

I’m not over emphasizing “extremely rare events” the point I make is that historically it’s been shown with previous vaccines (on some occasions…not all) that what started off as an “extremely rare event” with the passage of time and continued marketing of the product, not to be as rare as previously thought, and that may be the case with Covid vaccines and clots.

“And I reiterate that I believe with strong evidence that your 10 years of posting comments on your daughter’s unilateral hearing loss due to urabe mumps vaccine was more because you were denied the compensation of 120,000 british pounds.”

As I stated before you have no idea how the case concluded, and although I’m grateful for your interest in my daughter and her welfare you must appreciate that as she’s now very much an adult, I won’t be commenting on either.

I suggest you come up with a different explanation for why I keep posting………and once more for the record (although you know this) it’s the vaccine injured person who receives an award not the parent/representative.

@ Wendy Stephen

You write: “I’m not over emphasizing “extremely rare events” the point I make is that historically it’s been shown with previous vaccines (on some occasions…not all) that what started off as an “extremely rare event” with the passage of time and continued marketing of the product, not to be as rare as previously thought, and that may be the case with Covid vaccines and clots.”

The vaccines have been on the market for two years. I have ALL the up-to-date Information Statement given to patients. Below is for the Janssen COVID vaccine. Notice “about 8 cases for million vaccine doses AND 1 out of 7 fatal, which means approximately 1 death per million doses. Given the hospitalization and deaths from COVID I think quite excellent odds; but given your antivax bias, probably too high. Notice also occurred within 1 to 2 weeks. Also statement lists thrombocytopenia and Guillain-Barre Syndrome within 42 days. And ends with “These may not be all the possible side effects of the Janssen COVID-19 Vaccine. Serious and unexpected effects may occur. The Janssen COVID-19 Vaccine is still being studied in clinical trials.”

And neither the MODERNA nor Pfizer include clots, etc. You can find them on your own as I’m sure you won’t.

And I gave you link to just how many different ways vaccine safety are being followed up; but below is based on about 2 years. Given your belief that rare events could become more frequent, how long a follow-up would you want before people encouraged to get vaccinated? So, as usual, you are wrong. Long-term follow-ups would have found that rare events are actually more usual; but extremely rare events may still be uncovered.

As for whether your daughter or you would have received the compensation, ridiculous hair-splitting. Unless you are/were an uncaring parent, obviously the money would have been used to benefit your daughter.

And your continuous refusal to simply say how your daughter is doing with her unilateral hearing loss is absurd, unless, of course, she is doing fine and you don’t want to admit that, despite not receiving the compensation, despite unilateral hearing loss, she is doing fine. Given your continuous dishonesty, absurdly claiming what I have written, and 10 years of posting comments on not receiving compensation, etc. not surprising.

As far as I’m concerned you are some combination of DISHONEST and STUPID.

From Janssen (2022 May 5).

FACT SHEET FOR RECIPIENTS AND CAREGIVERS
EMERGENCY USE AUTHORIZATION (EUA) OF THE JANSSEN COVID-19 VACCINE TO PREVENT CORONAVIRUS DISEASE 2019 (COVID-19)

Blood Clots with Low Levels of Platelets
Blood clots involving blood vessels in the brain, lungs, abdomen, and legs along with low levels of platelets (blood cells that help your body stop bleeding), have occurred in some people who have received the Janssen COVID-19 Vaccine. In people who developed these blood clots and low levels of platelets, symptoms began approximately one to two weeks after vaccination. Blood clots with low levels of platelets following the Janssen COVID-19 Vaccine have been reported in males and females, across a wide age range of individuals 18 years and older; reporting has been highest in females ages 30 through 49 years (about 8 cases for every 1,000,000 vaccine doses administered), and about 1 out of every 7 cases has been fatal. You should seek medical attention right away if you have any of the following symptoms after receiving the Janssen COVID-19 Vaccine:
• Shortness of breath,
• Chest pain,
• Leg swelling,
• Persistent abdominal pain,
• Severe or persistent headaches or blurred vision,
• Easy bruising or tiny blood spots under the skin beyond the site of the injection.

Immune Thrombocytopenia (ITP)
Immune Thrombocytopenia (ITP) is a disorder that can cause easy or excessive bruising and bleeding due to very low levels of platelets. ITP has occurred in some people who have received the Janssen COVID-19 Vaccine. In most of these people, symptoms began within 42 days following receipt of the Janssen COVID-19 Vaccine. The chance of having this occur is very low. If you have ever had a diagnosis of ITP, talk to your vaccination provider before you get the Janssen COVID-19 Vaccine. You should seek medical attention right away if you develop any of the following symptoms after receiving the Janssen COVID-19 Vaccine:
• Easy or excessive bruising or tiny blood spots under the skin beyond the site of the injection,
• Unusual or excessive bleeding.

Guillain Barré Syndrome
Guillain Barré syndrome (a neurological disorder in which the body’s immune system damages nerve cells, causing muscle weakness and sometimes paralysis) has occurred in some people who have received the Janssen COVID-19 Vaccine. In most of these people, symptoms began within 42 days following receipt of the Janssen COVID-19 Vaccine. The chance of having this occur is very low. You should seek medical attention right away if you develop any of the following symptoms after receiving the Janssen COVID-19 Vaccine:
• Weakness or tingling sensations, especially in the legs or arms, that’s worsening and spreading to other parts of the body.
• Difficulty walking.
• Difficulty with facial movements, including speaking, chewing, or swallowing.
• Double vision or inability to move eyes.
• Difficulty with bladder control or bowel function.

These may not be all the possible side effects of the Janssen COVID-19 Vaccine. Serious and unexpected effects may occur. The Janssen COVID-19 Vaccine is still being studied in clinical trials.

@NumberWang

““I’m rather curious as to why you talk about overall mortality (an official data collection) whilst, simultaneously, taking the story of the lady at the checkout at face value?” Question is not relevant. Your other questions are not relevant either, as no hard conclusion is based on one such story. Feel free however to […]
Actually, all those questions are relevant. If you’re interested in separating genuine serious adverse events from the blizzard of shite, coincidence and conspiracy, that is.
It would appear that you have tucked yourself into the niche labelled JAQ.”

