COVID vaccins: the next problem?

GroupDIY Audio Forum

Help Support GroupDIY Audio Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
"Excess deaths" is a strange metric anyway. In my previous job, I had access to the numbers from several retirement homes. There were almost no deaths due to natural cause. That's logical because the average age of the deceased was well over 70. At that age, most people suffer from some ailment. Only one person died of covid.

You can imagine that these numbers depend on the interpretation of the MD that signs the death certificate. Often, these certificates had already been filled out by a nurse. They usually knew way more about the deceased than the MD. The MD might not have seen that patient in a while. The nurses are there continually.
 
"Excess deaths" is a strange metric anyway.
Not really. Seems pretty useful for tracking longer term mortality trends that might otherwise go unnoticed. Once recognized the underlying causes can be investigated. Or we can just keep trying to label it misinformation and gaslight everyone about it.

In my previous job, I had access to the numbers from several retirement homes. There were almost no deaths due to natural cause. That's logical because the average age of the deceased was well over 70. At that age, most people suffer from some ailment. Only one person died of covid.

You can imagine that these numbers depend on the interpretation of the MD that signs the death certificate. Often, these certificates had already been filled out by a nurse. They usually knew way more about the deceased than the MD. The MD might not have seen that patient in a while. The nurses are there continually.
Yep. My wife is a nurse. Cause of death is not always simple, especially when a person has one or more chronic conditions.
 
Yep. My wife is a nurse. Cause of death is not always simple, especially when a person has one or more chronic conditions.
Studying excess deaths is just smart. I recall reading reports that there were economic rewards for hospitals to report deaths as Covid caused.

As usual with economic incentives, reward some behavior and you get more of it.

JR
 
In this video the embalmer, Richard Hirschman, reports seeing a 50% clot rate in the deceased as early as November 2021.

https://banned.video/watch?id=65d3d0730d63da299e144fb6

Last night I saw Sen Rand Paul on cspan talking about Covid, China, and Dr Fauci. It appears that about half or more of the criticisms of vaccine and government supervision, discounted as conspiracies were true. Of course not all of them.

No one is right 100% of the time.

If I had a dollar for every time the clown show here called me a conspiracy theorist and I was later proven right I could buy a nice steak dinner at Mortons.

The point however is not being right - it's to keep the uniformed from depopulating themselves.

I recall reading reports that there were economic rewards for hospitals to report deaths as Covid caused.

I reported that eons ago. Among other bonuses the hospital gets a $3K payment if you die thus rewarding negative outcomes.

Studying excess deaths is just smart.

I can send you a pdf copy of Ed Dowd's book which analyses insurance actuarial data if you want to be smarter.
 
Last edited:
One lesson I learned from years working inside a decent sized business was to not discount all rumors. Likewise do not blindly accept everything you hear either. If of consequence do some, what-if it is true research.

Steered search engine results can fuel bad thesis popularity so develop a strong Bull S___ filter. 🤔

JR
 
Yes, that's been noted from the get-go, but a greater incidence from covid itself.

https://news.yale.edu/2023/05/05/yale-study-reveals-insights-post-vaccine-heart-inflammation-cases
Assuming their data is accurate, the net result is still worse for those young males who were vaccinated because the Covid infection rate of that group was tiny, while the vaccination rate is likely something over 50%. Scarring of heart muscle doesn't sound minor to me.

Also, myocarditis was not acknowledged as a vaccine risk "from the get-go." It was covered up, treated as misinformation, and ridiculed as conspiracy theory for quite a long time.
 
the net result is still worse for those young males who were vaccinated because the Covid infection rate of that group was tiny,

1709137734108.gif
https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/wr/mm695152a8.htm

myocarditis was not acknowledged as a vaccine risk "from the get-go."

Pfizer and BioNTech Share Detailed Update to the Results from 6 Month Safety and
Efficacy Data Analysis of Landmark COVID-19 Vaccine Study
NEW YORK AND MAINZ, GERMANY, JULY 28, 2021
Reports of adverse events following use of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine under
EUA suggest increased risks of myocarditis and pericarditis, particularly following the second
dose.
The decision to administer the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine to an individual with
a history of myocarditis or pericarditis should take into account the individual’s clinical
circumstances
https://cdn.pfizer.com/pfizercom/2021-07/Preprint_Post_Hoc_Publication_Statement_VF.pdf
 

Attachments

  • 1709134770632.jpeg
    1709134770632.jpeg
    125.4 KB · Views: 0
It's funny, but not funny.

Another anomaly has surfaced in China. Babies with heads that are larger than normal. Haven't found a serious source for it yet; could be fake. The vlogger is usually reliable, but she could be fooled too. It's probably also not COVID related. Anyhow, 300.000 victims isn't a small occurrence. Melamine poisoning?

 
Ah, "cases" based on the PCR tests again. I submit that a mild case (including one with no symptoms) is not likely to produce any systemic response involving the organs. A severe case likely does. How many severe cases were there in this cohort?

In addition, even the high 150 "cases" per 100k on your graph pales in comparison to a vaccination rate of 50,000 per 100k, possibly higher. And why is your data truncated to 2020 only?

Pfizer and BioNTech Share Detailed Update to the Results from 6 Month Safety and
Efficacy Data Analysis of Landmark COVID-19 Vaccine Study
NEW YORK AND MAINZ, GERMANY, JULY 28, 2021
Reports of adverse events following use of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine under
EUA suggest increased risks of myocarditis and pericarditis, particularly following the second
dose.
The decision to administer the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine to an individual with
a history of myocarditis or pericarditis should take into account the individual’s clinical
circumstances
https://cdn.pfizer.com/pfizercom/2021-07/Preprint_Post_Hoc_Publication_Statement_VF.pdf
Several months after the majority of people had already been coerced into getting at least two doses. I recall leaked docs that revealed the vaccine makers knew of these problems from testing before the EUA was done.

Nice try.
 
Yes, the myocarditis risk to young males was noted by Rand Paul as a "more harm than good" from vaccinating young people. Just one of the several examples of bad (non) science in the government response.

JR

PS; Rand Paul is an ophthalmologist so perhaps somewhat better informed than many, while not a full GP.
 
Yes, the myocarditis risk to young males was noted by Rand Paul as a "more harm than good" from vaccinating young people. Just one of the several examples of bad (non) science in the government response.

JR

PS; Rand Paul is an ophthalmologist so perhaps somewhat better informed than many, while not a full GP.
Vaccination is not only effective at the individual level, but collectively - herd immunity being the ultimate goal. So if vaccinating younger people helps contain the spread of the disease and thus prevent more deaths in older age groups, it could still make sense to do it.
 
BTW, Rand Paul has zero expertise in the relevant fields and has been on the record making absurd statements about Covid for years. Not a reliable source, unfortunately.
 
Pointless to go on if you're unable to understand that.
Yes, it's pre-vaccine "data," but it's also polluted by false-positive PCR testing with cycle counts 30+. Do you remember that? I do. In the Yale paper they refer to "infections" without defining whether that means simply "tested positive" or displayed symptoms specific to Covid. I see the flaws in the analysis. Do you?
 
Back
Top