Ahhh I see. I think she's always been pro-booster but especially for the most vulnerable or high exposure risks, but has always professed that our cellular immunity could obviate the need for some. She's always wanted to save doses for world health instead which I applaud her for. Maybe new evidence like this makes her more likely to recommend the booster to more people?? Idk. Good find.
Coronavirus
2,112,124 Views |
20108 Replies |
Last: 13 min ago by ncsupack1
I don't have a whole lot to add to the big juicy grey middle that exists in this discussion. Not sure why I am even dipping my toe in.
But this is what you get when our institutions like the CDC and 'public health' no longer stand for objective science and public good.
They exist as corrupt political and ideological entities. Misrepresenting science/data and projecting self-serving agendas.
Who are you left to trust?
But this is what you get when our institutions like the CDC and 'public health' no longer stand for objective science and public good.
They exist as corrupt political and ideological entities. Misrepresenting science/data and projecting self-serving agendas.
Who are you left to trust?
Ass... meet Silver Platter.
I wasn't trying to be argumentative. I recalled reading that tweet on this thread and decided that a booster was likely unnecessary for me and my wife. That's why I was so surprised to see her cheerleading boosters for all, not just the most vulnerable. I don't recall noticing the portion of her post that may have indicated she wanted to save doses for other nations. Perhaps that was her real motivation. Thanks for pointing that out.Mormad said:
Ahhh I see. I think she's always been pro-booster but especially for the most vulnerable or high exposure risks, but has always professed that our cellular immunity could obviate the need for some. She's always wanted to save doses for world health instead which I applaud her for. Maybe new evidence like this makes her more likely to recommend the booster to more people?? Idk. Good find.
I also seem to recall someone posting about her making the decision to stop posting so much on Twitter. When I went searching for the tweet this morning, I found her to be a very prolific Twitter user. Again, I was surprised. I wonder if she has someone posting for her so she can do some actual work. I would think taking the time to comprehend all these studies she is commenting on and then tweeting about would take several hours per day.
Another "rare" side effect of the vaxx...hearing loss or ringing in the ears. Although this is less serious than the myocarditis and heart attacks being caused by the vaxx, this is serious nonetheless. The WHO has been forced to open an investigation into the vaxx causing this. The CDC and FDA are holding the line and denying any link. 15,000 cases of this in the U.S. have been reported. Of course, remember that only about 1% of side effects are being reported. So none of the side effects are truly "rare" as being claimed. They are rampant.
"Ye are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you." - John 15:19
15,000/588,000,000 doses is 0.0026% risk. That's considered a rare occurrence in most circles. If it's 100x that as you say, that's still 0.255%. Still sounds rare. Though I admit, tinnitus sucks.
Tinnitus sucks but you learn to live with it. I no longer notice it unless someone mentions it. I must admit that the fact our brains produce the sensation, like a phantom pain from a missing limb, is interesting. Annoying, but interesting.Mormad said:
15,000/588,000,000 doses is 0.0026% risk. That's considered a rare occurrence in most circles. If it's 100x that as you say, that's still 0.255%. Still sounds rare. Though I admit, tinnitus sucks.
Well, let's assume for the sake of argument that basically everything in VAERS is being under-reported by a factor of 100. That means that we have 1.5 million people in the U.S. dealing with hearing loss or ringing in the ears caused by the vaxx. That's a hell of a lot of people. And to get a rate, I would divide by the number of people in the U.S. who've taken at least one dose of the vaxx (~258 million), not the number of doses. That's a rate of 0.58% or about a 1 in 172 chance.Mormad said:
15,000/588,000,000 doses is 0.0026% risk. That's considered a rare occurrence in most circles. If it's 100x that as you say, that's still 0.255%. Still sounds rare. Though I admit, tinnitus sucks.
"Ye are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you." - John 15:19
probably written down as a required question and recommendation.packgrad said:
At my annual physical earlier this year with my primary, under the Duke umbrella, he asked if I had a booster. I told him no, and he recommended I get one. Told him I had issues with afib with the initial 2 shots from moderna. He then responded, "yeah, don't get the booster." Haha. I was glad that was his response. He's a good dude.
