What is the infection fatality rate (IFR) of Covid 19 now?

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Asmodeus3
a reply to: ScepticScot


Stop the vaccine apologetics please.
Are you sure they are 60 deaths only from the vaccines in the UK?

IFR of Covid-19 was 0.15%

More than you are 'sure' the Global IFR is .15%.

60 deaths was the approximate recorded number of deaths towards end of last year.

It could be more or less based on accuracy of recording, time lags etc. Same as number of covid deaths are affected by the same things.

Your global IFR is based on recorded deaths including in countries with less complete or strictly managed data then divided by an estimated value of infections. There are also alternative estimates giving very different figures.

Even if we go with the figure of 60 deaths per almost 50 million fully vaccinated people, imagine what to happens when we scale up to 5.5 billion people who have been vaccinated (at least) over the last 2+ years.

With the most conservative estimates you are running into thousands of deaths caused by all products in the market.

So a tiny fraction of covid deaths and lifes saved by the vaccines.

What are you talking about??
Vaccines were pulled out of the market for a handful of deaths in the past. Killing thousands is scandalous and any such product should have been withdrawn from the market.

People die from reaction to antibiotics.

Should they be pulled off the market?

If thousands die. Then yes.

Even through they save millions.

Your post demonstrates exactly why your opinion on covid vaccination and lockdowns shouldn't be treated seriously.

You seem not to understand what standards of safety are and it's your posts that demonstrate inability to understand the basic issues and why lockdowns were catastrophic without any benefits.

You compare vaccines to viruses for fatality rates which is absurd. You need to compare vaccines to other vaccines. The standards of safety are not set by myself by the way. A product that causes a handful of deaths (and not thousands) is usually withdrawn from the markets for safety reasons.

You are admitting that thousands of deaths that could be caused by the vaccines is an acceptable number given they 'save many more'.

What on Earth are you talking about?
Any product with that profile will be immediately pulled out of the market.

Lockdowns are supported by those who have an interest and beliefs in them, hence they are misguided, or those who are lunatics.

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Asmodeus3
a reply to: ScepticScot


Stop the vaccine apologetics please.
Are you sure they are 60 deaths only from the vaccines in the UK?

IFR of Covid-19 was 0.15%

More than you are 'sure' the Global IFR is .15%.

60 deaths was the approximate recorded number of deaths towards end of last year.

It could be more or less based on accuracy of recording, time lags etc. Same as number of covid deaths are affected by the same things.

Your global IFR is based on recorded deaths including in countries with less complete or strictly managed data then divided by an estimated value of infections. There are also alternative estimates giving very different figures.

Even if we go with the figure of 60 deaths per almost 50 million fully vaccinated people, imagine what to happens when we scale up to 5.5 billion people who have been vaccinated (at least) over the last 2+ years.

With the most conservative estimates you are running into thousands of deaths caused by all products in the market.

So a tiny fraction of covid deaths and lifes saved by the vaccines.

What are you talking about??
Vaccines were pulled out of the market for a handful of deaths in the past. Killing thousands is scandalous and any such product should have been withdrawn from the market.

People die from reaction to antibiotics.

Should they be pulled off the market?

If thousands die. Then yes.

Even through they save millions.

Your post demonstrates exactly why your opinion on covid vaccination and lockdowns shouldn't be treated seriously.

You seem not to understand what standards of safety are and it's your posts that demonstrate inability to understand the basic issues and why lockdowns were catastrophic without any benefits.

You compare vaccines to viruses for fatality rates which is absurd. You need to compare vaccines to other vaccines. The standards of safety are not set by myself by the way. A product that causes a handful of deaths (and not thousands) is usually withdrawn from the markets for safety reasons.

You are admitting that thousands of deaths that could be caused by the vaccines is an acceptable number given they 'save many more'.

What on Earth are you talking about?
Any product with that profile will be immediately pulled out of the market.

Lockdowns are supported by those who have an interest and beliefs in them, hence they are misguided, or those who are lunatics.

Sorry you don't even understand the basic concepts of risk and benefits.

You think antibiotics should be withdrawn.

Your opinion can't be taken seriously.

originally posted by: Asmodeus3
The AstraZeneca vaccine was pulled out of most markets due to health and safety concerns.

So you keep trying to persuade yourself. The AZ was withdrawn from use in the UK and other countries because it had become less effective against prevailing strains of the virus. It was probably not helped by negative publicity due to blood clots, which were rare, but the decision was based on its efficacy.

originally posted by: paraphi

originally posted by: Asmodeus3
The AstraZeneca vaccine was pulled out of most markets due to health and safety concerns.

So you keep trying to persuade yourself. The AZ was withdrawn from use in the UK and other countries because it had become less effective against prevailing strains of the virus. It was probably not helped by negative publicity due to blood clots, which were rare, but the decision was based on its efficacy.

Only vaccine apologists and those who are trying to peddle the narrative argue such nonsense.

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Asmodeus3
a reply to: ScepticScot


Stop the vaccine apologetics please.
Are you sure they are 60 deaths only from the vaccines in the UK?

IFR of Covid-19 was 0.15%

More than you are 'sure' the Global IFR is .15%.

60 deaths was the approximate recorded number of deaths towards end of last year.

It could be more or less based on accuracy of recording, time lags etc. Same as number of covid deaths are affected by the same things.

Your global IFR is based on recorded deaths including in countries with less complete or strictly managed data then divided by an estimated value of infections. There are also alternative estimates giving very different figures.

Even if we go with the figure of 60 deaths per almost 50 million fully vaccinated people, imagine what to happens when we scale up to 5.5 billion people who have been vaccinated (at least) over the last 2+ years.

