Covid vaccine increases death rates!

[SirBillybob]

36 minutes ago, pubic_assistance said:

The suggestion is to make your own decision.

Vaccination doesn't prevent the spread of Covid19, as we were being told by Fauci. It's a lie.

Vaccination reduces your chance of death. That's it. It speeds up the immune response ( one which you make regardless ).

Since the early stages of Covid19 were quite virulent, the virus would reproduce quickly, and compromise your lungs. So speed of response was the reward for immunization.

Beyond that, your immune system either protects you or it doesn't. If your immune system sucks you're gonna die of something.

How you live out your remaining years, ( or not ) is your decision, not the Government.

Transmission, otherwise known as secondary attack rates, isn’t amenable to measurement because the assessment context is heterologous. All households contain a variable mix of immunity and its temporality. Household members also engage with the outside world. You cannot design transmission efficacy without a clear assignment of two separate scenarios held constant. Such a prospective design is cost-probibitive. This is one of the reasons that the basis of vaccination is oriented to morbidity and mortality. To suggest an elective uptake is outrageous considering that most people making that decision would be lacking comprehension of risk or are simply contrarian; they would not tend to be cavalier about the right to choose and its potentially dire consequences. It is not incontrovertible that transmission is not reduced by uptake, for the design reasons I put forward. 

[pubic_assistance]

13 minutes ago, SirBillybob said:

Transmission, otherwise known as secondary attack rates, isn’t amenable to measurement

I went to a Christmas Party in 2021 where everyone agreed to get vaccinated and/or boosted and checked for Covid within a week of the party. So...in a room full of vaccinated people more than half caught Covid19 within a few days. The good thing was that all the 90+ year olds survived with only minor suffering.

Covid19 is VERY contagious. With or without vaccine.

[pubic_assistance]

39 minutes ago, SirBillybob said:

You didn’t say it, I said it; but it’s a clinical heuristic consistent with your initial stratification of health status and knowing such arbitrary status being an albeit flimsy basis of sorting out to vaxx or not to vaxx. Again, an arbitrary dichotomy of healthy vs unhealthy is not predictive of vaccination value. 

I am so confused.

You are responding to things I didn't say.

How does that work ?
Is this some new form of conversation where you talk about what I might say, instead of what I did say ?

I specifically stated that you should base your decisions on you ACTUAL knowledge of your health status. (Which without having stated this previously), includes full blood panels and examinations annually with the same physician who can track all your vitals (and shifts in same).  The major problem with people in the US, is they only see their doctor when they're sick. The problem with the health care system in the US is that doctors very often treat the symptom, not the holistic problem for the patient. Now with Walk-in-care, you have doctors treating patients they don't know anything about !!

My decisions to vaccinate were based on my yearly health records which put me in the "very healthy" category. I chose to get vaccinated but I didn't panic and my doctor told me not to panic. We agreed it was far more important that others get vaccinated first, so I waited for over two months until the panic subsided and there was enough vaccine to go around.

Again this was MY decision based on SCIENCE with the help of a PROFESSIONAL. Which is what I am promoting. ( Not your made-up suppositions about what I am saying ).

 

Edited October 9, 2022 by pubic_assistance

[SirBillybob]

1 hour ago, pubic_assistance said:

I am so confused.

You are responding to things I didn't say.

How does that work ?
Is this some new form of conversation where you talk about what I might say, instead of what I did say ?

I specifically stated that you should base your decisions on you ACTUAL knowledge of your health status. (Which without having stated this previously), includes full blood panels and examinations annually with the same physician who can track all your vitals (and shifts in same).  The major problem with people in the US, is they only see their doctor when they're sick. The problem with the health care system in the US is that doctors very often treat the symptom, not the holistic problem for the patient. Now with Walk-in-care, you have doctors treating patients they don't know anything about !!

