How bad is my batch ?

The Amazing Virginian said:
And the long term side effects of having Covid itself are???
Click to expand...
Well, aside from my coffee tasting somewhat off for a spell, nothing so far. Had Delta at age 69. Did the early treatment protocol. As far as "long term", I'll let you know in 30 years. ;)


3D Anvil said:
The death rate is about 2%, currently. Last year COVID was the third leading cause of death in the US, behind heart disease and cancer. Personally, if we had safe vaccines for heart disease and cancer, I'd be first in line to get them.
Click to expand...
So, you do realize that those numbers came from treating the death of anybody WITH covid as a death FROM covid?

So far in this thread, three people posted that they know people who have had serious, and in two cases fatal, aftereffects from vaccination. Between the three of us we know 8 people. And thsoe are the "for sures".

However, if you are happy with the vaccine, that's cool by me.
 
knarfeng said:
Well, aside from my coffee tasting somewhat off for a spell, nothing so far. Had Delta at age 69. Did the early treatment protocol. As far as "long term", I'll let you know in 30 years. ;)



So, you do realize that those numbers came from treating the death of anybody WITH covid as a death FROM covid?

So far in this thread, three people posted that they know people who have had serious, and in two cases fatal, aftereffects from vaccination. Between the three of us we know 8 people. And thsoe are the "for sures".

However, if you are happy with the vaccine, that's cool by me.
Click to expand...
I am just now getting over my second round with Covid. This time around was headache, sore throat, hot/cold, inability to focus, and strangely like you mentioned coffee now tastes terrible.

First round was at the onset two years ago, and it knocked me out for a month.

I got the Pfizer shots last July. Did not want them, but it was either get the shots or not work.
 
Nope, it's simply not true that anyone who dies with covid is assumed to die from covid, any more than it's true that anyone who died after getting vaccinated is assumed to have died from the vaccine.
 
knarfeng said:
But that's how the statistics on covid deaths have been collected.
Click to expand...
*sigh*

No, it isn't. The truth is that COVID deaths have been significantly UNDERreported because many died at home and weren't included in the statistics. We can tell this by looking at excess deaths (number of deaths above the statistically expected number) and by looking at the decline in the average life expectancy (2020 saw the biggest decline in the US since WWII).
 
3D Anvil said:
Nope, it's simply not true that anyone who dies with covid is assumed to die from covid, any more than it's true that anyone who died after getting vaccinated is assumed to have died from the vaccine.
Click to expand...
It is hard to believe but the manipulation of these statistics has been amazing. I can't make a broad general statement but there have been many examples up here of people who happen to have Covid being counted as being admitted or as dying because of covid, and there actually has been at least one editorial in the Globe & Mail supporting the practice.

As to people dying after getting the vaccine, that has never happened, according to the statistics I see. Where a database does record it, like VAERS, the whole database is poo-pooed, and there have been some examples of that here ( possibly in the PA rather than current events. I can't remember, must be my vaccines.... ;) )

I have very little faith in the authorities now because they have proved one thing to me: they think it right to manipulate information to get a desired public reaction and policy result because they, what Sowell calls "the Anointed", think they know what we should be told and have a duty to control us since we are too ignorant to decide for ourselves and aren't ready to make judgements like them. This is what enrages and enables the "Deplorables" who are smart enough to smell a rat even if they aren't vetrinarians.

I hope that's not too political for here but it is such a part of what is going on
 
HJK said:
It is hard to believe but the manipulation of these statistics has been amazing.
Click to expand...

Including the overall US death count. That one changed dramatically after an article from John Hopkins in Nov 2020 including data showing that overall death count between 2020 and 2019 were similar.
 
Is that all he did, though?
———


Biologist Bret Weinstein said on Rogan’s show in June that a study suggested “ivermectin alone, if properly utilized, is capable of driving this pathogen to extinction.” He read from the study suggesting it was 86 percent effective in preventing infections.

“ Crazy number,” Rogan said

Weinstein added: “That number is high enough to be, independently, the end of covid if we decide to make it so.”

The study at issue, though, was a meta-analysis, reviewing generally smaller, lower-quality trials done on the use of ivermectin on covid patients. One of the main studies it relied upon, from Egypt, was soon withdrawn over major data issues. One watchdog stated that removing the Egyptian study from the meta-analysis effectively “reversed” the conclusions (which the study’s authors disputed).

The study was also conducted by people affiliated with an interest group that advocates for the use of ivermectin, PolitiFact reported, even though the authors claimed there was no conflict of interest. High-quality studies have repeatedly shown ivermectin having little to no benefit.
 
This whole issue is winding down anyway. By summer I don't think we'll even hear anyone talking about vaxes or batches . . . or even masks, except mostly in the past tense. It's about run its course. Did the vaxes save lives? Or cost lives? How about the masks? If so, how many? I guess folks can argue and debate that for the rest of eternity, but I think it is starting to become a moot issue.
 