With the most conservative estimates you are running into thousands of deaths caused by all products in the market.

So a tiny fraction of covid deaths and lifes saved by the vaccines.

What are you talking about??
Vaccines were pulled out of the market for a handful of deaths in the past. Killing thousands is scandalous and any such product should have been withdrawn from the market.

People die from reaction to antibiotics.

Should they be pulled off the market?

If thousands die. Then yes.

Even through they save millions.

Your post demonstrates exactly why your opinion on covid vaccination and lockdowns shouldn't be treated seriously.

You seem not to understand what standards of safety are and it's your posts that demonstrate inability to understand the basic issues and why lockdowns were catastrophic without any benefits.

You compare vaccines to viruses for fatality rates which is absurd. You need to compare vaccines to other vaccines. The standards of safety are not set by myself by the way. A product that causes a handful of deaths (and not thousands) is usually withdrawn from the markets for safety reasons.

You are admitting that thousands of deaths that could be caused by the vaccines is an acceptable number given they 'save many more'.

What on Earth are you talking about?
Any product with that profile will be immediately pulled out of the market.

Lockdowns are supported by those who have an interest and beliefs in them, hence they are misguided, or those who are lunatics.

Sorry you don't even understand the basic concepts of risk and benefits.

You think antibiotics should be withdrawn.

Your opinion can't be taken seriously.

If antibiotics or vaccines kill a good number of people then they are not safe for use. They have to be withdrawn. Standard practise that you seem to want to disregard.

The swine flu vaccine was withdrawn for a handful of deaths and same is true for the Rotavirus vaccine.

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Asmodeus3
a reply to: ScepticScot


Stop the vaccine apologetics please.
Are you sure they are 60 deaths only from the vaccines in the UK?

IFR of Covid-19 was 0.15%

More than you are 'sure' the Global IFR is .15%.

60 deaths was the approximate recorded number of deaths towards end of last year.

It could be more or less based on accuracy of recording, time lags etc. Same as number of covid deaths are affected by the same things.

Your global IFR is based on recorded deaths including in countries with less complete or strictly managed data then divided by an estimated value of infections. There are also alternative estimates giving very different figures.

Even if we go with the figure of 60 deaths per almost 50 million fully vaccinated people, imagine what to happens when we scale up to 5.5 billion people who have been vaccinated (at least) over the last 2+ years.

With the most conservative estimates you are running into thousands of deaths caused by all products in the market.

So a tiny fraction of covid deaths and lifes saved by the vaccines.

What are you talking about??
Vaccines were pulled out of the market for a handful of deaths in the past. Killing thousands is scandalous and any such product should have been withdrawn from the market.

People die from reaction to antibiotics.

Should they be pulled off the market?

If thousands die. Then yes.

Even through they save millions.

Your post demonstrates exactly why your opinion on covid vaccination and lockdowns shouldn't be treated seriously.

You seem not to understand what standards of safety are and it's your posts that demonstrate inability to understand the basic issues and why lockdowns were catastrophic without any benefits.

You compare vaccines to viruses for fatality rates which is absurd. You need to compare vaccines to other vaccines. The standards of safety are not set by myself by the way. A product that causes a handful of deaths (and not thousands) is usually withdrawn from the markets for safety reasons.

You are admitting that thousands of deaths that could be caused by the vaccines is an acceptable number given they 'save many more'.

What on Earth are you talking about?
Any product with that profile will be immediately pulled out of the market.

Lockdowns are supported by those who have an interest and beliefs in them, hence they are misguided, or those who are lunatics.

Sorry you don't even understand the basic concepts of risk and benefits.

You think antibiotics should be withdrawn.

Your opinion can't be taken seriously.

If antibiotics or vaccines kill a good number of people then they are not safe for use. They have to be withdrawn. Standard practise that you seem to want to disregard.

The swine flu vaccine was withdrawn for a handful of deaths and same is true for the Rotavirus vaccine.

That is laughably inaccurate.

All medical treatments or vaccines have a risk. If used often enough there will be deaths.

That has to be weighed against the benefits.

In the US at least, the virus was used to alter election norms to allow the largest voter fraud network to get Joe uhh uhh uhhh Biden into office.

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Asmodeus3
a reply to: ScepticScot


Stop the vaccine apologetics please.
Are you sure they are 60 deaths only from the vaccines in the UK?

IFR of Covid-19 was 0.15%

More than you are 'sure' the Global IFR is .15%.

60 deaths was the approximate recorded number of deaths towards end of last year.

It could be more or less based on accuracy of recording, time lags etc. Same as number of covid deaths are affected by the same things.

Your global IFR is based on recorded deaths including in countries with less complete or strictly managed data then divided by an estimated value of infections. There are also alternative estimates giving very different figures.

Even if we go with the figure of 60 deaths per almost 50 million fully vaccinated people, imagine what to happens when we scale up to 5.5 billion people who have been vaccinated (at least) over the last 2+ years.

With the most conservative estimates you are running into thousands of deaths caused by all products in the market.

So a tiny fraction of covid deaths and lifes saved by the vaccines.

What are you talking about??
Vaccines were pulled out of the market for a handful of deaths in the past. Killing thousands is scandalous and any such product should have been withdrawn from the market.

People die from reaction to antibiotics.

Should they be pulled off the market?

If thousands die. Then yes.

Even through they save millions.

Your post demonstrates exactly why your opinion on covid vaccination and lockdowns shouldn't be treated seriously.

You seem not to understand what standards of safety are and it's your posts that demonstrate inability to understand the basic issues and why lockdowns were catastrophic without any benefits.

You compare vaccines to viruses for fatality rates which is absurd. You need to compare vaccines to other vaccines. The standards of safety are not set by myself by the way. A product that causes a handful of deaths (and not thousands) is usually withdrawn from the markets for safety reasons.

