10 ms·

But the thing is we ran a massive experiment on this called "The covid-19 pandemic". What we saw was no serious increase in mortality for the immunized, and a

by mabbo 4y ago

But the thing is we ran a massive experiment on this called "The covid-19 pandemic". What we saw was no serious increase in mortality for the immunized, and a significant increase in mortality for the non-immunized. Seems like the data from that experiment should be taken into consideration when deciding if the tradeoff is worthwhile, right?

origin_path 4y ago
Two problems: 1. That wasn't a controlled experiment. Observational data < RCTs. 2. You are mixing up mortality and mortality attributed to COVID. It's a common error. For overall mortality the picture is far less clear. For example in the Pfizer trials there were more deaths overall in the vaccinated arm than the unvaccinated arm i.e. RCT evidence = no mortality benefit. Also, we now have excess deaths above the expected baseline for long periods in 2022, which is unprecedented. Governments are highly reluctant to split these deaths out by vaccine status, but the increase seems mostly attributed to heart and blood clotting related deaths. So the data from the "experiment" is not obviously positive.
- ttpphd 4y ago
  [flagged]
  - logic_beats_pro 4y ago
    As you see in the article, this is a mathematical model which indicates vaccines saved 20,000,000 lives. It is completely unprovable and only serves as a nice sounding talking point. I also could claim 20,000,000 lives were saved by natural immunity. Or vitamin D from sunshine. Or the placebo effect. All of those mentioned are also not provable.
    - blackbear_ 4y ago
      Do you have specific reasons not to believe the model and/or data in that article, beyond "all models are wrong by definition"?
      - throwaway4aday 4y ago
        A model is a prediction, nothing more. It can be a correct prediction but only after being verified by comparison with reality.
        mrguyorama 4y ago
        Show where this model disagrees with reality.
        logic_beats_pro 4y ago
        The problem is there is no way to accurately tell if the vaccine saved a single life, let alone 20 million
    - ttpphd 4y ago
      "It is completely unprovable" You have no idea what you are talking about or how empiricism works. It's laughable. The best data in the world tells us that 20 million lives were saved. Saying "No it didn't" is not an impressive or persuasive response.
      - logic_beats_pro 4y ago
        Prove it then... not even the 20 million but just a single death saved because of the vaccine. You cannot. It's not a rip on you, nobody can. Hence it's not provable. If anyone could, they would have already and wouldn't have to resort to nonsense theoretical computer models. VERY interested in your attempt though gets out popcorn
- Sohcahtoa82 4y ago
  > For example in the Pfizer trials there were more deaths overall in the vaccinated arm than the unvaccinated arm i.e. RCT evidence = no mortality benefit. > Governments are highly reluctant to split these deaths out by vaccine status, but the increase seems mostly attributed to heart and blood clotting related deaths. [citation needed]
  - stoneglyph 4y ago
    There were approximately 40k people in the vaccinated and the placebo groups. One group had 17 deaths, and the other one had 21. If you are not aware of this information, how can you consider yourself informed on the topic?
    - importantbrian 4y ago
      There is a pretty good reason that the Pfizer RCT doesn't show excess mortality benefit. It wasn't designed to study that. The recruited population is mostly healthy as individuals with multiple risk factors were excluded. For example the proportion of the study group over 65 and the proportion with at least 1 comorbidity is much smaller than the population as a whole. The studied group was very unlikely to experience mortality in the first place so a much larger study would be needed to show any evidence of an effect on mortality. The difference between 17 and 21 is not statistically significant. In the absence of a large enough RCT we're left with observational studies and there are a ton of these now. The observational data shows a large mortality benefit in the vaccinated population and I'm not aware of a single observational study that shows the opposite, but I suppose there could be one out there that I have missed. The preponderance of the evidence is pretty strongly in favor of the vaccinated population experiencing lower mortality than the unvaccinated population.
      - stoneglyph 4y ago
        Can you lead us to this preponderance of evidence that is out there?
        4y ago
- zionic 4y ago
  >You are mixing up mortality and mortality attributed to COVID. There's also the problem of governments playing funny games around deaths and "vaccinated". Someone who died from an adverse reaction immediately following their shot would not count as a vaccinated death, because the _definition_ of "vaccinated" meant you completed the vaccine schedule which was multiple shots over time.
  - peter422 4y ago
    Please show any evidence of this claim. In trials the vaccines were tested in tens of thousands of people where adverse reactions were meticulously recorded and there just isn’t any evidence that the vaccines caused immediate death in anybody. Then beyond that there isn’t any evidence that there also is a government conspiracy following the first dubious claim.
  - Izkata 4y ago