3D Anvil said:
*sigh*

No, it isn't. The truth is that COVID deaths have been significantly UNDERreported because many died at home and weren't included in the statistics. We can tell this by looking at excess deaths (number of deaths above the statistically expected number) and by looking at the decline in the average life expectancy (2020 saw the biggest decline in the US since WWII).
Click to expand...

I'd be interested in seeing that data. Got a link to it?
I've not paid serious attention to covid death rates. Too busy looking at better ways of fighting it.

3D Anvil said:
Is that all he did, though?
———


Biologist Bret Weinstein said on Rogan’s show in June that a study suggested “ivermectin alone, if properly utilized, is capable of driving this pathogen to extinction.” He read from the study suggesting it was 86 percent effective in preventing infections.

“ Crazy number,” Rogan said

Weinstein added: “That number is high enough to be, independently, the end of covid if we decide to make it so.”

The study at issue, though, was a meta-analysis, reviewing generally smaller, lower-quality trials done on the use of ivermectin on covid patients. One of the main studies it relied upon, from Egypt, was soon withdrawn over major data issues. One watchdog stated that removing the Egyptian study from the meta-analysis effectively “reversed” the conclusions (which the study’s authors disputed).

The study was also conducted by people affiliated with an interest group that advocates for the use of ivermectin, PolitiFact reported, even though the authors claimed there was no conflict of interest. High-quality studies have repeatedly shown ivermectin having little to no benefit.
Click to expand...
Ah, yes. PolitiFact. Funded by The Poynter Institute, which is funded by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. The foundation is heavily invested in big pharma and has been one of the major drivers for vaccine research, even before covid hit. Excuse me if I'm not impressed by anything that comes out of Politifact.

Here's another study. Try that one.
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Ivermectin for Prevention and Treatment of COVID-19 Infection: A Systematic Review, Meta-analysis, and Trial Sequential Analysis to Inform Clinical Guidelines

Repurposed medicines may have a role against the SARS-CoV-2 virus. The antiparasitic ivermectin, with antiviral and anti-inflammatory properties, has now been tested in numerous clinical trials.We assessed the efficacy of ivermectin treatment in reducing ...
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

And somebody needs to tell Japan that Ivermectin does not work. Within 10 days of allowing doctors to prescribe it, new cases began a precipitous fall. The cycle for covid is roughly 10 days. Strange coincidence, isn't it.
1643869084587.png


Yes, yes. All circumstantial. Not Proof. The "fact checkers" say... I'm sure you trust my sources about as much as I trust yours.

What is undeniably true is that somebody or something has systematically worked to eliminate all interest in early treatment as a viable alternative to vaccines. One need only look at the falsified article that got published in the Lancet claiming to have irrefutable proof that hydroxychloroquine had been tested and found to cause complications in patients. I remember when it came out. I heard about it because all the news channels trumpeted about it. But, I also know it got busted as bogus. The news channels did not trumpet that part. You had to know where to look for that information.
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)31180-6/fulltext
A recent Lancet Article by Mandeep Mehra and colleagues, which reported adverse events associated with hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine treatment in patients with COVID-19, has been retracted by three of the authors, 1 along with our linked Comment that provided a commentary on the Article and its findings, 2 because the veracity of the data ...
Click to expand...
The Lancet is supposed to be the gold standard of medical journals. Publication of false articles should be completely impossible in that journal. Yet the article was a complete fabrication. The Lancet eventually published a retraction and withdrew the article. But by then the FDA had cited the article and shut down all studies in the US on hydroxychloroquine.

I could cite other such falsifications against early treatment. But the Lancet article is easiest to validate.
Check who funds the checkers. Follow the money. It will take you to very dark places.
 
unwisefool said:
Sorry to hear that, that's always hard. So do you think there will be a rash of deaths in the next 5 to 10 years? Why do you think that time period instead of now?
Click to expand...
Wouldn’t that be a natural consequence of widely promoting a product while absolving its manufacturers of all liability? As for the time factor, it takes experience to properly evaluate any product. Your new car may be an object of pride today and far less so a year later when the 4 wheels fall off at highway speeds.

n2s
 
not2sharp said:
Wouldn’t that be a natural consequence of widely promoting a product while absolving its manufacturers of all liability? As for the time factor, it takes experience to properly evaluate any product. Your new car may be an object of pride today and far less so a year later when the 4 wheels fall off at highway speeds.

n2s
Click to expand...
I'm asking why that period of time was specifically mentioned. Not "I hate to see what happens in a few years" but 5-10.
 
It's surprising to me that the anti-vax crowd hasn't latched on to the one existing drug that actually DOES appear to be quite effective at preventing serious COVID consequences, unlike some of the ones they have heavily promoted.
--------------

Is Fluvoxamine the Covid Drug We’ve Been Waiting For?​

A 10-day treatment costs only $4 and appears to greatly reduce symptoms, hospitalization and death.​

www.wsj.com

Opinion | Is Fluvoxamine the Covid Drug We’ve Been Waiting For?

A 10-day treatment costs only $4 and appears to greatly reduce symptoms, hospitalization and death.
www.wsj.com www.wsj.com
 
Random Dan said:
The front page of this website states:

And indeed that seems to be the gist of the whole site.

