- Joined
- Nov 20, 2018
- Messages
- 287
- Reaction score
- 197

Mass. pharmacist accused of giving COVID vaccination cards to unvaccinated
The Stop & Shop pharmacist is accused of issuing dozens of vaccine cards to people who never filled out consent forms.
VAERS Data: 340,522 reports made 4,427 (1.3%) deaths | All time COVID tracking 81.8M cases 996K (1.22%) deaths | Start - Dec 18, 2020 (first EUA) 17,567,878 cases 316,439 (1.8%) deaths |
source: VAERS | source: JHU | source: JHU |
Everyone laughs, but the data doesn't lie. Risk vs benefit, risk is too high vs benefit. People are concerned for their lives. This is excluding any lovely long-term post-surveillance findings.
VAERS Data:
340,522 reports made
4,427 (1.3%) deathsAll time COVID tracking
81.8M cases
996K (1.22%) deathsStart - Dec 18, 2020 (first EUA)
17,567,878 cases
316,439 (1.8%) deathssource: VAERS source: JHU source: JHU
"FDA requires healthcare providers to report any death after COVID-19 vaccination to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS), even if its unclear whether the vaccine was the cause"You have no idea how VAERS works, do you?
lol another wacky VAERS-citing tweedle dum
I got some essential oils for ya, too
Your first paragraph is true but doesn't tell the whole story. Anyone can submit a VAERS report. You, me, my accountant, Nancy Pelosi, the puppeteer who controls Elmo, you get the idea. If a pattern emerges then the FDA (and anyone else who wants to) can investigate to see if there is anything to the reports. But using the raw data to make conclusions is almost certainly going to result in overestimating whatever negative thing you're going after."FDA requires healthcare providers to report any death after COVID-19 vaccination to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS), even if its unclear whether the vaccine was the cause"
And COVID deaths recorded by institutions do not follow similarly loose reporting criteria? Get real.
say you don't understand statistics and research without saying you don't understand statistics and researchEveryone laughs, but the data doesn't lie. Risk vs benefit, risk is too high vs benefit. People are concerned for their lives. This is excluding any lovely long-term post-surveillance findings.
VAERS Data:
340,522 reports made
4,427 (1.3%) deathsAll time COVID tracking
81.8M cases
996K (1.22%) deathsStart - Dec 18, 2020 (first EUA)
17,567,878 cases
316,439 (1.8%) deathssource: VAERS source: JHU source: JHU
Your first paragraph is true but doesn't tell the whole story. Anyone can submit a VAERS report. You, me, my accountant, Nancy Pelosi, the puppeteer who controls Elmo, you get the idea. If a pattern emerges then the FDA (and anyone else who wants to) can investigate to see if there is anything to the reports. But using the raw data to make conclusions is almost certainly going to result in overestimating whatever negative thing you're going after.
say you don't understand statistics and research without saying you don't understand statistics and research
Are you familiar with base rate fallacy?No doubt it's an overestimation, I understand that. However, so are reported COVID-19 deaths. You make the valid point that VAERS is subject to significantly more overestimation d/t it being open to anyone - so I'll disregard that as a valid argument. Death reports in VAERS are investigated, but the data isn't updated based on causal findings; which I originally thought was the case.
However, this does not change my stance on the shift of "risk vs benefit" decline:
View attachment 354622
No doubt it's an overestimation, I understand that. However, so are reported COVID-19 deaths.