I’ve never said I take the story of the lady at the checkout at face value. You fantasize obviously, can you not just read?
A story is just a story. Several similar stories from independent and unrelated sources combined, may however be an indication for some underlying phenomenon. None of you seems to want to understand this.
Your standard procedure here usually is to pick one such incident and find whatever reason the injury or death might have not been due to the vaccine. This is wrong.
Like I said, it is the sudden appearance of a number of such events combined that is relevant.

If you feel like taking a deeper dive into this one case, why not?
You give me all the relevant questions in order for you to determine if these two cases the woman told me about are vaccine related with more certainty. You might ask them yourself through email.

Data about overall mortality is a different story. I will look into that at some point, there’s no hurry. Just having not received input from any of you here is quite remarkable, to say the least.

@ Wendy Stephen

You write: As I stated before you have no idea how the case concluded, and although I’m grateful for your interest in my daughter and her welfare you must appreciate that as she’s now very much an adult, I won’t be commenting on either.”

So, I have no idea how the case concluded; yet, going back several years to several blogs you posted comments several times that your application for compensation was denied, though they admitted that the vaccine caused the unilateral hearing loss; but a unilateral hearing loss was considered a 20% disability and they didn’t compensate for low levels of disability. So, one more example of what a stupid dishonest liar you are. And I would bet that if Katie had received the compensation you wouldn’t be posting comments, at least not nearly as many.

And I have known people who had children with various disabilities, polio in wheel chair, Down Syndrome, etc. and the parents proudly talked about what their kids had achieved and I even knew someone whose child with polio retrained to walk and bragged about that. As I wrote, my guess is that Katie is doing fine and you don’t want to admit it because then your obsession with the compensation would just be sick. And I’m talking both achievements as kids and as adults.

And while I’m sorry about Katie’s unilateral hearing loss, I feel even more sorry for her having such a sick stupid dishonest mother. While my parents and grandparents weren’t well educated they were roll models for honesty and decency.

So, once more you prove what a STUPID DISHONEST PERSON YOU ARE.

@ Lucas

You write: “Data about overall mortality is a different story. I will look into that at some point, there’s no hurry. Just having not received input from any of you here is quite remarkable, to say the least.”

Bull Shit. Several people have included links to various data sets. Just one more example of what a sick dishonest troll you are. So, below is just one more excellent article on excess mortality, which I know you won’t read.

“What is ‘excess mortality?

Excess mortality is a term used in epidemiology and public health that refers to the number of deaths from all causes during a crisis above and beyond what we would have expected to see under ‘normal’ conditions.1 In this case, we’re interested in how the number of deaths during the COVID-19 pandemic compares to the deaths we would have expected had the pandemic not occurred — a crucial quantity that cannot be known but can be estimated in several ways.
Excess mortality is a more comprehensive measure of the total impact of the pandemic on deaths than the confirmed COVID-19 death count alone. It captures not only the confirmed deaths, but also COVID-19 deaths that were not correctly diagnosed and reported2 as well as deaths from other causes that are attributable to the overall crisis conditions”
Reference: Charlie Giattino, Hannah Ritchie, Max Roser, Esteban Ortiz-Ospina and Joe Hasell (2022 Nov 12). Excess mortality during the Coronavirus pandemic (COVID-19). Our World in Data.

The above is an excellent article that goes into depth how such estimates are made. And it is just one of dozens of articles I found and downloaded. The deaths from other causes include people with various diseases who during high point of pandemic were not admitted to hospitals and clinics because of infectious disease precautions as well as shortage of personnel, included people with cancer, heart disease needing surgery, etc. and people dying at home from, say, a heart attack; but not checked for covid infection. Quite simply, even with a heart condition, without a severe infection, people can live longer, some times much longer, etc. etc. etc.

So, as usual, you are just a dishonest lying troll.

@ldw56old

“”Conspiracy? No, policy”
No, your asinine take on policy. And there’s no more reason to believe anything you say about economics than there is anything you say above covid and the lack of safety of vaccines. As I’ve said, you’ve blatantly lied about so many things the safest (by far) position is to take everything you say as a lie. Same for your bullshit about “winners” and “losers” (although you’ve already lost at “being a decent person”).”

My asininine take on policy? Stupido.
Even you must have heard about the current high inflation from under your rock. In Economics inflation is equivalent to a tax by your government. Which means there was some policy causing it. When you are confronted with mega inflation during a couple of years, you will be surprised by how much and how fast your purchasing power has shrunk. It just melts like snow for sunshine.
Investors hedge themselves against inflation by buying assets, like gold, real estate, shares, bonds. The rich do this usually, often through an asset manager.
Your problem is probaly that you’re not rich. Which means – presumed that you would know how to invest in what assets at a given moment – that you don’t have much left for investments anyway. Which means that in times of inflation you do not compensate for it. No need to further explain (I hope, otherwise say so) that the current mega inflation pushes you as a probable middle class, lower at the wealth ladder, direction the poor. This is the game being played now, in case you haven’t noticed.

Look ldw56, I don’t care if use a silly enigrating word like ‘conspiracy’. Call it what you want, but it is real. And you are the looser.

Other than you not knowing anything about my financial situation [but begin completely ignorant on a topic never stops you from spouting a false statement] if you are really an economist [doubtful, since you’ve never demonstrated the intellect needed for a graduate program, or even a rigid undergraduate program] implying that the inflation here in the US is at a record level and is a product of government policies would indicate you’re a shitty economist. Just as you’re a shitty source for things vaccine and covid related. You seem as stupid as the people who keep pitching crypto-currencies.

@Dangerous Bacon

Yes, I did consider the possiblity that the rate of VITT might be overestimated due to the various definitions being relied on, but realistically how likely do you think that is with approx 2 weeks less of a cut- off date (in some instances nearly 3 weeks) in the window of opportunity/timeframe for making a VITT diagnosis in some versions?

If we take the Astra Zeneca timeframe (manufacturer of one of the Covid vaccines and presumably recipients of trial data and feedback) of 1-42 days for their product and (for example) a hospital using the 5-30 day window, or in some instances 4-20 days, the potential is for under reporting, not over reporting. The possibility exists that 2 weeks worth of potential VITT cases may be being overlooked due to a shortened time frame. Doesn’t seem at all likely, when the manufacturer of a vaccine provides a timeframe for a potential ADR to occur that it would result in an over estimation of cases unless that timeframe was for some reason extended, which I’m not seeing.

In the circumstances don’t you think it’s more likely than not, that anything short of the manufacturers recommended time frame for VITT is going to result in the problem being underestimated rather than over estimated.

