[flagged]
At a glance, the article is ranting, not science.
An axiom: When the best that dissenters can come up with can't be taken seriously, the dissent only lends credence to the consensus.
Accordingly, get your jabs, children. The risk of vaccination is infinitesimal. Meanwhile, long COVID can be a living hell [3].
[1] https://www.reddit.com/r/labrats/comments/1arhyee/published_...
Agreed. But it IS there, and we (at least in the Netherlands) were told it was 100% safe, and you would become unable to spread it. Which were bold-faced lies, and we weren't allowed to talk about that online (literally; read up on the facebook statement yesterday or the day before, about government pressure to "delay" the story).
Also, on television nobody was allowed to ask critical questions about it, or they would just get cut off.
That's what I don't like, and why I didn't go with it. If they would've been honest, I'd have no problem. But they messed that up, and my trust in the officials of my country is 0 now.
My experience in the same country was completely opposite.
I swear the true believers will go their graves before they admit “yea, this was all a bit of an over reaction”
I’m happy to let everyone make their own decisions, but it’s a big never-again from me. Miss me with your untested drugs, thanks.
One million, two hundred thousand dead from COVID and counting in the U.S. alone. Nearly 2% of all deaths in this past week were caused by COVID infection. This doesn’t even begin to touch the people who have suffered lifelong consequences from it.
Find me any statistic that puts any COVID vaccine within three orders of magnitude of these numbers or (maybe not so) kindly see yourself out.
By the same US federal data COVID brought someone back to life. I'm not joking the obvious mistake is recorded and is a wonderful example of how the data needs to be cleaned checked and examined more closely.
Showing that individual data points are inconsistent or wrong does not by itself indicate that conclusions gleaned from a data set as a whole are incorrect.
Read the accounts from funeral home staff some time. We were very literally running out of places to put the actual, physical bodies. It turns out when you have a mortuary system that’s set up to process a reasonably consistent and predictable number of deceased humans, adding an sudden, unexpected, and sustained additional load of 10–15% (with spikes up to 33% and 45%) system stretches it beyond its limit.
The data should be cleaned first to remove such problems which impacts totals.
Such work then has to look at labelled as having COVID at time of death Vs sole cause which is _missing_ from most Western datasets. And I'd be willing to believe it's missing from totals that large, unfortunately raising a question as to how many actually were killed by despite the fact we know >80% were likely over 80yr...
Not to forget the nice example, if you died from a heart attack due to a racy TV advert did the TV kill you?
Conspiracy bros failed math hard
I'm surprised (in a bad way) when people display limited ability to compare magnitudes. We see this all the time in discussions like clean energy and stuff. Sure, sometimes it is malicious or misinformed.
But in general it seems like some people can't do it (hence leading to things like payday loans, failure in managing finances, etc)
Quantitative amen.
Which one? If you're talking about the Oxford-Astrazeneca vaccine, you should be gald to know that the suspension was short lived, and around April 2021 it was in the market again.
They stopped selling it in 2024, but that's because:
1. we are collectively burying our head in the sand about covid (in the UK it seems we don't even monitor the wastewater covid levels anymore)
2. there are a bunch of other vaccines available, and due to the earlier suspension, people trusted the other vaccines more (and thus it was struggling in the market)
That said, they also stopped selling it:
https://www.fda.gov/news-events/press-announcements/fda-roun...
> requested the voluntary withdrawal of the EUA for this vaccine. Janssen Biotech, Inc. informed the FDA that the last lots of the vaccine purchased by the U.S. Government have expired, there is no demand for new lots of the vaccine in the U.S., and they do not intend to update the strain composition of this vaccine to address emerging variants
I'm not well acquainted with practices in the pharmaceutical industry, so it looks a bit weird to me that they would request to withdraw authorisation. I suppose that it might be simpler for them to do so if they know that all remaining doses have expired, rather than risk lawsuits in case that someone might accidentally administer expired doses?
Wow, I guess all the reports about blood clots and then pulling it was just not concerning.
I almost think it’s funny. You people will go to your graves before you admit that you were lied to.
I didn't doubt history will show a lot of best-guesses based on available information were untrue. But I'd rather people take it seriously and follow the guidance of the folks who prepared for this kind of disaster than do what we did in the 1920s. Even with a knowledge gap and errors, it lengthened most people's lives to lock down, mask up, and get vaccinated.
Covid
https://www.hdruk.ac.uk/news/risk-of-blood-clots-remains-for...
You should be grateful that you've been able to get a vaccine when you could, and quit being so arrogant and know-it-all.
You typed 3 replies, and you didn't corroborate a single one of your posts, all the while projecting your ignorance onto others
You'd have a more sympathetic argument if you could talk about non-covid induced blood clots, that despite being reported didn't get accounted properly in statistics. I'm sure the numbers might be a bit worse than in official statistics, because of deficiencies in our covid19 first-line response, and in the lack of trust that people like you have in the medical establishment (which means that issues might go unreported, or dismissed if reported by cranks without evidence)
Never got a cardiovascular condition from COVID, yet did (and it continues to worsen) from the vaccines.
Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.
At a certain point, "oh but statistically more people are worse off from COVID!" doesn't matter much to us as individuals, I think it's okay to act on behalf of my own self-preservation sometimes.
If the vaccine has caused you heart damage, that updates the Bayesian priors on whether you would have survived contracting the disease itself.
It is entirely possible the vaccine warded off a virus that would have killed your heart if your body had to respond directly to the unattenuated disease. I don't think we have enough information to be able to tell (how do you do an analysis of that kind when you don't even know precisely why COVID or the vaccine can cause heart damage?).