|
|
Post by libtard on Mar 17, 2022 12:45:06 GMT
And in the methodology
So basically, it's data taken from all over the place, with no controls in place, no filtering, no basic research done. The incidents are reported regardless of if they're proven to be linked to the vaccine or not.
This isn't proof dude. At best, it's wildly mis-represented. At worst, it's a scare tactic in an official looking document. Please be more careful when you disseminate this stuff, because it can and does mis-lead.
I'm sorry Libtard, but you're off the mark on this one.
You have absolutely no idea what you're talking about, and there is nothing I can say to alleviate that, because you still fail to grasp the basic reality here. Still, I'll try: 1) This is not "mis-represented." How can it be? By whom? These are Pfizer documents.2) It's not "an official-looking document." It is part of a tranche of documents which Pfizer were forced to release after they were sued under the FOI Why would they use "scare tactics" with regard to their own research? 3) I am not "disseminating" anything. It is a Pfizer document. It is now in the public domain. These deaths are associated. They have not been demonstrated to be caused because demonstrating causality requires very rigorous proof. Go back, and read all of my posts on this I have never asserted proof of causation, but pointed out association. But that's not what you want to read, is it? You are so embedded in the structural political dualism which prevails in the USA, that you don't understand that you are part of the problem, not part of the solution. Nothing which you write demonstrates a modicum of critical thinking. It's so much of a problem for you that you can only see this - or anything - in "us" versus "them" terms. It is pathological. You just mindlessly bleat "Team Blue! Team Blue!" You're just a soccer hooligan. |
|
|
|
Post by evileeyore on Mar 17, 2022 23:31:09 GMT
In before she blames the "misinformation on Trump".
|
|
|
|
Post by kirinke on Mar 17, 2022 23:42:39 GMT
It's garbage Libtard. Sorry, you're not convincing. It's basically a data-dump compiled by Public Health and Medical Professionals for Transparency, which is not Pfizer. It is a scare-tactic by Public Health and Medical Professionals for Transparency.
Pfizer even states "Pfizer’s safety database contains cases of AEs reported spontaneously to Pfizer, cases reported by the health authorities, cases published in the medical literature, cases from Pfizer-sponsored marketing programs, non-interventional studies, and cases of serious AEs reported from clinical studies regardless of causality assessment." So basically, all or most of your scary side-effects and deaths in this document aren't linked to the vaccine, and can't be proven to be linked. Zika is not even linked to the freaking vaccine nor a cause of it!
|
|
|
|
Post by Maxperson on Mar 20, 2022 21:00:26 GMT
Libtard posted information claiming it was something it was not, acknowledged the statement was inaccurate in a follow-up post after it was mentioned, then edited the remark of the original submission to better reflect the fact.
I don't know whether libtard was intentionally trying to mislead or perhaps just got carried away in the moment when posting in quick succession. Whatever the reason, it was publicly acknowledged and corrected. Some "news" sources don't seem to even do that regularly when this happens. The best we can do is take more time to think/reflect before we post/speak.
How do personal attacks after the fact help in the long run? Regardless of what others may believe, I think you are better than this.  There is a lot of data to parse, and I misconstrued the Appendix - although it should be noted that some of those conditions are likely directly associated with the vaccine. Perhaps kirinke would like to comment on the 1200+ deaths associated with the vaccine in the first 10 weeks, and the fact that the FDA redacted the information regarding the total number of doses administered in this period? According to Pfizer’s own documents- you know, the ones which were only released after a Freedom of Information suit was pressed? Those vaccines were given to ancient people in the first several weeks. A lot of them were going to die anyway of old age and other ailments. Those 1200 died after the vaccine, but there's no evidence that says that the vaccine is responsible. |
|
|
|
Post by Maxperson on Mar 20, 2022 21:04:32 GMT
Why are you citing a fact-checking report from December when this data only entered the public domain in the past couple of weeks? We can estimate that around 10 million doses were administered during the period in question- but why aren’t we simply given this specific data? A causal relationship has yet to be established between the vaccine and subsequent deaths. Maybe it won’t be. But you seem very happy with the lack of transparency in this whole process. Why? Yeah, that sounds like data that came from VAERS. Which is a worthless source. The problem with a lot of the data that is cited is basically that they're reports of adverse effects without any kind of proper follow up. For the VAERS data, for example, some of the deaths listed are car crashes sometime after being vaccinated. That's far less related than many of the complaints that people have of some of the deaths listed as having COVID as a contributing condition. Things like cause of death being a heart attack, but the person had COVID so it's listed as COVID related. For most of those, the reason they are listed as COVID related is because they are COVID related. COVID causes in some victims blood clots. Blood clots when they reach the heart can cause a heart attack. Did COVID kill those people? Not directly. The COVID related heart attack killed them. It can be hard to tell the difference between someone who died of something he would have died from anyway, while he has COVID, and someone whose death is COVID related. |
|
|
|
Post by Maxperson on Mar 20, 2022 21:09:35 GMT
Just because they're associated does not mean the vaccine is the cause of them. That's the crux. You have no proof. I can take a vaccine and die from a car crash the next day. The vaccine didn't cause my death, the car crash did. Yes they're associated, but no, the vaccine is not the culprit.
