4 ms·

Yes and 19.8 million people are still alive because of it in the first year. https://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-3099(22)00320-6/fulltex

Yes and 19.8 million people are still alive because of it in the first year. https://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-3099(22)00320-6/fulltext https://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-3... For comparison, World War I was 40 million casualties.

t0bia_s 4y ago
[flagged]
- ausbah 4y ago
  I don't have the domain expertise nor the time to address everything you've posted - and maybe these aren't valid reasons to distrust what you've shared - but I'm skeptical of your conclusion bc many are unreviewed studies from over a year ago by authors who don't have relevant background, and few are straight up right wing rags full of conspiracy theories & other nonsense.
  - z3c0 4y ago
    Since COVID, I've noticed a "quantity over quality" strategy deployed en massé by the pseudo-intellectual right. It allows one to give the impression of a well-researched response without doing any of the needed work. It's almost as if they realize that posting a wall of links will daunt most into not questioning them, even if most of the links wouldn't survive a hint of scrutiny.
    - t0bia_s 4y ago
      [flagged]
      - z3c0 4y ago
        You might need a preening; your feathers are looking rustled.
      - ffssffss 4y ago
        This is exactly the quantity over quality tactic that he's talking about. "You aren't qualified to debate me unless you read this pile of links to conspiracy blogs and unreviewed open access publications". Nobody is going to engage with that, since the best outcome we can expect is to carefully refute each one, only for you to show up with another pile and again demand we play along.
    - npteljes 4y ago
      Maybe it's a Gish gallop, but with source material.
      - z3c0 4y ago
        As someone who studies propaganda (especially disinformation), I'm amazed that I've never encountered the term "Gish gallop" before. Having researched it now, I'd say you've described the phenomenon perfectly.
        npteljes 4y ago
        I'm happy to have added a nuance! I know the term from my Rationalwiki binge, although it's even found on the regular Wikipedia. I don't know how much Rationalwiki is up your alley, they have several articles on propaganda and logic & rethoric, I personally found them enlightening (and entertaining!).
        z3c0 4y ago
        Very up my alley - I've encountered it in the past scouring the web, but haven't spent too much time there. I'll make a point to frequent it more.
  - t0bia_s 4y ago
    So why bother to judge something that you refuse to read? Are you serious? Graphs from EU data about excess mortality are conspiracy theories now?
    - mikeyouse 4y ago
      Posting charts reflecting excess mortality during a pandemic and attributing that to the vaccine gives the game away a bit, no?
    - nerdponx 4y ago
      > So why bother to judge something that you refuse to read? They did read it, and concluded it wasn't useful. > Graphs from EU data about excess mortality are conspiracy theories now? Excess mortality, by design, does not say anything about causes. In the USA for example, you can hypothesize a variety of plausible reasons for continued high excess mortality, pandemic-related and otherwise (increased crime, lower incomes, decreased access to non-Covid healthcare, increased highway speeds, et alia), but the excess mortality number itself cannot tell you the relative strengths of those causes.
      - t0bia_s 4y ago
        "They did read it, and concluded it wasn't useful.“ Response was few minutes after post. No wonder that answer is not even related to content of links.
        nerdponx 4y ago
        This is a wildly disingenuous response. If you claim that you saw Bigfoot, and your evidence is a sketch on the back of a napkin, I don't need to carefully study the sketch to reject it as useful evidence.
    - PuppyTailWags 4y ago
      tbh, I didn't see any establishment of causal relationship with excess mortality. This is like debugging a program by looking at the git history, without actually seriously thinking about what the bug actually is. It could be something recent. It could be something that was messed up ages ago and is only coming to rear its head now.
  - nerdponx 4y ago
    You should see the trash that gets posted in anti-vaccine groups. There are whole nutritional and supplement protocols meant to counteract "vaccine damage", and these pseudo-science studies get paraded around like religious texts.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- pfisherman 4y ago
  Sorry but we have more hard data on the COVID vaccine(s) than pretty much any drug in recorded history. With things like electronic health records, insurance claims databases, and state vaccine registries; it is trivial to check whether or not someone who is admitted to a hospital for COVID hot a vaccine or not. Arguing that the COVID vaccines we have available in the US are not effective is like arguing that the average global temperature has not increased over the last 50 years, or that smoking does not increase the risk of lung cancer and emphysema. You are making extraordinary claims that contradict a mountain of data.
  - t0bia_s 4y ago
    Yet, you are not link any data.
- Mistletoe 4y ago
  Those are complete nonsense. I don’t have the time or patience to go over why each one doesn’t mean what you think it means.

