Side note, is your property smoke free?
Covid Vaccine
- Thread starter jitter77
- Start date
Nope. Funeral pyres are encouraged here.
Yuk, yuk. I was referring to the state burning down because the tree huggers think forest management is heinous. Lots of smoke here.
Yeah, we had a little burn recently in the savannah - not a planned burn because of the winds - but not much otherwise. Those in charge did a TON of controlled burns last year so we are in pretty good shape here.
If they knock they all ready are on the MR scale.Someone knocks on my door to confront me, they'll leave retarded and bloody.
More tremendous news on the vax front. EVERYBODY needs to get the vax, even young people who are basically not at risk from COVID, even young people who have HAD COVID and have natural immunity.
Brilliant.
www.cnbc.com
Brilliant.
CDC safety group says there's a likely link between rare heart inflammation in young people after Covid shot
"This is still a rare event," Dr. Tom Shimabukuro said at the meeting. For both vaccines combined, there were 12.6 heart inflammation cases per million doses.
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2014
- Messages
- 13,571
- Reaction score
- 6,246
- Points
- 113
Filed under least surprising news ever. I guess the dumbasses who still refuse to vaccinate will try to explain it away. Good luck to them!
- Joined
- Sep 12, 2014
- Messages
- 15,452
- Reaction score
- 6,137
- Points
- 113
Some healthcare workers are trying to sue their employers because they’re mandating Covid vaccination. Talk about a sense of entitlement.
Funny how "My Body My Choice" is now an irrelevant rally cry for the Left.
And I'll bet they will win.
In their defense, they're trying to prevent innocent people from dying.
Oh wait, killing unborn babies is apparently okay.
- Joined
- Sep 12, 2014
- Messages
- 15,452
- Reaction score
- 6,137
- Points
- 113
Socialist. A JOB is a PRIVILEGE, not a right. Don’t like what your employer demands? Find another job.
Murderer. Life is a right, but "My Body My Choice" is used to justify the murder 3/4 of a million a year.
This also doesn't bode well for the vaccines. From the WSJ:
One remarkable aspect of the Covid-19 pandemic has been how often unpopular scientific ideas, from the lab-leak theory to the efficacy of masks, were initially dismissed, even ridiculed, only to resurface later in mainstream thinking. Differences of opinion have sometimes been rooted in disagreement over the underlying science. But the more common motivation has been political.
Another reversal in thinking may be imminent. Some scientists have raised concerns that the safety risks of Covid-19 vaccines have been underestimated. But the politics of vaccination has relegated their concerns to the outskirts of scientific thinking—for now.
Historically, the safety of medications—including vaccines—is often not fully understood until they are deployed in large populations. Examples include rofecoxib (Vioxx), a pain reliever that increased the risk of heart attack and stroke; antidepressants that appeared to increase suicide attempts among young adults; and an influenza vaccine used in the 2009-10 swine flu epidemic that was suspected of causing febrile convulsions and narcolepsy in children. Evidence from the real world is valuable, as clinical trials often enroll patients who aren’t representative of the general population. We learn more about drug safety from real-world evidence and can adjust clinical recommendations to balance risk and benefits.
The Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System, or Vaers, which is administered by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the Food and Drug Administration, is a database that allows Americans to document adverse events that happen after receiving a vaccine. The FDA and CDC state that the database isn’t designed to determine whether the events were caused by a vaccine. This is true. But the data can nonetheless be evaluated, accounting for its strengths and weaknesses, and that is what the CDC and FDA say they do.
The Vaers data for Covid-19 vaccines show an interesting pattern. Among the 310 million Covid-19 vaccines given, several adverse events are reported at high rates in the days immediately after vaccination, and then fall precipitously afterward. Some of these adverse events might have occurred anyway. The pattern may be partly attributable to the tendency to report more events that happen soon after vaccination.
The database can’t say what would have happened in the absence of vaccination. Nonetheless, the large clustering of certain adverse events immediately after vaccination is concerning, and the silence around these potential signals of harm reflects the politics surrounding Covid-19 vaccines. Stigmatizing such concerns is bad for scientific integrity and could harm patients.
Four serious adverse events follow this arc, according to data taken directly from Vaers: low platelets (thrombocytopenia); noninfectious myocarditis, or heart inflammation, especially for those under 30; deep-vein thrombosis; and death. Vaers records 321 cases of myocarditis within five days of receiving a vaccination, falling to almost zero by 10 days. Prior research has shown that only a fraction of adverse events are reported, so the true number of cases is almost certainly higher. This tendency of underreporting is consistent with our clinical experience.