“…realistically how likely do you think (overestimation of risk) is with approx 2 weeks less of a cut- off date (in some instances nearly 3 weeks) in the window of opportunity/timeframe for making a VITT diagnosis in some versions?”

It seems logical that dragging out the time frame for assigning correlation to a vaccine risks increasing the number of false positives.

Then again, I don’t have a well-worn antivax hammer and think everything looks like a nail. Nor do I automatically accept a manufacturer’s CYA statement as gospel.

@Dangerous Bacon

“Nor do I automatically accept a manufacturer’s CYA statement as gospel.”

Really?

Really, Really??

Why would someone who is an ardent supporter of vaccines say that they don’t automatically accept a manufacturers CYA statement as gospel? If I said that, there would have been a steady, deafening, trampling of feet (Joel at the front with his capitals) to label me an anti vaxxer for even daring to doubt the veracity of the manufacturers! What happened to trust the science ie the manufacturers on the back of trials/studies/ research and data gathering supply, (in an open and transparent fashion), information and guidance re possible ADR’s and you say you don’t automatically accept it as gospel.

I’ve got to ask………..why not?

This is highly reminiscent of your previous bizarre insistence that parents were being denied informed consent if they weren’t given a vaccine manufacturer’s handout.

Antivaxers do love those things if they can be selectively cited to seemingly back antivax claims.

Don’t pretend you’re unfamiliar with argument-by-package-insert.

https://vaxopedia.org/2019/01/29/show-me-the-vaccine-insert/

“Nor do I automatically accept a manufacturer’s CYA statement as gospel.”

Could you please answer the question ie why not? My previous question to you also remains unanswered.

Ps. I didn’t mention package insert, it’s you who are re introducing the topic even when I am not, just as Joel did with the VDPU and compensation………….what’s that all about?

You lambast me for raising the subject(s), then when I don’t you introduce them yourselves so that you can lambast me again, even when it’s off topic!

Joel is evidently living rent-free in your head, and vice versa.

You two should get a room.

“Could you please answer the question ie why not? My previous question to you also remains unanswered”

Well my partner’s package insert mentioned Stephens-Johnson syndrome. However, it said it was very rare. The doctor warned us what to look out for and what to do.

Her skin is still intact so……

There are legal reasons to make CYA statements as cautious as possible. I have underwear with warning that it is dangerous to put it to near to a fire.

“I have underwear with warning that it is dangerous to put it to near to a fire”.

As do I, but I’m presuming you recognise that the warning is there for a purpose and your protection and you don’t disregard it (or worse put it to the test) on the basis that it’s only included to allow the manufacturer to lawfully market their product!

It’s there for a purpose and the purpose is to warn of a potential hazard.

@Joel

Just to be clear, I didn’t raise anything to do with my daughter, the VDPS, compensation etc on this particular thread………………..that was you! I wonder why YOU have to keep on raising it even when I do not. Is it so that you can generate some legitmacy (in your thinking) for attacking my skills as a parent when I refuse to debate the subject with you? Is it to go off topic and deflect? Why would you criticise someone over and over for posting on a subject in the past and then entice them to do so when they aren’t?? Then you complain when I wont oblige you. Something really not right about that.

@ Wendy Stephen

I brought up the past as it is clear that your position on vaccines is based on it and your dishonest approach to just about anything. Just to summarize:
1. You were wrong about Spike protein (see my comment) and didn’t admit it
2. You were wrong about rare adverse events needing more follow-up in case not rare. I pointed out we have 2 years follow-up and the rare events occurred in less than two months and asked you if that was adequate. No response.
3. You wrote: “As I stated before you have no idea how the case concluded,” An absolute lie! ! !
4. And when I asked about Katie, your response, just as it was years ago, is that she is an adult, so you won’t discuss her. What an absolutely STUPID response, especially since she was interviewed by several newspapers and discussed her condition, interviewed as an adult; but they were from several years ago and maybe she was able, for instance, to get a cochlear implant?

In any case, as usual, your comment is stupidly dishonest.

@ Wendy Stephen

As of 2021, apparently Katie is graduate with MA, works as actress, stage manager and theater/musical reviewer. Could be another Katie Stephen???
Apparently she is doing well.

@ Wendy Stephen

As I wrote, I found recent articles about Katie Stephen, including a number of plays she worked in, either as actress or stage manager and that she has an MA. If I had a child with an MA and successful as an actress and stage manager I would be extremely proud of her. If she also had a handicap which she successfully overcame, I would be even more proud of her. Also, from photos in articles, she is a very attractive young lady. I spoke on phone with several friends and they would also have been quite proud, one does have a son who is a professional stage manager. If nothing else you are an extremely weird person who refused to publicly be proud of your daughter’s accomplishments.

@Joel
If this is an example of your research skills which you go on about at great length then everyone on here should be wary as my daughter does NOT (Yup, capitals) have an MA……………you have the wrong person!!!
Either your skills as a researcher aren’t what you make them out to be or your drive to present me in a very negative light at all costs on here has robbed you of all decency.
Either way for someone who repeatedly calls others dishonest and/or idiots, it’s a bit of an irony. This is high on the sale of ‘best laughs ever’ ………………. only surpassed by the one where you said Wakefield wasn’t really antivax!

Ps Just for the record, even though she doesn’t have an MA and isn’t the person you describe, I’m still incredibly proud of her, as I am of all my family.

Good try Joel!

@ Wendy Stephen

You really are FULL OF SHIT. I made it clear that I found several articles on a Katie Stephen. How the hell could I know which one was your daughter? Since you have given no information on her, what type of research skills would have helped? I search the web, only tool available and by the way, I was only wrong about the MA. Here is another article I found from August 28, 2012:

“Katie Stephen, a 21 year old actress, who is deaf
in one ear due to the MMR vaccine jab when she
was a child, on the beach in Kirkcaldy, Scotland,
on Tuesday 28th August 2012”

So, you could have simply written, yep, my daughter is a successful actress; but there must be some other Katie Stephen that has an MA. By the way, the Katie Stephen with the MA is also in the theater.

GO TO HELL YOU LOW LIFE SACK OF SHIT

“How the hell could I know which one was your daughter?”

You couldn’t, but most people would have clarified that before they lambasted me on my parenting skills etc for fear it wasn’t the right person but you are so driven to present me in a bad light that you plunged head long in there! That’s no one’s fault but your own.

