Printer-friendly version
Author:
In case anyone was interested. When you read it remember gov passed a law one may not sue the gov. doctors, health providers, vaccine makers. They tried to bury this for 75 years and most everyone would be dead. Nothing much to add.
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/chd-says-pfizer-fda-dropped-2...
Comments
Might Not Be Best Source
eom
Jill
Angela Rasch (Jill M I)
It was made very clear in the main stream media reports
that when they first approved using the vaccines on the public that it was for emergency use only. It was clearly spelled out in the news reports that this meant that, based on what was known at the time, that there would be more deaths and damage if the vaccines were withheld than if they were used. And there were a number of documented cases where the vaccine caused severe problems for a few individuals.
In other words they said quite clearly in the news reports that the vaccines had yet to be tested properly to the normal standards to be approved for use.
It has since been shown
Through rigorous and continued testing that the vaccines are safe. Thus they are now approved by the FDA as safe for use. The early approval has been replaced with the normal approval issued for all medications. The drug manufacturers continue to collect data on long term effects.
They know they can survive
Quoting anti-vax groups
If one were to look at the warnings and cautions for so many late night pharmaceutical ads it would make your hair stand on end.
A perfect medication does not exist, all have potential side effects for somebody. Period.
As Willow says, compare it to what the death toll and pain would've been like those issues are not show stoppers.
Those folks would love to ban any and all vaccines, probably even the rabies vaccine.
I do not like click bait articles like those who do not balance the reasons for taking the risk vs the benefits.
Why don't you find something that compares and contrasts the risks of vaccines vs case studies for the risks and benefits Ivermectin? No. Apparently Ivermectin is the darling of that part of the political spectrum.
Ivermectin was really designed for sheep in the first place so why take .... Oh, never mind.
Ivermectin was really designed for sheep in the first place so w
I've heard the same of aspirin.
Hugs
Patricia
Happiness is being all dressed up and HAVING some place to go.
Semper in femineo gerunt
Aspirin is just synthesized,
Aspirin is just synthesized, concentrated willow bark extract. It was a miracle drug at the time - they didn't know about the massive downsides (concentration, rather than excretion, at larger doses) for decades, and they didn't know _why_ it happened/worked until the 1970's - over 70 years after it was first sold.
Aspirin is also why the 1918 flu epidemic is hard to use as a comparative case for deaths; it had just exited patent, so almost everyone had a nostrum or treatment using it - often with no idea of the amount contained. I read a study by an epidemiologist that went back over doctors' notes, especially military doctors, and found that the levels of aspirin that they were using to try to reduce the fevers were often in the now known to be toxic levels. So you can't really separate out those that died from influenza directly, and those who died from aspirin overdose.
I'll get a life when it's proven and substantiated to be better than what I'm currently experiencing.
asprin back then...
now it is Paracetamol that is used to bring down a fever. Paracetamol has a lot of side effects, especially on the Liver and Kidneys.
I was given it intravenously in 2009 when the chemo I was on nixed what little was left of my immune system and I infected myself. I had a very high temperature and it was used to bring it down. The side effect that hit me was that 2 days later, I began to itch all over my body. That lasted three days. I'm still monitored for Liver and Kidney failure almost 13 years later.
Life is a risk. We just have to manage it and not live our lives wrapped in cotton wool.
Samantha
Aspirin is still commonly
Aspirin is still commonly used - it's just, like acetaminophen/paracetamol, you absolutely have to use the right dosages. I use it reasonably regularly, but I'm careful with the dosages. I've found that for actual headaches, aspirin works better for me than the others. For muscle aches, then it's acetaminophen or ibuprofen. Yesterday, I took magnesium salicylate. (Doans)
I'll get a life when it's proven and substantiated to be better than what I'm currently experiencing.
Aspirin
Like the other posters said, Aspirin when properly dosed at least does what it is supposed to do.
Due to ideological stubborness the Ivermectin herd continues to use it despite no true studies verifying its efficacy for the pandemic.
So you are effectively taking chances on all of the side effects that Ivermectin has (and obviously it has a lot of it) compared to taking a chance on the statistically small ones on a drug that actually does what is designed for.
VAERS is unverified reporting from the public
And asking for it to be excluded makes sense when some of the reported side-effects include being hit by a car and turning into Goofy.
VARERS is gold dust
to at least one Senator as in Senator Rand Paul. He uses VAERS data in his war on the FDA and CDC. He's only interested in the raw numbers. The fact that anyone can post anything they like on the system is irrelevant to him. using the Raw unfiltered data is dangerous. Anyone with a background in Statistics knows not to trust unvalidated/unfiltered data when looking at detailed trends. Unvalidated data can be used to report general totals over time including the number of people reporting that they turned into Goofy.
Samantha
One of the first things…..
My probability and statistics professor taught us, is that you can prove anything with statistics. You can use the same data to prove both sides of an argument simply by manipulating the data differently.
Anyone who has worked with statistics knows that even the word “average” is misleading. There are three basic types of average - mean, mode, and median. They can all three be different for any group of data, so by switching between them you can easily alter the perception of your audience - and that is just the first and most simple means of manipulating the data.
Providing a list of side effects from a given data set without showing the probabilities is another means of manipulating not just the data, but also the population reading the data. If one person out of 1,000,000 shows a possible side effect, and we don’t look at the probabilities, then all that is happening is that someone is manipulating the uneducated through fear tactics.
