3 ms·

Then you also accept that the asymptomatic (unvaccinated) covid risk of myocarditis is higher than the vaccine risk, because it is.

by croon 3mo ago

trimethylpurine 3mo ago
See my other comment answering this. It's only higher if you don't trust peer reviewed research, and instead use the numbers provided by the drug company in a study that was not peer reviewed. See the list of peer reviewers in Pfizer's study and notice that they are the same as the researchers, and that they've made claims without providing their results (those are still being released over an 80 year period by FOIA court order, you'll get the results when we're all dead). If you can't find a link to the court case on this, let me know. I'll find it for you.
- croon 3mo ago
  > those are still being released over an 80 year period by FOIA court order, you'll get the results when we're all dead Are you referring to this [0]? It was solved years ago. The study I posted in this thread that you're posting in is a peer-reviewed retrospective cohort study out of Spain. What is wrong with it? [0] https://www.denvergazette.com/2022/01/07/judge-scraps-75-year-fda-timeline-to-release-pfizer-vaccine-safety-data-giving-agency-eight-months/ https://www.denvergazette.com/2022/01/07/judge-scraps-75-yea...
  - trimethylpurine 3mo ago
    I wasn't aware that it was expedited, but I also wasn't able to find the documents. I did find that they were sued again to release them in Dec. 2024. https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/fda-must-disclose-more-covid-19-vaccine-records-us-judge-rules-2024-12-06/ https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/fda-must-disclose-m... So, at least until then they continued to hide them. Do you have a link to the documents, or any subsequent meta study? And then we still need to resolve the issue of peer review.

3 ms·

Then you also accept that the asymptomatic (unvaccinated) covid risk of myocarditis is higher than the vaccine risk, because it is.

by croon 3mo ago

Then you also accept that the asymptomatic (unvaccinated) covid risk of myocarditis is higher than the vaccine risk, because it is.

trimethylpurine 3mo ago
See my other comment answering this. It's only higher if you don't trust peer reviewed research, and instead use the numbers provided by the drug company in a study that was not peer reviewed. See the list of peer reviewers in Pfizer's study and notice that they are the same as the researchers, and that they've made claims without providing their results (those are still being released over an 80 year period by FOIA court order, you'll get the results when we're all dead). If you can't find a link to the court case on this, let me know. I'll find it for you.
- croon 3mo ago
  > those are still being released over an 80 year period by FOIA court order, you'll get the results when we're all dead Are you referring to this [0]? It was solved years ago. The study I posted in this thread that you're posting in is a peer-reviewed retrospective cohort study out of Spain. What is wrong with it? [0] https://www.denvergazette.com/2022/01/07/judge-scraps-75-year-fda-timeline-to-release-pfizer-vaccine-safety-data-giving-agency-eight-months/ https://www.denvergazette.com/2022/01/07/judge-scraps-75-yea...
  - trimethylpurine 3mo ago
    I wasn't aware that it was expedited, but I also wasn't able to find the documents. I did find that they were sued again to release them in Dec. 2024. https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/fda-must-disclose-more-covid-19-vaccine-records-us-judge-rules-2024-12-06/ https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/fda-must-disclose-m... So, at least until then they continued to hide them. Do you have a link to the documents, or any subsequent meta study? And then we still need to resolve the issue of peer review.