Werewolf said:probably written down as a required question and recommendation.packgrad said:
At my annual physical earlier this year with my primary, under the Duke umbrella, he asked if I had a booster. I told him no, and he recommended I get one. Told him I had issues with afib with the initial 2 shots from moderna. He then responded, "yeah, don't get the booster." Haha. I was glad that was his response. He's a good dude.
My dentist and cleaning tech have been HOUNDING me to get injected with the mystery juice my last two visits. Must be a protocol to ask the patients and pressure them to get vaxxed up.
"Ye are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you." - John 15:19
At least in my practice and hospital, other than the mask mandate in the medical setting and asking us to personally Vax, nobody has told me to do ANYTHING, established a protocol, set a narrative, or told us what we can and can't prescribe. We had treatment protocols for admitted pts based on best practices set forth by a team of physicians (infectious disease, critical care, etc), but it was a guideline. And it changed as we learned more and more about the disease and its management. Nobody told us what to do, and we were free to deviate from the protocol as we saw fit for individual pts. Nobody has told me what advice I should or should not give regarding any aspect of the management of or vaccination against covid. All of opinions and knowledge have been formed by me based on my background and 2 yrs of being knee deep in covid. They were not forced upon me. In fact, the only treatments that were standard were oxygen and dexamethasone. That's the TRUTH. But I love when people assume they know more about me and my management of patients and what I've been "TOLD" than me. It is laughable, ridiculous, offensive, and mind boggling to State such nonsense, and the crickets were because such incredulous misconceptions deserved no response.
Yes, the vaccines have some side effects, as do all medical treatments. But they are indeed rare.
Tylenol causes 56,000 ER visits per yr. Nsaids kill 15,000 people per year. But most here still give it to our febrile kids or take it back pain.
As I've said, during spikes it is NOT the vaccine side effects that are getting people admitted, it's the disease.
Tylenol causes 56,000 ER visits per yr. Nsaids kill 15,000 people per year. But most here still give it to our febrile kids or take it back pain.
As I've said, during spikes it is NOT the vaccine side effects that are getting people admitted, it's the disease.
It does and you're right. The VA actually gives me 10% disability for it. Too many times down on the gun line without my earplugs when a fire mission came in, I guess.PackFansXL said:Tinnitus sucks but you learn to live with it. I no longer notice it unless someone mentions it. I must admit that the fact our brains produce the sensation, like a phantom pain from a missing limb, is interesting. Annoying, but interesting.Mormad said:
15,000/588,000,000 doses is 0.0026% risk. That's considered a rare occurrence in most circles. If it's 100x that as you say, that's still 0.255%. Still sounds rare. Though I admit, tinnitus sucks.
GuerrillaPack said:
Well, let's assume for the sake of argument that basically everything in VAERS is being under-reported by a factor of 100.
Why would we assume that?
The reports in VAERS aren't vetted or confirmed to be caused by the vaccine.
Assuming side effects are under-reported in VAERS is just as likely compounding an error as getting closer to the truth.
Joined:
Feb 8, 2018
Posts:
4,100
User Profile
Private Message
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Staff
Correct. As I have explained many times over the past couple of years, VAERS is not a reliable data source. It is self-reported and unsubstantiated.Civilized said:GuerrillaPack said:
Well, let's assume for the sake of argument that basically everything in VAERS is being under-reported by a factor of 100.
Why would we assume that?
The reports in VAERS aren't vetted or confirmed to be caused by the vaccine.
Assuming side effects are under-reported in VAERS is just as likely compounding an error as getting closer to the truth.
Hey Davie, did you see my post about Monica and her sabbatical from Twitter? Do you recall that post from her as well?
PackFansXL said:
Hey Davie, did you see my post about Monica and her sabbatical from Twitter? Do you recall that post from her as well?
Didn't that have to do with another (idiot) doc at UCSF calling her out and saying she was causing harm with her opinions?
