[Lord Dave]

You act like the .02% is a legitimate number.

I mean, I was making it high.  Let me grab the real number...
https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/covid-19/info-by-product/pfizer/reactogenicity.html#18-serious-adverse-events

.06% had serious side effects in the vaccine group.  .05% in the placebo group.
Meaning its .01% of people likely had vaccine related issues that were serious.

That is some serious math you got going on there!

The .06% number stands alone and there is no reduction in that number just because Sally down the street had some of the same serious side effects by drinking plain old water.

Kinda does, yeah.  Means the side effects may not be related to the vaccine.  The goal is to determine what happens with and without the vaccine.  If people have the same issue regardless, you can't attribute it to the vaccine itself.  Same with any medicine or any study with a control group.
If 100 people drink the new pepsi, another 100 drink only water, and 10 from each group puke... New pepsi probably didn't make them puke.  Unless the control group was just a coincidence.

No, absolutely not. Incorrect.

Why?
If two groups have the same side effects from two different substances (one being water, one being medicine) why is it that the medicine side effects were caused by the medicine?  And what caused the ones who took water to have the side effect?

Know wnat?
Sure.
Lets agree on that then.
Glad you approve of the Johnson and Johnson vaccine at least.

I approve of valid clinical trials and full transparency.

You, it seems at least, (based on your posts), approve of underhanded shady dealings by pharmaceutical companies and world governments.

Unbelievable.

Well... Yeah.  I support capitalism, not government regulations.

[Action80]

You act like the .02% is a legitimate number.

I mean, I was making it high.  Let me grab the real number...
https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/covid-19/info-by-product/pfizer/reactogenicity.html#18-serious-adverse-events

.06% had serious side effects in the vaccine group.  .05% in the placebo group.
Meaning its .01% of people likely had vaccine related issues that were serious.

That is some serious math you got going on there!

The .06% number stands alone and there is no reduction in that number just because Sally down the street had some of the same serious side effects by drinking plain old water.

Kinda does, yeah.  Means the side effects may not be related to the vaccine.  The goal is to determine what happens with and without the vaccine.  If people have the same issue regardless, you can't attribute it to the vaccine itself.  Same with any medicine or any study with a control group.
If 100 people drink the new pepsi, another 100 drink only water, and 10 from each group puke... New pepsi probably didn't make them puke.  Unless the control group was just a coincidence.

No, absolutely not. Incorrect.

Why?
If two groups have the same side effects from two different substances (one being water, one being medicine) why is it that the medicine side effects were caused by the medicine?  And what caused the ones who took water to have the side effect?

POINT ONE - Please link a paper written by an INDEPENDENT source that provides a .06 percent number for adverse reactions to the Pfizer vaccine.

Betcha can't do that.

Know wnat?
Sure.
Lets agree on that then.
Glad you approve of the Johnson and Johnson vaccine at least.

I approve of valid clinical trials and full transparency.

You, it seems at least, (based on your posts), approve of underhanded shady dealings by pharmaceutical companies and world governments.

Unbelievable.

Well... Yeah.  I support capitalism, not government regulations.

LOL!


We have discussed economic systems before and the odds of you having any sort of idea or concept of capitalism is beyond the pale. You got no clue at all.

[Lord Dave]

You act like the .02% is a legitimate number.

I mean, I was making it high.  Let me grab the real number...
https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/covid-19/info-by-product/pfizer/reactogenicity.html#18-serious-adverse-events

.06% had serious side effects in the vaccine group.  .05% in the placebo group.
Meaning its .01% of people likely had vaccine related issues that were serious.

That is some serious math you got going on there!

The .06% number stands alone and there is no reduction in that number just because Sally down the street had some of the same serious side effects by drinking plain old water.

Kinda does, yeah.  Means the side effects may not be related to the vaccine.  The goal is to determine what happens with and without the vaccine.  If people have the same issue regardless, you can't attribute it to the vaccine itself.  Same with any medicine or any study with a control group.
If 100 people drink the new pepsi, another 100 drink only water, and 10 from each group puke... New pepsi probably didn't make them puke.  Unless the control group was just a coincidence.

No, absolutely not. Incorrect.

Why?
If two groups have the same side effects from two different substances (one being water, one being medicine) why is it that the medicine side effects were caused by the medicine?  And what caused the ones who took water to have the side effect?

POINT ONE - Please link a paper written by an INDEPENDENT source that provides a .06 percent number for adverse reactions to the Pfizer vaccine.

Betcha can't do that.

Please define indepentant.  Because i'd like to not waste my time when you move goalposts.

Know wnat?
Sure.
Lets agree on that then.
Glad you approve of the Johnson and Johnson vaccine at least.

