Debunking Vaccine Myths RE VAERS

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: DawgsterK
a reply to: JBurns

Excellent summary

VAERS states some truths; 1. the data does not show causation or correlation to vaccine deaths.

This is the data we need to look for and not what fits the narrative.

The very large number of reports doesn't seem to fit your own narratives...

That's why a number of vaccine apologists are desperate in trying to ignore and discredit the system.

a reply to: quintessentone


twitter.com...

Joseph Ladapo State Surgreon General Florida

Florida saw a 1,700% increase in adverse event reports after COVID-19 vaccinations. Does that sound safe and effective? I didn’t think so either. That’s why we released this health alert.

Just because “correlation ≠ causation” doesn’t mean we should abandon common sense.

Common sense as you can see.

Don't tell me you understand better the purpose, advantages and limitations of VAERS, in comparison to the Dr Ladapo. Or is it that you have already claimed he doesn't understand much...

I think you went as far as claiming he is irrelevant...

At least he knows the different between Covid-19 and SARS-CoV-2...

originally posted by: Asmodeus3
a reply to: quintessentone

I find it amazing on what lengths vaccine apologists can go to defend the junk by Pfizer and Moderna by start dismissing the systems of recording and surveillance that were created for these particular reasons in the first place.

Vaccine apologetics and denialism of reality.

It has been stated by infectious disease experts, such as Willian Schaffner, who know how to interpret data, says that your Florida Surgeon General misused the data for his narrative.

Unvaccinated people do more than merely risk their own health. They’re also a risk to everyone if they become infected with coronavirus, infectious disease specialists say.

That’s because the only source of new coronavirus variants is the body of an infected person.

“Unvaccinated people are potential variant factories,” Dr. William Schaffner, a professor in the Division of Infectious Diseases at Vanderbilt University Medical Center, told CNN Friday.

“The more unvaccinated people there are, the more opportunities for the virus to multiply,” Schaffner said.

www.cnn.com...

Of about 550,000 seniors who got Pfizer bivalent boosters and were tracked by the VSD, 130 had strokes in the three weeks after the shot, according to a CDC official who spoke to CNN on condition of anonymity because they weren’t authorized to share the data. None of the 130 people died.

The number of strokes detected is relatively small, said Dr. William Schaffner, an infectious disease expert at Vanderbilt University and a member of the CDC Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices’ Covid-19 Vaccine Work Group.

“These strokes are not a confirmed adverse event at the moment,” he said. “It’s like a radar system. You’re getting a blip on the radar, and you have to do further investigation to discover whether that airplane is friend or foe.”

The same safety signal has not been detected with the bivalent Moderna booster, the CDC said in its notice.

www.cnn.com...

Another reporting site is VSD (Vaccine Safety Datalink) and they are mining the large amount of data somewhat differently.

In summary, in this inclusive data-mining evaluation of 4.1, 2.6, and 0.4 million Pfizer-BioNTech, Moderna, and Janssen vaccinees, respectively, completely unanticipated adverse events within several weeks of vaccination could have come to light. However, no unexpected serious adverse events were identified, only known adverse events. Clusters of myocarditis in the week after Pfizer-BioNTech Dose 2 were detected in vaccinees of ages 12–17- and 18–39-years. While not ruling out the possibility of rare vaccine-associated adverse events, these results offer additional reassurance about the safety of COVID-19 vaccines, in view of the broad, untargeted nature of the study.

www.sciencedirect.com...

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: DawgsterK
a reply to: JBurns

Excellent summary

VAERS states some truths; 1. the data does not show causation or correlation to vaccine deaths.

This is the data we need to look for and not what fits the narrative.

The very large number of reports doesn't seem to fit your own narratives...

That's why a number of vaccine apologists are desperate in trying to ignore and discredit the system.

I am not discrediting the system, I am repeating what VAERS' limitations are by their own standards.

originally posted by: Asmodeus3
a reply to: quintessentone


twitter.com...