I don't know. That's why I was asking someone who may have been the one who posted her tweet. Do you recall the event?Mormad said:Didn't that have to do with another (idiot) doc at UCSF calling her out and saying she was causing harm with her opinions?PackFansXL said:
Hey Davie, did you see my post about Monica and her sabbatical from Twitter? Do you recall that post from her as well?
BTW, the wife and I both finally got COVID. We were both vaxxed but not boosted. My symptoms were not as bad as the worst case of the flu I have ever had. Three days of up to 102 fever and an annoying cough. The Mrs is having more difficulty shedding the cough than I have had. I don't know if it affected taste and smell since I lost those when I inadvertently tried to drive an S2000 in the inverted orientation and smacked my head on a driveway. That event cost me smell, taste, hearing above 4kHz in my right ear, and the most fun vehicle I have ever owned.
UCSF idiot doc has to be Bob WachterMormad said:PackFansXL said:
Hey Davie, did you see my post about Monica and her sabbatical from Twitter? Do you recall that post from her as well?
Didn't that have to do with another (idiot) doc at UCSF calling her out and saying she was causing harm with her opinions?
The WHO publication referred to earlier states (WHO Pharmaceuticals Newsletter No. 1, 2022 pg 22):
" ...
Under-reporting is a well-known limitation of spontaneous adverse drug reaction reporting.
However, there is high interest in COVID-19 and COVID-19 vaccines, which may
contribute to increased reporting and therefore, potentially an overestimation of
the risk. Additionally, the observed versus expected numbers and IC 025 values need to
be interpreted with caution, since reporting by healthcare providers and the sites is a
requirement under the terms of the Emergency Use Authorizations for COVID-19
vaccines in some places (e.g., the USA where most of the cases were reported).
... "
Per the WHO, it could be just as likely over-reported by a factor of 10, 17, or 32. I just dreamed those numbers up, for comparison sake.
" ...
Under-reporting is a well-known limitation of spontaneous adverse drug reaction reporting.
However, there is high interest in COVID-19 and COVID-19 vaccines, which may
contribute to increased reporting and therefore, potentially an overestimation of
the risk. Additionally, the observed versus expected numbers and IC 025 values need to
be interpreted with caution, since reporting by healthcare providers and the sites is a
requirement under the terms of the Emergency Use Authorizations for COVID-19
vaccines in some places (e.g., the USA where most of the cases were reported).
... "
Per the WHO, it could be just as likely over-reported by a factor of 10, 17, or 32. I just dreamed those numbers up, for comparison sake.
So you personally determined that Ivermectin was not effective, therefore, you independently decided not to prescribe it...........even though its listed on the CDC website as a treatment?Mormad said:
At least in my practice and hospital, other than the mask mandate in the medical setting and asking us to personally Vax, nobody has told me to do ANYTHING, established a protocol, set a narrative, or told us what we can and can't prescribe. We had treatment protocols for admitted pts based on best practices set forth by a team of physicians (infectious disease, critical care, etc), but it was a guideline. And it changed as we learned more and more about the disease and its management. Nobody told us what to do, and we were free to deviate from the protocol as we saw fit for individual pts. Nobody has told me what advice I should or should not give regarding any aspect of the management of or vaccination against covid. All of opinions and knowledge have been formed by me based on my background and 2 yrs of being knee deep in covid. They were not forced upon me. In fact, the only treatments that were standard were oxygen and dexamethasone. That's the TRUTH. But I love when people assume they know more about me and my management of patients and what I've been "TOLD" than me. It is laughable, ridiculous, offensive, and mind boggling to State such nonsense, and the crickets were because such incredulous misconceptions deserved no response.
So you personally determined that Remdesivir was effective, therefore, you independently decided to prescribe it...........as it was listed on the CDC website as a treatment/
So you personally determined that hydroxychloroquine was unsafe; therefore, you independently decided not to prescribe it?\\
Bear in mind, my formulation of what actually has been occurring is formulated from discussions with family members during the COVID breakout time including 2 MD's, 3 NPs and 3 N's. And I am all too familiar with the plight of medical doctor independence and the many issues with independence associated with hospitalists.