You are using insane troll logic there.
? The patients aren't dying in car crashes. They're dying from hypoxia, thrombosis and cardiogenic shock, amongst other things. Perhaps you could explain how mentioning people dying in car crashes - and other obviously unconnected causes - is not "insane troll logic?" Here's the report again, as you've obviously inserted your elbows in your ears and buried your head under 11 tons of volcanic ash: phmpt.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/5.3.6-postmarketing-experience.pdfYou said 10 million doses over 10 weeks and 1200 deaths. I'm going to assume 5 million double doses, though likely many were single and many were double. So 5 million people aged 60+ got the vaccine. If you look at 5 MILLION old people(60+) for the last 10 weeks, do you think you'd see 1200+ deaths? I do. And we'd see a huge variety of causes like that list. |
|
|
|
Post by libtard on Mar 20, 2022 23:28:02 GMT
? The patients aren't dying in car crashes. They're dying from hypoxia, thrombosis and cardiogenic shock, amongst other things. Perhaps you could explain how mentioning people dying in car crashes - and other obviously unconnected causes - is not "insane troll logic?" Here's the report again, as you've obviously inserted your elbows in your ears and buried your head under 11 tons of volcanic ash: phmpt.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/5.3.6-postmarketing-experience.pdfYou said 10 million doses over 10 weeks and 1200 deaths. I'm going to assume 5 million double doses, though likely many were single and many were double. So 5 million people aged 60+ got the vaccine. If you look at 5 MILLION old people(60+) for the last 10 weeks, do you think you'd see 1200+ deaths? I do. And we'd see a huge variety of causes like that list. See section 3. Results, from the pdf. The largest group of reported cases was the 31-50 age range, with a bell curve which skewed toward high and a small secondary peak in age category 75+: the average age of received cases was 50.9. There were a total 42,000 case reports describing 159,000 events including 1223 deaths. 10 million doses administered is a guesstimate - Pfizer/FDA hasn't released this information. But we're probably looking at around 1 million old people age 65+ assuming that they all get double doses. We don't know the average age of the associated mortalities - Pfizer hasn't released this data. Again, this is association, not demonstrated causation. |
|
|
|
Post by Devoid on Mar 20, 2022 23:55:01 GMT
I would like to know more of the demographics of those vaccinated in this study. Most of the cases seem to heavily skew towards women over men (4:1 in some categories). A not insignificant percentage who received the first doses weren't just the elderly / exceptional risk, but those on the front lines (medical and other emergency services). The reporting on events is all well and good; however, without knowing more about those who actually received one or both rounds (and not just the ones that reported issues) might paint a clearer picture.
|
|
|
|
Post by libtard on Mar 21, 2022 0:11:23 GMT
Yes, it's a not-for profit cabal of hundreds of medical professionals from around the world who are conspiring to scare you.
Correct. The spontaneous reporting system should be used for signal detection rather than hypothesis testing.
