Question for sand_puppy

Login or register to post comments Last Post 0 reads   12 posts
Viewing 10 posts - 1 through 10 (of 12 total)
  • Fri, Aug 27, 2021 - 12:00pm

    #1
    Mike from Jersey

    Mike from Jersey

    Status Diamond Member (Offline)

    Joined: Jan 22 2018

    Posts: 1637

    count placeholder8

    Question for sand_puppy

This study concludes that, when adverse vaccine events are taken into consideration:

Scientific analysis of the data from pivotal clinical trials for US COVID-19 vaccines indicates the vaccines fail to show any health benefit and in fact, all the vaccines cause a decline in health in the immunized groups.

Trends in Internal Medicine

Is the journal “Trends In Internal Medicine” considered a legitimate medical journal?

Note that the study only studied post vaccine benefits and detriments for a limited time post injection, so the study does not address longer term usefulness of the vaccine either pro or con.

  • Fri, Aug 27, 2021 - 01:01pm

    #2
    Mike from Jersey

    Mike from Jersey

    Status Diamond Member (Offline)

    Joined: Jan 22 2018

    Posts: 1637

    count placeholder7

    Question for sand_puppy

I can actually answer my own question by looking at the journal.

It is issue 1, volume 1 of the journal.

It has quotes such as:

Manufacturers would market their products under the fraudulent philosophical argument that shrinking tumors or reducing cancer deaths equates to improved survival. However, many of the toxic chemotherapeutic agents would destroy vital organs and actually reduce survival while decreasing cancer deaths at the same time.

While that statement may be true, calling another’s position “fraudulent” in a purported scientific paper reduces its credibility.

There are other statements like that in the study.

Still, I think that there is some merit to the position he is taking. Put bluntly, it is not enough to measure a treatment’s success by the limited criteria of “does it reduce hospitalization from Covid 19 infection?” If a vaccine does “reduce hospitalization from Covid 19 infection” in a percentage of the population but causes death or disability in vaccinees due to the very fact of the vaccination, then the “deaths or disabilities” should be taken into account and considered against purported benefits. That just makes sense.

  • Fri, Aug 27, 2021 - 01:02pm

    #3
    TWalker5

    TWalker5

    Status Silver Member (Offline)

    Joined: Mar 13 2020

    Posts: 240

    count placeholder5

    Question for sand_puppy

Mike, it’s a brand new journal, so I’d have to say that is not considered legit at this point. That said, it appears to have so well qualified editors.  I’m wondering if some researchers have reacted to the current climate in publishing by saying screw it, we’ll start our own journal.
https://www.scivisionpub.com/journals/editorialboard-trends-in-internal-medicine

 

  • Fri, Aug 27, 2021 - 01:19pm

    #4
    sand_kitty

    sand_kitty

    Status Member (Offline)

    Joined: Apr 13 2011

    Posts: 2026

    count placeholder11

    Reply To: Question for sand_puppy

Hi Mike,

JB Classen, the author of the above study, is a well known anti-vax writer.   He has previously written on the links between Hep B vaccine and the onset of diabetes 3 years later. Therefore, he is rejected as a heretic by the mainstream medical community.

As you point out, the journal “Trends in Internal Medicine” is a new journal, not listed in PubMed (that I can find).

So this is NOT an authoritative article in the MSM and will not convince a medical professional.

—-

Separate question:  Is his analysis correct?

I suspect that there is truth in it.  JB Classen looks at the reduction in ICU-level-severity COVID infections in the vaccinated, then attempts to compare these benefits of vaccination with the costs of vaccination in terms of vaccine related adverse effects.

He digs through the appendices of the original NEJM article for data on adverse events.

His conclusion is that the severe adverse events produced by vaccination offset the benefits of reduced severe COVID offered by the vaccine.

To make sense of this one has to download the appendices to the NEJM article (links in the bibliography).

A problem in his analysis is that he includes “grade 3” and “grade 4” adverse events in his totals of “severe events.”  And these  are actually not terribly bad.  High fever, bad headache, really sore arm at injection site, etc.

For Moderna:

Control means placebo injection

——–

And the third question:  Is Classen asking the right question?

I do think that Classen is asking EXACTLY the right question.

Do the negative adverse events from the vaccine offset the advantages in reduced (ICU-level) disease severity .

I really want the answer to this question!!

  • Fri, Aug 27, 2021 - 01:38pm

    #5
    nordicjack

    nordicjack

    Status Bronze Member (Offline)

    Joined: Feb 03 2020

    Posts: 773

    count placeholder3

    Question for sand_puppy

I just read this study as well.  It is sad that a lot of data and studies are not accepted by those that clearly are experts in data cherry picking to manipulate for their own agenda.

