3 ms·

What would be compelling evidence? Would excess deaths in summer in 0 - 45 age group, in Europe be compelling or is there some other explanation to those? For

What would be compelling evidence? Would excess deaths in summer in 0 - 45 age group, in Europe be compelling or is there some other explanation to those? For preventing spread ineffectiveness, would Gibraltar being #2 in the World by infection rate while having 99% vaccination be compelling? For waning hospital and death protection would Israel data be compelling? What about countless anecdotal stories of similar persistent adverse effects and VAERS reports? If none of that is evidence, then even if this vaccine was unsafe, it would be virtually impossible to prove that, no?

Nursie 5y ago
> Would excess deaths in summer in 0 - 45 age group, in Europe be compelling or is there some other explanation to those? I don't know, what figures are you referring to and what do you think those are evidence of? > For preventing spread ineffectiveness, would Gibraltar being #2 in the World by infection rate while having 99% vaccination be compelling? Taken in isolation, not particularly, no. What you appear to have there is some vaguely formed speculation. > For waning hospital and death protection would Israel data be compelling? Be specific, what claims are you making and what evidence do you think backs them up? > What about countless anecdotal stories of similar persistent adverse effects and VAERS reports? Perhaps you could count them, and investigate to understand if the anecdotes and VAERS reports are true or not, and at what rate they occur. VAERS is by design a catch-all and self-reported, so the data there is interesting but not necessarily trustworthy. Anecdotes are not data, after all.
- mewpmewp2 5y ago
  I have scanned through so many forums reading anecdotal stories, also downloaded VAERS data, and I definitely see a pattern, but this is not enough of compelling evidence for anyone. But let's just focus on what could be causing excess deaths during summer. Source: https://www.euromomo.eu/graphs-and-maps/ https://www.euromomo.eu/graphs-and-maps/ Scroll to Excess Mortality See 0-14 age group excess mortality growth during summer (EU approved vaccines for 12+ in May). There has been similar rate variance in winters, but this can be explained by bad flu seasons, there's no such variance ever during summer. If vaccines really were the cause, it means only 12-14 group should be affecting the rate, this means that with 0-11 the growth could be 4x that assuming linear relation. Also see 15-44 excess which has never been climbing that fast and is much higher than previously in total. You can also include other years from 2016 to compare. These may not be vaccines, but what is causing this then and why specifically in younger demographics? I'm honestly looking to understand what could be the explanation here.
  - Nursie 5y ago
    VAERS data is not verified, as I said, it's self reported. It's useful but not necessarily great for basing hunches on. According to your graph, excess mortality for ages 0-14 for this year is lower than it was in 2019, before the vaccine or the pandemic hit. And the excess mortality in the 15-44 age group is maybe 5000 people across 28 countries. Without knowing the variance in previous years, which is not given in those graphs, that's meaningless and could easily be down to the disease itself. I personally know a lot of people in this age group who have come down with the disease now, as they are starting to go out and socialise a lot more than they were a year ago. It's hard to see how the 'normal range' is calculated on the pooled deaths graphs as there only appears to be about 4 years data there, which is not a lot to go on. So as I said before, what you have here is vague speculation. You can't tell from there that anything unusual is necessarily going on at all, let alone what might be causing it.
    - jacquesm 5y ago
      But it did give him what he was looking for: a reason not to get vaccinated. All of the above is just that: justification for that decision, and once looked at through that lens it makes a lot more sense.
      - mewpmewp2 5y ago
        What you are saying is that I made the decision first and then looked for the material? I was strongly pro-vax before that, and I was debating anti-vax people. Why would I want to make such a decision that would make me be hated by so many, stress me out of my mind, make people think I'm some sort of anti-science or anti-intellectual, etc? If covid vaccines are truly safe and effective, I would have 0 motivation to believe in some sort of conspiracy, or not take it.
  - detaro 5y ago
    > EU approved vaccines for 12+ in May which doesn't mean kids were vaccinated at any relevant rate at that point. In plenty places they only started that August or thereabouts. There has been some talk of delayed infections with various things due to school closures etc before, I do not know if that had any relevant impact on death rates though, but would explain why they shifted to later in the year. > and why specifically in younger demographics? Looking at the 44+ ranges, those are way more above or close to "substantial increase" - as you would expect with them at being higher risk from covid. Higher vaccination rates help, but aren't entirely stopping it. Potentially also some other medical factors, not aware of any good data on them (i.e. delayed treatments, risky delayed treatments now happening, ...) > Also see 15-44 excess Delta is affecting them more, for at least part summer you can't assume them to be vaccinated yet (and even today, in the badly hit places the vaccination rates are far from perfect - here in Germany "people in hospital" and "percentage unvaccinated" correlates quite well between regions). Delayed treatments again might hit here too, again unsure if relevant. Could there be something hidden in there: sure. But it doesn't seem all that obvious that anything is weird about these numbers.