You are admitting that thousands of deaths that could be caused by the vaccines is an acceptable number given they 'save many more'.

What on Earth are you talking about?
Any product with that profile will be immediately pulled out of the market.

Lockdowns are supported by those who have an interest and beliefs in them, hence they are misguided, or those who are lunatics.

Sorry you don't even understand the basic concepts of risk and benefits.

You think antibiotics should be withdrawn.

Your opinion can't be taken seriously.

If antibiotics or vaccines kill a good number of people then they are not safe for use. They have to be withdrawn. Standard practise that you seem to want to disregard.

The swine flu vaccine was withdrawn for a handful of deaths and same is true for the Rotavirus vaccine.

That is laughably inaccurate.

All medical treatments or vaccines have a risk. If used often enough there will be deaths.

That has to be weighed against the benefits.

What is laughable are your attempts to justify the deaths and serious injuries and trivialise them.

If many deaths are caused then the vaccine or drug is out if the market.

You seem to have become furious when the interests of the pharmaceuticals are discussed...
Hmmm

Not to forget the IFR of Covid-19 is about 0.15%

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Asmodeus3
a reply to: ScepticScot


Stop the vaccine apologetics please.
Are you sure they are 60 deaths only from the vaccines in the UK?

IFR of Covid-19 was 0.15%

More than you are 'sure' the Global IFR is .15%.

60 deaths was the approximate recorded number of deaths towards end of last year.

It could be more or less based on accuracy of recording, time lags etc. Same as number of covid deaths are affected by the same things.

Your global IFR is based on recorded deaths including in countries with less complete or strictly managed data then divided by an estimated value of infections. There are also alternative estimates giving very different figures.

Even if we go with the figure of 60 deaths per almost 50 million fully vaccinated people, imagine what to happens when we scale up to 5.5 billion people who have been vaccinated (at least) over the last 2+ years.

With the most conservative estimates you are running into thousands of deaths caused by all products in the market.

So a tiny fraction of covid deaths and lifes saved by the vaccines.

What are you talking about??
Vaccines were pulled out of the market for a handful of deaths in the past. Killing thousands is scandalous and any such product should have been withdrawn from the market.

People die from reaction to antibiotics.

Should they be pulled off the market?

If thousands die. Then yes.

Even through they save millions.

Your post demonstrates exactly why your opinion on covid vaccination and lockdowns shouldn't be treated seriously.

You seem not to understand what standards of safety are and it's your posts that demonstrate inability to understand the basic issues and why lockdowns were catastrophic without any benefits.

You compare vaccines to viruses for fatality rates which is absurd. You need to compare vaccines to other vaccines. The standards of safety are not set by myself by the way. A product that causes a handful of deaths (and not thousands) is usually withdrawn from the markets for safety reasons.

You are admitting that thousands of deaths that could be caused by the vaccines is an acceptable number given they 'save many more'.

What on Earth are you talking about?
Any product with that profile will be immediately pulled out of the market.

Lockdowns are supported by those who have an interest and beliefs in them, hence they are misguided, or those who are lunatics.

Sorry you don't even understand the basic concepts of risk and benefits.

You think antibiotics should be withdrawn.

Your opinion can't be taken seriously.

If antibiotics or vaccines kill a good number of people then they are not safe for use. They have to be withdrawn. Standard practise that you seem to want to disregard.

The swine flu vaccine was withdrawn for a handful of deaths and same is true for the Rotavirus vaccine.

That is laughably inaccurate.

All medical treatments or vaccines have a risk. If used often enough there will be deaths.

That has to be weighed against the benefits.

What is laughable are your attempts to justify the deaths and serious injuries and trivialise them.

If many deaths are caused then the vaccine or drug is out if the market.

You seem to have become furious when the interests of the pharmaceuticals are discussed...
Hmmm

Not to forget the IFR of Covid-19 is about 0.15%

Not furious at all.

Enjoying how laughable your understanding of risk is.

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Asmodeus3
a reply to: ScepticScot


Stop the vaccine apologetics please.
Are you sure they are 60 deaths only from the vaccines in the UK?

IFR of Covid-19 was 0.15%

More than you are 'sure' the Global IFR is .15%.

60 deaths was the approximate recorded number of deaths towards end of last year.

It could be more or less based on accuracy of recording, time lags etc. Same as number of covid deaths are affected by the same things.

Your global IFR is based on recorded deaths including in countries with less complete or strictly managed data then divided by an estimated value of infections. There are also alternative estimates giving very different figures.

Even if we go with the figure of 60 deaths per almost 50 million fully vaccinated people, imagine what to happens when we scale up to 5.5 billion people who have been vaccinated (at least) over the last 2+ years.

With the most conservative estimates you are running into thousands of deaths caused by all products in the market.

So a tiny fraction of covid deaths and lifes saved by the vaccines.

What are you talking about??
Vaccines were pulled out of the market for a handful of deaths in the past. Killing thousands is scandalous and any such product should have been withdrawn from the market.

People die from reaction to antibiotics.

Should they be pulled off the market?

If thousands die. Then yes.

Even through they save millions.

Your post demonstrates exactly why your opinion on covid vaccination and lockdowns shouldn't be treated seriously.

You seem not to understand what standards of safety are and it's your posts that demonstrate inability to understand the basic issues and why lockdowns were catastrophic without any benefits.

You compare vaccines to viruses for fatality rates which is absurd. You need to compare vaccines to other vaccines. The standards of safety are not set by myself by the way. A product that causes a handful of deaths (and not thousands) is usually withdrawn from the markets for safety reasons.