t0bia_s 4y ago

[flagged]

ausbah 4y ago
I don't have the domain expertise nor the time to address everything you've posted - and maybe these aren't valid reasons to distrust what you've shared - but I'm skeptical of your conclusion bc many are unreviewed studies from over a year ago by authors who don't have relevant background, and few are straight up right wing rags full of conspiracy theories & other nonsense.
- z3c0 4y ago
  Since COVID, I've noticed a "quantity over quality" strategy deployed en massé by the pseudo-intellectual right. It allows one to give the impression of a well-researched response without doing any of the needed work. It's almost as if they realize that posting a wall of links will daunt most into not questioning them, even if most of the links wouldn't survive a hint of scrutiny.
  - t0bia_s 4y ago
    [flagged]
    - z3c0 4y ago
      You might need a preening; your feathers are looking rustled.
    - ffssffss 4y ago
      This is exactly the quantity over quality tactic that he's talking about. "You aren't qualified to debate me unless you read this pile of links to conspiracy blogs and unreviewed open access publications". Nobody is going to engage with that, since the best outcome we can expect is to carefully refute each one, only for you to show up with another pile and again demand we play along.
  - npteljes 4y ago
    Maybe it's a Gish gallop, but with source material.
    - z3c0 4y ago
      As someone who studies propaganda (especially disinformation), I'm amazed that I've never encountered the term "Gish gallop" before. Having researched it now, I'd say you've described the phenomenon perfectly.
      - npteljes 4y ago
        I'm happy to have added a nuance! I know the term from my Rationalwiki binge, although it's even found on the regular Wikipedia. I don't know how much Rationalwiki is up your alley, they have several articles on propaganda and logic & rethoric, I personally found them enlightening (and entertaining!).
        z3c0 4y ago
        Very up my alley - I've encountered it in the past scouring the web, but haven't spent too much time there. I'll make a point to frequent it more.
- t0bia_s 4y ago
  So why bother to judge something that you refuse to read? Are you serious? Graphs from EU data about excess mortality are conspiracy theories now?
  - mikeyouse 4y ago
    Posting charts reflecting excess mortality during a pandemic and attributing that to the vaccine gives the game away a bit, no?
  - nerdponx 4y ago
    > So why bother to judge something that you refuse to read? They did read it, and concluded it wasn't useful. > Graphs from EU data about excess mortality are conspiracy theories now? Excess mortality, by design, does not say anything about causes. In the USA for example, you can hypothesize a variety of plausible reasons for continued high excess mortality, pandemic-related and otherwise (increased crime, lower incomes, decreased access to non-Covid healthcare, increased highway speeds, et alia), but the excess mortality number itself cannot tell you the relative strengths of those causes.
    - t0bia_s 4y ago
      "They did read it, and concluded it wasn't useful.“ Response was few minutes after post. No wonder that answer is not even related to content of links.
      - nerdponx 4y ago
        This is a wildly disingenuous response. If you claim that you saw Bigfoot, and your evidence is a sketch on the back of a napkin, I don't need to carefully study the sketch to reject it as useful evidence.
  - PuppyTailWags 4y ago
    tbh, I didn't see any establishment of causal relationship with excess mortality. This is like debugging a program by looking at the git history, without actually seriously thinking about what the bug actually is. It could be something recent. It could be something that was messed up ages ago and is only coming to rear its head now.
- nerdponx 4y ago
  You should see the trash that gets posted in anti-vaccine groups. There are whole nutritional and supplement protocols meant to counteract "vaccine damage", and these pseudo-science studies get paraded around like religious texts.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
pfisherman 4y ago
Sorry but we have more hard data on the COVID vaccine(s) than pretty much any drug in recorded history. With things like electronic health records, insurance claims databases, and state vaccine registries; it is trivial to check whether or not someone who is admitted to a hospital for COVID hot a vaccine or not. Arguing that the COVID vaccines we have available in the US are not effective is like arguing that the average global temperature has not increased over the last 50 years, or that smoking does not increase the risk of lung cancer and emphysema. You are making extraordinary claims that contradict a mountain of data.
- t0bia_s 4y ago
  Yet, you are not link any data.
Mistletoe 4y ago
Those are complete nonsense. I don’t have the time or patience to go over why each one doesn’t mean what you think it means.