My decisions to vaccinate were based on my yearly health records which put me in the "very healthy" category. I chose to get vaccinated but I didn't panic and my doctor told me not to panic. We agreed it was far more important that others get vaccinated first, so I waited for over two months until the panic subsided and there was enough vaccine to go around.

Again this was MY decision based on SCIENCE with the help of a PROFESSIONAL. Which is what I am promoting. ( Not your made-up suppositions about what I am saying ).

 

I find this to be disingenuous. I began by critically appraising a Florida bulletin that derived from a lack of research acumen in interpreting cardiac mortality in terms of such clinical outcomes being attributable to vaccination. You opined that healthy people do not benefit from vaccination over and above infection, input unrelated to the thread and its hyperbole-slanted headline, and that the standard for assessing vaxx uptake legitimacy should be advanced awareness of one’s baseline medical status, notwithstanding the infrastructure impediments to that standard. That is simply unrealistic in the real world. Your viewpoint accompanied by a self-referential rendering of personal health status, related attention to it, and its influence on your own decision-making, as well as an anecdote about a gathering in which some transmission potential exists in spite of immunity and/or test neg’y, something we already know. Then you suggest that vaccination be a personal choice, seemingly predicated on your own distinctive advantage regarding health self-awareness, when in fact personal choice for a majority of decliners is confounded by distorted interpretations of science or rejections of compelling findings that support the merits of vaccination uptake. And you suggest that inferiority in health management self-efficacy is central to poor outcomes …. when the competing reality as we know it is that such limitations are not intrinsic to the individual.

If you had opened with the Big Lie victimization and over-extrapolating from personal experience I’d have wasted less of my time.

If you had begun a thread of your own I would likely have not responded. This is the liability of attempting to provide input into a topic. Lesson learned; the pandemic is one of convoluted thinking and tangential input. I am not in a position to disabuse others of their flawed views. In contrast, I was capable of deconstructing the data on which the misguided Florida public health guidance on vaccination was based.

Edited October 9, 2022 by SirBillybob

[+ keroscenefire]

2 hours ago, pubic_assistance said:

Again..this is speculation, not science.

I think saying everyone who has died of COVID-19 had pre-existing conditions is speculation, not science. Or it's practically pointless. Nick Cordero was by all accounts a healthy 41-year old man who was a Broadway dancer so likely in incredible shape for his age. Yet he died of COVID-19 without any apparent pre-existing conditions. 

Someone like Nick Cordero might not seem like someone at risk of a bad case of COVID, but he clearly did. And if he could die of COVID, I really don't think we have any clue of who else would be at risk. Unfortunately Nick got COVID before the vaccine. But the evidence is clear that COVID vaccines lower the rate of hospitalizations and deaths.  That's not a risk I'm willing to take.

[+ purplekow]

5 hours ago, pubic_assistance said:

HEALTHY YOUNG people don't need the jab.

 

 

First, there were certainly young healthy people who died from Covid.  About 10% of the deaths have been in people under 50.  Some of those were at risk, but many were not.  Unfortunately, I took care of many such patients and even many of those who survived had prolonged hospital stays and secondary effects such as myocarditis, Guillan Barre syndrome, renal failure, pulmonary embolism etc.  

Vaccinations have dramatically decreased the number of admissions to the hospital and were a first line prevention of many serious cases.  They did not prevent disease necessarily. They. did limit the severity of disease and the cost to the health care system and the economy as a whole.  The vaccine also allowed science to catch up and develop other treatments which limited disease severity and length of contagion.  

From my limited experience, caring for several hundred people with Covid, at the onset, there were the elderly and those at high risk being admitted  who came severely ill and died during the first wave. The hospital in which I worked had about 150 beds which were designated for Covid patients, we now have 6.    Eventually,  there was a lull in the numbers of people being admitted to the hospital. That occurred  at the time of vaccines, mask protocol and with the change in the weather which allowed people to more easily avoid significant contacts.   With the second wave, the patients I cared for in the hospital were generally younger than during the first wave and almost exclusively unvaccinated.  The death rate was lower, people went home sooner as better treatments were available and the news stopped reporting on the numbers of people dying 1 million in the US,  though there still were and are people dying.  