Analyses to confirm or dismiss these findings should be performed using large data sets of health-insurance companies and healthcare organizations. The CDC and FDA are surely aware of these data patterns, yet neither agency has acknowledged the trend.
The implication is that the risks of a Covid-19 vaccine may outweigh the benefits for certain low-risk populations, such as children, young adults and people who have recovered from Covid-19. This is especially true in regions with low levels of community spread, since the likelihood of illness depends on exposure risk.
And while you would never know it from listening to public-health officials, not a single published study has demonstrated that patients with a prior infection benefit from Covid-19 vaccination. That this isn’t readily acknowledged by the CDC or Anthony Fauci is an indication of how deeply entangled pandemic politics is in science.
There are, however, signs of life for scientific honesty. In May, the Norwegian Medicines Agency reviewed case files for the first 100 reported deaths of nursing-home residents who received the Pfizer vaccine. The agency concluded that the vaccine “likely” contributed to the deaths of 10 of these residents through side effects such as fever and diarrhea, and “possibly” contributed to the deaths of an additional 26. But this type of honesty is rare. And it is rare for any vaccine to be linked to deaths, so this unusual development for mRNA vaccines merits further investigation.
The battle to recover scientific honesty will be an uphill one in the U.S. Anti-Trump politics in the spring of 2020 mushroomed into social-media censorship. News reporting often lacked intellectual curiosity about the appropriateness of public-health guidelines—or why a vocal minority of scientists strongly disagreed with prevailing opinions. Scientists have advocated for or against Covid-19 therapies while having financial relationships with product manufacturers and their foundation benefactors.
Public-health authorities are making a mistake and risking the public’s trust by not being forthcoming about the possibility of harm from certain vaccine side effects. There will be lasting consequences from mingling political partisanship and science during the management of a public-health crisis.
Dr. Ladapo is an associate professor of medicine at UCLA’s David Geffen School of Medicine. Dr. Risch is a professor of epidemiology at Yale School of Public Health.
Are Covid Vaccines Riskier Than Advertised?
There are concerning trends on blood clots and low platelets, not that the authorities will tell you.
One remarkable aspect of the Covid-19 pandemic has been how often unpopular scientific ideas, from the lab-leak theory to the efficacy of masks, were initially dismissed, even ridiculed, only to resurface later in mainstream thinking. Differences of opinion have sometimes been rooted in disagreement over the underlying science. But the more common motivation has been political.
Another reversal in thinking may be imminent. Some scientists have raised concerns that the safety risks of Covid-19 vaccines have been underestimated. But the politics of vaccination has relegated their concerns to the outskirts of scientific thinking—for now.
Historically, the safety of medications—including vaccines—is often not fully understood until they are deployed in large populations. Examples include rofecoxib (Vioxx), a pain reliever that increased the risk of heart attack and stroke; antidepressants that appeared to increase suicide attempts among young adults; and an influenza vaccine used in the 2009-10 swine flu epidemic that was suspected of causing febrile convulsions and narcolepsy in children. Evidence from the real world is valuable, as clinical trials often enroll patients who aren’t representative of the general population. We learn more about drug safety from real-world evidence and can adjust clinical recommendations to balance risk and benefits.
The Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System, or Vaers, which is administered by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the Food and Drug Administration, is a database that allows Americans to document adverse events that happen after receiving a vaccine. The FDA and CDC state that the database isn’t designed to determine whether the events were caused by a vaccine. This is true. But the data can nonetheless be evaluated, accounting for its strengths and weaknesses, and that is what the CDC and FDA say they do.
The Vaers data for Covid-19 vaccines show an interesting pattern. Among the 310 million Covid-19 vaccines given, several adverse events are reported at high rates in the days immediately after vaccination, and then fall precipitously afterward. Some of these adverse events might have occurred anyway. The pattern may be partly attributable to the tendency to report more events that happen soon after vaccination.
The database can’t say what would have happened in the absence of vaccination. Nonetheless, the large clustering of certain adverse events immediately after vaccination is concerning, and the silence around these potential signals of harm reflects the politics surrounding Covid-19 vaccines. Stigmatizing such concerns is bad for scientific integrity and could harm patients.
Four serious adverse events follow this arc, according to data taken directly from Vaers: low platelets (thrombocytopenia); noninfectious myocarditis, or heart inflammation, especially for those under 30; deep-vein thrombosis; and death. Vaers records 321 cases of myocarditis within five days of receiving a vaccination, falling to almost zero by 10 days. Prior research has shown that only a fraction of adverse events are reported, so the true number of cases is almost certainly higher. This tendency of underreporting is consistent with our clinical experience.