PREMIERING JUNE 4, 6PM ET] Headwind The Debate: Dr. Robert Malone vs. Dr. Geert Vanden Bossche
https://rumble.com/v16ohek-headwind2-the-debate.html
The two heavyweights don't agree on everything as witnessed from recent HIGHWIRECOM discussions. The thing they do agree on is the JAB narrative.
Werewolf said:So you personally determined that Ivermectin was not effective, therefore, you independently decided not to prescribe it...........even though its listed on the CDC website as a treatment?Mormad said:
At least in my practice and hospital, other than the mask mandate in the medical setting and asking us to personally Vax, nobody has told me to do ANYTHING, established a protocol, set a narrative, or told us what we can and can't prescribe. We had treatment protocols for admitted pts based on best practices set forth by a team of physicians (infectious disease, critical care, etc), but it was a guideline. And it changed as we learned more and more about the disease and its management. Nobody told us what to do, and we were free to deviate from the protocol as we saw fit for individual pts. Nobody has told me what advice I should or should not give regarding any aspect of the management of or vaccination against covid. All of opinions and knowledge have been formed by me based on my background and 2 yrs of being knee deep in covid. They were not forced upon me. In fact, the only treatments that were standard were oxygen and dexamethasone. That's the TRUTH. But I love when people assume they know more about me and my management of patients and what I've been "TOLD" than me. It is laughable, ridiculous, offensive, and mind boggling to State such nonsense, and the crickets were because such incredulous misconceptions deserved no response.
So you personally determined that Remdesivir was effective, therefore, you independently decided to prescribe it...........as it was listed on the CDC website as a treatment/
So you personally determined that hydroxychloroquine was unsafe; therefore, you independently decided not to prescribe it?\\
Bear in mind, my formulation of what actually has been occurring is formulated from discussions with family members during the COVID breakout time including 2 MD's, 3 NPs and 3 N's. And I am all too familiar with the plight of medical doctor independence and the many issues with independence associated with hospitalists.
Oh, well I stand fully corrected, sir. You so obviously know much more than me about the practice of medicine. And most interestingly about the way I personally practice. Though I'm not a hospitalist. But I shall bear in mind that your familiarity with our plight much supercedes mine! Sorry for the confusion.
Joined:
Feb 8, 2018
Posts:
4,100
User Profile
Private Message
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Staff
Yes. I did see the post about her leaving Twitter for a while. Even though she was an early advocate for masking in public settings, she gradually shifted to be a supporter of the vaccines and the protection they can provide long-term. For this view, she received a lot of pushback on Twitter.PackFansXL said:
Hey Davie, did you see my post about Monica and her sabbatical from Twitter? Do you recall that post from her as well?
Early in the pandemic, I found her information with regards to how the immune system works (she provide links to many scholarly articles and papers) to be an excellent resource. When the vaccines were being developed, she provided information regularly on the differences between how the different vaccines work and as trial data was made public, she provided summations and information on how to interpret the data, When the vaccines were made available, she was an advocate for vaccinating those who were high risk first and trying to provide global vaccine equity - with a focus on vaccinating those countries that are typically under-served by healthcare. For this view, she was criticized on Twitter.
She also continued to receive pushback on her early views on masking from the anti-mask supporters on Twitter. She admitted when she got some things wrong and when she did, she would be attacked for being wrong. Additionally, I believe she was receiving some direct, personal pushback from some other doctors with whom she works. As you know, Twitter (and other forms of social media) can be very toxic and it was impacting her emotionally. At one point, she did take a few weeks away from Twitter, but she did return. I remember her actually taking a couple of breaks from Twitter to focus on family and her work with HIV. There are some doctors on Twitter who told her she was harming people with her views and that she should be taking Covid more seriously. The Covidians doctors and the ones who think they are doctors (the really bad epidemiologists to numerous to call out) are the ones most upset with her. Most of them are grifters who are using the pandemic as a way of gaining power and influence over others and just like some in the media, they can not let the hysteria die.