- mewpmewp2 5y ago
  I can't reply to your last comment because it's too deep, so I'll comment here: > According to your graph, excess mortality for ages 0-14 for this year is lower than it was in 2019, before the vaccine or the pandemic hit. And the excess mortality in the 15-44 age group is maybe 5000 people across 28 countries See week 18-42, for 0-14 age group. Yes it has barely got to 2019 levels, but consider that beginning of year they died much less due to lockdowns, so summer high rate was enough to make up for 2019 where both winters the starting and ending saw very high climb. Again, it's about having that type of velocity during summer, not winters. It's 500-800 children compared to other summers. Since 3 millions of vaccinations given out it could mean around 1 out of 6,000 deaths per vaccination. So all in all, it wouldn't be possible for me to prove it even if vaccine was causing a lot of harm? Because what else can I use besides excess deaths (as much data that as it's possible to gather), adverse event reporting tools etc, anecdotal stories. There's just no way. To myself, there are too many signs pointing towards it, but I guess there's no point to really crusade at all even if it is causing harm.
  - Nursie 5y ago
    > Since 3 millions of vaccinations given out it could mean around 1 out of 6,000 deaths per vaccination. It could, or it could mean something else entirely, and it could be within normal trends. Which is what it looks like to me if all cause mortality is lower than 2019 levels. > So all in all, it wouldn't be possible for me to prove it even if vaccine was causing a lot of harm? Not from this data, no. > Because what else can I use besides excess deaths (as much data that as it's possible to gather), adverse event reporting tools etc, anecdotal stories. There's just no way. Real research and analysis, not "I looked at some very high level graphs with fairly shallow data and decided that it fit my preconceptions". If you're thinking "I don't have easy access to that information, and I don't have the time or the funding to investigate", you're quite right. Medical researchers will have to carry the can here.
    - mewpmewp2 5y ago
      > If you're thinking "I don't have easy access to that information, and I don't have the time or the funding to investigate", you're quite right. Medical researchers will have to carry the can here. Yeah, unfortunately, I've lost all my trust in anything that comes in from mainstream. I was to vaccinate myself, but then I found contradicting information, and from there I couldn't stop going to the rabbit hole, because this doesn't make sense. Mathematically and statistically if mainstream was only telling truth, what I'm seeing should be impossible. It's a terrible situation for me to be in as it stresses me daily, ruins my focus and depresses me. Either I'm crazy and worried about nothing or things generally in the world are not going well and people are in mass hypnosis. Neither is a good side to be in.
- analyte123 5y ago
  Either the VAERS data is broadly accurate, and the COVID vaccines are the most dangerous vaccines ever released (which is not to say they aren't helpful in some populations); or the VAERS data is all just useless unverified anecdotes like you're saying, and so there is no useful system in the US to monitor patient- or doctor-reported adverse events at all, in which case nobody can effectively claim that they are safe for any event that happens more than 1/(number of people in the trials). Which is it? If the VAERS data is all garbage, and someone claims on Telegram that the vaccine gave them lupus or cirrhosis or something, I guess I can't go on VAERS and see that there aren't reported events beyond population baseline, then, and I'll have to take them at their word?
  - mewpmewp2 5y ago
    I have seen enough video stories to believe those anecdotal stories and VAERS, where people got a vaccine complication and nobody believed them, everyone gaslighted them and considered them anti-vaxxers - even though they did take the vaccine. Text based stories, you can never tell, but with video stories you can at least understand their sincerity. And after that it's possible to notice patterns within anecdotal reports as well. And mainstream media has not talked about these side effects at all so I fully believe side effects are not being reported and what are reported is probably with less frequency, it's just difficult for me to tell what the exact frequencies of different side effects are. I have got pretty obsessed now with trying to understand what the frequencies are, there's so much conflicting information. If I had to guess I'd guess that there's some sort of age cut-off where harm may be greater than benefits. It would also highly depend on how social person you are and how much in risk situations, as if you are someone that works remotely, doesn't go out at all, and not in a risk group, then I don't think there's point in taking the vaccine.
