Yes, we have readers in this blog that are against vaccination and about the same number in favor of the shots. Debates in the comments have been lively but never stupid (OK, maybe a comment or two qualify as last). But this latest vaccine panic?
LONDON — The coronavirus vaccine developed by AstraZeneca and the University of Oxford has now been suspended in a number of countries across Europe and Asia, following reports of blood clots in some vaccinated people. Many other nations, however, have defended their use of the shot and said they will continue their respective inoculation campaigns.
And how many thousands of people have suddenly become ill because of clots crated by the vaccine?
As of Wednesday, around 5 million people in Europe had received the Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine. Of this figure, 30 cases of so-called “thromboembolic events” have been reported. These cases refer to blood clots forming in the blood vessels and blocking blood flow.
Are you effing kidding me? You suspend a vaccination because 0.0006% of those who got it reported developing clots? Who are the medical experts who concluded the vaccine was too much of a risk for clots that they rather have 100% of the people do without it than 99.9994% of the people get it without getting clots?
The worse part? People are applauding this decision and demanding a 100% Free Risk solution.
Darwin in action.
Hat Tip @el_espia_vago
Relevant Reason.com story:
https://reason.com/2021/03/11/stop-trying-to-create-a-zero-risk-society-covid-19/printer/
This is the same “reasoning” the Dems and their alleged MD allies are using to keep the country closed down even after vaccination.
For a sane analysis, yesterday’s WSJ has an op-ed by prof. Marty Makary, MD — https://www.wsj.com/articles/covid-prescription-get-the-vaccine-wait-a-month-return-to-normal-11615401516?st=je4xf48g1ex36sw&reflink=desktopwebshare_permalink
I wonder what the baseline thrombo-embolic event rate is in that population?
ACEP (emergency physicians) reports (2018) estimated incidence annually running around 1-2 per 1 000. That would be 5 000- 10 000 cases out of 5 000 000(1-2/1000,
5 000 x 1000= 5 000 000).
How would you identify 50 VTE out of a background rate of 5 000 to 10 000 in a population of 5 000 000?
And, thanks for bringing the science in, which is something the “scientists” apparently are afraid to do these days.
Yes, exactly what is the clotting risk to the population without the vaccine? Just because it happened after the shot does not mean it was not going to happen anyway.
But, why ask questions? The science has it covered.
ETA: I’m sorry, THIRTY!, Not 50.
Remember before the vaccines were released and all the media and Democrats had in their arsenal to foment terror was the virus itself? I remember. Now that cases are plummeting, some of which has to do with the multiple effective vaccines we have, the cult of Leftist science has shifted to “OMG MORE LETHAL STRAINS!!!” and doing everything they can do sew distrust in the vaccines available. That vile little elf Fauci is even running out of steam and is increasingly unable to justify his morbid desire for perpetual lockdowns.
I know I’m preaching to the choir here, but damnit I’m sick of this abhorrent, transparent attempt at the continued destruction of our society despite this pandemic being in its death throes.
Ah, the old “if it saves just one life” argument and its corollaries.
What they’re talking about here is suspending a treatment program that will claim X lives from side effects, at the expense of Y lives who will die from the disease itself, or complications of the disease the vaccine could have prevented. (Probabilities, again, not absolute certainties on the numbers.)
I agree that (most) human life is precious and deserves to be protected and defended. A human life, however, can be valued via several metrics to come up with a “dollar cost equivalent.” Call that C(x), the equivalent cost of the life of person x. And it’s not a constant – it’s going to depend on factors like age, occupation, marital status, etc. (This is how, for instance, wrongful-death lawsuits come up with “reasonable amounts” to settle for.)
If Y > X, in absolute numbers there’s an argument against suspending the treatment: fewer people will die from the treatment than from the untreated disease.
If we can estimate the value of C(X) = the sum of the equivalent dollar value of everyone in X, then one might – might – be able to argue that suspending the treatment is a good idea if C(X) > C(Y). But, then, that would imply that the people in X are worth more as individuals, on average, than the people in Y. (Maybe they make more money, for instance, or are younger and have larger lifetime earning potential. Etc.) And anyway we’re told that it’s wrong to value people on the basis of what they earn and such, right?
So, we come back to, if we think vaccinating everyone will result in more people alive when it’s all over, shouldn’t we continue?
I come back to, in the end, getting vaccinated – or wearing seatbelts, or a motorcycle helmet, or owning a gun, et cetera – should be a personal choice. Let everyone evaluate the risks for themselves, and make the decision that works for them.
Sorry for the rant…
There are 2 aspects of this story.
1) these adverse effects were predicted months ago. There was an open letter to CDC on the topic.
There are other adverse effects predicted months ago. I see them in VAERS and population stats.
But the population was intentionally scared shitless and Covid vaccines are our lord and saver.
Bringing up the side effects is professional suicide.
There is a reason why hcq or ivermectin or simple vit D were suppressed from the start: if there is a cure, experimental vaccines cannot be authorized by law.
2) I do not know euro regs.
US regs for reporting side effects are as follows: only manufactures are required to report side effects.
They do not administer the drugs, so they learn about side effects only if somebody volontarily report it to them.
But, the reports to manufacturers have to be confirmed by a commitee, 3-5 MD etc, there are regs for that.
So if the prescribed committee wS not on site (Publix anyone), the reports are not valid.
All other reports are voluntary.
Most of the population and majority of medical professionals are not familiar with VAERS.
Pilligrum Healthcare estimated that only 1% of adverse vaccine reports are reported to VAERS.
And a lot of mds who are vaccinated believe in the God of the Covid vaccines and do not report. Because it is not mandatory. They do not have to.
My last comment in the Covid vaccine here.
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.03.01.21252652v1.full-text
Another predicted side effect:.
‘The odds of testing positive among vaccinated individuals increased during the early period up to days 7-9, reaching 1.48 (95%CI 1.23-1.77). The odds ratios then began to decrease from 10-13 days after vaccination, reaching 0.41’
To summarize: increased infection with Covid 19 in the first 10 days
Pfizer 48%, second shot 30%. AZ 44%.
That is why grandma’s are dying of Covid in nursing homes after their first dose.
But they are too old, it is not vaccine, just old age.
No, it cannot be increased succeptability due to lymphopenia or reactivation of dormant virus.
Yes, let’s kill or cripple the minority by vaccinating the population terrified of virus that is virtually harmless to under 40 and can be ameliorate by proper dosing of vit D., or iviromctin
P. S. And the 500000 bullshit is 43 cycle count and only 1 out of 3 primers positive for an official reported positive test, where one primer is generic for Asian viruses and not Covid 19 specific. Any death of the patient positive in this joke of a test 30 (up to 45) days after the test is concidered to be Covid 19.
P. P. S. I am too pissed to check the spelli g shit
Another factor- who’s been getting the jabs? It’s mostly old people & people with health issues. That this population would have side effects really isn’t surprising.
And… how accurate is the reporting of negative effects?
Betcha less complete than the “motorcycle wreck , but had covid” Covid deaths.