Covid19 Jabs Vs Flu Jabs

Treatments and their effectiveness, herd immunity, masks, testing, etc.
jmc
Posts: 436
Joined: Mon Sep 21, 2020 9:01 am

Re: Covid19 Jabs Vs Flu Jabs

Post by jmc »

thinksaboutit wrote: Tue Mar 09, 2021 5:32 pm The angry response seems to be the norm, when people challenge you. Do you do this in person?

Now picking through the actual content of your rant.
jmc wrote: Tue Mar 09, 2021 12:10 pm Sorry. You really dont have the slightest idea about how the CDC works or how the VAERS DB works, the entries are inputted , or the regulatory foundation for its existence.

Your "anti-vaxxer" comment just shows how little you know about how these systems work in the US. It is quite simply stupid.
How do you know what I understand. Disagreeing with you doesn't make me stupid.
jmc wrote: Tue Mar 09, 2021 12:10 pm This is a raw data DB. Its the first entry for data. With all that entails. When the data is normalized and cleaned up later on when the meta-analysis is done for every entry that is reclassified and correct at least one or more are added. That is the nature of this type of clinical data. It is a first pass. But it gives you a very good ball park estimate number for adverse reaction types and severity.
This was my point exactly.. when the spurious entries have been filtered out, it will be useful. Not now!

Can you explain why the reported deaths for February are 1/3 of those for reported for January. Isn't this odd? Make you wonder about the quality of the data?
The vast majority of posters here come over as genuine posters. Just like all the others I have read in the last 30 years online. But a few just dont sound right. The pattern and content of their posts is unlike the genuine posters. These people are usually playing some game or another. Sometimes malicious. We already have had a few on here already. Since removed.

So with the genuine posters I try to be as polite and informative as possible. Plenty of examples here. With a few who I have suspicions about I will take a more robust line just to check. Usually nothing there. But now and then there is a poster who just does not sound legitimate. And those I give short shrift to. I am combatative because thats how you deal with these people online. They either stop playing games or they push off.

I have to come to the conclusion that you are a deliberate troll and thread spoiler. Whose only purpose is here seem to be to derail thread after thread. Its not just with me but with other posters here you seem to put on this act of almost dull stupidity as you stolidly seem to deliberately misunderstand post after post from me and others as we try to patiently explain often complex ideas in pretty clear layman terms. I can tell the difference between when I am not explaining some complex idea clearly enough and when the other party seems to be playing silly-buggers. Which is how you are starting to come across.

What is your day job? Because it obviously does not seem to entail an ability to understand fairly clear explanations, explanations of the sort I have been doing for decades for non-technical people on a wide variety of subjects. To their complete satisfaction. You seem incapable of understanding trends, initial data sets, data entry time lag, incomplete data entry, reasonable comparisons of equivalent datasets. etc etc. This is very basic stuff. None of this is the hard stuff. And there is plenty of that as you dig deeper into these subjects

The VAERS data is initial data. The time lag of entry can be of the order of days / weeks / months. Longer term effects, month to years. This is not a voluntary system in practice it is basically required by Federal Law. All Federal "voluntary" systems are de-facto mandatory due to the way professional liability lawsuits works. So entries will often be added weeks / months / years later. Knowingly entering false data is a Federal crime. Which is a big deal in the health care business.

https://vaers.hhs.gov/reportevent.html

I really cannot see the point of your nit picking. More than 1200 people have died from this vaccine so far in the US and at the current rate it will kill up to 3000 people by the summer. These people are dead because of the rushed vaccination process.

When I look through the case records in VAERS I just see lots of old frail people, at least 10% of them suffering from dementia, dying for an experimental untested vaccine rushed out due to little more than mass hysteria. Each of these cases is a real person. And in the case record you can often hear the real anguish of the health care professional who had to fill out the VAERS record of the death of this old person. Because 90% of the deaths are old person. So when I look through the case records I see and hear real people, not just text on a screen.

This SARS CoV 2 vaccine is killing old people at rate unparalleled rate in the modern era. No other mass inoculation vaccine has killed people at this rate. None.

Those are the facts. As established by VAERS.