    Not just after the last shot, you're not counted as fully vaccinated until two weeks after the last shot: https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/faq.html https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/faq.html (look under "Am I still considered fully vaccinated if I don't get a booster?")
treeman79 4y ago
Isn’t “unknown cause of death” skyrocketing? https://youtu.be/F74iqEJnb14 https://youtu.be/F74iqEJnb14 https://thehill.com/changing-america/well-being/longevity/588738-huge-huge-numbers-death-rates-up-40-percent-over-pre/amp/ https://thehill.com/changing-america/well-being/longevity/58...
- yojo 4y ago
  Excess deaths are widely considered to be “from Covid” right now. It is possible there’s something else going on, but as the parent said, the numbers you should care about when making a vaccine decision are the mortality rate of the vaccinated vs the unvaccinated. Unvaccinated people are dying at a much higher rate. If your biggest concern is not dying, you should be vaccinated.
  - base698 4y ago
    Most of the excess deaths are not covid but attributed from effects of lockdown (drug use, untreated cancers).
    - soco 4y ago
      Then we cannot attribute them to the vaccine, which was the original point.
      - omniglottal 4y ago
        And, likewise, you cannot NOT attribute them to the vaccine. Inconclusive data is not to be either used as a calibrated measure nor to be simply ignored.
        costigan 4y ago
        The excess deaths are quite possibly attributable to both the virus and the vaccines if, as one plausible but very unproven example, they're due to inflammation and/or micro-clotting caused by the spike protein. But in an environment where everyone will be exposed to the actual virus eventually, with uncontrolled initial exposures, it comes down to whether the benefit of getting vaccinated is worth the risk. The data I've seen says that it is.
dapf 4y ago
> What we saw was no serious increase in mortality for the immunized, and a significant increase in mortality for the non-immunized Where did you see that?
- robbiemitchell 4y ago
  Here's just a few seconds of searching re: increased mortality for non-vaccinated: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-to-compare-covid-deaths-for-vaccinated-and-unvaccinated-people/ https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-to-compare-co... https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/71/wr/mm7104e2.htm https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/71/wr/mm7104e2.htm https://doh.wa.gov/sites/default/files/2022-02/421-010-CasesInNotFullyVaccinated.pdf https://doh.wa.gov/sites/default/files/2022-02/421-010-Cases... https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/2022/02/08/omicron-deaths-covid/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/2022/02/08/omicron-dea...
stoneglyph 4y ago
[flagged]
canoebuilder 4y ago
What we saw was no serious increase in mortality for the immunized https://nitter.ca/AlexBerenson/status/1569648795373166593#m https://nitter.ca/AlexBerenson/status/1569648795373166593#m We are seeing high levels of excess mortality that we shouldn’t be seeing, if the “safe and effective” propaganda was remotely true. If by “immunized” you mean those who had one or many mRNA injections, then we are seeing high correlation between excess deaths and that population. And there are many papers detailing likely causal mechanisms between those deaths and those injections. Sorry people, we were lied to. Was it malice, incompetence, both? Don’t know… But I see no reason to go on Stockholm syndroming ourselves.
- belltaco 4y ago
  That's a lot of unfounded speculation. There's as much evidence that invisible space aliens are causing excess deaths as there is for mRNA vaccines.
  - canoebuilder 4y ago
    Really, you think that? There are excess deaths and dropping fertility. What is the cause? People have tried every explanation they can think of and nothing adds up except for one thing few people want to talk or think about, why is that? We’re not talking about speculation, we’re talking about clear thinking and rigorous deduction of potential causal pathways. The drop in fertility is, horribly so, blindingly obvious. In country after country, 9 months after mRNA injections rollout for young people we are seeing a striking drop in births. We know there is an effect on women’s reproductive system and men’s. Men’s sperm counts drop a study from Israel has shown. Many, many reports from women of their periods having been effected. Unfortunately, there is nothing speculative about this. Nobody wants this to be the case. That this was pushed the way it was on young people is criminal and insane. In terms of death or injury there are definitely cases where it is entirely clear cut just hours or days after an injection somebody is dead or severely debilitated in a way clearly linked to the shot. Those are deaths or injuries that had no business occurring and yet they did, why? In the aggregate/macro overview we’re seeing it in data where it can’t be hidden and in the day to day. Just do a search for something like “unexpectedly died” Again, who wants this thing so many went fanatical about a year ago to have caused this? Something did cause it though, and at this point the most likely and parsimonious explanation is the shots. And not for lack of trying alternative explanations. Why stick your head in the sand if that leads to more death and destruction. We’ve found ourselves in a hole in terms of societal health, let’s stop digging. This is the first I’ve heard of the invisible space alien theory. What is the evidence for it?

