3 ms·

> yea, this was all a bit of an over reaction One million, two hundred thousand dead from COVID and counting in the U.S. alone. Nearly 2% of all deaths in this

> yea, this was all a bit of an over reaction One million, two hundred thousand dead from COVID and counting in the U.S. alone. Nearly 2% of all deaths in this past week were caused by COVID infection. This doesn’t even begin to touch the people who have suffered lifelong consequences from it. Find me any statistic that puts any COVID vaccine within three orders of magnitude of these numbers or (maybe not so) kindly see yourself out.

yawpitch 2y ago
> Find me any statistic that puts any COVID vaccine within three orders of magnitude of these numbers or (maybe not so) kindly see yourself out. Quantitative amen.
raverbashing 2y ago
Exactly this Conspiracy bros failed math hard I'm surprised (in a bad way) when people display limited ability to compare magnitudes. We see this all the time in discussions like clean energy and stuff. Sure, sometimes it is malicious or misinformed. But in general it seems like some people can't do it (hence leading to things like payday loans, failure in managing finances, etc)
johnisgood 2y ago
[flagged]
- stouset 2y ago
  I am finding it very hard to reply to this post within the HN commenting guidelines, as it is essentially 100% unsubstantiated misinformation. The COVID vaccines did not and do not cause deaths that are recorded as COVID deaths, full stop. A simple and obvious test of this is that there would have been a clear and obvious spike in COVID-related hospitalizations and deaths in locations where the vaccine began to be mass-administered. There is zero evidence of this in the data. In fact, the exact opposite is true. > Plus everyone says it's safe but there was a vaccine that caused some condition 1-2 years post-vaccination, and it was by pure luck they found the connection to the vaccine. This would be a lot more compelling if you could even name this condition. When you manage to figure that out, I will be happy to engage in further critical discussion.
  - johnisgood 2y ago
    > This would be a lot more compelling if you could even name this condition. Pandremix vaccine against H1N1 influenza (swine flu). > The link between Pandemrix and narcolepsy was identified after epidemiological studies were conducted in these countries. It was largely by chance that researchers noticed a higher incidence of narcolepsy among children and adolescents who had received the vaccine. > The exact mechanism linking Pandemrix to narcolepsy is not fully understood, but it is suspected to involve an autoimmune response possibly triggered by the adjuvant used in the vaccine (AS03), or by some components in the vaccine itself. > Cases of narcolepsy were reported primarily in Finland and Sweden in 2010 and 2011, about 1-2 years after the mass vaccination campaigns. You think it can only happen with Pandemrix? It is known that mRNA vaccines cause an autoimmune response. I have also seen a massive influx of patients with newly diagnosed autoimmune disorders post-vaccination. You could call it a coincidence all you want. On top of that, Pandemrix is a vaccine is supplied in separate vials, one containing the adjuvant, and the other the inactivated virus, so it is not even as relatively new as the mRNA vaccines. Perhaps ask family or friends around who work in healthcare, I don't know.
    - johnisgood 2y ago