So I have to ask, what exactly are you trying to establish by your repeated sniping comments. That none of those 1200 people died? That the 1200 plus health care professionals who made those VAERS entries were negligent or deliberately lying? The 1200 deaths are all data entry errors?

If between 30 to 50 people die from the 150 million vaccinations every year and more than 1200 people die from less than 60 million vaccinations in three months that is very real data.

If the IFR and CFR of both diseases being vaccinated against are about the same that is very pertinent information.

If most of those 1200 people who have died so fare were unlikely to have got any meaningful protection from the vaccine that is exceptionally important information.

The SARs CoV 2 vaccine gives little protection to those at high risk, and only give any real protection to those at very low risk.

Thats why the VAERS numbers are so important. The vaccine seem to be killing mostly those people who are unlikely to get any health benefit from the vaccine.

VAERS is what it is. Just like every other equivalent regulatory notification system. With all that entails. And there are plenty of those. Many hundreds. If you still dont understand what this means there are lots of professional text books and articles that will explain the principals involved.

thinksaboutit
Posts: 675
Joined: Wed Jan 06, 2021 11:38 am

Re: Covid19 Jabs Vs Flu Jabs

Post by thinksaboutit »

jmc wrote: Wed Mar 10, 2021 2:52 pm
thinksaboutit wrote: Tue Mar 09, 2021 5:32 pm The angry response seems to be the norm, when people challenge you. Do you do this in person?

Now picking through the actual content of your rant.
jmc wrote: Tue Mar 09, 2021 12:10 pm Sorry. You really dont have the slightest idea about how the CDC works or how the VAERS DB works, the entries are inputted , or the regulatory foundation for its existence.

Your "anti-vaxxer" comment just shows how little you know about how these systems work in the US. It is quite simply stupid.
How do you know what I understand. Disagreeing with you doesn't make me stupid.
jmc wrote: Tue Mar 09, 2021 12:10 pm This is a raw data DB. Its the first entry for data. With all that entails. When the data is normalized and cleaned up later on when the meta-analysis is done for every entry that is reclassified and correct at least one or more are added. That is the nature of this type of clinical data. It is a first pass. But it gives you a very good ball park estimate number for adverse reaction types and severity.
This was my point exactly.. when the spurious entries have been filtered out, it will be useful. Not now!

Can you explain why the reported deaths for February are 1/3 of those for reported for January. Isn't this odd? Make you wonder about the quality of the data?
The vast majority of posters here come over as genuine posters. Just like all the others I have read in the last 30 years online. But a few just dont sound right. The pattern and content of their posts is unlike the genuine posters. These people are usually playing some game or another. Sometimes malicious. We already have had a few on here already. Since removed.

So with the genuine posters I try to be as polite and informative as possible. Plenty of examples here. With a few who I have suspicions about I will take a more robust line just to check. Usually nothing there. But now and then there is a poster who just does not sound legitimate. And those I give short shrift to. I am combatative because thats how you deal with these people online. They either stop playing games or they push off.

I have to come to the conclusion that you are a deliberate troll and thread spoiler. Whose only purpose is here seem to be to derail thread after thread. Its not just with me but with other posters here you seem to put on this act of almost dull stupidity as you stolidly seem to deliberately misunderstand post after post from me and others as we try to patiently explain often complex ideas in pretty clear layman terms. I can tell the difference between when I am not explaining some complex idea clearly enough and when the other party seems to be playing silly-buggers. Which is how you are starting to come across.

What is your day job? Because it obviously does not seem to entail an ability to understand fairly clear explanations, explanations of the sort I have been doing for decades for non-technical people on a wide variety of subjects. To their complete satisfaction. You seem incapable of understanding trends, initial data sets, data entry time lag, incomplete data entry, reasonable comparisons of equivalent datasets. etc etc. This is very basic stuff. None of this is the hard stuff. And there is plenty of that as you dig deeper into these subjects

The VAERS data is initial data. The time lag of entry can be of the order of days / weeks / months. Longer term effects, month to years. This is not a voluntary system in practice it is basically required by Federal Law. All Federal "voluntary" systems are de-facto mandatory due to the way professional liability lawsuits works. So entries will often be added weeks / months / years later. Knowingly entering false data is a Federal crime. Which is a big deal in the health care business.

https://vaers.hhs.gov/reportevent.html

I really cannot see the point of your nit picking. More than 1200 people have died from this vaccine so far in the US and at the current rate it will kill up to 3000 people by the summer. These people are dead because of the rushed vaccination process.