Analyses to confirm or dismiss these findings should be performed using large data sets of health-insurance companies and healthcare organizations. The CDC and FDA are surely aware of these data patterns, yet neither agency has acknowledged the trend.
The implication is that the risks of a Covid-19 vaccine may outweigh the benefits for certain low-risk populations, such as children, young adults and people who have recovered from Covid-19. This is especially true in regions with low levels of community spread, since the likelihood of illness depends on exposure risk.
And while you would never know it from listening to public-health officials, not a single published study has demonstrated that patients with a prior infection benefit from Covid-19 vaccination. That this isn’t readily acknowledged by the CDC or Anthony Fauci is an indication of how deeply entangled pandemic politics is in science.
There are, however, signs of life for scientific honesty. In May, the Norwegian Medicines Agency reviewed case files for the first 100 reported deaths of nursing-home residents who received the Pfizer vaccine. The agency concluded that the vaccine “likely” contributed to the deaths of 10 of these residents through side effects such as fever and diarrhea, and “possibly” contributed to the deaths of an additional 26. But this type of honesty is rare. And it is rare for any vaccine to be linked to deaths, so this unusual development for mRNA vaccines merits further investigation.
The battle to recover scientific honesty will be an uphill one in the U.S. Anti-Trump politics in the spring of 2020 mushroomed into social-media censorship. News reporting often lacked intellectual curiosity about the appropriateness of public-health guidelines—or why a vocal minority of scientists strongly disagreed with prevailing opinions. Scientists have advocated for or against Covid-19 therapies while having financial relationships with product manufacturers and their foundation benefactors.
Public-health authorities are making a mistake and risking the public’s trust by not being forthcoming about the possibility of harm from certain vaccine side effects. There will be lasting consequences from mingling political partisanship and science during the management of a public-health crisis.
Dr. Ladapo is an associate professor of medicine at UCLA’s David Geffen School of Medicine. Dr. Risch is a professor of epidemiology at Yale School of Public Health.
And.....
www.lifesitenews.com
CDC finds ‘likely’ link between heart inflammation and Pfizer, Moderna COVID vaccines - LifeSite
During today’s meeting, members of a CDC advisory committee acknowledged 1,200 cases of heart inflammation in 16- to 24-year-olds, and said mRNA COVID vaccines should carry a warning statement — but physicians and other public commenters accused the CDC of exaggerating the risk to young people...
www.lifesitenews.com
Huh. So I don't know all the details about the situation (did they check these people for T cell immunity before mandating they take an experimental vaccine only approved by the FDA for EUA), but that seems a little authoritarian.
And so if your employer demanded you did something that could potentially be a risk to your health, you'd be okay with that? Or would you just willy nilly go find another job?
- Joined
- Sep 12, 2014
- Messages
- 15,452
- Reaction score
- 6,137
- Points
- 113
Life’s a right? Tell that to the people that died of Covid.
- Joined
- Sep 12, 2014
- Messages
- 15,452
- Reaction score
- 6,137
- Points
- 113
There’s many dangerous occupations that require people take calculated risks with their lives and wellbeing.Huh. So I don't know all the details about the situation (did they check these people for T cell immunity before mandating they take an experimental vaccine only approved by the FDA for EUA), but that seems a little authoritarian.
And so if your employer demanded you did something that could potentially be a risk to your health, you'd be okay with that? Or would you just willy nilly go find another job?
- Joined
- Apr 12, 2014
- Messages
- 7,086
- Reaction score
- 7,202
- Points
- 113
Flogmanbun you ignorant slut,
Intentional murder of a baby in utero is so far removed from dying from an infectious disease that its not even an apples to oranges comparison. Its more like comparing ostrich feathers to cude oil.
Putting the abortion thing aside, if I'm a healthy 22 year old and my employer tells me that in order to have a job I have to get stuck, my question would be why.
Their reason cannot be because we say so, although it's all they will have. This will result in a class action lawsuit, and Dr. Jimmy will make millions off of it.
Their reason cannot be because we say so, although it's all they will have. This will result in a class action lawsuit, and Dr. Jimmy will make millions off of it.
Clearly not to your side.
- Joined
- Apr 21, 2014
- Messages
- 12,767
- Reaction score
- 17,186
- Points
- 113
so what's the problem? if that's true then it must mean the vaccine works so if you get the poke, you're safe and if you don't then you are taking a personal risk.
Just think of it like assisted suicide if it makes you feel better. Your programming says you are in favor of assisted suicide so it should be all good.