  - jacquesm 5y ago
    VAERS will report all of the cases reported in, it is prior to analysis and once the analysis is done the final tally looks completely different. Any possible relation is reported (or actually, should be reported) to VAERS, so if you die the day after you took the vaccin, you will be listed there, whether or not that had anything to do with your vaccination will be determined later on. For another viewpoint: if everybody was vaccinated there would be 7000 people dying the day after they got vaccinated for the USA alone. But that wouldn't mean anything at all, the big question is which of those deaths would not have happened if the vaccine had not been administered. So interpreting VAERS data in any other way than relative day-to-day is not very useful absent further background into those particular cases.

Nursie 5y ago

> Would excess deaths in summer in 0 - 45 age group, in Europe be compelling or is there some other explanation to those? I don't know, what figures are you referring to and what do you think those are evidence of? > For preventing spread ineffectiveness, would Gibraltar being #2 in the World by infection rate while having 99% vaccination be compelling? Taken in isolation, not particularly, no. What you appear to have there is some vaguely formed speculation. > For waning hospital and death protection would Israel data be compelling? Be specific, what claims are you making and what evidence do you think backs them up? > What about countless anecdotal stories of similar persistent adverse effects and VAERS reports? Perhaps you could count them, and investigate to understand if the anecdotes and VAERS reports are true or not, and at what rate they occur. VAERS is by design a catch-all and self-reported, so the data there is interesting but not necessarily trustworthy. Anecdotes are not data, after all.

mewpmewp2 5y ago
I have scanned through so many forums reading anecdotal stories, also downloaded VAERS data, and I definitely see a pattern, but this is not enough of compelling evidence for anyone. But let's just focus on what could be causing excess deaths during summer. Source: https://www.euromomo.eu/graphs-and-maps/ https://www.euromomo.eu/graphs-and-maps/ Scroll to Excess Mortality See 0-14 age group excess mortality growth during summer (EU approved vaccines for 12+ in May). There has been similar rate variance in winters, but this can be explained by bad flu seasons, there's no such variance ever during summer. If vaccines really were the cause, it means only 12-14 group should be affecting the rate, this means that with 0-11 the growth could be 4x that assuming linear relation. Also see 15-44 excess which has never been climbing that fast and is much higher than previously in total. You can also include other years from 2016 to compare. These may not be vaccines, but what is causing this then and why specifically in younger demographics? I'm honestly looking to understand what could be the explanation here.
- Nursie 5y ago
  VAERS data is not verified, as I said, it's self reported. It's useful but not necessarily great for basing hunches on. According to your graph, excess mortality for ages 0-14 for this year is lower than it was in 2019, before the vaccine or the pandemic hit. And the excess mortality in the 15-44 age group is maybe 5000 people across 28 countries. Without knowing the variance in previous years, which is not given in those graphs, that's meaningless and could easily be down to the disease itself. I personally know a lot of people in this age group who have come down with the disease now, as they are starting to go out and socialise a lot more than they were a year ago. It's hard to see how the 'normal range' is calculated on the pooled deaths graphs as there only appears to be about 4 years data there, which is not a lot to go on. So as I said before, what you have here is vague speculation. You can't tell from there that anything unusual is necessarily going on at all, let alone what might be causing it.
  - jacquesm 5y ago
    But it did give him what he was looking for: a reason not to get vaccinated. All of the above is just that: justification for that decision, and once looked at through that lens it makes a lot more sense.
    - mewpmewp2 5y ago
      What you are saying is that I made the decision first and then looked for the material? I was strongly pro-vax before that, and I was debating anti-vax people. Why would I want to make such a decision that would make me be hated by so many, stress me out of my mind, make people think I'm some sort of anti-science or anti-intellectual, etc? If covid vaccines are truly safe and effective, I would have 0 motivation to believe in some sort of conspiracy, or not take it.
- detaro 5y ago
  > EU approved vaccines for 12+ in May which doesn't mean kids were vaccinated at any relevant rate at that point. In plenty places they only started that August or thereabouts. There has been some talk of delayed infections with various things due to school closures etc before, I do not know if that had any relevant impact on death rates though, but would explain why they shifted to later in the year. > and why specifically in younger demographics? Looking at the 44+ ranges, those are way more above or close to "substantial increase" - as you would expect with them at being higher risk from covid. Higher vaccination rates help, but aren't entirely stopping it. Potentially also some other medical factors, not aware of any good data on them (i.e. delayed treatments, risky delayed treatments now happening, ...) > Also see 15-44 excess Delta is affecting them more, for at least part summer you can't assume them to be vaccinated yet (and even today, in the badly hit places the vaccination rates are far from perfect - here in Germany "people in hospital" and "percentage unvaccinated" correlates quite well between regions). Delayed treatments again might hit here too, again unsure if relevant. Could there be something hidden in there: sure. But it doesn't seem all that obvious that anything is weird about these numbers.