You are admitting that thousands of deaths that could be caused by the vaccines is an acceptable number given they 'save many more'.

What on Earth are you talking about?
Any product with that profile will be immediately pulled out of the market.

Lockdowns are supported by those who have an interest and beliefs in them, hence they are misguided, or those who are lunatics.

Sorry you don't even understand the basic concepts of risk and benefits.

You think antibiotics should be withdrawn.

Your opinion can't be taken seriously.

If antibiotics or vaccines kill a good number of people then they are not safe for use. They have to be withdrawn. Standard practise that you seem to want to disregard.

The swine flu vaccine was withdrawn for a handful of deaths and same is true for the Rotavirus vaccine.

That is laughably inaccurate.

All medical treatments or vaccines have a risk. If used often enough there will be deaths.

That has to be weighed against the benefits.

What is laughable are your attempts to justify the deaths and serious injuries and trivialise them.

If many deaths are caused then the vaccine or drug is out if the market.

You seem to have become furious when the interests of the pharmaceuticals are discussed...
Hmmm

Not to forget the IFR of Covid-19 is about 0.15%

Not furious at all.

Enjoying how laughable your understanding of risk is.

You seem not to understand what standards of safety are and it's your posts that demonstrate inability to understand the basic issues and why lockdowns were catastrophic without any benefits.

You compare vaccines to viruses for fatality rates which is absurd. You need to compare vaccines to other vaccines. The standards of safety are not set by myself by the way. A product that causes a handful of deaths (and not thousands) is usually withdrawn from the markets for safety reasons.

You are admitting that thousands of deaths that could be caused by the vaccines is an acceptable number given they 'save many more'.

In addition you are trying hard to inflate the IFR so to justify your beliefs in the lockdowns and mass vaccinations.

a reply to: ScepticScot

What about that post is inaccurate??

When the swine flu vaccine started killing people, they pulled it for 5 deaths I think it was. That is common sense, which seems to be ins short supply during the covid CF. You are ignoring the obvious elephant in the room: When covid happened, medical best practices were thrown in the trash, and they push on even though this vaccine is more dangerous than any in history.

VAERS Data through 12/08/2022

Adverse Reactions: 1,481,226 All other vaccines since 1990: 912,419

Deaths: 32,828 All other vaccines since 1990: 10,046

Permanent Disabilities: 61,065 All other vaccines since 1990: 21,626

Birth Defects: 1194 All other vaccines since 1990: 208

In two years, in the US alone, this "vaccine" has caused 500k more adverse reactions, 3.2x the deaths, 2.9x the permanent disabilities, and 5.5x the number of birth defects than all other vaccines combined in the last 3 decades.

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Asmodeus3
a reply to: ScepticScot


Stop the vaccine apologetics please.
Are you sure they are 60 deaths only from the vaccines in the UK?

IFR of Covid-19 was 0.15%

More than you are 'sure' the Global IFR is .15%.

60 deaths was the approximate recorded number of deaths towards end of last year.

It could be more or less based on accuracy of recording, time lags etc. Same as number of covid deaths are affected by the same things.

Your global IFR is based on recorded deaths including in countries with less complete or strictly managed data then divided by an estimated value of infections. There are also alternative estimates giving very different figures.

Even if we go with the figure of 60 deaths per almost 50 million fully vaccinated people, imagine what to happens when we scale up to 5.5 billion people who have been vaccinated (at least) over the last 2+ years.

With the most conservative estimates you are running into thousands of deaths caused by all products in the market.

So a tiny fraction of covid deaths and lifes saved by the vaccines.

What are you talking about??
Vaccines were pulled out of the market for a handful of deaths in the past. Killing thousands is scandalous and any such product should have been withdrawn from the market.

People die from reaction to antibiotics.

Should they be pulled off the market?

If thousands die. Then yes.

Even through they save millions.

Your post demonstrates exactly why your opinion on covid vaccination and lockdowns shouldn't be treated seriously.

You seem not to understand what standards of safety are and it's your posts that demonstrate inability to understand the basic issues and why lockdowns were catastrophic without any benefits.

You compare vaccines to viruses for fatality rates which is absurd. You need to compare vaccines to other vaccines. The standards of safety are not set by myself by the way. A product that causes a handful of deaths (and not thousands) is usually withdrawn from the markets for safety reasons.

You are admitting that thousands of deaths that could be caused by the vaccines is an acceptable number given they 'save many more'.

What on Earth are you talking about?
Any product with that profile will be immediately pulled out of the market.

Lockdowns are supported by those who have an interest and beliefs in them, hence they are misguided, or those who are lunatics.

Sorry you don't even understand the basic concepts of risk and benefits.

You think antibiotics should be withdrawn.

Your opinion can't be taken seriously.

If antibiotics or vaccines kill a good number of people then they are not safe for use. They have to be withdrawn. Standard practise that you seem to want to disregard.

The swine flu vaccine was withdrawn for a handful of deaths and same is true for the Rotavirus vaccine.

That is laughably inaccurate.

All medical treatments or vaccines have a risk. If used often enough there will be deaths.

That has to be weighed against the benefits.

What is laughable are your attempts to justify the deaths and serious injuries and trivialise them.

If many deaths are caused then the vaccine or drug is out if the market.

You seem to have become furious when the interests of the pharmaceuticals are discussed...
Hmmm

Not to forget the IFR of Covid-19 is about 0.15%

Not furious at all.

Enjoying how laughable your understanding of risk is.

You seem not to understand what standards of safety are and it's your posts that demonstrate inability to understand the basic issues and why lockdowns were catastrophic without any benefits.

You compare vaccines to viruses for fatality rates which is absurd. You need to compare vaccines to other vaccines. The standards of safety are not set by myself by the way. A product that causes a handful of deaths (and not thousands) is usually withdrawn from the markets for safety reasons.