“So, you could have simply written, yep, my daughter is a successful actress; but there must be some other Katie Stephen that has an MA. By the way, the Katie Stephen with the MA is also in the theatre”.

And therein lies your problem, my daughter is not a successful actress, she is not a performer or stage manager and she does not have an MA!!! You have confused two different individuals with the same name.

So no, I could not say my “daughter is a successful actress” because she isn’t and it would have been a lie.

Now, who is full of shit?

@ Wendy Stephen

You write: “where you said Wakefield wasn’t really antivax!”

You disgusting low life sack of shit. I wrote that Wakefield may not have been antivax in the beginning since he was in partnership to develop a monovalent measles vaccine, so his position may just have been to harm the MMR vaccine. One more example of how you twist and lie. YOU ARE ONE REALLY SICK INDIVIDUAL.

And then I wrote once his monovalent vaccine failed and he lost his job and license he has become clearly antivax.

@ Wendy Stephen

As you wrote: “Joel, the rarity of a serious adverse event in association with a vaccine can start off as extremely rare. Some, with the best of checks, clinical trials and studies (for one reason or another), go undetected prior to marketing. Sometimes it is only in the post marketing era that “rare but serious adverse- effects” even start to become apparent.”

And I explained just how thorough vaccine safety studies are done, including continuing post post post marketing. In addition, anyone who understands the immune system will understand how vaccines work and why serious adverse events will occur almost always within two months; however, as I wrote, in a world of eight billion people the possibility of some genetic predisposition and/or exposure to toxins could cause an extremely rare serious adverse condition; but it would be insane to warn people of something that might occur once per 10 million doses; but the main point is that it is exactly one of the major positions of antivaxxers that regardless of how well-done both studies and post-marketing studies are that vaccines cause serious adverse events, sometimes in the distant future. So, your position makes it clear YOU ARE AN ANTIVAXXER.

@Joel

“….as I wrote, in a world of eight billion people the possibility of some genetic predisposition and/or exposure to toxins could cause an extremely rare serious adverse condition;”

I agree that some underlying and often undetected predispositions might make an individual more vulnerable to serious ADR’s but it is also possible, as it was with the Urabe containing vaccines, that the product itself is defective ie Urabe was insufficiently attenuated and ergo more reactogenic than it should have been.

@ Wendy Stephen

Yep, the Urabe wasn’t as attenuated as it should have been; but the requirements and oversight and adverse events monitoring of vaccines around the world have improved, so, once again, you bring up the past to muddy the waters, to give ammunition to your fellow antivaxxers. And yet, the Urabe caused very few unilateral hearing losses, very few, compared to from the natural mumps, so it still fwas or the vast majority of kids improvement. And I won’t go into whether UK should have switched to Jeryl-Lynn sooner as, again, this was 30 years ago. I suggest you write articles emphasizing that the first heart transplants were failures. Maybe you can persuade some people to forgo one. Bad analogy; but still . . .

And, as usual, you fail to address/admit that you were wrong about long term serious adverse events, especially ignoring all the programs doing long-term follow-ups, and that you were wrong about the S-Spike protein, etc.

Bottom line, you are a dishonest despicable excuse for a human being. An antivaxxer who lies about being one.

@ Wendy Stephen

Once more, you write: “I agree that some underlying and often undetected predispositions might make an individual more vulnerable to serious ADR’s but it is also possible, as it was with the Urabe containing vaccines, that the product itself is defective ie Urabe was insufficiently attenuated and ergo more reactogenic than it should have been.”

Not defective. As I wrote and in your immense stupid dishonesty you ignore, highly likely that the rare cases of unilateral hearing loss from the Urabe was because of a genetic predisposition. Yep, if more attenuated probably would not have occurred; but still also highly likely a genetic predisposition. The world isn’t black and white, thus a combination of factors, and as I also wrote if your daughter had been exposed to actual mumps I would bet she would have suffered unilateral hearing loss.

Imagine a scenario. Mumps is raging now, no vaccine, then newspaper article explains two new vaccines, Urabe and Jeryl Lynn. The article also explains that ca 1 in 500,000 Urabe vaccinated suffer unilateral hearing loss and only 1 in 10 million from Jeryl Lynn. The article also explains that from natural mumps 5% suffer some unilateral hearing loss. Well, I would want to get the Jeryl Lynn for my child or grandchild. But the article also says there is a production problem and a delay in getting out the Jeryl Lynn. This is in the middle of a major mumps epidemic. So, Jeryl Lynn compared to natural mumps, given approximately 10 million kids, 500,000 vs 1. Urabe 500,000 vs 20. Given the extremely small risk from Urabe and an ongoing pandemic, I would make sure kid got the Urabe vaccine. And if he/she developed unilateral hearing loss, of course I would be upset; but would focus on two things: 1. doing everything possible to make sure kid advanced a much as possible despite having a disability, as your daughter did and 2. get government to fund more programs to help kids with disabilities, either from vaccines or natural disease.

So, one can argue to hell freezes over why UK didn’t get Jeryl Lynn sooner; but the risk from natural mumps was exponentially higher and very very very few suffered unilateral hearing loss from the urabe. But, as a rabid stupid dishonest antivaxxer you continue to bring up something from 30 years ago and refuse to discuss how well your daughter has done. Something else in your immense ignorance you don’t understand is that a significant portion of population have some type of disability; e.g., autoimmune disease, allergies, muscle/skeletal problems or just plain different IQs; but even someone with a lower IQ can achieve much if they work at, not as much as higher IQ; but how much someone with any deficit achieves depends on them. You should be proud of your daughter’s accomplishments.

So, I repeat, it was a combination of not attenuated enough and a genetic predisposition that led to your daughter’s extremely rare unilateral hearing loss; but for the overwhelming majority of kids, the Urabe vaccine did its job. Again, you want to see the world in black and white. STUPID, STUPID, STUPID

@ Wendy Stephen
As you wrote: “If this is an example of your research skills which you go on about at great length then everyone on here should be wary as my daughter does NOT (Yup, capitals) have an MA……………you have the wrong person!!!
Either your skills as a researcher aren’t what you make them out to be or your drive to present me in a very negative light at all costs on here has robbed you of all decency.
Either way for someone who repeatedly calls others dishonest and/or idiots, it’s a bit of an irony. This is high on the sale of ‘best laughs ever’ ………………. only surpassed by the one where you said Wakefield wasn’t really antivax!