She seems to have moderated her views on some of the key topics, but she has always been a strong supporter for the ability of the immune system to provide protection after it has been exposed to Covid and after vaccination. Early on, she argued that T and B-Cell responses would provide protection, even after antibody protection wanes. She has appeared on a few of Dr. Zubin Damania's video podcasts to discuss the current state of Covid, vaccines, masking, etc. I have watched most of her appearances, along with some of his other podcasts and have found them very informative.
She has been a supporter of boosters for elderly and at-risk people with comorbidities. As to regular boosting of generally healthy people, I believe she has supported them, but not as urgently as those who are at-risk. She has stated on numerous occasions that T and B-Cells are likely to provide protection from a long time. The advantage of boosters is it helps to broaden the protection from the T and B-Cells and also provides some immediate antibody protection - even though antibodies will wane over a few months. There are other virologists I follow on Twitter (@sailorrooscout as an example) who share this view and it is backed up by medical science.
Thanks for the detailed response. I only read her tweets that you and a few others posted. I knew there was a short term boost in antibodies but I didn't know about the broadening effect until I saw the link posted by Mormad.Quote:
The advantage of boosters is it helps to broaden the protection from the T and B-Cells and also provides some immediate antibody protection - even though antibodies will wane over a few months. There are other virologists I follow on Twitter (@sailorrooscout as an example) who share this view and it is backed up by medical science.
I assume the booster is identical to the original vaccine; so, I don't really understand why repeated exposure broadens the protection. As I stated a few posts back, the wife and I just had COVID; so, I don't think a booster is relevant for us anymore since we got nature's dose. I suppose I should read the article she linked to try to understand the reasons for the broadened protection, but I don't think it would apply to my case.
Joined:
Feb 8, 2018
Posts:
4,100
User Profile
Private Message
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Staff
Here's a perfect example of what happens when Monica posts something fairly non-controversial (this post is from 9 hours ago). She receives comments from both sides. The long-Covid zealots are upset people are becoming infected and from the anti-vaccine zealots who continue to demonstrate they do not understand statistics.
More than two-thirds of world's population has high levels of antibodies to COVID per WHO (infection or vaccination). Antibodies can come down with time but B/T cells remainhttps://t.co/bQGhJzQEEH
— Monica Gandhi MD, MPH (@MonicaGandhi9) June 4, 2022
Joined:
Feb 8, 2018
Posts:
4,100
User Profile
Private Message
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Staff
You are welcome. I am sorry to hear you and your wife are infected. My wife and I were infected several weeks ago (made it 2+ years avoiding Covid) and the infections were extremely mild. Both of us had only received the initial dose (she had 2 shots of Pfizer and I had one shot of J&J), but no booster.PackFansXL said:Thanks for the detailed response. I only read her tweets that you and a few others posted. I knew there was a short term boost in antibodies but I didn't know about the broadening effect until I saw the link posted by Mormad.Quote:
The advantage of boosters is it helps to broaden the protection from the T and B-Cells and also provides some immediate antibody protection - even though antibodies will wane over a few months. There are other virologists I follow on Twitter (@sailorrooscout as an example) who share this view and it is backed up by medical science.
I assume the booster is identical to the original vaccine; so, I don't really understand why repeated exposure broadens the protection. As I stated a few posts back, the wife and I just had COVID; so, I don't think a booster is relevant for us anymore since we got nature's dose. I suppose I should read the article she linked to try to understand the reasons for the broadened protection, but I don't think it would apply to my case.
My wife had a little post-nasal drip and a mild cough. I had a runny nose, a sore throat for one day, and a little cough. My symptoms started to clear up on day 6 of symptoms (it was like a switch being flipped) and my wife's symptoms cleared in about 10 days. We never had a noticeable fever or general lack of energy. We both worked full days from home for a week. We were both fortunate, since others, such as you and your wife, have much worse symptoms. Since I have now recovered, I will not consider a booster until the late-Fall or early-Winter, but it depends on the variants in circulation and if they new Novavax vaccine gets approved.