by mabbo 4y ago

origin_path 4y ago

Two problems: 1. That wasn't a controlled experiment. Observational data < RCTs. 2. You are mixing up mortality and mortality attributed to COVID. It's a common error. For overall mortality the picture is far less clear. For example in the Pfizer trials there were more deaths overall in the vaccinated arm than the unvaccinated arm i.e. RCT evidence = no mortality benefit. Also, we now have excess deaths above the expected baseline for long periods in 2022, which is unprecedented. Governments are highly reluctant to split these deaths out by vaccine status, but the increase seems mostly attributed to heart and blood clotting related deaths. So the data from the "experiment" is not obviously positive.

ttpphd 4y ago
[flagged]
- logic_beats_pro 4y ago
  As you see in the article, this is a mathematical model which indicates vaccines saved 20,000,000 lives. It is completely unprovable and only serves as a nice sounding talking point. I also could claim 20,000,000 lives were saved by natural immunity. Or vitamin D from sunshine. Or the placebo effect. All of those mentioned are also not provable.
  - blackbear_ 4y ago
    Do you have specific reasons not to believe the model and/or data in that article, beyond "all models are wrong by definition"?
    - throwaway4aday 4y ago
      A model is a prediction, nothing more. It can be a correct prediction but only after being verified by comparison with reality.
      - mrguyorama 4y ago
        Show where this model disagrees with reality.
        logic_beats_pro 4y ago
        The problem is there is no way to accurately tell if the vaccine saved a single life, let alone 20 million
  - ttpphd 4y ago
    "It is completely unprovable" You have no idea what you are talking about or how empiricism works. It's laughable. The best data in the world tells us that 20 million lives were saved. Saying "No it didn't" is not an impressive or persuasive response.
    - logic_beats_pro 4y ago
      Prove it then... not even the 20 million but just a single death saved because of the vaccine. You cannot. It's not a rip on you, nobody can. Hence it's not provable. If anyone could, they would have already and wouldn't have to resort to nonsense theoretical computer models. VERY interested in your attempt though gets out popcorn
Sohcahtoa82 4y ago
> For example in the Pfizer trials there were more deaths overall in the vaccinated arm than the unvaccinated arm i.e. RCT evidence = no mortality benefit. > Governments are highly reluctant to split these deaths out by vaccine status, but the increase seems mostly attributed to heart and blood clotting related deaths. [citation needed]
- stoneglyph 4y ago
  There were approximately 40k people in the vaccinated and the placebo groups. One group had 17 deaths, and the other one had 21. If you are not aware of this information, how can you consider yourself informed on the topic?
  - importantbrian 4y ago
    There is a pretty good reason that the Pfizer RCT doesn't show excess mortality benefit. It wasn't designed to study that. The recruited population is mostly healthy as individuals with multiple risk factors were excluded. For example the proportion of the study group over 65 and the proportion with at least 1 comorbidity is much smaller than the population as a whole. The studied group was very unlikely to experience mortality in the first place so a much larger study would be needed to show any evidence of an effect on mortality. The difference between 17 and 21 is not statistically significant. In the absence of a large enough RCT we're left with observational studies and there are a ton of these now. The observational data shows a large mortality benefit in the vaccinated population and I'm not aware of a single observational study that shows the opposite, but I suppose there could be one out there that I have missed. The preponderance of the evidence is pretty strongly in favor of the vaccinated population experiencing lower mortality than the unvaccinated population.
    - stoneglyph 4y ago
      Can you lead us to this preponderance of evidence that is out there?
      - 4y ago
zionic 4y ago
>You are mixing up mortality and mortality attributed to COVID. There's also the problem of governments playing funny games around deaths and "vaccinated". Someone who died from an adverse reaction immediately following their shot would not count as a vaccinated death, because the _definition_ of "vaccinated" meant you completed the vaccine schedule which was multiple shots over time.
- peter422 4y ago
  Please show any evidence of this claim. In trials the vaccines were tested in tens of thousands of people where adverse reactions were meticulously recorded and there just isn’t any evidence that the vaccines caused immediate death in anybody. Then beyond that there isn’t any evidence that there also is a government conspiracy following the first dubious claim.
- Izkata 4y ago
  Not just after the last shot, you're not counted as fully vaccinated until two weeks after the last shot: https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/faq.html https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/faq.html (look under "Am I still considered fully vaccinated if I don't get a booster?")

