- Joined
- Sep 12, 2014
- Messages
- 14,361
- Reaction score
- 5,428
- Points
- 113
Not what you want to believe, but…
Covid Vaccine
- Thread starter jitter77
- Start date
Of course. Like Covid Deaths were drastically overstated, so too were the efficacy of the vaccines.
Researchers allege that biases and manipulation of Pfizer and Moderna COVID-19 vaccine clinical data have exaggerated vaccine efficacy and underestimated vaccine adverse events.
While most clinical trials would evaluate the effects of a drug from the day it is administered, these COVID-19 mRNA vaccines are not being evaluated from the first day the vaccines are given. A later date is chosen, which inflates the vaccine’s perceived efficacy and safety, researchers say.
It could make an ineffective vaccine—a COVID vaccine with zero efficacy—have a perceived vaccine effectiveness of up to 48 percent, said researcher Raphael Lataster on Feb. 26, citing a paper co-authored by professor Peter Doshi from the University of Maryland.
“We have found in the studies varying definitions of fully vaccinated and unvaccinated. Generally what we find is that they are ignoring COVID infections in the partially vaccinated,” Mr. Lataster said.
“In randomized trials, it is customary to define ‘time zero’ as the point in time, for each trial participant, when eligibility criteria are met, treatment is assigned, and follow‐up begins,” Mr. Doshi and another author wrote in one of the papers.
Instead, COVID cases in vaccinated individuals are only counted weeks after a person is vaccinated. In Pfizer’s clinical trials, a person is considered vaccinated and their COVID cases are counted a week after they received the second dose, whereas in Moderna’s clinical trials, a person is considered vaccinated two weeks after their second dose.
By substituting some of Pfizer’s phase 3 clinical data and defining a person as vaccinated or unvaccinated according to Pfizer’s criteria in the clinical trials, Mr. Doshi and his authors found that Pfizer clinical trial could inflate a vaccine with zero efficacy to 48 percent. Their finding was published in the Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice.
Additionally, they found that this hypothetical number could further inflate to 67 percent due to other real-life factors during vaccine rollouts.
As older people were more likely to get vaccinated early on due to being more at risk of infections, this may reduce the perceived vaccine efficacy.
However, people were getting vaccinated at the time when COVID cases were peaking and people were generating natural immunity to the virus. The subsequent decline in COVID cases coincided with increased vaccination rates, which would then inflate perceived vaccine efficacy, according to the paper.
Mr. Lataster has been invited to partake in a study reviewing whether the mRNA vaccines have saved millions of lives.
“There are many problems we found, over twelve issues with how the data is utilized and estimated. For one thing, it’s [based on] a model and the map is not the territory,” Mr. Lataster said. The study is currently unpublished.
He said that they have also been looking at verifying claims that COVID-19 vaccines reduced severe disease, hospitalizations, and deaths.
One of the problems that has been identified is that most of these studies do not define or have different definitions of what counted as a vaccinated person.
These suspected cases were split almost evenly between the treatment and placebo groups.
The Pfizer vaccines were estimated to have over 90 percent vaccine efficacy because while 850 out of around 22,000 people in the placebo group contracted COVID, only 80 out of 22,000 vaccinated participants contracted COVID. This difference in proportion of COVID cases is how the researchers calculated the vaccine efficacy.
However, if all of the suspected cases were indeed COVID-19 cases, having a similar proportion of COVID-19 cases between the treatment and placebo group “would have drastically brought down treatment efficacy estimates,” Mr. Lataster wrote in his commentary.
“In any case, you can argue that figure is well below the 50 percent required for approval,” Mr. Lataster said.
Therefore, some of the adverse events that may have occurred soon after vaccination and would therefore be more strongly linked to vaccination would not be attributed to the vaccine, leading to underestimated adverse event rates.
Also, the recording of the adverse events is mostly reliant on unsolicited reporting by vaccine participants, especially for serious adverse events, according to Pfizer’s fact sheet for health providers. If the participant dies following the COVID-19 vaccine, the trial researchers may be unable to track this since they need reporting from the participants, according to Mr. Lataster.
COVID vaccination adverse event reports to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reports System show that more than 12 percent of deaths occurred on the day or the day after vaccination.
Furthermore, the placebo group was later given the COVID-19 vaccines, effectively “unblinding” them. This meant that researchers would be unable to compare the placebo and the vaccine group for potential long-term safety signals.