I wrote: “As of 2021, apparently Katie is graduate with MA, works as actress, stage manager and theater/musical reviewer. Could be another Katie Stephen???”
I guess you are just too stupid to notice I wrote “Could be another Katie Stephen???” As I already wrote, please explain how I could have known that articles on Katie Stephen listed both as actresses and one article also said earned an MA? So, I made clear wasn’t certain if it was your daughter. You could simply have responded that, yep, she is an actress; but doesn’t have an MA, so must be two actresses with same name; but one has MA. Not even close to indicating problems with my research skills.

As for Wakefield, you made the same claim quite a while ago and I responded in depth, including references to his attempt at a univalent measles vaccine.
Just several examples of just how dishonest and stupid you are. I don’t need to paint you in a negative light as you do it yourself. As for decency, you lie about what I have written or twist it or just make things up. You ignore when I point out your errors; e.g., Spike Protein, Follow-up on serious adverse events, etc.
YOU ARE ONE EXTREMELY STUPID DISHONEST LIAR. And this is an extremely accurate description.

@NumberWang

“Could you please answer the question ie why not? My previous question to you also remains unanswered”

Well my partner’s package insert mentioned Stephens-Johnson syndrome. However, it said it was very rare.”

Good try to deflect. The issue is, why would, Dangerous Bacon, so very obviously an ardent supporter of vaccines etc say “Nor do I automatically accept a manufacturer’s CYA statement as gospel.”

Do they not trust the manufacturers data produced in conjunction with their vaccines?

Are they questioning the veracity of it?

Do they know something we don’t?

Are they so very driven to argue absolute vaccine safety/promote vaccination that they’d go as far as to take issue with specific parts of a vaccine manufacturer’s recommendations /data when it doesn’t suit their arguments or acknowledges that sometimes on rare occasions, (sometimes very rare occasions, others not so) that their product can potentially cause ADR’s.

Why so driven to berate those on here who question the absolute veracity of data, science, research etc and relay their hesitancy/ doubt when clearly they are not without hesitancy themselves?

Any poster on here who even suggested that they could not automatically accept data from a vaccine manufacturer would be immediately and relentlessly branded an anti vaxxer for failing to invest whole heartedly in vaccine safety.

And so, my question to DB remains unanswered………why would DB as someone who is passionate about vaccination and argues for vaccine safety etc not automatically accept data from a manufacturer as gospel?

What makes DB doubt any aspect of it?

I wrote an extended reply to you this morning but the comment posting app gobbled it. I’ll give you the short version.

I looked up the information sheets for a flu vaccine which I received in September and the Pfizer Covid-19 booster which I got in October. The flu sheet had lots of information on adverse events that had previously been reported in various years. But it barely mentioned adverse effects except for studies on pregnant animals. The Pfizer sheet grouped adverse effects into a whole series of categories from common to very uncommon.

But even the information provided in these sheets is not data in the same sense as the data published and reported in scientific studies like the ones done for licensure and follow-up observational studies to look at effects in the much larger population after mass immunization is started.

And DB’s comment about argument by package insert seems very pertinent.

I will conditionally accept that these documents are prepared honestly and represent a good faith effort to meet a legal requirement. If you wish to pick one, link to it and tell us what you make of it, please do so.

But your comment about accepting them as gospel seems ill-posed since you don’t specify what that means. And it seems like a set-up for a gotcha question.

@ Wendy Stephen

As usual you ignore what I wrote that showed just how stupid and dishonest you are, so you now write: “Why so driven to berate those on here who question the absolute veracity of data, science, research etc and relay their hesitancy/ doubt when clearly they are not without hesitancy themselves? Any poster on here who even suggested that they could not automatically accept data from a vaccine manufacturer would be immediately and relentlessly branded an anti vaxxer for failing to invest whole heartedly in vaccine safety.”

Your so-called questioning isn’t really questioning, it is rhetorical, that is, not open for investigation; but clearly stating something, one can’t trust . . . And, nope, if someone suggests that, for instance, original claims based on research missed some rare problems and linked to the studies, they would not be branded antivaxxer, especially if they also highly recommended all the other vaccines, excepting the one until further research is done. You have continued for over a decade to hammer Urabe mumps vaccine; but have seldom if ever written that since then safety requirements for vaccine approval and follow-up have improved immensely and seldom if ever said you highly recommend parents get their kids the Jeryl Lynn. I guess if you focused on cars you could hammer the Ford Pinto that 40 years ago had an explosive gas tank and never mention the massive increases in car safety since then, including Fords.

And when I asked you which vaccines you have received over the past decades and when, you refuse to answer. If you aren’t an antivaxxer why refuse to name vaccines you have received. Maybe you did once; but I certainly don’t remember such

You just keep proving that any negative opinion of you is totally accurate.

Aaah, nice to be back dear friends.
Antwerp was nice, Ghent the surprise.
Naming no names, but highly recommended for grumpy haters.

@Aarno Syvänen

“So it was not removing the farmers, it was originally proposal to reduce cattle. It as not WEF, it was environmentalists Difficult to speak truthfully,is it not?”

Aarno, what power do environmentalists have to remove one farmer, let alone a couple of thousands of them?
And the thought didn’t come from our government.
So reducing nitrogen pollution is why these farmers have to quit? I have a better idea Aarno: why not target a sector like aviation? Why not shut down Tata steel here (IJmuiden)? Problem solved and my country can continue to feed the world.
But hey, who cares about how the people get fed that our farmers export to? Who cares about shortages, whether that’s cheese or gas?
Politics Aarno. It stinks so much more then cow shit.

@Chris Preston

“”Perhaps also why an ‘antivaxxer’ would want to lie.”
To be an anti-vaxxer, you have to lie about vaccines. The answer you are after defines itself.”

You mean a sincere anti-vaxxer is a contradictio in terminis?
The answer I am after seems to differ from yours. Are these vaccines a threat to public health vs how to defend a biased point of view.

@ Lucas

No, the vaccines are NOT a threat to public health. Just the opposite. You ignore the overwhelming evidence of how effective vaccines have been in saving lives, preventing suffering, preventing hospitalizations, etc. going back to the first vaccine, the smallpox vaccine.

So, the moronic TROLL is back.

@ Wendy Stephen

You write: “why would DB as someone who is passionate about vaccination and argues for vaccine safety etc not automatically accept data from a manufacturer as gospel?”