When I look through the case records in VAERS I just see lots of old frail people, at least 10% of them suffering from dementia, dying for an experimental untested vaccine rushed out due to little more than mass hysteria. Each of these cases is a real person. And in the case record you can often hear the real anguish of the health care professional who had to fill out the VAERS record of the death of this old person. Because 90% of the deaths are old person. So when I look through the case records I see and hear real people, not just text on a screen.

This SARS CoV 2 vaccine is killing old people at rate unparalleled rate in the modern era. No other mass inoculation vaccine has killed people at this rate. None.

Those are the facts. As established by VAERS.

So I have to ask, what exactly are you trying to establish by your repeated sniping comments. That none of those 1200 people died? That the 1200 plus health care professionals who made those VAERS entries were negligent or deliberately lying? The 1200 deaths are all data entry errors?

If between 30 to 50 people die from the 150 million vaccinations every year and more than 1200 people die from less than 60 million vaccinations in three months that is very real data.

If the IFR and CFR of both diseases being vaccinated against are about the same that is very pertinent information.

If most of those 1200 people who have died so fare were unlikely to have got any meaningful protection from the vaccine that is exceptionally important information.

The SARs CoV 2 vaccine gives little protection to those at high risk, and only give any real protection to those at very low risk.

Thats why the VAERS numbers are so important. The vaccine seem to be killing mostly those people who are unlikely to get any health benefit from the vaccine.

VAERS is what it is. Just like every other equivalent regulatory notification system. With all that entails. And there are plenty of those. Many hundreds. If you still dont understand what this means there are lots of professional text books and articles that will explain the principals involved.
When challenged you seem to become even more angry in your responses. For all your undermining of my intellect (and that of others people in prior exchanges), you fail to address the questions and valid points put to you. This really does look like a defence mechanism.

Here is a reduced list, so you can have another attempt.

1. There are clearly spurious entries in this database : How else do you explain the people who have both died and recovered.
2. You assert that all people who reported died after taking the vaccine were killed by it. This is clearly not probable, is it?
3. Where is the explanation for the dramatically lower number of reports of vaccine related deaths in February, vs. January.

Just responding with abuse to the questioner, is not a good way to demonstrate your great knowledge and wisdom.

Perhaps you could respond to the questions next time.

thinksaboutit
Posts: 675
Joined: Wed Jan 06, 2021 11:38 am

Re: Covid19 Jabs Vs Flu Jabs

Post by thinksaboutit »

jmc wrote: Wed Mar 10, 2021 2:52 pm
thinksaboutit wrote: Tue Mar 09, 2021 5:32 pm The angry response seems to be the norm, when people challenge you. Do you do this in person?

Now picking through the actual content of your rant.
jmc wrote: Tue Mar 09, 2021 12:10 pm Sorry. You really dont have the slightest idea about how the CDC works or how the VAERS DB works, the entries are inputted , or the regulatory foundation for its existence.

Your "anti-vaxxer" comment just shows how little you know about how these systems work in the US. It is quite simply stupid.
How do you know what I understand. Disagreeing with you doesn't make me stupid.
jmc wrote: Tue Mar 09, 2021 12:10 pm This is a raw data DB. Its the first entry for data. With all that entails. When the data is normalized and cleaned up later on when the meta-analysis is done for every entry that is reclassified and correct at least one or more are added. That is the nature of this type of clinical data. It is a first pass. But it gives you a very good ball park estimate number for adverse reaction types and severity.
This was my point exactly.. when the spurious entries have been filtered out, it will be useful. Not now!

Can you explain why the reported deaths for February are 1/3 of those for reported for January. Isn't this odd? Make you wonder about the quality of the data?
The vast majority of posters here come over as genuine posters. Just like all the others I have read in the last 30 years online. But a few just dont sound right. The pattern and content of their posts is unlike the genuine posters. These people are usually playing some game or another. Sometimes malicious. We already have had a few on here already. Since removed.