Joseph Ladapo State Surgreon General Florida

Florida saw a 1,700% increase in adverse event reports after COVID-19 vaccinations. Does that sound safe and effective? I didn’t think so either. That’s why we released this health alert.

Just because “correlation ≠ causation” doesn’t mean we should abandon common sense.

Common sense as you can see.

Don't tell me you understand better the purpose, advantages and limitations of VAERS, in comparison to the Dr Ladapo. Or is it that you have already claimed he doesn't understand much...

I think you went as far as claiming he is irrelevant...

At least he knows the different between Covid-19 and SARS-CoV-2...

Dr. William Schaffner, infectious disease expert, says he misused the data, so your doctor is not an infectious disease expert, so I will ignore right-wing Dr. Ladapo's political agenda and believe the experts that actually know their business.

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: InachMarbank

How does that lend credibility to the numbers?

How does any of the VAERS 'denying' change the fact that, prior to Covid, VAERS had been used for decades as it was intended, an early warning system.

How does any of the VAERS 'denying' change the fact that the number of serious adverse events reported for just the 3 Covid jabs alone in the first year or two were almost double the number of serious adverse events reported for all other jabs combined over the last 30 years?

The numbers are just as credible today as they were 3 years ago, and 5 years ago, and the early warning signs they are generating are deafening

a reply to: quintessentone

I really want you to explain this

The genome researchers said Covid-19 is FROM SARS-CoV-2 and merged with another pathogen to become a Chimera, so Covid-19 as a Chimera did indeed come from SARS-CoV-2, what is so difficult to understand about that.

Which scientists have said what and to which research paper or papers you are referring to? So again you are referring to Covid-19 as being a virus but this time a chimeric virus....

I see!

Here is the most updated data mining evaluation for everyone's perusal.

www.sciencedirect.com...

Notwithstanding the limitations, this self-controlled tree-temporal scan statistical method provides unique advantages for vaccine safety monitoring by virtue of its population-based and untargeted nature—neither specific health outcomes nor specific post-exposure periods of potentially increased risk are pre-specified. Adjustment for the evaluation of the tens of thousands of diagnoses and groups of diagnoses and the hundreds of risk intervals keeps the number of false signals low. Further, the method is self-controlled, such that any potential confounding from time-invariant characteristics, including chronic disease status, is essentially eliminated. It nicely complements VSD’s sequential analysis (also known as “rapid cycle analysis”), which has greater power to detect increased risks of its prespecified health outcomes in prespecified risk windows but is not as broad an assessment of safety, given the need to prespecify outcomes and risk windows.

In summary, in this inclusive data-mining evaluation of 4.1, 2.6, and 0.4 million Pfizer-BioNTech, Moderna, and Janssen vaccinees, respectively, completely unanticipated adverse events within several weeks of vaccination could have come to light. However, no unexpected serious adverse events were identified, only known adverse events. Clusters of myocarditis in the week after Pfizer-BioNTech Dose 2 were detected in vaccinees of ages 12–17- and 18–39-years. While not ruling out the possibility of rare vaccine-associated adverse events, these results offer additional reassurance about the safety of COVID-19 vaccines, in view of the broad, untargeted nature of the study.

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: Asmodeus3
a reply to: quintessentone

I find it amazing on what lengths vaccine apologists can go to defend the junk by Pfizer and Moderna by start dismissing the systems of recording and surveillance that were created for these particular reasons in the first place.

Vaccine apologetics and denialism of reality.

It has been stated by infectious disease experts, such as Willian Schaffner, who know how to interpret data, says that your Florida Surgeon General misused the data for his narrative.

Unvaccinated people do more than merely risk their own health. They’re also a risk to everyone if they become infected with coronavirus, infectious disease specialists say.

That’s because the only source of new coronavirus variants is the body of an infected person.

“Unvaccinated people are potential variant factories,” Dr. William Schaffner, a professor in the Division of Infectious Diseases at Vanderbilt University Medical Center, told CNN Friday.

“The more unvaccinated people there are, the more opportunities for the virus to multiply,” Schaffner said.

www.cnn.com...