This could be considered the same – it does look at a different end point.  I am not sure looking at the macro picture as they do here is a complete picture here either.  Its sort of like looking at the total deaths in the US or the excess deaths in the US to determine how many people died from Covid or how many deaths covid caused.

I am sure its meaningful, however it cant be taken and accepted alone.   I think more studies are articles would be more persuasive and show less bias if they tried to offer conflicting information.  where one asks a question rather than making subjective conclusion.

  • Fri, Aug 27, 2021 - 01:45pm

    #6
    davefairtex

    davefairtex

    Status Member (Offline)

    Joined: Sep 03 2008

    Posts: 3094

    count placeholder5

    all cause mortality

I think (in my humble opinion) that it all boils down to all cause mortality.

The “Coronary Drug Project” ended up with the “niacin” arm having an all-cause-mortality benefit of about 10%, 6 years after the trial ended.

To me, that’s where the rubber meets the road: all-cause mortality.  Do you die more, less, or the same?

That’s why, in the Pfizer trial where all-cause mortality showed no benefit – it did not impress.  “In this horrid pandemic where there are millions of people dying” – presumably you’d see an all-cause mortality benefit in the vaccinated population.

Nope.

  • Fri, Aug 27, 2021 - 02:03pm

    #7
    sand_kitty

    sand_kitty

    Status Member (Offline)

    Joined: Apr 13 2011

    Posts: 2026

    count placeholder4

    Did you die?

It is hard to fudge this solid endpoint.  Even lay people are pretty reliable in detecting death.   🙂

 

  • Fri, Aug 27, 2021 - 02:13pm

    #8
    Mike from Jersey

    Mike from Jersey

    Status Diamond Member (Offline)

    Joined: Jan 22 2018

    Posts: 1637

    count placeholder5

    Did you die?

Here is an article in relation to that “end point.” It is difficult to cover up vaccine deaths when it happens to a high profile vaccinee.

If Lisa Shaw hadn’t taken a Covid vaccine then she would, in all probability, still be alive today. The mother of one, a popular presenter at BBC Radio Newcastle, was only 44 years old and fit and healthy, with no known underlying conditions.

Yet take the Covid vaccine she did on April 29, despite being in a very low risk category – and complications from it killed her. That’s not a ‘conspiracy theory’ – or the view of an ‘anti-vaxxer’ – it’s the official coroner’s report.

A High Profile Vaccinee Death

Until we get real, honest answers to the Death/Disability side of the vaccine equation, it would be foolish for most people to even consider getting the vaccine.

The article notes:

How many deaths can be linked to the various Covid vaccines? It’s impossible to know for certain, but the government’s own website informs us: “The MHRA has received 508 UK reports of suspected ADRs to the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine in which the patient died shortly after vaccination, 1,056 reports for the Covid-19 Vaccine AstraZeneca, 17 for the Covid-19 Vaccine Moderna and 28 where the brand of vaccine was unspecified.” (Emphasis added)

These are not reports of deaths long after the vaccine, these are reports of people who admittedly “died shortly after the vaccination.” I am not alleging that. The Government of Britain is admitting that. If no serious investigation of things like this is undertaken, then no serious person should take the vaccine.

  • Fri, Aug 27, 2021 - 02:42pm   (Reply to #4)

    #9
    Netlej

    Netlej

    Status Silver Member (Offline)

    Joined: Dec 09 2020

    Posts: 361

    count placeholder2

    Question with a moving target.

Do the negative adverse events from the vaccine offset the advantages in reduced (ICU-level) disease severity .

I really want the answer to this question!!

I forget who said it but perspective is everything.

If you are over 60, overweight, have other co-morbidities then that is maybe a legitimate question.

If you are under 60, reasonably healthy, nutritionally balanced (easier said than done but still pretty easy), that is a question that should not come up as they should not be injected.

We need only treat the vulnerable and that doesn’t necessarily need to be with an injection

It seems pretty clear to me that most if not all vaccinations have claimed a higher degree of success by riding on the fact that natural immunity is way more wide spread and 10X more effective than vax.

  • Fri, Aug 27, 2021 - 02:54pm

    #10
    Mike from Jersey

    Mike from Jersey

    Status Diamond Member (Offline)

    Joined: Jan 22 2018

    Posts: 1637

    count placeholder3

    Question for sand_puppy

Netlej,

I probably have close to a perfect BMI. And I have little (but not zero) in the way of co-morbidities.

But I am over 70.

So it is an issue for me.

Viewing 10 posts - 1 through 10 (of 12 total)

Login or Register to post comments