So with the genuine posters I try to be as polite and informative as possible. Plenty of examples here. With a few who I have suspicions about I will take a more robust line just to check. Usually nothing there. But now and then there is a poster who just does not sound legitimate. And those I give short shrift to. I am combatative because thats how you deal with these people online. They either stop playing games or they push off.

I have to come to the conclusion that you are a deliberate troll and thread spoiler. Whose only purpose is here seem to be to derail thread after thread. Its not just with me but with other posters here you seem to put on this act of almost dull stupidity as you stolidly seem to deliberately misunderstand post after post from me and others as we try to patiently explain often complex ideas in pretty clear layman terms. I can tell the difference between when I am not explaining some complex idea clearly enough and when the other party seems to be playing silly-buggers. Which is how you are starting to come across.

What is your day job? Because it obviously does not seem to entail an ability to understand fairly clear explanations, explanations of the sort I have been doing for decades for non-technical people on a wide variety of subjects. To their complete satisfaction. You seem incapable of understanding trends, initial data sets, data entry time lag, incomplete data entry, reasonable comparisons of equivalent datasets. etc etc. This is very basic stuff. None of this is the hard stuff. And there is plenty of that as you dig deeper into these subjects

The VAERS data is initial data. The time lag of entry can be of the order of days / weeks / months. Longer term effects, month to years. This is not a voluntary system in practice it is basically required by Federal Law. All Federal "voluntary" systems are de-facto mandatory due to the way professional liability lawsuits works. So entries will often be added weeks / months / years later. Knowingly entering false data is a Federal crime. Which is a big deal in the health care business.

https://vaers.hhs.gov/reportevent.html

I really cannot see the point of your nit picking. More than 1200 people have died from this vaccine so far in the US and at the current rate it will kill up to 3000 people by the summer. These people are dead because of the rushed vaccination process.

When I look through the case records in VAERS I just see lots of old frail people, at least 10% of them suffering from dementia, dying for an experimental untested vaccine rushed out due to little more than mass hysteria. Each of these cases is a real person. And in the case record you can often hear the real anguish of the health care professional who had to fill out the VAERS record of the death of this old person. Because 90% of the deaths are old person. So when I look through the case records I see and hear real people, not just text on a screen.

This SARS CoV 2 vaccine is killing old people at rate unparalleled rate in the modern era. No other mass inoculation vaccine has killed people at this rate. None.

Those are the facts. As established by VAERS.

So I have to ask, what exactly are you trying to establish by your repeated sniping comments. That none of those 1200 people died? That the 1200 plus health care professionals who made those VAERS entries were negligent or deliberately lying? The 1200 deaths are all data entry errors?

If between 30 to 50 people die from the 150 million vaccinations every year and more than 1200 people die from less than 60 million vaccinations in three months that is very real data.

If the IFR and CFR of both diseases being vaccinated against are about the same that is very pertinent information.

If most of those 1200 people who have died so fare were unlikely to have got any meaningful protection from the vaccine that is exceptionally important information.

The SARs CoV 2 vaccine gives little protection to those at high risk, and only give any real protection to those at very low risk.

Thats why the VAERS numbers are so important. The vaccine seem to be killing mostly those people who are unlikely to get any health benefit from the vaccine.

VAERS is what it is. Just like every other equivalent regulatory notification system. With all that entails. And there are plenty of those. Many hundreds. If you still dont understand what this means there are lots of professional text books and articles that will explain the principals involved.
See the CDC assessment : A direct quote.....

"Over 92 million doses of COVID-19 vaccines were administered in the United States from December 14, 2020, through March 8, 2021. During this time, VAERS received 1,637 reports of death (0.0018%) among people who received a COVID-19 vaccine. CDC and FDA physicians review each case report of death as soon as notified and CDC requests medical records to further assess reports. A review of available clinical information including death certificates, autopsy, and medical records revealed no evidence that vaccination contributed to patient deaths. CDC and FDA will continue to investigate reports of adverse events, including deaths, reported to VAERS."

TheHandbag
Posts: 39
Joined: Sun Jan 10, 2021 2:43 pm

Re: Covid19 Jabs Vs Flu Jabs

Post by TheHandbag »

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/ ... sthrough=1

Here’s the one for the UK. As you can see, 222 deaths since 1963 to the covid vaccine’s 400+ Since Dec 2020.

Post Reply