Of about 550,000 seniors who got Pfizer bivalent boosters and were tracked by the VSD, 130 had strokes in the three weeks after the shot, according to a CDC official who spoke to CNN on condition of anonymity because they weren’t authorized to share the data. None of the 130 people died.

The number of strokes detected is relatively small, said Dr. William Schaffner, an infectious disease expert at Vanderbilt University and a member of the CDC Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices’ Covid-19 Vaccine Work Group.

“These strokes are not a confirmed adverse event at the moment,” he said. “It’s like a radar system. You’re getting a blip on the radar, and you have to do further investigation to discover whether that airplane is friend or foe.”

The same safety signal has not been detected with the bivalent Moderna booster, the CDC said in its notice.

www.cnn.com...

Another reporting site is VSD (Vaccine Safety Datalink) and they are mining the large amount of data somewhat differently.

In summary, in this inclusive data-mining evaluation of 4.1, 2.6, and 0.4 million Pfizer-BioNTech, Moderna, and Janssen vaccinees, respectively, completely unanticipated adverse events within several weeks of vaccination could have come to light. However, no unexpected serious adverse events were identified, only known adverse events. Clusters of myocarditis in the week after Pfizer-BioNTech Dose 2 were detected in vaccinees of ages 12–17- and 18–39-years. While not ruling out the possibility of rare vaccine-associated adverse events, these results offer additional reassurance about the safety of COVID-19 vaccines, in view of the broad, untargeted nature of the study.

www.sciencedirect.com...

It may have been stated. It doesn't make it correct though. Appealing to some statements is not that great as an argument. You need better arguments.
I don't think any sane person will take any different approach with so many reports in their system.

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: DawgsterK
a reply to: JBurns

Excellent summary

VAERS states some truths; 1. the data does not show causation or correlation to vaccine deaths.

This is the data we need to look for and not what fits the narrative.

The very large number of reports doesn't seem to fit your own narratives...

That's why a number of vaccine apologists are desperate in trying to ignore and discredit the system.

I am not discrediting the system, I am repeating what VAERS' limitations are by their own standards.

And si what if it has limitations?? Every system has limitations.

originally posted by: Asmodeus3
a reply to: quintessentone

I really want you to explain this

The genome researchers said Covid-19 is FROM SARS-CoV-2 and merged with another pathogen to become a Chimera, so Covid-19 as a Chimera did indeed come from SARS-CoV-2, what is so difficult to understand about that.

Which scientists have said what and to which research paper or papers you are referring to? So again you are referring to Covid-19 as being a virus but this time a chimeric virus....

I see!

Do your own research then get back to me.

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: DawgsterK
a reply to: JBurns

Excellent summary

VAERS states some truths; 1. the data does not show causation or correlation to vaccine deaths.

This is the data we need to look for and not what fits the narrative.

The very large number of reports doesn't seem to fit your own narratives...

That's why a number of vaccine apologists are desperate in trying to ignore and discredit the system.

I am not discrediting the system, I am repeating what VAERS' limitations are by their own standards.

And si what if it has limitations?? Every system has limitations.

Especially when the limitations do not show correlation nor causation.

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: Asmodeus3
a reply to: quintessentone

I find it amazing on what lengths vaccine apologists can go to defend the junk by Pfizer and Moderna by start dismissing the systems of recording and surveillance that were created for these particular reasons in the first place.

Vaccine apologetics and denialism of reality.

It has been stated by infectious disease experts, such as Willian Schaffner, who know how to interpret data, says that your Florida Surgeon General misused the data for his narrative.

Unvaccinated people do more than merely risk their own health. They’re also a risk to everyone if they become infected with coronavirus, infectious disease specialists say.

That’s because the only source of new coronavirus variants is the body of an infected person.

“Unvaccinated people are potential variant factories,” Dr. William Schaffner, a professor in the Division of Infectious Diseases at Vanderbilt University Medical Center, told CNN Friday.

“The more unvaccinated people there are, the more opportunities for the virus to multiply,” Schaffner said.

www.cnn.com...