I have no doubt that vaccinations saved lives and limited morbidity.  

That some people opt to continue to espouse that philosophy against vaccinations does not mean they are stupid, but it does, in my opinion, make them foolish in this decision.  I feel about them, they way I feel about people who say they do not worry about the effects of tobacco because their grandmother is 91 and smokes two packs a day,  and that is you take your chance and if you lose, you and the health care economy pay the price.  

I am glad you opted for the vaccine.  I think you were generous in waiting for others who were at higher risk to have access to the limited supply of vaccines that was the case early on.  You considered the pluses and minuses as you saw them and opted for the vaccine.  I wish others had taken the same considerations and come to the same decision.  I had several young healthy patients in particular, for whom making a different decision contributed to their dying much too young.  

[+ sync]

Ever notice it's the non-medical science armchair crowd and Monday morning quarterbacks that are the most knowledgeable about Covid and the vaccines?   🙄

[pubic_assistance]

3 hours ago, keroscenefire said:

Yet he died of COVID-19 without any apparent pre-existing conditions. 

Keyword: "apparent". By definition: if a young seemingly healthy person dies of a coronavirus, it means they only appear to be healthy. 

My 90 year old mother-in-law got it an survived and early Covid 19 infection with just a bit of trouble breathing for two days.

By definition - She's healthy.

 

 

[pubic_assistance]

1 hour ago, purplekow said:

Some of those were at risk, but many were not.

And where are you getting this information from ?

Because it's certainly not what the forensics show.

Any young healthy person who died with Covid was found to have ore existing conditions where autopsies occur. If there is no autopsy then their "perfectly healthy" status is conjecture not science.

[pubic_assistance]

1 hour ago, sync said:

Ever notice it's the non-medical science armchair crowd and Monday morning quarterbacks that are the most knowledgeable about Covid and the vaccines?   🙄

Clearly.

Because I am arguing with a bunch of people who's random opinions seem to be more important than facts I shared from a 60 year old scientist who's a text book and well published American immunogist.

[+ keroscenefire]

53 minutes ago, pubic_assistance said:

Keyword: "apparent". By definition: if a young seemingly healthy person dies of a coronavirus, it means they only appear to be healthy. 

My 90 year old mother-in-law got it an survived and early Covid 19 infection with just a bit of trouble breathing for two days.

By definition - She's healthy.

 

 

But there really is no way to know whether one is going to have these complications or not. Certainly there are risk factors, but a lot of them might not be known until you actually get sick. Again, if someone like Nick Cordero can die from COVID, anyone can die from COVID.

[coriolis888]

21 hours ago, Spiritualadvisor said:

He went to Wake Forrest and then got a MD from Harvard medical school and then a PhD in health policy from Harvard graduate school. He was a professor of medicine at UCLA and then at University of Florida. 
Maybe you’re confusing him with someone else?

With all due respect, you copied only the complimentary attributes concerning the doctor. 

You did not complete the remainder of the article that shows his accomplishments and/or beliefs.

In addition to what you quoted, let us finish the remainder of the article you selectively quoted:

 

During the COVID-19 pandemic, Ladapo has promoted unproven treatments, opposed vaccine mandates,

questioned vaccine safety, and associated with America's Frontline Doctors, a right-wing group known to promote falsehoods about the pandemic.^{[8][9][10][11]} In March 2022, as the Surgeon General of Florida, he misrepresented work by fellow scholars to recommend that healthy children not be vaccinated against COVID-

19, a decision that also went contrary to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and American

Academy of Pediatrics.^[12][13] Since then, Ladapo has banned gender-affirming counselling, hormonal

therapies, and related medications for transgender and nonbinary children, contravening relevant guidelines by - - - 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Ladapoa host of professional organizations.^[14

[Spiritualadvisor]

25 minutes ago, coriolis888 said:

With all due respect, you copied only the complimentary attributes concerning the doctor. 