PackFansXL said:Thanks for the detailed response. I only read her tweets that you and a few others posted. I knew there was a short term boost in antibodies but I didn't know about the broadening effect until I saw the link posted by Mormad.Quote:
The advantage of boosters is it helps to broaden the protection from the T and B-Cells and also provides some immediate antibody protection - even though antibodies will wane over a few months. There are other virologists I follow on Twitter (@sailorrooscout as an example) who share this view and it is backed up by medical science.
I assume the booster is identical to the original vaccine; so, I don't really understand why repeated exposure broadens the protection. As I stated a few posts back, the wife and I just had COVID; so, I don't think a booster is relevant for us anymore since we got nature's dose. I suppose I should read the article she linked to try to understand the reasons for the broadened protection, but I don't think it would apply to my case.
Yes, I agree. I wouldn't boost any time soon (or likely never for me personally based on my health) after an infection.
The article explains it and compares groups (no Vax, 2 doses, 3 doses, 2 doses +infection, infection then Vax, etc). But it's dense reading. It basically comes down to repeated exposures leads to expansion and further maturation of previously primed B and T cells. Which is great, because there are those who had/have rational fears that there could be issues with reduction in immunity (second ag sin, Vax aids) with repeated exposures, but studies like this help reduce that fear for the rational.
"These Aren't Normal Cancers" - Doctors All Over the World Are Noticing That "Something Is Wrong"
https://rumble.com/v14hqea-these-arent-normal-cancers-doctors-all-over-the-world-are-noticing-that-som.html
https://rumble.com/v14hqea-these-arent-normal-cancers-doctors-all-over-the-world-are-noticing-that-som.html
What I restated was i have personal information from a number of family members in the BIZ. I'm asking you to elaborate on your statements. I'll rephrase my comment to more correctly allow you to define how the decisions were made "at your hospital" and by "you"....to:Mormad said:Werewolf said:So you personally determined that Ivermectin was not effective, therefore, you independently decided not to prescribe it...........even though its listed on the CDC website as a treatment?Mormad said:
At least in my practice and hospital, other than the mask mandate in the medical setting and asking us to personally Vax, nobody has told me to do ANYTHING, established a protocol, set a narrative, or told us what we can and can't prescribe. We had treatment protocols for admitted pts based on best practices set forth by a team of physicians (infectious disease, critical care, etc), but it was a guideline. And it changed as we learned more and more about the disease and its management. Nobody told us what to do, and we were free to deviate from the protocol as we saw fit for individual pts. Nobody has told me what advice I should or should not give regarding any aspect of the management of or vaccination against covid. All of opinions and knowledge have been formed by me based on my background and 2 yrs of being knee deep in covid. They were not forced upon me. In fact, the only treatments that were standard were oxygen and dexamethasone. That's the TRUTH. But I love when people assume they know more about me and my management of patients and what I've been "TOLD" than me. It is laughable, ridiculous, offensive, and mind boggling to State such nonsense, and the crickets were because such incredulous misconceptions deserved no response.
So you personally determined that Remdesivir was effective, therefore, you independently decided to prescribe it...........as it was listed on the CDC website as a treatment/
So you personally determined that hydroxychloroquine was unsafe; therefore, you independently decided not to prescribe it?\\
Bear in mind, my formulation of what actually has been occurring is formulated from discussions with family members during the COVID breakout time including 2 MD's, 3 NPs and 3 N's. And I am all too familiar with the plight of medical doctor independence and the many issues with independence associated with hospitalists.
Oh, well I stand fully corrected, sir. You so obviously know much more than me about the practice of medicine. And most interestingly about the way I personally practice. Though I'm not a hospitalist. But I shall bear in mind that your familiarity with our plight much supercedes mine! Sorry for the confusion.
1. determine Hydroxychlooiquine was dangerous and should not be used to treat COVID
2. determine Ivermectin was not effective and to dismiss the CDC guidelines
3. determine Remdesivir was effective and to follow CDC guidelines.