You are admitting that thousands of deaths that could be caused by the vaccines is an acceptable number given they 'save many more'.

In addition you are trying hard to inflate the IFR so to justify your beliefs in the lockdowns and mass vaccinations.

You gave repeatedly posted that vaccines should be wuthdrawn based on a set number of deaths. This absolutely shows that you don't have an understanding of risk.

Yes you have to consider the fatality rates of the virus and other factors. Your idea that they compare it to other vaccines is ridiculous.

Actually think for a moment about what you are suggesting. That if there was a major ebola outbreak you would only approve a vaccine that had the same safety profile as a vaccine for chicken pox.

And for avoidance of doubt I am outright stating thousands of deaths is acceptable if it saves many more.

I have repeately pointed out that IFR is population specific. Decisions on covid policies are generally based at national level (or smaller) not global. So unless you can explain why the demographics of Afghanistan should influence UK policy (or whatever xlcountry you choose) then repeating the Global IFR is not an cohetent argument against lockdowns or vaccination.

originally posted by: MaxxAction
a reply to: ScepticScot

What about that post is inaccurate??

When the swine flu vaccine started killing people, they pulled it for 5 deaths I think it was. That is common sense, which seems to be ins short supply during the covid CF. You are ignoring the obvious elephant in the room: When covid happened, medical best practices were thrown in the trash, and they push on even though this vaccine is more dangerous than any in history.

VAERS Data through 12/08/2022

Adverse Reactions: 1,481,226 All other vaccines since 1990: 912,419

Deaths: 32,828 All other vaccines since 1990: 10,046

Permanent Disabilities: 61,065 All other vaccines since 1990: 21,626

Birth Defects: 1194 All other vaccines since 1990: 208

In two years, in the US alone, this "vaccine" has caused 500k more adverse reactions, 3.2x the deaths, 2.9x the permanent disabilities, and 5.5x the number of birth defects than all other vaccines combined in the last 3 decades.

Only that isn't what VAERs is. It is a record of events after vaccination not caused by it. If you look at the website it specifically and unequivocally tells you that you can't use VAERs in the way you posted.

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Asmodeus3
a reply to: ScepticScot


Stop the vaccine apologetics please.
Are you sure they are 60 deaths only from the vaccines in the UK?

IFR of Covid-19 was 0.15%

More than you are 'sure' the Global IFR is .15%.

60 deaths was the approximate recorded number of deaths towards end of last year.

It could be more or less based on accuracy of recording, time lags etc. Same as number of covid deaths are affected by the same things.

Your global IFR is based on recorded deaths including in countries with less complete or strictly managed data then divided by an estimated value of infections. There are also alternative estimates giving very different figures.

Even if we go with the figure of 60 deaths per almost 50 million fully vaccinated people, imagine what to happens when we scale up to 5.5 billion people who have been vaccinated (at least) over the last 2+ years.

With the most conservative estimates you are running into thousands of deaths caused by all products in the market.

So a tiny fraction of covid deaths and lifes saved by the vaccines.

What are you talking about??
Vaccines were pulled out of the market for a handful of deaths in the past. Killing thousands is scandalous and any such product should have been withdrawn from the market.

People die from reaction to antibiotics.

Should they be pulled off the market?

If thousands die. Then yes.

Even through they save millions.

Your post demonstrates exactly why your opinion on covid vaccination and lockdowns shouldn't be treated seriously.

You seem not to understand what standards of safety are and it's your posts that demonstrate inability to understand the basic issues and why lockdowns were catastrophic without any benefits.

You compare vaccines to viruses for fatality rates which is absurd. You need to compare vaccines to other vaccines. The standards of safety are not set by myself by the way. A product that causes a handful of deaths (and not thousands) is usually withdrawn from the markets for safety reasons.

You are admitting that thousands of deaths that could be caused by the vaccines is an acceptable number given they 'save many more'.

What on Earth are you talking about?
Any product with that profile will be immediately pulled out of the market.

Lockdowns are supported by those who have an interest and beliefs in them, hence they are misguided, or those who are lunatics.

Sorry you don't even understand the basic concepts of risk and benefits.

You think antibiotics should be withdrawn.

Your opinion can't be taken seriously.

If antibiotics or vaccines kill a good number of people then they are not safe for use. They have to be withdrawn. Standard practise that you seem to want to disregard.

The swine flu vaccine was withdrawn for a handful of deaths and same is true for the Rotavirus vaccine.

That is laughably inaccurate.

All medical treatments or vaccines have a risk. If used often enough there will be deaths.

That has to be weighed against the benefits.

What is laughable are your attempts to justify the deaths and serious injuries and trivialise them.

If many deaths are caused then the vaccine or drug is out if the market.

You seem to have become furious when the interests of the pharmaceuticals are discussed...
Hmmm

Not to forget the IFR of Covid-19 is about 0.15%

Not furious at all.

Enjoying how laughable your understanding of risk is.

You seem not to understand what standards of safety are and it's your posts that demonstrate inability to understand the basic issues and why lockdowns were catastrophic without any benefits.

You compare vaccines to viruses for fatality rates which is absurd. You need to compare vaccines to other vaccines. The standards of safety are not set by myself by the way. A product that causes a handful of deaths (and not thousands) is usually withdrawn from the markets for safety reasons.

You are admitting that thousands of deaths that could be caused by the vaccines is an acceptable number given they 'save many more'.

In addition you are trying hard to inflate the IFR so to justify your beliefs in the lockdowns and mass vaccinations.

You gave repeatedly posted that vaccines should be wuthdrawn based on a set number of deaths. This absolutely shows that you don't have an understanding of risk.