You did not complete the remainder of the article that shows his accomplishments and/or beliefs.

In addition to what you quoted, let us finish the remainder of the article you selectively quoted:

 

During the COVID-19 pandemic, Ladapo has promoted unproven treatments, opposed vaccine mandates,

questioned vaccine safety, and associated with America's Frontline Doctors, a right-wing group known to promote falsehoods about the pandemic.^{[8][9][10][11]} In March 2022, as the Surgeon General of Florida, he misrepresented work by fellow scholars to recommend that healthy children not be vaccinated against COVID-

19, a decision that also went contrary to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and American

Academy of Pediatrics.^[12][13] Since then, Ladapo has banned gender-affirming counselling, hormonal

therapies, and related medications for transgender and nonbinary children, contravening relevant guidelines by - - - 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Ladapoa host of professional organizations.^[14

I didn’t know this. 

[+ BenjaminNicholas]

23 minutes ago, Spiritualadvisor said:

I didn’t know this. 

Well, now you do. 

Do better research next time. 

This dude is a fucking quack. 

[+ purplekow]

8 hours ago, pubic_assistance said:

And where are you getting this information from ?

Because it's certainly not what the forensics show.

Any young healthy person who died with Covid was found to have ore existing conditions where autopsies occur. If there is no autopsy then their "perfectly healthy" status is conjecture not science.

Clearly you have an opinion which are now defending with circular reasoning:   Your premise: People only died with Covid if they had a preexisting condition therefore if you died of Covid you had a preexisting condition.  .  A million people in the US  died.  About 10000 of them were under 50.  If you chose to believe that every one of those 100000 who died had some vague underlying condition to justify which is reality is an unjustifiable position, continue.  If you do not know you have a pre-existing condition and it is found on autopsy, then your decision to not take the vaccine as you did not have a pre-existing condition was incorrect but unknowable.  

By the way, The number of autopsies done during the height of the pandemic were minimal as most medical personel were busy trying to keep people alive.  Autopsies in general have decreased in frequency for many reasons but to assert or imply that autopsies would have proven that those young people who died of Covid really had a previously unknown risk factor which became apparent post mortem has no bearing on their particular decision to have or not have the vaccine.  But there is a precedent for uncovering underlying disease on autopsy. 

During the Viet Nam war autopsies done on battle field casualties revealed an astonishing high number of them had a degree of coronary artery disease, most men in their 20s many hard early CAD.  Those people still died of the wounds inflicted and not from CAD.  The healthy people under 50 who died from Covid, died from Covid.  One day they were fine and a week later they were dead from Covid.   Many of those that died did so after the vaccine was available and they chose not to take it.  They lived with that decision and some of them died as a result of that decision.  

If anything your argument that only at risk young individuals died of Covid would suggest that since one can never be absolutely sure that one does not have a risk factor since there was this great uncovering of risky medical condition on the innumerable autopsies you suggest were done, that taking the vaccine to cover that possibility is probably prudent.  That was the decision that you made for yourself.  That indicates to mean that you at least think there may be some legitimacy to the vaccinations.  

[+ Tygerscent]

On 10/8/2022 at 7:08 PM, Lucky said:

The study above itself lists many limitations on its credibility:

Discussion/Conclusion
In this statewide study of vaccinated Florida residents aged 18 years or older, COVID-vaccination was
not associated with an elevated risk for all-cause mortality. COVID-19 vaccination was associated with a
modestly increased risk for cardiac-related mortality 28 days following vaccination. Results from the
stratified analysis for cardiac-related death following vaccination suggests mRNA vaccination may be
driving the increased risk in males, especially among males aged 18 - 39. Risk for both all-cause and
cardiac-related deaths was substantially higher 28 days following COVID-19 infection. The risk associated
with mRNA vaccination should be weighed against the risk associated with COVID-19 infection.
Limitations
These data are preliminary, based on surveillance data, and should be interpreted with caution. The
results have several limitations:
While this method has been used to assess risk of death following COVID-19 vaccination,2 it violates the
assumption that an event does not affect subsequent exposure (for mRNA vaccines), which may
introduce bias.6 Further, it does not consider the multidose vaccination schedule required for mRNA
vaccination.
This study cannot determine the causative nature of a participant’s death. We used death certificate
data and not medical records. COVID testing status was unknown for those who did not die of/with
COVID. Cardiac-related deaths were ascertained if an ACME code of I3-I52 were on their death
certificate, thus, the underlying cause of death may not be cardiac-related.
The finding that the Janssen vaccine was more protective than mRNA vaccine against mortality within 28
days of vaccination could be due to confounding and needs to be further evaluated. It is likely that the
populations who received COVID-19 mRNA vaccine and the Johnson vaccine are different, something we
were not able to ascertain in this analysis. It is possible that the population who received the Johnson
vaccine was younger and healthier than those receiving the mRNA vaccines. The Pfizer and Moderna
mRNA vaccines were released more than 2 months earlier than the Janssen vaccine when the
recommendations were limited to those 65 and older.
Additional studies should be conducted to further understand the risks and benefits of vaccination of
males between 25-39. Increased risk in the primary analysis for the 25 - 39 age group was based on a
small sample size. Additionally, significant mortality from diagnosed COVID-19 infection occurred among
all adult age groups. COVID-19 mortality among asymptomatic or undiagnosed COVID-19 infection is less
clear. However, excess overall mortality among 25–44-year-old Americans was significant in a study1
looking at mortality from January 2020-October 2020. The largest increases were among Hispanic and
Latino. It is unclear what the contribution of asymptomatic or undiagnosed COVID-19 infection is to
mortality risk, and how this contributes to excess mortality.
1 https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/wr/mm6942e2.htm

Confounding by age may be present in the 60 years or older age group, which may explain the slight
elevated risk for cardiac-related deaths following vaccination. This may also explain the increased risk
for the entire vaccination analysis group for cardiac-related deaths since this group comprises the vast
majority of deaths. Removing those aged 60 years or older yielded non-significant results for cardiac-
related deaths following vaccination (RI = 1.15, 95% CI = 0.99 - 1.34), mRNA vaccination (RI = 1.17, 95%
CI = 1.00 - 1.37), and males with mRNA vaccination (RI = 1.09, 95% CI = 0.89 - 1.34).
Lastly, this analysis was conducted during the first months the vaccines were available. Both COVID-19
mortality due to infection or risk of mortality associated with vaccination have likely changed over time.
In the fall of 2022, most people have either been vaccinated or have natural immunity to COVID-19.
Many have had multiple vaccine doses, multiple infections or both. Research to assess the current risks
and benefits of the COVID-19 vaccine to help update vaccine recommendations should be studied in this context.

 

 

15 hours ago, pubic_assistance said:

The suggestion is to make your own decision.

Vaccination doesn't prevent the spread of Covid19, as we were being told by Fauci. It's a lie.

Vaccination reduces your chance of death. That's it. It speeds up the immune response ( one which you make regardless ).

Since the early stages of Covid19 were quite virulent, the virus would reproduce quickly, and compromise your lungs. So speed of response was the reward for immunization.

Beyond that, your immune system either protects you or it doesn't. If your immune system sucks you're gonna die of something.

How you live out your remaining years, ( or not ) is your decision, not the Government.

When/where did fauci say covid vaccinations stop infection~?

compromise of lung (function~?) is considered one result of covid infection but, does it effect other body systems like cardio, inflammation responses and systems, cognitive and neurological systems in the body~? Is the lung thing just part of what covid does~? 
 