Of about 550,000 seniors who got Pfizer bivalent boosters and were tracked by the VSD, 130 had strokes in the three weeks after the shot, according to a CDC official who spoke to CNN on condition of anonymity because they weren’t authorized to share the data. None of the 130 people died.

The number of strokes detected is relatively small, said Dr. William Schaffner, an infectious disease expert at Vanderbilt University and a member of the CDC Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices’ Covid-19 Vaccine Work Group.

“These strokes are not a confirmed adverse event at the moment,” he said. “It’s like a radar system. You’re getting a blip on the radar, and you have to do further investigation to discover whether that airplane is friend or foe.”

The same safety signal has not been detected with the bivalent Moderna booster, the CDC said in its notice.

www.cnn.com...

Another reporting site is VSD (Vaccine Safety Datalink) and they are mining the large amount of data somewhat differently.

In summary, in this inclusive data-mining evaluation of 4.1, 2.6, and 0.4 million Pfizer-BioNTech, Moderna, and Janssen vaccinees, respectively, completely unanticipated adverse events within several weeks of vaccination could have come to light. However, no unexpected serious adverse events were identified, only known adverse events. Clusters of myocarditis in the week after Pfizer-BioNTech Dose 2 were detected in vaccinees of ages 12–17- and 18–39-years. While not ruling out the possibility of rare vaccine-associated adverse events, these results offer additional reassurance about the safety of COVID-19 vaccines, in view of the broad, untargeted nature of the study.

www.sciencedirect.com...

It may have been stated. It doesn't make it correct though. Appealing to some statements is not that great as an argument. You need better arguments.
I don't think any sane person will take any different approach with so many reports in their system.

The statements must be from reputable sources, your sources are not reputable.

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: Asmodeus3
a reply to: quintessentone

I really want you to explain this

The genome researchers said Covid-19 is FROM SARS-CoV-2 and merged with another pathogen to become a Chimera, so Covid-19 as a Chimera did indeed come from SARS-CoV-2, what is so difficult to understand about that.

Which scientists have said what and to which research paper or papers you are referring to? So again you are referring to Covid-19 as being a virus but this time a chimeric virus....

I see!

Do your own research then get back to me.

I will repeat this as you are trying to avoid answering the question

I really want you to explain this as you have made this claim above.

The genome researchers said Covid-19 is FROM SARS-CoV-2 and merged with another pathogen to become a Chimera, so Covid-19 as a Chimera did indeed come from SARS-CoV-2, what is so difficult to understand about that.

Which scientists have said what and to which research paper or papers you are referring to? So again you are referring to Covid-19 as being a virus but this time a chimeric virus....

So before you were referring to Covid-19 as a virus and now as a chimeric virus as it seems.

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: DawgsterK
a reply to: JBurns

Excellent summary

VAERS states some truths; 1. the data does not show causation or correlation to vaccine deaths.

This is the data we need to look for and not what fits the narrative.

The very large number of reports doesn't seem to fit your own narratives...

That's why a number of vaccine apologists are desperate in trying to ignore and discredit the system.

I am not discrediting the system, I am repeating what VAERS' limitations are by their own standards.

And si what if it has limitations?? Every system has limitations.

Especially when the limitations do not show correlation nor causation.

They don't necessarily have to. VAERS wasn't created for this reason. But it doesn't make VAERS non-credible and unreliable as you are trying to imply.

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: Asmodeus3
a reply to: quintessentone

I really want you to explain this

The genome researchers said Covid-19 is FROM SARS-CoV-2 and merged with another pathogen to become a Chimera, so Covid-19 as a Chimera did indeed come from SARS-CoV-2, what is so difficult to understand about that.

Which scientists have said what and to which research paper or papers you are referring to? So again you are referring to Covid-19 as being a virus but this time a chimeric virus....

I see!

Do your own research then get back to me.

I will repeat this as you are trying to avoid answering the question

I really want you to explain this as you have made this claim above.

