SuzukiSavage.com - Print Page

SuzukiSavage.com
/cgi-bin/YaBB.pl
General Category >> Politics, Religion (Tall Table) >> Have a look
/cgi-bin/YaBB.pl?num=1636305422

Message started by justin_o_guy2 on 11/07/21 at 09:17:02

Title: Have a look
Post by justin_o_guy2 on 11/07/21 at 09:17:02

https://noqreport.com/2021/10/21/are-the-covid-jabs-responsible-for-rising-mortality-trends/

Decided for yourself.

Title: Re: Have a look
Post by Eegore on 11/07/21 at 09:51:21

Tell you what, I will read your article, like I always do.

Then you read my information and we can have an informed discussion and compare. I see no reason not to look into a global increase in cardiac events if we can get information that shows it is true. I have been following cardiac event status in the US, but the information is still too diluted to be usable.

So what about this?

https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.abm0620

Or would you rather not read anything I provide but somehow challenge it's validity as usual?

Here let me pull out something:

similar results when examining the time period corresponding to the dominance of the Delta variant (fig. S1). Specifically, among those with a positive PCR test on or after July 1, 2021, vaccination was protective against death, although with some differences by age and vaccine type.
For age <65 years, vaccine effectiveness against death (VE-D) was 81.7% (95% CI: 75.7% to 86.2%) for any vaccine; 73.0% (95% CI: 52.0% to 84.8%) for Janssen; 81.5% (95% CI: 70.7% to 88.4%) for Moderna; and 84.3% (95% CI: 76.3% to 89.7%) for Pfizer-BioNTech. For age [ch8805]65 years, VE-D was 71.6% (95% CI: 68.6% to 74.2%) for any vaccine; 52.2% (95% CI: 37.2% to 63.6%) for Janssen; 75.5% (95% CI: 71.8% to 78.7%) for Moderna; and 70.1% (95% CI: 66.1% to 73.6%) for Pfizer-BioNTech.

That's from the direct medical records of 780,225 Veteran medical records that can, and have been verified, because these documents actually exist.

So will go with speculative information or actual information first?

One issue is that the increase in ED activity is not skewed towards higher numbers of vaccinated. How are unvaccinated ending up in hospitals at the current percentage if it's the "Jab" causing the issue? If the jab is the catalyst why aren't more jabbed people per capita in the hospitals? I would expect to see that if the jab is the cause right?

Title: Re: Have a look
Post by justin_o_guy2 on 11/07/21 at 11:58:52

I'm Goin to look dumb,but what is ED?

the jab is the catalyst why aren't more jabbed people per capita in the hospitals? I would expect to see that if the jab is the cause right?

A lot of what I'm seeing says that is exactly what is happening.

Title: Re: Have a look
Post by Serowbot on 11/07/21 at 12:46:51

Erectile dysfunction?..

Too many acronyms happening today. ::)

Title: Re: Have a look
Post by justin_o_guy2 on 11/07/21 at 13:39:08

That's The Only thing I could think of, but it seemed incongruent with the conversation.
I'm OLD.I see BLM or CRT and I have to translate from
Bureau of Land Management and
Cathode Ray Tube..
I can't keep up!

Title: Re: Have a look
Post by Serowbot on 11/07/21 at 14:13:48

687771766B6C5D6D5D65777B30020 wrote:

I'm OLD.I see BLM or CRT and I have to translate from
Bureau of Land Management and
Cathode Ray Tube..
I can't keep up!

YES!..

Title: Re: Have a look
Post by Eegore on 11/07/21 at 18:14:34

ED is ER, Emergency Department. Not really a "room" anymore.

I'm sure there are upticks in reactions from the vaccine. When millions and millions of people take it in the US alone (7.26 Billion worldwide) then there should be an expected increase in adverse reactions. I'd expect more football related injuries in the ED during football season for a reason.

Whole numbers are simple but scary and that's why people use them to get a point across. For instance 50 people this month came to the hospital with suspected vaccine reactions, that's a big deal, a few a day is bad. Then when you see 100,450 people got the shot this month that means 0.05% had a reaction that needed care.

5 were hospitalized, 4 with cardiac symptoms. That's .004% of the overall monthly total. Is it important to acknowledge that the primary medical treatment for a vaccine is heart issues? Absolutely. That cardiac trend is very important to acknowledge but 4 out of over 100,000 is not a massive number.

Should we ignore the overall percentages? No. Because all of the information is more important than my opinion.

Bottom line, right now, more unvaccinated people are medically treated in the US for life-threatening issues than vaccinated. That can change, I totally agree we should keep an eye on it. But these articles that only give me adverse treatment numbers are leaving out the overall percentages for a reason.