Yes you have to consider the fatality rates of the virus and other factors. Your idea that they compare it to other vaccines is ridiculous.

Actually think for a moment about what you are suggesting. That if there was a major ebola outbreak you would only approve a vaccine that had the same safety profile as a vaccine for chicken pox.

And for avoidance of doubt I am outright stating thousands of deaths is acceptable if it saves many more.

I have repeately pointed out that IFR is population specific. Decisions on covid policies are generally based at national level (or smaller) not global. So unless you can explain why the demographics of Afghanistan should influence UK policy (or whatever xlcountry you choose) then repeating the Global IFR is not an cohetent argument against lockdowns or vaccination.

Imagine you have tens of thousands of deaths from a vaccine and you argue these products can have to be kept in the latest and sold as safe and effective?!

You said

And for avoidance of doubt I am outright stating thousands of deaths is acceptable if it saves many more

Yes you could argue this type of nonsense I suppose or you could try to inflate the IFR.

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Asmodeus3
a reply to: ScepticScot


Stop the vaccine apologetics please.
Are you sure they are 60 deaths only from the vaccines in the UK?

IFR of Covid-19 was 0.15%

More than you are 'sure' the Global IFR is .15%.

60 deaths was the approximate recorded number of deaths towards end of last year.

It could be more or less based on accuracy of recording, time lags etc. Same as number of covid deaths are affected by the same things.

Your global IFR is based on recorded deaths including in countries with less complete or strictly managed data then divided by an estimated value of infections. There are also alternative estimates giving very different figures.

Even if we go with the figure of 60 deaths per almost 50 million fully vaccinated people, imagine what to happens when we scale up to 5.5 billion people who have been vaccinated (at least) over the last 2+ years.

With the most conservative estimates you are running into thousands of deaths caused by all products in the market.

So a tiny fraction of covid deaths and lifes saved by the vaccines.

What are you talking about??
Vaccines were pulled out of the market for a handful of deaths in the past. Killing thousands is scandalous and any such product should have been withdrawn from the market.

People die from reaction to antibiotics.

Should they be pulled off the market?

If thousands die. Then yes.

Even through they save millions.

Your post demonstrates exactly why your opinion on covid vaccination and lockdowns shouldn't be treated seriously.

You seem not to understand what standards of safety are and it's your posts that demonstrate inability to understand the basic issues and why lockdowns were catastrophic without any benefits.

You compare vaccines to viruses for fatality rates which is absurd. You need to compare vaccines to other vaccines. The standards of safety are not set by myself by the way. A product that causes a handful of deaths (and not thousands) is usually withdrawn from the markets for safety reasons.

You are admitting that thousands of deaths that could be caused by the vaccines is an acceptable number given they 'save many more'.

What on Earth are you talking about?
Any product with that profile will be immediately pulled out of the market.

Lockdowns are supported by those who have an interest and beliefs in them, hence they are misguided, or those who are lunatics.

Sorry you don't even understand the basic concepts of risk and benefits.

You think antibiotics should be withdrawn.

Your opinion can't be taken seriously.

If antibiotics or vaccines kill a good number of people then they are not safe for use. They have to be withdrawn. Standard practise that you seem to want to disregard.

The swine flu vaccine was withdrawn for a handful of deaths and same is true for the Rotavirus vaccine.

That is laughably inaccurate.

All medical treatments or vaccines have a risk. If used often enough there will be deaths.

That has to be weighed against the benefits.

What is laughable are your attempts to justify the deaths and serious injuries and trivialise them.

If many deaths are caused then the vaccine or drug is out if the market.

You seem to have become furious when the interests of the pharmaceuticals are discussed...
Hmmm

Not to forget the IFR of Covid-19 is about 0.15%

Not furious at all.

Enjoying how laughable your understanding of risk is.

You seem not to understand what standards of safety are and it's your posts that demonstrate inability to understand the basic issues and why lockdowns were catastrophic without any benefits.

You compare vaccines to viruses for fatality rates which is absurd. You need to compare vaccines to other vaccines. The standards of safety are not set by myself by the way. A product that causes a handful of deaths (and not thousands) is usually withdrawn from the markets for safety reasons.

You are admitting that thousands of deaths that could be caused by the vaccines is an acceptable number given they 'save many more'.

In addition you are trying hard to inflate the IFR so to justify your beliefs in the lockdowns and mass vaccinations.

You gave repeatedly posted that vaccines should be wuthdrawn based on a set number of deaths. This absolutely shows that you don't have an understanding of risk.

Yes you have to consider the fatality rates of the virus and other factors. Your idea that they compare it to other vaccines is ridiculous.

Actually think for a moment about what you are suggesting. That if there was a major ebola outbreak you would only approve a vaccine that had the same safety profile as a vaccine for chicken pox.

And for avoidance of doubt I am outright stating thousands of deaths is acceptable if it saves many more.

I have repeately pointed out that IFR is population specific. Decisions on covid policies are generally based at national level (or smaller) not global. So unless you can explain why the demographics of Afghanistan should influence UK policy (or whatever xlcountry you choose) then repeating the Global IFR is not an cohetent argument against lockdowns or vaccination.

Imagine you have tens of thousands of deaths from a vaccine and you argue these products can have to be kept in the latest and sold as safe and effective?!

You said

And for avoidance of doubt I am outright stating thousands of deaths is acceptable if it saves many more

Yes you could argue this type of nonsense I suppose or you could try to inflate the IFR.

What is nonsense about it.

You think it's acceptable to let people die if a treatment or prevention has a risk.

That is nonsense.

originally posted by: Asmodeus3
You seem not to understand what standards of safety are and it's your posts that demonstrate inability to understand the basic issues and why lockdowns were catastrophic without any benefits.