The genome researchers said Covid-19 is FROM SARS-CoV-2 and merged with another pathogen to become a Chimera, so Covid-19 as a Chimera did indeed come from SARS-CoV-2, what is so difficult to understand about that.

Which scientists have said what and to which research paper or papers you are referring to? So again you are referring to Covid-19 as being a virus but this time a chimeric virus....

So before you were referring to Covid-19 as a virus and now as a chimeric virus as it seems.

It is you who is avoiding finding the truth. If you do your own research your confirmation bias will be addressed and hopefully you will see how you have been programmed all this time. By me giving you sources you will only reject and go to your mantra.

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: Asmodeus3
a reply to: quintessentone

I find it amazing on what lengths vaccine apologists can go to defend the junk by Pfizer and Moderna by start dismissing the systems of recording and surveillance that were created for these particular reasons in the first place.

Vaccine apologetics and denialism of reality.

It has been stated by infectious disease experts, such as Willian Schaffner, who know how to interpret data, says that your Florida Surgeon General misused the data for his narrative.

Unvaccinated people do more than merely risk their own health. They’re also a risk to everyone if they become infected with coronavirus, infectious disease specialists say.

That’s because the only source of new coronavirus variants is the body of an infected person.

“Unvaccinated people are potential variant factories,” Dr. William Schaffner, a professor in the Division of Infectious Diseases at Vanderbilt University Medical Center, told CNN Friday.

“The more unvaccinated people there are, the more opportunities for the virus to multiply,” Schaffner said.

www.cnn.com...

Of about 550,000 seniors who got Pfizer bivalent boosters and were tracked by the VSD, 130 had strokes in the three weeks after the shot, according to a CDC official who spoke to CNN on condition of anonymity because they weren’t authorized to share the data. None of the 130 people died.

The number of strokes detected is relatively small, said Dr. William Schaffner, an infectious disease expert at Vanderbilt University and a member of the CDC Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices’ Covid-19 Vaccine Work Group.

“These strokes are not a confirmed adverse event at the moment,” he said. “It’s like a radar system. You’re getting a blip on the radar, and you have to do further investigation to discover whether that airplane is friend or foe.”

The same safety signal has not been detected with the bivalent Moderna booster, the CDC said in its notice.

www.cnn.com...

Another reporting site is VSD (Vaccine Safety Datalink) and they are mining the large amount of data somewhat differently.

In summary, in this inclusive data-mining evaluation of 4.1, 2.6, and 0.4 million Pfizer-BioNTech, Moderna, and Janssen vaccinees, respectively, completely unanticipated adverse events within several weeks of vaccination could have come to light. However, no unexpected serious adverse events were identified, only known adverse events. Clusters of myocarditis in the week after Pfizer-BioNTech Dose 2 were detected in vaccinees of ages 12–17- and 18–39-years. While not ruling out the possibility of rare vaccine-associated adverse events, these results offer additional reassurance about the safety of COVID-19 vaccines, in view of the broad, untargeted nature of the study.

www.sciencedirect.com...

It may have been stated. It doesn't make it correct though. Appealing to some statements is not that great as an argument. You need better arguments.
I don't think any sane person will take any different approach with so many reports in their system.

The statements must be from reputable sources, your sources are not reputable.

Yes I think the State Surgeon General of Florida is a reputable source together with all other peer reviewed publications that everyone has cited here.

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: DawgsterK
a reply to: JBurns

Excellent summary

VAERS states some truths; 1. the data does not show causation or correlation to vaccine deaths.

This is the data we need to look for and not what fits the narrative.

The very large number of reports doesn't seem to fit your own narratives...

That's why a number of vaccine apologists are desperate in trying to ignore and discredit the system.

I am not discrediting the system, I am repeating what VAERS' limitations are by their own standards.

And si what if it has limitations?? Every system has limitations.

Especially when the limitations do not show correlation nor causation.

They don't necessarily have to. VAERS wasn't created for this reason. But it doesn't make VAERS non-credible and unreliable as you are trying to imply.

It is only credible and reliable as to it being an early alarm system, not data mining and evaluation regarding correlation and causation to vaccine-related deaths.