From the CDC VIS Frequently Asked Questions

Q: Some VISs contain recommendations that are at odds with the manufacturer’s package insert. Why?
A: VISs are based on the ACIP’s recommendations, which occasionally differ from those made by the manufacturer. These differences may involve adverse events. Package inserts generally tend to include all adverse events that were temporally associated with a vaccine during clinical trials, whereas ACIP tends to recognize only those believed to be causally linked to the vaccine.

So, the manufacturer’s package inserts, etc. include associations that were not shown by further research to be causally linked to the vaccine.

In addition, you continue to ignore that once a vaccine is approved and use begun there are several programs in US and many other nations that follow adverse events for years and one can also go to National Library of Medicine’s online database PubMed and search for various vaccines adverse events. I just searched using “Moderna covid vaccine adverse events” and got 258 results. And I would bet one or two, especially case, case series, or even small studies might claim to have found some specific adverse event; but, as opposed to people like you, I learned a long time ago not to rely on one or two studies, except if large well-done placebo-controlled randomized clinical trials. On the other hand if 256 found no verified particular serious adverse events and two weak studies did, you, of course, would latch on to the latter because your unscientific rigid rabid anti vaccine position would be your criteria.

So, squirrelelite is absolutely right

Very interesting. I questioned Dangerous Bacon as to why they had said …….

“Nor do I automatically accept a manufacturer’s CYA statement as gospel.”

No response. I pose the question again and this time ………………

“Joel is evidently living rent-free in your head, and vice versa.
You two should get a room.”

Meanwhile, NumberWang comments as does Squirrelelite but Dangerous Bacon who made the comment and would know the answer/could provide an explanation can merely make an off topic and very unsavoury comment while continuing to ignore the question.

(No sacks of shit or capitals yet though!!)

Thanks, Joel!
No one has to answer Wendy’s questions. And they can judge from the other content of her comments whether they think it is worth their time to undertake further discussion.

I gave her an opening to start such a substantive interchange, but she bypassed it.

C’est la vie!

CYA statement is abou ligitation, “May underestinate” is there to avoid accusations of false advertisement.Like somebody telling you that you should not put underear near to fire.

@ Wendy Stephen

I repeat what you wrote: “why would DB as someone who is passionate about vaccination and argues for vaccine safety etc not automatically accept data from a manufacturer as gospel?”

And I responded to it. So, one more example of your stupid dishonest self.

You write: ““Joel is evidently living rent-free in your head, and vice versa.
You two should get a room.”

If, in your infinite stupidity you notice that two people who base their responses on real science are in agreement, you are right; but it isn’t that we agree with each other as individuals; but both agree with the same REAL SCIENCE.

Just one more moronic statement by you.

@ Wendy Stephen

You write: “while continuing to ignore the question.”

Wow, what a hypocrite? When I have responded, directly addressed, comments by you, you either ignore or twist what I said; but almost never actually address what I write in a logical, scientific manner, so when someone else on a rare occasion does something similar, you attack.

YOU JUST KEEP MAKING A FOOL OF YOURSELF.

You wrote a while ago that you don’t like me making you look negative; but I don’t. I just describe/explain your comments which, in themselves, show what a negative stupid dishonest person you are.

Joel, just in case you missed it, I posted to Dangerous Bacon (not Joel Harrison)
“Could you please answer the question ie why not?”

However, it is interesting that you continue to reply and Dangerous Bacon doesn’t. You did not make the statement, and ergo cannot answer the question in their stead.

And even more concerning you are now saying to me……………….

“You write: ““Joel is evidently living rent-free in your head, and vice versa.
You two should get a room.”

Actually it was Dangerous Bacon and not me who posted that on 6th December and as it was said in response to my post, I think you’ll find that for some very bizarre, perverse reason (which I cannot begin to understand) Dangerous Bacon wants you and I to get a room!

Who’s suffering from infinite stupidity now?

Moronic statement ….you say that of me??

And as for this………. “YOU JUST KEEP MAKING A FOOL OF YOURSELF”.

And this……….. “I just describe/explain your comments which, in themselves, show what a negative stupid dishonest person you are.

I fear the sacks of shit aren’t far off!

@ Joel A. Harrison, PhD, MPH

“Bull Shit. Several people have included links to various data sets. Just one more example of what a sick dishonest troll you are.”
Still waiting for the data. No link to what I asked for; how hard can it be?
It’s not in the ONS data either: “There will be a delay in publishing the next edition of the deaths by vaccination status”.

“So, below is just one more excellent article on excess mortality, which I know you won’t read.”
Just another useless remark, Joel. Time to grow up.

““What is ‘excess mortality?
Excess mortality is a term used in epidemiology and public health that refers to the number of deaths from all causes during a crisis above and beyond what we would have expected to see under ‘normal’ conditions.”
Not specifically during a crisis. Can be afterwards as well.

“1 In this case, we’re interested in how the number of deaths during the COVID-19 pandemic compares to the deaths we would have expected had the pandemic not occurred — a crucial quantity that cannot be known but can be estimated in several ways.”
Yes, of course.

“Excess mortality is a more comprehensive measure of the total impact of the pandemic on deaths than the confirmed COVID-19 death count alone. It captures not only the confirmed deaths, but also COVID-19 deaths that were not correctly diagnosed and reported2 as well as deaths from other causes that are attributable to the overall crisis conditions”
“As well as deaths from other causes that are attributable to the overall crisis conditions” – correct. Vaccines included.

“The above is an excellent article that goes into depth how such estimates are made. And it is just one of dozens of articles I found and downloaded. The deaths from other causes include people with various diseases who during high point of pandemic were not admitted to hospitals and clinics because of infectious disease precautions as well as shortage of personnel, included people with cancer, heart disease needing surgery, etc. and people dying at home from, say, a heart attack; but not checked for covid infection. Quite simply, even with a heart condition, without a severe infection, people can live longer, some times much longer, etc. etc. etc.”
All fine. There will be several causes for excess mortality. These factors have been there during the last two and a half years, but were – except due to covid – not really visible. Furthermore, many had already died a premature death due to these factors. These absorb future mortality. Nevertheless we see the opposite of the expected under-mortality.
Anyway, there’s so much to look into. The more so in case of a significant relative difference in mortality between the vaccinated vs the unvaccinated. I’ll wait.

