I guess from this that death is not a long term side effect

Login or register to post comments Last Post 0 reads   46 posts
Viewing 10 posts - 11 through 20 (of 47 total)
  • Fri, Jun 18, 2021 - 10:39am

    #11
    Mike from Jersey

    Mike from Jersey

    Status Gold Member (Offline)

    Joined: Jan 22 2018

    Posts: 735

    count placeholder6

    Reply To: I guess from this that death is not a long term side effect

Brushhog,

You wrote:

Ive noticed, since the vaxx numbers have hit the wall, the push for the vaccine passports has slowed way down. With only 50% of the people going along with the vax, they know they do not have the numbers to shut half the population out of the economy.

I have noticed the same thing.

In the Google News feed this morning there was an article about people now needing “double lung transplants” due to Covid 19. Articles like that make me believe that they are getting desperate. And with good reason. If they had vaxxed 90 per cent of the population they could push anything on the remaining 10 per cent. If it was 75 per cent, it would be tougher but doable. But at 50 per cent, there are just too many dissenters.

And that 50 per cent number includes those who have just gotten one shot. I am sure that a good number have gotten one shot and decided not to get the second. Moreover, as more time goes on, word of mouth is passing the message that people are dying or becoming disabled from the vaccine.

  • Fri, Jun 18, 2021 - 10:56am

    #11
    Doug

    Doug

    Status Platinum Member (Offline)

    Joined: Oct 01 2008

    Posts: 1556

    count placeholder0

    I guess from this that death is not a long term side effect

I don’t really understand the point of this thread.  Everything in life involves risk.  We continue to build and drive cars despite 30-40,000 people dying in them every year.  It used to be 50-60,000 but we didn’t stop.  Actuary tables can predict with a fair degree of certainty how many people will die in agricultural, industrial, forestry, fossil fuel extraction and fishing accidents every year.  But, we keep on doing those things.

Assuming westcoastjan’s numbers are correct, one of every 10,000 people who are vaccinated will have an “adverse event” after having a vaccination.  There’s no causation statement there.  Nor is there any indication of how many of those 10,000 would have died or had “adverse events” if they hadn’t been vaccinated.

So, the question becomes, what is an acceptable number of deaths or “adverse events” in any enterprise if it is undertaken for the public good?  Not whether there will be any deaths or “adverse events”, there will be, but how many are acceptable?

s

  • Fri, Jun 18, 2021 - 11:08am

    #12
    brushhog

    brushhog

    Status Gold Member (Offline)

    Joined: Oct 06 2015

    Posts: 624

    count placeholder13

    Reply To: I guess from this that death is not a long term side effect

“Everything in life involves risk.  We continue to build and drive cars despite 30-40,000 people dying in them every year.  It used to be 50-60,000 but we didn’t stop.  Actuary tables can predict with a fair degree of certainty how many people will die in agricultural, industrial, forestry, fossil fuel extraction and fishing accidents every year.  But, we keep on doing those things”

Exactly the point Ive tried to make regarding covid since the beginning. With a 99.7% survival rate, why should we go to these lengths over a rebranded flu strain?

Locking down an economy? Quarantining healthy people? Masking an entire population? Pushing unapproved, potentially dangerous “vaccines” on the public? All to avoid a death rate that is dwarfed by automobile accidents?

Makes no sense. Covid19 barely warrants another discussion, much less an experimental vaccine!

  • Fri, Jun 18, 2021 - 11:20am   (Reply to #11)

    #13
    brushhog

    brushhog

    Status Gold Member (Offline)

    Joined: Oct 06 2015

    Posts: 624

    count placeholder3

    I guess from this that death is not a long term side effect

Mike, it wouldnt surprise me if even that 50% vaccinated number is massaged to the up side.

There are a good number of people who follow the herd and when they hear that most people are doing a thing, they’ll go along with it. Obviously TPTB are aware of this dynamic. If you turn on the TV, its just saturated with celebrities, and sports figures pushing the jab to give the impression of a strong public consensus.

They’ve certainly used fake poll numbers to push narratives in the past so I wouldnt put it past them. I’d bet a good 55% havent been vaxxed and when you add those who only got one shot but wont get the second? Probably approaching 60%.

  • Fri, Jun 18, 2021 - 11:24am   (Reply to #11)

    #14
    westcoastjan

    westcoastjan

    Status Gold Member (Offline)

    Joined: Jun 04 2012

    Posts: 621

    count placeholder12

    I guess from this that death is not a long term side effect

Doug: last I heard, driving a car was a choice and a privilege, as is choosing one’s occupation. No one is forcing anyone to drive or to work in jobs that are dangerous. Those are CHOICES, that are freely made without coercion of any kind.

The jabs are being forced on us via various methods, including threats, bribery and enticements.  All of this is in clear violation of human rights and the Nuremberg code.

If you are okay with that, well, that is your health and life to gamble with. But let me be absolutely clear: neither you nor anyone else, regardless of their station/role in our society, where we are legally protected from this kind of coercion, is entitled to gamble with my health or life. That is not your/their decision. It is my choice.

  • Fri, Jun 18, 2021 - 11:38am

    #15

    Jim H

    Status Bronze Member (Offline)

    Joined: Jun 08 2009

    Posts: 1440

    count placeholder13

    Public good?