      I would also like to add another condition, which is far more known: Guillain-Barré Syndrome (GBS), which is a rare autoimmune disorder that has been associated with some vaccines in rare cases. Actually, while we are at it, there have been several instances where rare adverse events or long-term conditions were discovered years after the introduction of a vaccine. So, apart from narcolepsy caused by Pandemrix (again, made the association by luck), and GBS which is associated with most if not all vaccinations (albeit rare), there are a couple more: - Oral Polio Vaccine (OPV) and Vaccine-Derived Poliovirus (VDPV) -- Type: live attenuated vaccine -- Discovery: *years* after initial widespread use - Rotavirus Vaccines -- Discovery: within a year after mass vaccination but took time to confirm causation - HPV Vaccine and POTS (Postural Orthostatic Tachycardia Syndrome) -- Discovery: concerns emerged years after widespread use So, given our history, do you think an mRNA vaccine is completely safe and there is no way it could be associated to any conditions down on the line? To me that sounds like either denial or wishful thinking. It took years after mass vaccination with some vaccines, you simply cannot deny that, it is a fact. If you think mRNA vaccines are completely safe (which is highly doubtful, call it healthy skepticism), good for you, but do not threaten to take away people's jobs (among other things) because they care more about their life than you do. If you do care about your life, where is the skepticism given our history of some vaccines? We have never had an mRNA vaccine that we administered on a massive, global scale before. --- > The COVID vaccines did not and do not cause deaths that are recorded as COVID deaths, full stop We literally do this in my country, and I know this because I worked in healthcare, and I have family and friends working in healthcare (doctors, nurses). It is not limited to COVID, FWIW. So as far as "100% unsubstantiated misinformation" goes, yeah, no, I have first-hand experiences with such practices. You do not have to believe me, it makes no difference to me personally, and it seems like you already made up your mind about it.
rob_c 2y ago
Oh the piles of bodies. Please check the details behind such claims before trotting them out. By the same US federal data COVID brought someone back to life. I'm not joking the obvious mistake is recorded and is a wonderful example of how the data needs to be cleaned checked and examined more closely.
- stouset 2y ago
  Hundreds of millions of entries of data input by a large group of people across a wide region will always have errors and inconsistencies. This is true of data related to COVID-related deaths, homicides, car accidents, daycare enrollment rates, and everything in between. Showing that individual data points are inconsistent or wrong does not by itself indicate that conclusions gleaned from a data set as a whole are incorrect. Read the accounts from funeral home staff some time. We were very literally running out of places to put the actual, physical bodies. It turns out when you have a mortuary system that’s set up to process a reasonably consistent and predictable number of deceased humans, adding an sudden, unexpected, and sustained additional load of 10–15% (with spikes up to 33% and 45%) system stretches it beyond its limit.
  - rob_c 2y ago
    No but it's a glaring example of referring to a non consistent dataset. The data should be cleaned first to remove such problems which impacts totals. Such work then has to look at labelled as having COVID at time of death Vs sole cause which is _missing_ from most Western datasets. And I'd be willing to believe it's missing from totals that large, unfortunately raising a question as to how many actually were killed by despite the fact we know >80% were likely over 80yr... Not to forget the nice example, if you died from a heart attack due to a racy TV advert did the TV kill you?