“So, as usual, you are just a dishonest lying troll.”
Play at 33 or 45 RPM?
Btw, I asked you to quit your pleonasms; a doctor should at least master his mother tongue.

@Joel A. Harrison, PhD, MPH

“No, the vaccines are NOT a threat to public health. Just the opposite. You ignore the overwhelming evidence of how effective vaccines have been in saving lives, preventing suffering, preventing hospitalizations, etc. going back to the first vaccine, the smallpox vaccine.”

Your opinion is of no importance. It all depends on statistics. Statistics depend on a certain database. The database depends on accuracy and reliability of input.
Both are questionable.

Furthermore I have repeatedly told you to think before you write. Here you state that the vaccines are not a threat because of its effectiveness. That is nonsense, Joel.

Actually death statistics depends on death certificates, which are legal documents.

@ Wendy Stephen

Wow! You got one thing right. It was Dangerous Bacon who first wrote: “Joel is evidently living rent-free in your head, and vice versa.
You two should get a room.” But typical of your moronic gross exaggerations to write: “Who’s suffering from infinite stupidity now?”

So, I missed one simple quote and in your sick mind represents “infinite stupidity.” Applies much more to you who gets so many things wrong over and over again.

As for your getting one thing right, there is an old saying: Even a broken clock gets the time right twice daily.”

If I remember correctly you worked as an assistant nurse in psychiatry? Years ago I read that doctors and other health care workers who chose psychiatry often because they themselves suffered from psychiatric problems. Not all; but more than from other branches of medicine. I wonder if this applies to you. In any case, I am so glad you retired. I would hate to think that someone who is so anti-science, thus, ignoring/contradicting how to treat patients, would be working with them.

So, just to satisfy you: YOU ARE FULL OF SHIT. And this is not cussing; but an accurate description of you and what you write in comments

@Joel Harrison

“So, I missed one simple quote and in your sick mind represents “infinite stupidity.” Applies much more to you who gets so many things wrong over and over again”.

Not for the first time this week you lunged headlong into a retort on the back of an error in your judgement. The issue isn’t making a mistake (we’ve all made mistakes) it’s more to do with your frenzied attempt to discredit me on the back of nonsense resulting in seriously flawed posts. Besides, you didn’t miss the quote, you failed to observe who had posted it and then turned the contents into something it wasn’t, to provide an inaccurate retort to me (while ascribing the quote to me).

Come on Joel, do you really think that I would suggest you and I get a room?? Didn’t alarm bells go off in your head at that point?

I’m only now recovering from the post several days later!

@ Lucas

It isn’t worth responding to you. You twist what people write and lie outright. As I wrote, there are literally hundreds of articles in peer-reviewed journals on the effectiveness of the mRNA covid vaccines and I understand mRNA and the immune system. If one doesn’t understand these, then one doesn’t understand how and why vaccines work.

You really are nothing more than an obnoxious TROLL

@ Lucas

CDC Excess Deaths Associated with COVID-19 links to several datasets at: https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid19/excess_deaths.htm

CDC (2022 Jul 15). New COVID-19 Vaccine Effectiveness Data Showcase Protection Gained by 3rd and 4th Doses

Canada @ https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/pub/45-28-0001/2020001/article/00076-eng.htm

PubMed typed in: “bnt162b2 mrna covid-19 vaccine efficacy” results 428 papers

"moderna covid vaccine efficacy" results 314 papers

'pfizer covid vaccine efficacy" results 566 papers

World Health Organization (2021 Mar). Evaluation of COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness

Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation (2022 Nov 18). COVID-19 vaccine efficacy summary.

@Joel A. Harrison, PhD, MPH

“It isn’t worth responding to you.”
Especially so when you don’t have any substantial comment left to refute. Synonym for ‘you are right Lucas’.

“You twist what people write and lie outright. As I wrote, there are literally hundreds of articles in peer-reviewed journals on the effectiveness of the mRNA covid vaccines and I understand mRNA and the immune system. If one doesn’t understand these, then one doesn’t understand how and why vaccines work.”
Yes Joel, we know you understand it all.
And again this twisted reasoning of yours. I repeat what you implied: the vaccines are not a threat because of its effectiveness. Right, Joel.
And hey, I know what mRNA does as well: biology lessons. I just happen to not know all about the subject. And so don’t you.
I asked ldw56 if he understands a hammer. Do you, Joel? Better quit your arrogance.

“You really are nothing more than an obnoxious TROLL”
33 or 45 RPM?

I asked ldw56 if he understands a hammer.

Yes, you’re very good at meaningless questions. Honesty and understanding complicated things — you fail miserably at both.

I know what mRNA does

Ha! About a day ago I challenged another antivaxxer, well known in these parts, to demonstrate that she knows something about mRNA vaccines and how they compare with other types. She didn’t even try, but made a bunch of claims about some vaccines that proved her profound ignorance. Would YOU like to try to write a little about mRNA? Where it normally comes from, where it goes, what happens when it gets where it’s going – that sort of stuff. Dazzle us! Make us believe you “know what mRNA does.”

the vaccines are not a threat because of its effectiveness.
What does this mean ?

@ Lucas

First, you questioned vaccine effectiveness, that is, is there data? So, I gave a number of websites that give effectiveness data, so you basically ignore and write: “the vaccines are not a threat because of its effectiveness” and to show not a threat, that is risk of serious adverse events I listed a number of websites just above Joel A. Harrison, PhD, MPHsays:
December 9, 2022 at 5:58 pm. So, absolute proof you are a dishonest TROLL