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: Asmodeus3
a reply to: quintessentone

I find it amazing on what lengths vaccine apologists can go to defend the junk by Pfizer and Moderna by start dismissing the systems of recording and surveillance that were created for these particular reasons in the first place.

Vaccine apologetics and denialism of reality.

It has been stated by infectious disease experts, such as Willian Schaffner, who know how to interpret data, says that your Florida Surgeon General misused the data for his narrative.

Unvaccinated people do more than merely risk their own health. They’re also a risk to everyone if they become infected with coronavirus, infectious disease specialists say.

That’s because the only source of new coronavirus variants is the body of an infected person.

“Unvaccinated people are potential variant factories,” Dr. William Schaffner, a professor in the Division of Infectious Diseases at Vanderbilt University Medical Center, told CNN Friday.

“The more unvaccinated people there are, the more opportunities for the virus to multiply,” Schaffner said.

www.cnn.com...

Of about 550,000 seniors who got Pfizer bivalent boosters and were tracked by the VSD, 130 had strokes in the three weeks after the shot, according to a CDC official who spoke to CNN on condition of anonymity because they weren’t authorized to share the data. None of the 130 people died.

The number of strokes detected is relatively small, said Dr. William Schaffner, an infectious disease expert at Vanderbilt University and a member of the CDC Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices’ Covid-19 Vaccine Work Group.

“These strokes are not a confirmed adverse event at the moment,” he said. “It’s like a radar system. You’re getting a blip on the radar, and you have to do further investigation to discover whether that airplane is friend or foe.”

The same safety signal has not been detected with the bivalent Moderna booster, the CDC said in its notice.

www.cnn.com...

Another reporting site is VSD (Vaccine Safety Datalink) and they are mining the large amount of data somewhat differently.

In summary, in this inclusive data-mining evaluation of 4.1, 2.6, and 0.4 million Pfizer-BioNTech, Moderna, and Janssen vaccinees, respectively, completely unanticipated adverse events within several weeks of vaccination could have come to light. However, no unexpected serious adverse events were identified, only known adverse events. Clusters of myocarditis in the week after Pfizer-BioNTech Dose 2 were detected in vaccinees of ages 12–17- and 18–39-years. While not ruling out the possibility of rare vaccine-associated adverse events, these results offer additional reassurance about the safety of COVID-19 vaccines, in view of the broad, untargeted nature of the study.

www.sciencedirect.com...

It may have been stated. It doesn't make it correct though. Appealing to some statements is not that great as an argument. You need better arguments.
I don't think any sane person will take any different approach with so many reports in their system.

The statements must be from reputable sources, your sources are not reputable.

Yes I think the State Surgeon General of Florida is a reputable source together with all other peer reviewed publications that everyone has cited here.

Experts disagree.

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: DawgsterK
a reply to: JBurns

Excellent summary

VAERS states some truths; 1. the data does not show causation or correlation to vaccine deaths.

This is the data we need to look for and not what fits the narrative.

The very large number of reports doesn't seem to fit your own narratives...

That's why a number of vaccine apologists are desperate in trying to ignore and discredit the system.

I am not discrediting the system, I am repeating what VAERS' limitations are by their own standards.

And si what if it has limitations?? Every system has limitations.

Especially when the limitations do not show correlation nor causation.

They don't necessarily have to. VAERS wasn't created for this reason. But it doesn't make VAERS non-credible and unreliable as you are trying to imply.

It is only credible and reliable as to it being an early alarm system, not data mining and evaluation regarding correlation and causation to vaccine-related deaths.

I don't think anyone has claimed you can prove causation by only using VAERS but as Dr Ladapo stated we also have common sense to make specific recommendations and the evidence of excess deaths and the large numbers of vaccine injuries so far.

Florida saw a 1,700% increase in adverse event reports after COVID-19 vaccinations. Does that sound safe and effective? I didn’t think so either. That’s why we released this health alert.

Just because “correlation ≠ causation” doesn’t mean we should abandon common sense.