yawpitch 2y ago

> Find me any statistic that puts any COVID vaccine within three orders of magnitude of these numbers or (maybe not so) kindly see yourself out. Quantitative amen.

raverbashing 2y ago

Exactly this Conspiracy bros failed math hard I'm surprised (in a bad way) when people display limited ability to compare magnitudes. We see this all the time in discussions like clean energy and stuff. Sure, sometimes it is malicious or misinformed. But in general it seems like some people can't do it (hence leading to things like payday loans, failure in managing finances, etc)

johnisgood 2y ago

[flagged]

stouset 2y ago
I am finding it very hard to reply to this post within the HN commenting guidelines, as it is essentially 100% unsubstantiated misinformation. The COVID vaccines did not and do not cause deaths that are recorded as COVID deaths, full stop. A simple and obvious test of this is that there would have been a clear and obvious spike in COVID-related hospitalizations and deaths in locations where the vaccine began to be mass-administered. There is zero evidence of this in the data. In fact, the exact opposite is true. > Plus everyone says it's safe but there was a vaccine that caused some condition 1-2 years post-vaccination, and it was by pure luck they found the connection to the vaccine. This would be a lot more compelling if you could even name this condition. When you manage to figure that out, I will be happy to engage in further critical discussion.
- johnisgood 2y ago
  > This would be a lot more compelling if you could even name this condition. Pandremix vaccine against H1N1 influenza (swine flu). > The link between Pandemrix and narcolepsy was identified after epidemiological studies were conducted in these countries. It was largely by chance that researchers noticed a higher incidence of narcolepsy among children and adolescents who had received the vaccine. > The exact mechanism linking Pandemrix to narcolepsy is not fully understood, but it is suspected to involve an autoimmune response possibly triggered by the adjuvant used in the vaccine (AS03), or by some components in the vaccine itself. > Cases of narcolepsy were reported primarily in Finland and Sweden in 2010 and 2011, about 1-2 years after the mass vaccination campaigns. You think it can only happen with Pandemrix? It is known that mRNA vaccines cause an autoimmune response. I have also seen a massive influx of patients with newly diagnosed autoimmune disorders post-vaccination. You could call it a coincidence all you want. On top of that, Pandemrix is a vaccine is supplied in separate vials, one containing the adjuvant, and the other the inactivated virus, so it is not even as relatively new as the mRNA vaccines. Perhaps ask family or friends around who work in healthcare, I don't know.
  - johnisgood 2y ago
    I would also like to add another condition, which is far more known: Guillain-Barré Syndrome (GBS), which is a rare autoimmune disorder that has been associated with some vaccines in rare cases. Actually, while we are at it, there have been several instances where rare adverse events or long-term conditions were discovered years after the introduction of a vaccine. So, apart from narcolepsy caused by Pandemrix (again, made the association by luck), and GBS which is associated with most if not all vaccinations (albeit rare), there are a couple more: - Oral Polio Vaccine (OPV) and Vaccine-Derived Poliovirus (VDPV) -- Type: live attenuated vaccine -- Discovery: *years* after initial widespread use - Rotavirus Vaccines -- Discovery: within a year after mass vaccination but took time to confirm causation - HPV Vaccine and POTS (Postural Orthostatic Tachycardia Syndrome) -- Discovery: concerns emerged years after widespread use So, given our history, do you think an mRNA vaccine is completely safe and there is no way it could be associated to any conditions down on the line? To me that sounds like either denial or wishful thinking. It took years after mass vaccination with some vaccines, you simply cannot deny that, it is a fact. If you think mRNA vaccines are completely safe (which is highly doubtful, call it healthy skepticism), good for you, but do not threaten to take away people's jobs (among other things) because they care more about their life than you do. If you do care about your life, where is the skepticism given our history of some vaccines? We have never had an mRNA vaccine that we administered on a massive, global scale before. --- > The COVID vaccines did not and do not cause deaths that are recorded as COVID deaths, full stop We literally do this in my country, and I know this because I worked in healthcare, and I have family and friends working in healthcare (doctors, nurses). It is not limited to COVID, FWIW. So as far as "100% unsubstantiated misinformation" goes, yeah, no, I have first-hand experiences with such practices. You do not have to believe me, it makes no difference to me personally, and it seems like you already made up your mind about it.

rob_c 2y ago

Oh the piles of bodies. Please check the details behind such claims before trotting them out. By the same US federal data COVID brought someone back to life. I'm not joking the obvious mistake is recorded and is a wonderful example of how the data needs to be cleaned checked and examined more closely.

stouset 2y ago
Hundreds of millions of entries of data input by a large group of people across a wide region will always have errors and inconsistencies. This is true of data related to COVID-related deaths, homicides, car accidents, daycare enrollment rates, and everything in between. Showing that individual data points are inconsistent or wrong does not by itself indicate that conclusions gleaned from a data set as a whole are incorrect. Read the accounts from funeral home staff some time. We were very literally running out of places to put the actual, physical bodies. It turns out when you have a mortuary system that’s set up to process a reasonably consistent and predictable number of deceased humans, adding an sudden, unexpected, and sustained additional load of 10–15% (with spikes up to 33% and 45%) system stretches it beyond its limit.
- rob_c 2y ago
  No but it's a glaring example of referring to a non consistent dataset. The data should be cleaned first to remove such problems which impacts totals. Such work then has to look at labelled as having COVID at time of death Vs sole cause which is _missing_ from most Western datasets. And I'd be willing to believe it's missing from totals that large, unfortunately raising a question as to how many actually were killed by despite the fact we know >80% were likely over 80yr... Not to forget the nice example, if you died from a heart attack due to a racy TV advert did the TV kill you?