Tell us, oh wise one, what do you mean by standards of safety. In your own words.

On risk. As previously stated numerous times, all medicines carry some form of risk. Mostly, side effects are minor, or certainly not fatal. In the case of antibiotics, the fatal element is anaphylaxis, which is an allergic reaction. When new medicines are introduced, the relevant licensing authority / regulator will assess the risk, based upon evidence from trials and other things. It's one reason why it takes so long for pharmaceuticals to come to market.

With the Covid vaccinations, their introduction was necessarily rushed, but regulators were able to assess the risks regardless, mainly because the science was understood and had been previously advanced.

On lockdowns... Most people would agree that lockdowns were a blunt tool, and in hindsight the pandemic could have been managed differently. However, as a blunt tool, lockdowns and vaccinations did protect the more vulnerable in society e.g. the over 65's, who has a significant chance of dying is they caught Covid.

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Asmodeus3
a reply to: ScepticScot


Stop the vaccine apologetics please.
Are you sure they are 60 deaths only from the vaccines in the UK?

IFR of Covid-19 was 0.15%

More than you are 'sure' the Global IFR is .15%.

60 deaths was the approximate recorded number of deaths towards end of last year.

It could be more or less based on accuracy of recording, time lags etc. Same as number of covid deaths are affected by the same things.

Your global IFR is based on recorded deaths including in countries with less complete or strictly managed data then divided by an estimated value of infections. There are also alternative estimates giving very different figures.

Even if we go with the figure of 60 deaths per almost 50 million fully vaccinated people, imagine what to happens when we scale up to 5.5 billion people who have been vaccinated (at least) over the last 2+ years.

With the most conservative estimates you are running into thousands of deaths caused by all products in the market.

So a tiny fraction of covid deaths and lifes saved by the vaccines.

What are you talking about??
Vaccines were pulled out of the market for a handful of deaths in the past. Killing thousands is scandalous and any such product should have been withdrawn from the market.

People die from reaction to antibiotics.

Should they be pulled off the market?

If thousands die. Then yes.

Even through they save millions.

Your post demonstrates exactly why your opinion on covid vaccination and lockdowns shouldn't be treated seriously.

You seem not to understand what standards of safety are and it's your posts that demonstrate inability to understand the basic issues and why lockdowns were catastrophic without any benefits.

You compare vaccines to viruses for fatality rates which is absurd. You need to compare vaccines to other vaccines. The standards of safety are not set by myself by the way. A product that causes a handful of deaths (and not thousands) is usually withdrawn from the markets for safety reasons.

You are admitting that thousands of deaths that could be caused by the vaccines is an acceptable number given they 'save many more'.

What on Earth are you talking about?
Any product with that profile will be immediately pulled out of the market.

Lockdowns are supported by those who have an interest and beliefs in them, hence they are misguided, or those who are lunatics.

Sorry you don't even understand the basic concepts of risk and benefits.

You think antibiotics should be withdrawn.

Your opinion can't be taken seriously.

If antibiotics or vaccines kill a good number of people then they are not safe for use. They have to be withdrawn. Standard practise that you seem to want to disregard.

The swine flu vaccine was withdrawn for a handful of deaths and same is true for the Rotavirus vaccine.

That is laughably inaccurate.

All medical treatments or vaccines have a risk. If used often enough there will be deaths.

That has to be weighed against the benefits.

What is laughable are your attempts to justify the deaths and serious injuries and trivialise them.

If many deaths are caused then the vaccine or drug is out if the market.

You seem to have become furious when the interests of the pharmaceuticals are discussed...
Hmmm

Not to forget the IFR of Covid-19 is about 0.15%

Not furious at all.

Enjoying how laughable your understanding of risk is.

You seem not to understand what standards of safety are and it's your posts that demonstrate inability to understand the basic issues and why lockdowns were catastrophic without any benefits.

You compare vaccines to viruses for fatality rates which is absurd. You need to compare vaccines to other vaccines. The standards of safety are not set by myself by the way. A product that causes a handful of deaths (and not thousands) is usually withdrawn from the markets for safety reasons.

You are admitting that thousands of deaths that could be caused by the vaccines is an acceptable number given they 'save many more'.

In addition you are trying hard to inflate the IFR so to justify your beliefs in the lockdowns and mass vaccinations.

You gave repeatedly posted that vaccines should be wuthdrawn based on a set number of deaths. This absolutely shows that you don't have an understanding of risk.

Yes you have to consider the fatality rates of the virus and other factors. Your idea that they compare it to other vaccines is ridiculous.

Actually think for a moment about what you are suggesting. That if there was a major ebola outbreak you would only approve a vaccine that had the same safety profile as a vaccine for chicken pox.

And for avoidance of doubt I am outright stating thousands of deaths is acceptable if it saves many more.

I have repeately pointed out that IFR is population specific. Decisions on covid policies are generally based at national level (or smaller) not global. So unless you can explain why the demographics of Afghanistan should influence UK policy (or whatever xlcountry you choose) then repeating the Global IFR is not an cohetent argument against lockdowns or vaccination.

Imagine you have tens of thousands of deaths from a vaccine and you argue these products can have to be kept in the latest and sold as safe and effective?!

You said

And for avoidance of doubt I am outright stating thousands of deaths is acceptable if it saves many more

Yes you could argue this type of nonsense I suppose or you could try to inflate the IFR.

What is nonsense about it.

You think it's acceptable to let people die if a treatment or prevention has a risk.

That is nonsense.

If you knew how safety standards are set you wouldn't argue such nonsense.