So. What signals do you detect?
|
|
|
|
Post by libtard on Mar 21, 2022 0:15:29 GMT
I would like to know more of the demographics of those vaccinated in this study. Most of the cases seem to heavily skew towards women over men (4:1 in some categories). A not insignificant percentage who received the first doses weren't just the elderly / exceptional risk, but those on the front lines (medical and other emergency services). The reporting on events is all well and good; however, without knowing more about those who actually received one or both rounds (and not just the ones that reported issues) might paint a clearer picture. Yes. Why do you suppose that information has not been forthcoming? |
|
|
|
Post by Devoid on Mar 21, 2022 0:34:41 GMT
I would like to know more of the demographics of those vaccinated in this study. Most of the cases seem to heavily skew towards women over men (4:1 in some categories). A not insignificant percentage who received the first doses weren't just the elderly / exceptional risk, but those on the front lines (medical and other emergency services). The reporting on events is all well and good; however, without knowing more about those who actually received one or both rounds (and not just the ones that reported issues) might paint a clearer picture. Yes. Why do you suppose that information has not been forthcoming? I don't know and I'm not sure how such speculation would improve the situation. What we need is more data. |
|
|
|
Post by Maxperson on Mar 21, 2022 0:35:26 GMT
You said 10 million doses over 10 weeks and 1200 deaths. I'm going to assume 5 million double doses, though likely many were single and many were double. So 5 million people aged 60+ got the vaccine. If you look at 5 MILLION old people(60+) for the last 10 weeks, do you think you'd see 1200+ deaths? I do. And we'd see a huge variety of causes like that list. See section 3. Results, from the pdf. The largest group of reported cases was the 31-50 age range, with a bell curve which skewed toward high and a small secondary peak in age category 75+: the average age of received cases was 50.9. There were a total 42,000 case reports describing 159,000 events including 1223 deaths. 10 million doses administered is a guesstimate - Pfizer/FDA hasn't released this information. But we're probably looking at around 1 million old people age 65+ assuming that they all get double doses. We don't know the average age of the associated mortalities - Pfizer hasn't released this data. Again, this is association, not demonstrated causation. Ahh, yes. I forgot that it was old people and younger people with other conditions(including cancer and things killing them) that made them highly at risk. So sorry. It changes nothing, though. You'd still expect that many deaths normally. |
|
|
|
Post by Maxperson on Mar 21, 2022 0:36:43 GMT
I would like to know more of the demographics of those vaccinated in this study. Most of the cases seem to heavily skew towards women over men (4:1 in some categories). A not insignificant percentage who received the first doses weren't just the elderly / exceptional risk, but those on the front lines (medical and other emergency services). The reporting on events is all well and good; however, without knowing more about those who actually received one or both rounds (and not just the ones that reported issues) might paint a clearer picture. You're talking multiple millions of people, though. Even with a bunch front line workers being in the mix, you'd expect 1200ish sickly old and sickly middle aged to succumb to their ailments out of the millions vaccinated in the first 10 weeks. |
|
|
|
Post by Maxperson on Mar 21, 2022 0:37:30 GMT
I would like to know more of the demographics of those vaccinated in this study. Most of the cases seem to heavily skew towards women over men (4:1 in some categories). A not insignificant percentage who received the first doses weren't just the elderly / exceptional risk, but those on the front lines (medical and other emergency services). The reporting on events is all well and good; however, without knowing more about those who actually received one or both rounds (and not just the ones that reported issues) might paint a clearer picture. Yes. Why do you suppose that information has not been forthcoming? They like fucking with crazy conspiracy theorists? |
|
|
|
Post by libtard on Mar 21, 2022 6:19:17 GMT
When you write you'd expect 1200-ish, what you really mean is "it doesn't seem implausible to me, based on a bunch of assumptions I'm making, and which I can continually shift in order for it to remain plausible."
Right? Or did I miss something?
Anecdotally, when the vaccine was first rolled out, I was working in a Skilled Nursing Facility with an attached Assisted Living and Dementia Ward. The staff outnumbered the patients and residents; average staff age was probably in the early 40s. We'd all had our first shot by the end of February.
It seems plausible to me that the majority of shots which were administered in the first 10-12 weeks were in the context of residential care (CCRCs) of one kind or another, where a static, vulnerable population, carers and support staff can be vaccinated using existing medical staff and facilities.
|
|