I approve of valid clinical trials and full transparency.

You, it seems at least, (based on your posts), approve of underhanded shady dealings by pharmaceutical companies and world governments.

Unbelievable.

Well... Yeah.  I support capitalism, not government regulations.

LOL!


We have discussed economic systems before and the odds of you having any sort of idea or concept of capitalism is beyond the pale. You got no clue at all.

Not a hard concept.  Individuals sell products for their own personal profit.
Capitalism, in its pure form, has no rules.  No ethics.  Just profit.  Sell your product, get your profit.  Who cares if they aren't happy so long as you are.

[Action80]

Please define indepentant.  Because i'd like to not waste my time when you move goalposts.

A paper written by a firm not hired by Pfizer to conduct a research trial. At least one of the firms employed by Pfizer released bullshit data.

Not a hard concept.  Individuals sell products for their own personal profit.
Capitalism, in its pure form, has no rules.  No ethics.  Just profit.  Sell your product, get your profit.  Who cares if they aren't happy so long as you are.

Oh, I see.

And you believe Pfizer is currently conducting business in a pure, capitalistic economic sense?

[stack]

Please define indepentant.  Because i'd like to not waste my time when you move goalposts.

A paper written by a firm not hired by Pfizer to conduct a research trial. At least one of the firms employed by Pfizer released bullshit data.

Analysis of COVID-19 Vaccine Type and Adverse Effects Following Vaccination

Key Points
Question  What factors are associated with adverse effects after COVID-19 vaccination?

Findings  In an online cohort study including 19 586 adults who received a COVID-19 vaccination, the factors most strongly associated with adverse effects were full vaccination dose, brand of vaccine, younger age, female sex, and having had COVID-19 before vaccination. Allergic reaction or anaphylaxis was reported in 0.3% of participants after partial vaccination and 0.2% of participants after full vaccination.

Meaning  These findings suggest that some individuals experience more adverse effects after COVID-19 vaccination, but serious adverse effects are rare.

Results  The 19 586 participants had a median (IQR) age of 54 (38-66) years, and 13 420 (68.8%) were women. Allergic reaction or anaphylaxis was reported in 26 of 8680 participants (0.3%) after 1 dose of the BNT162b2 (Pfizer/BioNTech) or mRNA-1273 (Moderna) vaccine, 27 of 11 141 (0.2%) after 2 doses of the BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273 vaccine or 1 dose of the JNJ-78436735 (Johnson & Johnson) vaccine. The strongest factors associated with adverse effects were vaccine dose (2 doses of BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273 or 1 dose of JNJ-78436735 vs 1 dose of BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273; odds ratio [OR], 3.10; 95% CI, 2.89-3.34; P < .001), vaccine brand (mRNA-1273 vs BNT162b2, OR, 2.00; 95% CI, 1.86-2.15; P < .001; JNJ-78436735 vs BNT162b2: OR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.52-0.79; P < .001), age (per 10 years: OR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.72-0.76; P < .001), female sex (OR, 1.65; 95% CI, 1.53-1.78; P < .001), and having had COVID-19 before vaccination (OR, 2.17; 95% CI, 1.77-2.66; P < .001).

[Lord Dave]

Please define indepentant.  Because i'd like to not waste my time when you move goalposts.

A paper written by a firm not hired by Pfizer to conduct a research trial. At least one of the firms employed by Pfizer released bullshit data.

Analysis of COVID-19 Vaccine Type and Adverse Effects Following Vaccination

Key Points
Question  What factors are associated with adverse effects after COVID-19 vaccination?

Findings  In an online cohort study including 19 586 adults who received a COVID-19 vaccination, the factors most strongly associated with adverse effects were full vaccination dose, brand of vaccine, younger age, female sex, and having had COVID-19 before vaccination. Allergic reaction or anaphylaxis was reported in 0.3% of participants after partial vaccination and 0.2% of participants after full vaccination.

Meaning  These findings suggest that some individuals experience more adverse effects after COVID-19 vaccination, but serious adverse effects are rare.