Whom specifically made these 3 determinations? Whom specifically and how, if you know?
***I've seen numerous testimonies about doctors attempting or using Ivermectin in a hospital and being overruled or even threatened with termination.
Dr. Paul Marik and Dr. Pierre Kory are happy to introduce the new I-RECOVER: Post-Vaccine Treatment protocol, designed to help people who have experienced adverse symptoms after a COVID vaccine.
To download the protocol:https://geni.us/FLCCC_postvaxprotocol
For other supplemental info: https://covid19criticalcare.com/
Some interesting graphs.......since graphs have been in vogue, I'm sharing:
https://covid19criticalcare.com/ivermectin-in-covid-19/epidemiologic-analyses-on-covid19-and-ivermectin/
To download the protocol:https://geni.us/FLCCC_postvaxprotocol
For other supplemental info: https://covid19criticalcare.com/
Some interesting graphs.......since graphs have been in vogue, I'm sharing:
https://covid19criticalcare.com/ivermectin-in-covid-19/epidemiologic-analyses-on-covid19-and-ivermectin/
GuerrillaPack said:Well, let's assume for the sake of argument that basically everything in VAERS is being under-reported by a factor of 100. That means that we have 1.5 million people in the U.S. dealing with hearing loss or ringing in the ears caused by the vaxx. That's a hell of a lot of people. And to get a rate, I would divide by the number of people in the U.S. who've taken at least one dose of the vaxx (~258 million), not the number of doses. That's a rate of 0.58% or about a 1 in 172 chance.Mormad said:
15,000/588,000,000 doses is 0.0026% risk. That's considered a rare occurrence in most circles. If it's 100x that as you say, that's still 0.255%. Still sounds rare. Though I admit, tinnitus sucks.
How can you argue that you should calculate the rate by number of people rather than number of doses since you believe the injected are at risk (and to you, increasing risk) with EACH dose? Is VAERS not open for people to use after EACH dose? Can they not do great with the first 2 doses and then react to a third and only then report an event? Do you think there are those who reacted to the first but then did fine with subsequent dosing and yet be included in your per person number to falsely elevate it? If a person has 2 doses and no reaction, they're perfectly fine for booster because it's per person and they've tested it out twice with no reaction? I'd bet there are people who reported 3 separate events...a sore arm after the first, fatigue after the second, and tinnitus after the third? Makes that factor of 100 less likely. And why 100? Maybe it's 1000. Maybe it's a factor of 10.
And how long are these events lasting? Are they a nuisance for a few days or are they life long? That matters. If the Vax gave me tinnitus for 2 weeks I'd likely blow it off, but if it gave me tinnitus for life I'd be pissed.
I do think VAERS underreports side effects as most reasonable people expect a sore arm after a shot and won't bother reporting such similar minor reactions, but I think the major events are pretty well understood by the medical community. But I think it's fairly unreasonable to argue that 99% of the deaths related to the wu flu are REALLY unrelated to the infection by simply deaths related to co-morbidities, while truly harmful reactions to vaccines are 99% underreported and 99% related to the injection INSTEAD of co-morbidities.
While a per person event rate is very important to understand because individual morbidities/sensitivities/reactions differ so greatly among a population (please refer to the disclaimers written by the heroes in were's links above), the events you claim are per dose.
I recommend reading the disclaimers in the links provided by werewolf. I think they are important to remember when considering each and every management option we discuss here.
In keynote speech to students in NYC, King Fauci is livid that the "conspiracy theorists" have won yet again...
"Ye are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you." - John 15:19
Featured Stories
See All
COMMIT ALERT: In-State Star Arrion Concepcion Picks NC State
by James Henderson
IPS IN 5: Elliott Avent's Best Coaching Job?
by James Henderson
TOP PLAYS: Trent Pennix
by Bryant Carson
IPS IN 5: Strong Start To The Weekend For Wolfpack Football
by James Henderson
COMMIT ALERT: 2025 CB Cam Strong Makes It Official
by James Henderson