mewpmewp2 5y ago
I can't reply to your last comment because it's too deep, so I'll comment here: > According to your graph, excess mortality for ages 0-14 for this year is lower than it was in 2019, before the vaccine or the pandemic hit. And the excess mortality in the 15-44 age group is maybe 5000 people across 28 countries See week 18-42, for 0-14 age group. Yes it has barely got to 2019 levels, but consider that beginning of year they died much less due to lockdowns, so summer high rate was enough to make up for 2019 where both winters the starting and ending saw very high climb. Again, it's about having that type of velocity during summer, not winters. It's 500-800 children compared to other summers. Since 3 millions of vaccinations given out it could mean around 1 out of 6,000 deaths per vaccination. So all in all, it wouldn't be possible for me to prove it even if vaccine was causing a lot of harm? Because what else can I use besides excess deaths (as much data that as it's possible to gather), adverse event reporting tools etc, anecdotal stories. There's just no way. To myself, there are too many signs pointing towards it, but I guess there's no point to really crusade at all even if it is causing harm.
- Nursie 5y ago
  > Since 3 millions of vaccinations given out it could mean around 1 out of 6,000 deaths per vaccination. It could, or it could mean something else entirely, and it could be within normal trends. Which is what it looks like to me if all cause mortality is lower than 2019 levels. > So all in all, it wouldn't be possible for me to prove it even if vaccine was causing a lot of harm? Not from this data, no. > Because what else can I use besides excess deaths (as much data that as it's possible to gather), adverse event reporting tools etc, anecdotal stories. There's just no way. Real research and analysis, not "I looked at some very high level graphs with fairly shallow data and decided that it fit my preconceptions". If you're thinking "I don't have easy access to that information, and I don't have the time or the funding to investigate", you're quite right. Medical researchers will have to carry the can here.
  - mewpmewp2 5y ago
    > If you're thinking "I don't have easy access to that information, and I don't have the time or the funding to investigate", you're quite right. Medical researchers will have to carry the can here. Yeah, unfortunately, I've lost all my trust in anything that comes in from mainstream. I was to vaccinate myself, but then I found contradicting information, and from there I couldn't stop going to the rabbit hole, because this doesn't make sense. Mathematically and statistically if mainstream was only telling truth, what I'm seeing should be impossible. It's a terrible situation for me to be in as it stresses me daily, ruins my focus and depresses me. Either I'm crazy and worried about nothing or things generally in the world are not going well and people are in mass hypnosis. Neither is a good side to be in.
analyte123 5y ago
Either the VAERS data is broadly accurate, and the COVID vaccines are the most dangerous vaccines ever released (which is not to say they aren't helpful in some populations); or the VAERS data is all just useless unverified anecdotes like you're saying, and so there is no useful system in the US to monitor patient- or doctor-reported adverse events at all, in which case nobody can effectively claim that they are safe for any event that happens more than 1/(number of people in the trials). Which is it? If the VAERS data is all garbage, and someone claims on Telegram that the vaccine gave them lupus or cirrhosis or something, I guess I can't go on VAERS and see that there aren't reported events beyond population baseline, then, and I'll have to take them at their word?
- mewpmewp2 5y ago
  I have seen enough video stories to believe those anecdotal stories and VAERS, where people got a vaccine complication and nobody believed them, everyone gaslighted them and considered them anti-vaxxers - even though they did take the vaccine. Text based stories, you can never tell, but with video stories you can at least understand their sincerity. And after that it's possible to notice patterns within anecdotal reports as well. And mainstream media has not talked about these side effects at all so I fully believe side effects are not being reported and what are reported is probably with less frequency, it's just difficult for me to tell what the exact frequencies of different side effects are. I have got pretty obsessed now with trying to understand what the frequencies are, there's so much conflicting information. If I had to guess I'd guess that there's some sort of age cut-off where harm may be greater than benefits. It would also highly depend on how social person you are and how much in risk situations, as if you are someone that works remotely, doesn't go out at all, and not in a risk group, then I don't think there's point in taking the vaccine.
- jacquesm 5y ago
  VAERS will report all of the cases reported in, it is prior to analysis and once the analysis is done the final tally looks completely different. Any possible relation is reported (or actually, should be reported) to VAERS, so if you die the day after you took the vaccin, you will be listed there, whether or not that had anything to do with your vaccination will be determined later on. For another viewpoint: if everybody was vaccinated there would be 7000 people dying the day after they got vaccinated for the USA alone. But that wouldn't mean anything at all, the big question is which of those deaths would not have happened if the vaccine had not been administered. So interpreting VAERS data in any other way than relative day-to-day is not very useful absent further background into those particular cases.