The problem is that it's a competely baseless assertion. In general there is no evidence of a causal relationship for effects recorded in VAERS, as it clearly states on their website in the "Guide to Interpreting VAERS Data":



Presenting VAERS data as though the deaths, disabilities,and illnesses reported are caused by vaccines is at best irresponsible and at worst malicious.
Click to expand...
Delete
 
kwackster said:
This website came up in a Dutch healthcare workers Telegram group (my wife is a pharmacy tech), and since much of the info concerns the US i post the link here as well.


Batch codes and associated deaths, disabilities and illnesses for Covid 19 Vaccines.
Click to expand...
The data on this site is totally bogus. As you said, there is no causation shown in VAERS, meaning just because there is an adverse reaction entered, does not mean it was a result of the vaccine. But this clown took all of the batch codes entered, and grouped by adverse reactions/batch codes. Nearly All of the fields in VAERS are freeform fields, meaning anyone can type in anything in most fields. If you scroll though the batch codes for say, Pfizer codes, you will see huge numbers of invalid codes. So he is comparing incidents of reactions from the valid batch codes to the MANY invalid ones. So naturally, the invalid codes are relatively "safe", as few people enter the same batch codes in the exact same incorrect manner. He even has batch codes entered as "????" And "Unknown". He didn't even go to the trouble of removing codes that could not be right. I looked at my code, EW0150. All Pfizer codes are 2 letters followed by 4 numbers. Not surprisingly, mine came up as a "DANGEROUS" batch. Because I entered it correctly. Had I entered EW-0150, or EW 0150, or replaced "0" with "o" like EW-o15o or EWo15o, suddenly I am SAFE. The guy is an absolute quack. But antivaxxers eat this stuff up. Unfortunate
 
Steveg1 said:
The data on this site is totally bogus. As you said, there is no causation shown in VAERS, meaning just because there is an adverse reaction entered, does not mean it was a result of the vaccine. But this clown took all of the batch codes entered, and grouped by adverse reactions/batch codes. Nearly All of the fields in VAERS are freeform fields, meaning anyone can type in anything in most fields. If you scroll though the batch codes for say, Pfizer codes, you will see huge numbers of invalid codes. So he is comparing incidents of reactions from the valid batch codes to the MANY invalid ones. So naturally, the invalid codes are relatively "safe", as few people enter the same batch codes in the exact same incorrect manner. He even has batch codes entered as "????" And "Unknown". He didn't even go to the trouble of removing codes that could not be right. I looked at my code, EW0150. All Pfizer codes are 2 letters followed by 4 numbers. Not surprisingly, mine came up as a "DANGEROUS" batch. Because I entered it correctly. Had I entered EW-0150, or EW 0150, or replaced "0" with "o" like EW-o15o or EWo15o, suddenly I am SAFE. The guy is an absolute quack. But antivaxxers eat this stuff up. Unfortunate
Click to expand...
I know personally 5 youths ages 15-17 that have died within 1-3 weeks after the vaccination. Four of them were healthy athletes who were not experiencing any problems but suddenly developed heart problems and pulmonary embolism . The other one was my daughter’s nephew by marriage. He was a special needs person and had no prior problems or health problems. Suddenly after going outside to feed the squirrels and returned to the kitchen he collapsed on the floor and died. Pulmonary embolism was the cause of death but the reason was inconclusive! Really? Wth? Three of the other youths died of pulmonary embolism and the other was heart lining inflammation. You can do all the following of the cdc and dr facui you want but something evil lurks .
 
Lesknife said:
I know personally 5 youths ages 15-17 that have died within 1-3 weeks after the vaccination. Four of them were healthy athletes who were not experiencing any problems but suddenly developed heart problems and pulmonary embolism . The other one was my daughter’s nephew by marriage. He was a special needs person and had no prior problems or health problems. Suddenly after going outside to feed the squirrels and returned to the kitchen he collapsed on the floor and died. Pulmonary embolism was the cause of death but the reason was inconclusive! Really? Wth? Three of the other youths died of pulmonary embolism and the other was heart lining inflammation. You can do all the following of the cdc and dr facui you want but something evil lurks .
Click to expand...
And I know 0. I do not know anyone who knows anyone that has died from the vaccine. I know numerous people who have died from the virus, and many people who have had relatives and friends die from it. My roomate in the hospital, among others. But that was not the point of my post.
 
kwackster said:
Would this be considered credible info or just misinformation ?
You decide.
Click to expand...

Try this one:
This is a listing of reported VAERS deaths by year. This is from the "confirmed data" which has been validated by CDC and assigned a permanent case number.


1647401103841-png.1767710


rumble.com

PETER McCULLOUGH MD: How We Know the COVID Shots Are Causing Excess Deaths

Highly accomplished professor/cardiologist/epidemiologist Peter McCullough MD, explains the science used to assess the probable causes of mortality in medicine. Known as the Bradford-Hill criteria, th
rumble.com rumble.com
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top