 The sRudy didn’t actually address statistics regarding how actual covid infection, (single or repeated), affects short and long term cardio health and events~ Maybe I just didn’t see that part in the report~ 

[Alex.Blessings]

I feel a little bit better now after reading all of this. Thank you 🙏🏽

I got the Pfizer updated booster shot last week Tuesday and got very concerned after reading the bulletin by the FL SG.

Great discussion. 
 

Thank you again!

[+ augustus]

On 10/9/2022 at 10:54 AM, pubic_assistance said:

If you're overweight, elderly, smoke or have a suppressed immune system it's highly advisable to stay immunized and boosted.

Absolutely correct!

[+ augustus]

On 10/9/2022 at 11:58 AM, SirBillybob said:

Nobody can possibly know what huge array of personal complex variables predispose them to morbidity and mortality upon CoV infection.

Wrong!  Look at the death stats.  99% are the people who @pubic_assistance classified.

[+ augustus]

My nurse friend at a major hospital said they have not had ONE case of a Covid patient needing to be put on a ventilator in the last 6 months.  Most of the patients are hysterical hypochondriacs who keep flooding and OVERBURDENING the hospitals which are already short staffed as it is.

[+ augustus]

The WHO said the virus is becoming less dangerous with every passing month.  I myself was never vaxxed, got Covid early on and recovered in like 3 days.  And I never wear a mask.  Unless you have pre-existing health issues, then just move on with your life. 

[+ augustus]

Covid was real. So was the contagion of misinformation and fear spread by the US government and proponents of Safetyism, much of it politically motivated. For the elderly and high-risk individuals, the greater danger of the two was Covid. For the rest of us, it was the social contagion.   Unhinged hysteria combined with a complete lack of common sense.  

[+ augustus]

Anxiety, fear, problems hiring and staffing, materials supply and now rapid inflation are all directly related to overblown fear and government response to covid.   The economic crisis from all of this will hit like a tsunami soon.

[coriolis888]

On 10/9/2022 at 7:10 PM, pubic_assistance said:

I went to a Christmas Party in 2021 where everyone agreed to get vaccinated and/or boosted and checked for Covid within a week of the party. So...in a room full of vaccinated people more than half caught Covid19 within a few days. The good thing was that all the 90+ year olds survived with only minor suffering.

Covid19 is VERY contagious. With or without vaccine.

Check out the time period for the covid-19 vaccine to become effective.  It is two weeks.  

"Within a week of the party." did not give the vaccine sufficient time to become effective.

See - 

"How long does it take for the COVID-19 vaccine to work?"

Regardless of which vaccine you get, you won’t reach full protection until two weeks after your second or final dose. That’s about how long it takes your immune system to mount an antibody response to the vaccine.

[Guest]

It's always best to form one's opinions based on hard data and facts, rather than "There's someone who agrees with me who teaches at Harvard Medical School or wrote a textbook, or who works for some public health agency." The data are unequivocal that the original vaccines were highly effective, saved hundreds of thousands of lives in the US alone, and probably kept millions from being hospitalized. The Florida caution from the OP basically weighs two extremely rare events: deaths from the vaccine in 18-39 year-olds vs deaths from the omicron variant in 18-39 year-olds. So far, I haven't seen anyone crank out the data to give hard answers, so I can't say I have an opinion at this point. The virus is extremely different now that it was in 2021, both in terms of its virulence and also in terms of the protection provided by the original vaccine. 

The data were unequivocal a year ago that the risk of going unvaccinated was orders of magnitude greater than the risk of vaccination. It might, or might not, be the case at this time that the data are much more equivocal when it comes to 18-39 year-old males. But the risks are tiny in any case, for either decision. I don't think that anyone who actually looks at the data would argue that risks < benefits for the 40+. That being said, the risks from this virus are fairly small at this juncture, less than that of influenza in most years.