Results  The 19 586 participants had a median (IQR) age of 54 (38-66) years, and 13 420 (68.8%) were women. Allergic reaction or anaphylaxis was reported in 26 of 8680 participants (0.3%) after 1 dose of the BNT162b2 (Pfizer/BioNTech) or mRNA-1273 (Moderna) vaccine, 27 of 11 141 (0.2%) after 2 doses of the BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273 vaccine or 1 dose of the JNJ-78436735 (Johnson & Johnson) vaccine. The strongest factors associated with adverse effects were vaccine dose (2 doses of BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273 or 1 dose of JNJ-78436735 vs 1 dose of BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273; odds ratio [OR], 3.10; 95% CI, 2.89-3.34; P < .001), vaccine brand (mRNA-1273 vs BNT162b2, OR, 2.00; 95% CI, 1.86-2.15; P < .001; JNJ-78436735 vs BNT162b2: OR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.52-0.79; P < .001), age (per 10 years: OR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.72-0.76; P < .001), female sex (OR, 1.65; 95% CI, 1.53-1.78; P < .001), and having had COVID-19 before vaccination (OR, 2.17; 95% CI, 1.77-2.66; P < .001).

Thanks, Stack.
I was just gonna ignore him because I have better shit to do than feed a troll whose not gonna accept anything I throw out anyway.

[Action80]

Thanks, Stack.
I was just gonna ignore him because I have better shit to do than feed a troll whose not gonna accept anything I throw out anyway.

Stack didn't help you at all.

I am sure Pfizer is acting according to capitalism as you understand it, which actually speaks volumes about your understanding rather than capitalism.

[stack]

Thanks, Stack.
I was just gonna ignore him because I have better shit to do than feed a troll whose not gonna accept anything I throw out anyway.

Stack didn't help you at all.

I am sure Pfizer is acting according to capitalism as you understand it, which actually speaks volumes about your understanding rather than capitalism.

You asked for a non-Pfizer independent source. You got one. Why not address what you asked for rather than deflecting toward whatever your notion of "capitalism" is?

Is it that you simply have an issue with Pfizer alone and not the other vaccines India has been using to dole out 1.8 billion doses?

[Action80]

Thanks, Stack.
I was just gonna ignore him because I have better shit to do than feed a troll whose not gonna accept anything I throw out anyway.

Stack didn't help you at all.

I am sure Pfizer is acting according to capitalism as you understand it, which actually speaks volumes about your understanding rather than capitalism.

You asked for a non-Pfizer independent source. You got one. Why not address what you asked for rather than deflecting toward whatever your notion of "capitalism" is?

Is it that you simply have an issue with Pfizer alone and not the other vaccines India has been using to dole out 1.8 billion doses?

Where does your non-independent source help re: 0.06? Let alone, methodology.

From your source: "there is little real-world, patient-reported data on adverse effects after receiving COVID-19 vaccination and in whom adverse effects may be more common."

[stack]

Thanks, Stack.
I was just gonna ignore him because I have better shit to do than feed a troll whose not gonna accept anything I throw out anyway.

Stack didn't help you at all.

I am sure Pfizer is acting according to capitalism as you understand it, which actually speaks volumes about your understanding rather than capitalism.

You asked for a non-Pfizer independent source. You got one. Why not address what you asked for rather than deflecting toward whatever your notion of "capitalism" is?

Is it that you simply have an issue with Pfizer alone and not the other vaccines India has been using to dole out 1.8 billion doses?

Where does your non-independent source help re: 0.06? Let alone, methodology.

Under the heading called "Methods".

Before I waste more time, what stats are you actually looking for? Stats for any After Effects (AE), Severe After Effects (SAE - Usually defined as would you have to miss a day of work after a jab) and/or Life-Threatening After Effects (Like going into anaphylactic shock and can't breathe or some heart inflammation issue, etc.

From your source: "there is little real-world, patient-reported data on adverse effects after receiving COVID-19 vaccination and in whom adverse effects may be more common."

Yep. And that's what the study set out to tackle.

Do you have an issue with Pfizer alone and not the other vaccines India has been using to dole out 1.8 billion doses? Would you prefer Russia's Sputnik vax?

[Action80]

Thanks, Stack.
I was just gonna ignore him because I have better shit to do than feed a troll whose not gonna accept anything I throw out anyway.

Stack didn't help you at all.

I am sure Pfizer is acting according to capitalism as you understand it, which actually speaks volumes about your understanding rather than capitalism.

You asked for a non-Pfizer independent source. You got one. Why not address what you asked for rather than deflecting toward whatever your notion of "capitalism" is?

Is it that you simply have an issue with Pfizer alone and not the other vaccines India has been using to dole out 1.8 billion doses?

Where does your non-independent source help re: 0.06? Let alone, methodology.

Under the heading called "Methods".

Before I waste more time, what stats are you actually looking for? Stats for any After Effects (AE), Severe After Effects (SAE - Usually defined as would you have to miss a day of work after a jab) and/or Life-Threatening After Effects (Like going into anaphylactic shock and can't breathe or some heart inflammation issue, etc.

From your source: "there is little real-world, patient-reported data on adverse effects after receiving COVID-19 vaccination and in whom adverse effects may be more common."