treeman79 4y ago

Isn’t “unknown cause of death” skyrocketing? https://youtu.be/F74iqEJnb14 https://youtu.be/F74iqEJnb14 https://thehill.com/changing-america/well-being/longevity/588738-huge-huge-numbers-death-rates-up-40-percent-over-pre/amp/ https://thehill.com/changing-america/well-being/longevity/58...

yojo 4y ago
Excess deaths are widely considered to be “from Covid” right now. It is possible there’s something else going on, but as the parent said, the numbers you should care about when making a vaccine decision are the mortality rate of the vaccinated vs the unvaccinated. Unvaccinated people are dying at a much higher rate. If your biggest concern is not dying, you should be vaccinated.
- base698 4y ago
  Most of the excess deaths are not covid but attributed from effects of lockdown (drug use, untreated cancers).
  - soco 4y ago
    Then we cannot attribute them to the vaccine, which was the original point.
    - omniglottal 4y ago
      And, likewise, you cannot NOT attribute them to the vaccine. Inconclusive data is not to be either used as a calibrated measure nor to be simply ignored.
      - costigan 4y ago
        The excess deaths are quite possibly attributable to both the virus and the vaccines if, as one plausible but very unproven example, they're due to inflammation and/or micro-clotting caused by the spike protein. But in an environment where everyone will be exposed to the actual virus eventually, with uncontrolled initial exposures, it comes down to whether the benefit of getting vaccinated is worth the risk. The data I've seen says that it is.

dapf 4y ago

> What we saw was no serious increase in mortality for the immunized, and a significant increase in mortality for the non-immunized Where did you see that?

robbiemitchell 4y ago
Here's just a few seconds of searching re: increased mortality for non-vaccinated: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-to-compare-covid-deaths-for-vaccinated-and-unvaccinated-people/ https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-to-compare-co... https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/71/wr/mm7104e2.htm https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/71/wr/mm7104e2.htm https://doh.wa.gov/sites/default/files/2022-02/421-010-CasesInNotFullyVaccinated.pdf https://doh.wa.gov/sites/default/files/2022-02/421-010-Cases... https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/2022/02/08/omicron-deaths-covid/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/2022/02/08/omicron-dea...

stoneglyph 4y ago

[flagged]

canoebuilder 4y ago

What we saw was no serious increase in mortality for the immunized https://nitter.ca/AlexBerenson/status/1569648795373166593#m https://nitter.ca/AlexBerenson/status/1569648795373166593#m We are seeing high levels of excess mortality that we shouldn’t be seeing, if the “safe and effective” propaganda was remotely true. If by “immunized” you mean those who had one or many mRNA injections, then we are seeing high correlation between excess deaths and that population. And there are many papers detailing likely causal mechanisms between those deaths and those injections. Sorry people, we were lied to. Was it malice, incompetence, both? Don’t know… But I see no reason to go on Stockholm syndroming ourselves.

belltaco 4y ago
That's a lot of unfounded speculation. There's as much evidence that invisible space aliens are causing excess deaths as there is for mRNA vaccines.
- canoebuilder 4y ago
  Really, you think that? There are excess deaths and dropping fertility. What is the cause? People have tried every explanation they can think of and nothing adds up except for one thing few people want to talk or think about, why is that? We’re not talking about speculation, we’re talking about clear thinking and rigorous deduction of potential causal pathways. The drop in fertility is, horribly so, blindingly obvious. In country after country, 9 months after mRNA injections rollout for young people we are seeing a striking drop in births. We know there is an effect on women’s reproductive system and men’s. Men’s sperm counts drop a study from Israel has shown. Many, many reports from women of their periods having been effected. Unfortunately, there is nothing speculative about this. Nobody wants this to be the case. That this was pushed the way it was on young people is criminal and insane. In terms of death or injury there are definitely cases where it is entirely clear cut just hours or days after an injection somebody is dead or severely debilitated in a way clearly linked to the shot. Those are deaths or injuries that had no business occurring and yet they did, why? In the aggregate/macro overview we’re seeing it in data where it can’t be hidden and in the day to day. Just do a search for something like “unexpectedly died” Again, who wants this thing so many went fanatical about a year ago to have caused this? Something did cause it though, and at this point the most likely and parsimonious explanation is the shots. And not for lack of trying alternative explanations. Why stick your head in the sand if that leads to more death and destruction. We’ve found ourselves in a hole in terms of societal health, let’s stop digging. This is the first I’ve heard of the invisible space alien theory. What is the evidence for it?