Reports like this will cause the same idiot who thinks nothing of having a few beers and then driving home from the bar to freak out because, “Oh my God - the vaccine will make me impotent!” The same idiot who has a much better chance of killing someone by driving drunk freaks out because one in a million men showed a lower sperm count after getting vaccinated.
D. Eden
Dum Vivimus, Vivamus
My usual response to 'average' claims is ...
... that over 99% of the population has more than the average number of legs. My father, for instance, had 1.75 legs for most of his life.
I just wonder if the anti-vaxxers wish Jenner had never noticed that milk maids rarely suffered from small pox because they were naturally immunised through contracting cow pox - a much milder complaint. Of course, that would mean that small pox would be still endemic rather than effectively eliminated. What's their attitude to antibiotics? Presumably they'd be happy to experience a major surgical procedure unprotected from possible infection.
They seem a very odd lot, to me. The best I can make of the world right now is that I can take a little comfort that, at 82, I won't be here much longer so, hopefully, won't experience the worst outcomes. Though with Putin having thrown his dummy out of his pram with such devastating effect, who can tell?
R
It's Obvious
Obviously, we all know that ingesting things that we aren't sure are good for us is bad practice. Mom's tell us that ad nauseum. Having been a parent I know that parents don't like cleaning up nauseum caused by stomach disorder.
Obviously, we can't trust the government. How do I know that? I lived through the sixties. As Abbie Hoffman noted Dope was cheap, Sex was entered into freely, and 60's Rock and Roll was amazing. The government worked to end all of that. Many of those elected killjoys were acknowledged Dicks (Nixon, Daley, Chaney, etc. Please note that party affiliation is not important for Dickiness.)
Cynical politicians (Dicks and some Rands - remind me to burn my Ron Paul t-shirt) -- and those who make money off clicks and viewers understand the Obvious and use it to their own personal advantage.
That too, is Obvious.
Jill
Angela Rasch (Jill M I)
About ten months ago…..
I was diagnosed with stage 3C melanoma, and after surgery to remove two lymph nodes and a section of tissue from the upper right side of my back, I was placed on immunotherapy. I have five more treatments to go.
The point of this comment is that before beginning the therapy I was provided with a list of possible side effects that literally covered a page and a half of 8.5x11 paper. I remember reading the list in the doctor’s office and noting that one of the possible side effects was death. I laughed and told my spouse and the doctor that I would prefer to avoid that one if possible.
Bottom line, anything you do has potential repercussions, all medications have potential side effects, and we all have to make choices. I chose to take the treatments, and have now had three PET scans that are completely clear. The only side effects I have had from the medication are that I am extremely tired for about 48 hours after a treatment (which occurs every 21 days), and my eyes water more than normal - which apparently is an effect of increased thyroid activity.
What an obviously reactionary, anti-vaccine group has done here is to take a list of the known possible side effects and blow it out of proportion. ALL MEDICATIONS HAVE POTENTIAL SIDE EFFECTS. We have known for years that taking the tetanus vaccine has a potential side effect of arthritis - but isn’t that better than dying from tetanus? People have adverse reactions to antibiotics, but should we stop using them altogether? Or do we simply use care in administering them, advise the patients of the possibilities, and save lives?
Everything is measured in probabilities, but the true story is that you are more likely to die driving your car than you are to have one of the side effects to the vaccine. How many of us are giving up driving because of the probability of getting killed in a car accident?
As for me, I’ll live with the side effects of my immunotherapy rather than die of cancer.
D. Eden
Dum Vivimus, Vivamus
All medications have side effects
We take them for some of the side effects, which include treating the disease. When they are prescribed there are known risks and adverse side effects but that risk is taken into account and the prescriber does what they think is in the best interests of the patient.
The anti-vaxxers are deliberately misconstruing all sorts of data and statistics because they have an irrational opinion on the matter which is taken to the same sort of level as religious people telling you that you are offending their god and thus have to die. We have them leafletting school kids as they come out of school and causing other nuisance. I think they should be treated as terrorists as they are trying to spread fear and disrupt ordinary life, just like terrorists do
Angharad
But seriously, folks...
Anti-Vaxxer: "I'm not taking that damn vaccine; 25 people DIED from it!"
Normal Person: "Half a million died from the disease it gives protection from."
Anti-Vaxxer: "I like those odds!"
The Potato says:
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/o4jTclx61Tc
Knowing what things actually mean is important
In America, every day about 12 400 people die. Just the inevitable result of having a population of 325 millions and a life expectancy of 77 years.
Assuming everyone is vaccinated, that means about 12 400 people will die in the day they are vaccinated. Another about 12 400 will die on the next day. Sum that and multiply by 3 (2 standard doses and a booster dose). You get almost 75 000 people who will die on the day they are vaccinated, or on the next day.
Now, imagine a headline screaming: "75 000 PEOPLE DIED AFTER BEING VACCINATED! DO YOU BELIEVE THAT THIS IS JUST A COINCIDENCE?".
How many people will not fall for this? Likely a minority.
Or, look at dhmo.org (https://www.dhmo.org/facts.html). Don't the facts there scare you?
That is why it is important to know what numbers - and facts - actually mean.
Your hypothesis is flawed
For 12, 400 to die the day they are vaccinated would need 325 million to be vaccinated on the same day to be able to claim that correlation which would be coincidence at best. I understand the point you're trying to make and politicians play with statistics every day to tell lies that seem to be based on fact. Sometimes they are called out.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2022/mar/05/downing-st-...
Angharad