Doug said,

So, the question becomes, what is an acceptable number of deaths or “adverse events” in any enterprise if it is undertaken for the public good?

As usual, Doug is posting from another planet.  Planet Doug.  On planet Doug there really are no early intervention therapeutics like Ivermectin or HCQ.  On planet Doug 90% of the Covid-19 deaths were not avoidable, and the experiment mRNA vaccines are in fact the only form of protection available.  On planet Doug, evolutionary biology works differently and we don’t need to worry about narrow, spike-protein based vax immunity actually driving the selection pressure that will accelerate the proliferation of variant strains, which is fortunate because otherwise the vaccines would definitely not be a public good.

On planet Doug the vax programs, even with some level of vax injury, are arguably a public good.

Sometimes I wish we did live on planet Doug.  We don’t.

  • Fri, Jun 18, 2021 - 12:42pm

    #16

    Jim H

    Status Bronze Member (Offline)

    Joined: Jun 08 2009

    Posts: 1440

    count placeholder5

    Back on planet RealScience an interesting signal emerges from UK data

The UK is tracking variants and giving us some stats.  Although they don’t call attention to this nugget, one can plainly see that the majority of deaths from the Delta variant are now among the vax’ed.  In other words, when we subtract the signal for death in the “Unvaccinated” column (note the prominent display, why no equivalent column for vaccinated death?  I think we know) from the total, we get the vaccinated death count.  The signal:  Vaccinated death > unvaccinated death.   

There could be some confounding variables behind this.. likely more of the older, more vulnerable population is vaccinated vs unvaccinated.  But still… we can clearly see that the vaccines are not protecting well against variants.

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/994839/Variants_of_Concern_VOC_Technical_Briefing_16.pdf

 

  • Fri, Jun 18, 2021 - 12:47pm   (Reply to #11)

    #17

    Quercus bicolor

    Status Gold Member (Offline)

    Joined: Mar 19 2008

    Posts: 789

    count placeholder4

    I guess from this that death is not a long term side effect

So, the question becomes, what is an acceptable number of deaths or “adverse events” in any enterprise if it is undertaken for the public good? Not whether there will be any deaths or “adverse events”, there will be, but how many are acceptable?

Clearly less than the number that would happen without the intervention for that specific age group, gender and health status  – after accounting for the impact of existing, proven treatments and preventatives on disease course.  (Note to Doug – please don’t tell me ivermectin doesn’t work without carefully reading at least 10 scientific papers on ivermectin intervention including at least a few well planned and executed, relatively unflawed, larger RCTs.  I have done that.)

For young people, the requirement in bold is an impossibly high bar for the vaccine.  For older people and middle aged folks with significant health conditions, perhaps not, but there is a lot of uncertainty and there is also immune escape to consider as JimH mentions.

But first I must consider my personal experience.  There are 8 likely vaccine adverse events I have heard about in person or over the phone or witnessed in an ER, doctor’s office waiting room or patient room (first ever seizures, one after each dose in a 45 year old woman, a significant stroke in a 70 year old man, new symptoms and diagnosis of Parkinson’s in a 69 year old man, little bruises over much of body in a 40ish woman, another seizure, heart issue in a 20ish woman, severe tremors in a 75ish woman, unable to lift arms above shoulders in a 55ish woman).  Only one of those was even suspected by the patient to be a vaccine adverse event (the arms above shoulders issue).  This is literally a landslide of serious health issues reported to or witnessed by me after a lifetime of an occasional clump of soil or rock coming down the slope.  I’ve heard many similar stories reported on this site as well.  So just how many adverse events are there really? And how many deaths are there really?

  • Fri, Jun 18, 2021 - 01:07pm

    #18

    Quercus bicolor

    Status Gold Member (Offline)

    Joined: Mar 19 2008

    Posts: 789

    count placeholder2

    I guess from this that death is not a long term side effect

why no equivalent column for vaccinated death?

Here’s what I see in that chart, Jim:

73 deaths comprised of:

  • 2 “unlinked” whatever that is
  • 34 unvaccinated
  • 1  from 0-21 days after dose 1
  • 10 from 21 days after dose 1 until 14 days after dose 2
  • 26 > 14 days after dose 2

So fully vaccinated deaths (260 are a bit less than unvaccinated deaths (34), BUT, we need to now the time-weighted average population in each group to get the actual deaths/million.  My guess is that on average, the fully vaccinated population was smaller and the death rates are nearly equivalent or higher for the vaccinated.

  • Fri, Jun 18, 2021 - 01:13pm   (Reply to #11)

    #19
    Kathy

    Kathy

    Status Silver Member (Offline)

    Joined: Feb 21 2020

    Posts: 342

    count placeholder2

    Maybe we need vax/ Covid insurance

Actuary tables can predict with a fair degree of certainty how many people will die in agricultural, industrial, forestry, fossil fuel extraction and fishing accidents every year.  But, we keep on doing those things.

Then we’d get actuary tables that would predict our risk of the vaccine vs. Covid which really is what this is all about.

Viewing 10 posts - 11 through 20 (of 47 total)

Login or Register to post comments