Yep. And that's what the study set out to tackle.

Do you have an issue with Pfizer alone and not the other vaccines India has been using to dole out 1.8 billion doses? Would you prefer Russia's Sputnik vax?

I asked for a source independent of Pfizer's bullshit marketing ploy regarding adverse effects citing support for the Norwegian's #'s. You got nothing.

[stack]

Thanks, Stack.
I was just gonna ignore him because I have better shit to do than feed a troll whose not gonna accept anything I throw out anyway.

Stack didn't help you at all.

I am sure Pfizer is acting according to capitalism as you understand it, which actually speaks volumes about your understanding rather than capitalism.

You asked for a non-Pfizer independent source. You got one. Why not address what you asked for rather than deflecting toward whatever your notion of "capitalism" is?

Is it that you simply have an issue with Pfizer alone and not the other vaccines India has been using to dole out 1.8 billion doses?

Where does your non-independent source help re: 0.06? Let alone, methodology.

Under the heading called "Methods".

Before I waste more time, what stats are you actually looking for? Stats for any After Effects (AE), Severe After Effects (SAE - Usually defined as would you have to miss a day of work after a jab) and/or Life-Threatening After Effects (Like going into anaphylactic shock and can't breathe or some heart inflammation issue, etc.

From your source: "there is little real-world, patient-reported data on adverse effects after receiving COVID-19 vaccination and in whom adverse effects may be more common."

Yep. And that's what the study set out to tackle.

Do you have an issue with Pfizer alone and not the other vaccines India has been using to dole out 1.8 billion doses? Would you prefer Russia's Sputnik vax?

I asked for a source independent of Pfizer's bullshit marketing ploy regarding adverse effects citing support for the Norwegian's #'s. You got nothing.

And I gave you a source. The CDC figures Dave provided were in relation to Severe Side Effects. As defined: Serious adverse events were defined as any untoward medical occurrence that resulted in death, was life-threatening, required inpatient hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization, or resulted in persistent disability/incapacity.

In the independent study I provided, severe side effects were as follows:

There was not a statistically significant difference in odds of severe or very severe adverse effects reported by participants receiving the JNJ-78436735 vaccine compared with the BNT162b2 vaccine (OR, 1.03; 95% CI, 0.67-1.58; P = .89).

Pretty much inline with the CDC. If you had actually read the study, you might know this.

In any case, do you have an issue with Pfizer alone and not the other vaccines India has been using to dole out 1.8 billion doses? Would you prefer Russia's Sputnik vax? India uses that one a lot.

[Action80]

I'm sure nothing could go wrong here:

Prior to this whole business of vaccines for respiratory illnesses (which do not prevent you from catching OR spreading said illnesses), you got a vaccine if you desired to be immune to the effects of the virus. Now, with this development, pharma intends to give you the vaccine whether you want it or not.

[stack]

I'm sure nothing could go wrong here:
Now, with this development, pharma intends to give you the vaccine whether you want it or not.

When should we expect this to occur? This is nothing new. According to the article Mr. Dore cites, folks have been messing around with this tech for at least 20 years. Also, is Mr. Dore your sole source of info these days?

Lastly, you never answered the question: Do you have an issue with Pfizer alone and not the other vaccines India has been using to dole out 1.8 billion doses? Would you prefer Russia's Sputnik vax?

[AATW]

Interesting video about attitudes towards the vaccine across the political divide in the US and what those attitudes are based on

[Tom Bishop]

Sorry kid, but you don't usually read about kids in textbooks unless it's about a tragedy.

[Rama Set]

Sorry kid, but you don't usually read about kids in textbooks unless it's about a tragedy.

Did you mean to post this in terrible political memes? That’s about the level of your punditry here.

[Lord Dave]

Sorry kid, but you don't usually read about kids in textbooks unless it's about a tragedy.

My wife has 5-10 textbooks in the attic that would disagree with you.

[Tom Bishop]

It looks like Phizer is finally releasing its safety data.

The Pfizer Vaccine Only Has 1,291 Side Effects! - A judge forced the FDA to release Pfizer's clinical data and it's worse than you can possibly imagine

[Lord Dave]

It looks like Phizer is finally releasing its safety data.

The Pfizer Vaccine Only Has 1,291 Side Effects! - A judge forced the FDA to release Pfizer's clinical data and it's worse than you can possibly imagine

Is that a list of everything the vaccine caused (because they did a study) or a list of everything that people got after getting the vaccine?
Because one is not the same as the other.
Like I could die from a gunshot wound after taking the vaccine.  Doesn't mean the vaccine shot me.