Vaccines are withdrawn for a handful of deaths and a number of serious adverse reactions. Let alone thousands of deaths and multiples of serious adverse reactions.

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Asmodeus3
a reply to: ScepticScot


Stop the vaccine apologetics please.
Are you sure they are 60 deaths only from the vaccines in the UK?

IFR of Covid-19 was 0.15%

More than you are 'sure' the Global IFR is .15%.

60 deaths was the approximate recorded number of deaths towards end of last year.

It could be more or less based on accuracy of recording, time lags etc. Same as number of covid deaths are affected by the same things.

Your global IFR is based on recorded deaths including in countries with less complete or strictly managed data then divided by an estimated value of infections. There are also alternative estimates giving very different figures.

Even if we go with the figure of 60 deaths per almost 50 million fully vaccinated people, imagine what to happens when we scale up to 5.5 billion people who have been vaccinated (at least) over the last 2+ years.

With the most conservative estimates you are running into thousands of deaths caused by all products in the market.

So a tiny fraction of covid deaths and lifes saved by the vaccines.

What are you talking about??
Vaccines were pulled out of the market for a handful of deaths in the past. Killing thousands is scandalous and any such product should have been withdrawn from the market.

People die from reaction to antibiotics.

Should they be pulled off the market?

If thousands die. Then yes.

Even through they save millions.

Your post demonstrates exactly why your opinion on covid vaccination and lockdowns shouldn't be treated seriously.

You seem not to understand what standards of safety are and it's your posts that demonstrate inability to understand the basic issues and why lockdowns were catastrophic without any benefits.

You compare vaccines to viruses for fatality rates which is absurd. You need to compare vaccines to other vaccines. The standards of safety are not set by myself by the way. A product that causes a handful of deaths (and not thousands) is usually withdrawn from the markets for safety reasons.

You are admitting that thousands of deaths that could be caused by the vaccines is an acceptable number given they 'save many more'.

What on Earth are you talking about?
Any product with that profile will be immediately pulled out of the market.

Lockdowns are supported by those who have an interest and beliefs in them, hence they are misguided, or those who are lunatics.

Sorry you don't even understand the basic concepts of risk and benefits.

You think antibiotics should be withdrawn.

Your opinion can't be taken seriously.

If antibiotics or vaccines kill a good number of people then they are not safe for use. They have to be withdrawn. Standard practise that you seem to want to disregard.

The swine flu vaccine was withdrawn for a handful of deaths and same is true for the Rotavirus vaccine.

That is laughably inaccurate.

All medical treatments or vaccines have a risk. If used often enough there will be deaths.

That has to be weighed against the benefits.

What is laughable are your attempts to justify the deaths and serious injuries and trivialise them.

If many deaths are caused then the vaccine or drug is out if the market.

You seem to have become furious when the interests of the pharmaceuticals are discussed...
Hmmm

Not to forget the IFR of Covid-19 is about 0.15%

Not furious at all.

Enjoying how laughable your understanding of risk is.

You seem not to understand what standards of safety are and it's your posts that demonstrate inability to understand the basic issues and why lockdowns were catastrophic without any benefits.

You compare vaccines to viruses for fatality rates which is absurd. You need to compare vaccines to other vaccines. The standards of safety are not set by myself by the way. A product that causes a handful of deaths (and not thousands) is usually withdrawn from the markets for safety reasons.

You are admitting that thousands of deaths that could be caused by the vaccines is an acceptable number given they 'save many more'.

In addition you are trying hard to inflate the IFR so to justify your beliefs in the lockdowns and mass vaccinations.

You gave repeatedly posted that vaccines should be wuthdrawn based on a set number of deaths. This absolutely shows that you don't have an understanding of risk.

Yes you have to consider the fatality rates of the virus and other factors. Your idea that they compare it to other vaccines is ridiculous.

Actually think for a moment about what you are suggesting. That if there was a major ebola outbreak you would only approve a vaccine that had the same safety profile as a vaccine for chicken pox.

And for avoidance of doubt I am outright stating thousands of deaths is acceptable if it saves many more.

I have repeately pointed out that IFR is population specific. Decisions on covid policies are generally based at national level (or smaller) not global. So unless you can explain why the demographics of Afghanistan should influence UK policy (or whatever xlcountry you choose) then repeating the Global IFR is not an cohetent argument against lockdowns or vaccination.

Imagine you have tens of thousands of deaths from a vaccine and you argue these products can have to be kept in the latest and sold as safe and effective?!

You said

And for avoidance of doubt I am outright stating thousands of deaths is acceptable if it saves many more

Yes you could argue this type of nonsense I suppose or you could try to inflate the IFR.

What is nonsense about it.

You think it's acceptable to let people die if a treatment or prevention has a risk.

That is nonsense.

If you knew how safety standards are set you wouldn't argue such nonsense.

Vaccines are withdrawn for a handful of deaths and a number of serious adverse reactions. Let alone thousands of deaths and multiples of serious adverse reactions.

Since you are so knowledgeable on these safety standards what is the number a vaccine gets withdrawn.

Details please.

a reply to: ScepticScot

That's funny...

when those who are opposed to all vaccines tried to argue that they are dangerous, VAERS data was used often to show that in general, vaccines are safe, considering in 30 years, and millions of people took vaccines, only 900k adverse events. Again, you want to have your argument both ways.

originally posted by: MaxxAction
a reply to: ScepticScot

That's funny...

when those who are opposed to all vaccines tried to argue that they are dangerous, VAERS data was used often to show that in general, vaccines are safe, considering in 30 years, and millions of people took vaccines, only 900k adverse events. Again, you want to have your argument both ways.

Not at all.

The purpose of VAERs is to indicate potential areas of risk to investigate. It has never been used as proof of vaccine safety.