@ Wendy Stephen

I wrote: Joel A. Harrison, PhD, MPH
says:
December 5, 2022 at 9:35 am
@ Wendy Stephen
As of 2021, apparently Katie is graduate with MA, works as actress, stage manager and theater/musical reviewer. Could be another Katie Stephen???
Apparently she is doing well.
Your response was: Wendy Stephen
says:
December 6, 2022 at 6:11 am
@Joel
If this is an example of your research skills which you go on about at great length then everyone on here should be wary as my daughter does NOT (Yup, capitals) have an MA……………you have the wrong person!!!
Either your skills as a researcher aren’t what you make them out to be or your drive to present me in a very negative light at all costs on here has robbed you of all decency.
My response was:
Joel A. Harrison, PhD, MPH
says:
December 6, 2022 at 12:24 pm
@ Wendy Stephen
You really are FULL OF SHIT. I made it clear that I found several articles on a Katie Stephen. How the hell could I know which one was your daughter? Since you have given no information on her, what type of research skills would have helped? I search the web, only tool available and by the way, I was only wrong about the MA. Here is another article I found from August 28, 2012:
“Katie Stephen, a 21 year old actress, who is deaf
in one ear due to the MMR vaccine jab when she
was a child, on the beach in Kirkcaldy, Scotland,
on Tuesday 28th August 2012”
So, as usual, you attacked me, my research skills because I couldn’t know which of two Katie Stephen was your daughter and you even, in your immense stupidity, missed that I also wrote “Could be another Katie Stephen???”
So, I clearly admitted I wasn’t sure; but just to give some examples of my research skills look above at two of my comments which include quite a few references to data on mRNA vaccine efficacy and safety. My research skills mean I know how to find appropriate websites, scientifically valid articles, etc.
Just one more example of what a stupid dishonest person you are. I have EXCELLENT research skills. I could link to papers I’ve written with up to 150 valid references.
YOU JUST KEEP MAKING A FOOL OF YOURSELF


@Joel Harrison

“So, as usual, you attacked me, my research skills because I couldn’t know which of two Katie Stephen was your daughter and you even, in your immense stupidity, missed that I also wrote “Could be another Katie Stephen???”

No Joel, (yet another good try) I responded to you not because you couldn’t know which of two Katie Stephen was my daughter but because you launched into a rant against me and my parenting skills despite not knowing for sure and seeking clarification first. I told you directly that you could not have known which was the right person. There’s no shame in that.

You made numerous assumptions and wrote a post based on a fixed false belief attempting to influence others to buy into your view of things and you were wrong. The worst bit is that you knew that it was possibly not the right person but you risked it anyway and launched into a rant based on false information. You made no attempt to determine whether or not you had the right person before placing an erroneous statement in the public domain.

How many of your other posts are similarly flawed but as yet go undetected?

@ Wendy Stephen

You write: “The worst bit is that you knew that it was possibly not the right person but you risked it anyway and launched into a rant based on false information. You made no attempt to determine whether or not you had the right person before placing an erroneous statement in the public domain.
How many of your other posts are similarly flawed but as yet go undetected?”

First, calling it a “rant” for simply writing I found a Katie Stephen listed as an actress with an MA is INSANE. And how in hell could I have determined if she was the right person? You just keep making ever more stupid statements.

As for how many of my other posts are similarly flawed, I gave an example of my research skills above. On topics related to science, especially vaccines and public health, my research skills are excellent. I just noticed that one of the two comments I posted that gave list of websites, articles, etc on vaccine safety somehow didn’t get posted, so I am going to submit it again.

On the other hand, I have torn to shreds almost everything you have written and when someone finds an error in one of my comments, I double check and if they are right, I immediately admit it. I have absolutely NO problem admitting when I am wrong. My self image is based on doing my best to base my positions on solid science and logic and since even science, though seldom, makes errors and I accept I am a mortal being, my self-image is actually strengthened when I admit mistakes. Plus, my dad taught me that a real man is someone who admits his mistakes

So, one more example of your immense stupidity to make a big deal of my including an MA with your daughter’s name. And you ignore that even if only an actress I made clear that my comment was positive about her.

As for you parenting skills, quite simply my parents were roll models for honesty and decency. I see no indication in your stupid dishonest antivax position that indicates you are similar. And, yes, you are an antivaxxer. When I asked you a while back if someone you knew with small kids asked about getting them vaccinated, would you encourage it? Or maybe i just asked would you encourage people to vaccinate their kids? Basically the same. You replied you would basically neither encourage or discourage, you would say nothing. Well, someone who understands even the most basics of public health, understands why it is important to vaccinate kids, both to protect them and to protect others, simply herd immunity. A kid may not get sick from being infected; but could infect someone who is vulnerable, for instance, if shopping with parent. And I asked you which vaccines you have had and you refused to answer. And your 10 year RANT (appropriate use of word) on the mumps vaccine clearly indicates pathology.

KEEP MAKING A FOOL OF YOURSELF, THE ONE THING YOU ARE AN EXPERT AT

@ Lucas and Wendy

After I posted list of websites and papers on mRNA vaccine efficacy, Lucas wrote: “the vaccines are not a threat because of its effectiveness”. So I submitted another comment with a few examples of websites and papers on safety; but somehow didn’t get posted, so here it is again (NOTE that i could have listed many more; but I realize that you two will ignore anyway and my 76 year old arthritic hands don’t want to waste such effort). One more point, so far it appears that mRNA vaccines may be among the safest ever produced:

COVID-19 Vaccine & Safety Studies

PubMed
Search terms:

covid vaccine AND safety
4,478 results

covid vaccine AND adverse events
1,659 results

Kantarcioglu B et al. (2021 Jan).An Update on the Pathogenesis of COVID-19 and the Reportedly Rare Thrombotic Events Following Vaccination. Clinical and applied thrombosis/hemostasis

Li Z et al. (2022 Sep 13). Efficacy, immunogenicity and safety of COVID-19 vaccines in older adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Frontiers in immunology

Cari L et al (2021 Aug). Blood clots and bleeding events following BNT162b2 and ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine: An analysis of European data
COVID-19 Vaccine-Related Thrombosis: A Systematic Review and Exploratory Analysis. Journal of autoimmunity

CDC (2022 Jul 6). Selected Adverse Events Reported after COVID-19 Vaccination. Available at: https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/safety/adverse-events.html

Government of Canada. COVID-19: Vaccine safety and side effects. Available at: https://www.canada.ca/en/public-health/services/diseases/coronavirus-disease-covid-19/vaccines/safety-side-effects.html

Sweden. Public Health Agency of Sweden. Vaccination Against COVID-19.
Available at: https://www.folkhalsomyndigheten.se/the-public-health-agency-of-sweden/communicable-disease-control/covid-19/vaccination-against-covid-19/

@Aarno, @Joel

Joel wrote in his December 9, 2022 at 10:46 am post:

“No, the vaccines are NOT a threat to public health. Just the opposite. You ignore the overwhelming evidence of how effective vaccines have been in saving lives, preventing suffering, preventing hospitalizations, etc. going back to the first vaccine, the smallpox vaccine.”

What kind of proof is this? Joel tries to underpin his statement that ‘vaccines are not a threat’ with ‘evidence of how effective vaccines have been’. Like I wrote, this is basically no