Pfizer and Moderna COVID Vaccines’ Efficacy Exaggerated, Effectiveness ‘Well Below’ 50 Percent, Researchers Say
A key problem with the clinical trial is that the definition of vaccinated and unvaccinated is unclear, the paper says.Researchers allege that biases and manipulation of Pfizer and Moderna COVID-19 vaccine clinical data have exaggerated vaccine efficacy and underestimated vaccine adverse events.
While most clinical trials would evaluate the effects of a drug from the day it is administered, these COVID-19 mRNA vaccines are not being evaluated from the first day the vaccines are given. A later date is chosen, which inflates the vaccine’s perceived efficacy and safety, researchers say.
It could make an ineffective vaccine—a COVID vaccine with zero efficacy—have a perceived vaccine effectiveness of up to 48 percent, said researcher Raphael Lataster on Feb. 26, citing a paper co-authored by professor Peter Doshi from the University of Maryland.
Unclear Definitions of Vaccinated vs. Unvaccinated
Mr. Lataster, associate lecturer at the University of Sydney, spoke at Sen. Ron Johnson’s (R-Wis.) Feb. 26 roundtable discussion on COVID-19 vaccines and public health messaging. He summarized findings from a collection of four commentaries published in a peer-reviewed journal, of which two were authored by him.“We have found in the studies varying definitions of fully vaccinated and unvaccinated. Generally what we find is that they are ignoring COVID infections in the partially vaccinated,” Mr. Lataster said.
“In randomized trials, it is customary to define ‘time zero’ as the point in time, for each trial participant, when eligibility criteria are met, treatment is assigned, and follow‐up begins,” Mr. Doshi and another author wrote in one of the papers.
Instead, COVID cases in vaccinated individuals are only counted weeks after a person is vaccinated. In Pfizer’s clinical trials, a person is considered vaccinated and their COVID cases are counted a week after they received the second dose, whereas in Moderna’s clinical trials, a person is considered vaccinated two weeks after their second dose.
By substituting some of Pfizer’s phase 3 clinical data and defining a person as vaccinated or unvaccinated according to Pfizer’s criteria in the clinical trials, Mr. Doshi and his authors found that Pfizer clinical trial could inflate a vaccine with zero efficacy to 48 percent. Their finding was published in the Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice.
Additionally, they found that this hypothetical number could further inflate to 67 percent due to other real-life factors during vaccine rollouts.
As older people were more likely to get vaccinated early on due to being more at risk of infections, this may reduce the perceived vaccine efficacy.
However, people were getting vaccinated at the time when COVID cases were peaking and people were generating natural immunity to the virus. The subsequent decline in COVID cases coincided with increased vaccination rates, which would then inflate perceived vaccine efficacy, according to the paper.
Millions of Lives Saved Based on Modeling
The COVID-19 mRNA vaccines have been promoted to have saved millions of lives. However, Mr. Lataster said that those statements may not reflect what happened in real life.Mr. Lataster has been invited to partake in a study reviewing whether the mRNA vaccines have saved millions of lives.
“There are many problems we found, over twelve issues with how the data is utilized and estimated. For one thing, it’s [based on] a model and the map is not the territory,” Mr. Lataster said. The study is currently unpublished.
He said that they have also been looking at verifying claims that COVID-19 vaccines reduced severe disease, hospitalizations, and deaths.
One of the problems that has been identified is that most of these studies do not define or have different definitions of what counted as a vaccinated person.
Significant Number of Unconfirmed COVID Cases
According to an FDA briefing document, Pfizer acknowledged “3410 total cases of suspected but unconfirmed COVID‐19 in the overall study population.”These suspected cases were split almost evenly between the treatment and placebo groups.
The Pfizer vaccines were estimated to have over 90 percent vaccine efficacy because while 850 out of around 22,000 people in the placebo group contracted COVID, only 80 out of 22,000 vaccinated participants contracted COVID. This difference in proportion of COVID cases is how the researchers calculated the vaccine efficacy.
However, if all of the suspected cases were indeed COVID-19 cases, having a similar proportion of COVID-19 cases between the treatment and placebo group “would have drastically brought down treatment efficacy estimates,” Mr. Lataster wrote in his commentary.
“In any case, you can argue that figure is well below the 50 percent required for approval,” Mr. Lataster said.
Underrepresented Adverse Events
While Pfizer and Moderna phase 3 clinical trials followed adverse events from the day of vaccine administration, they defined an individual as vaccinated only if several weeks had passed following vaccination.Therefore, some of the adverse events that may have occurred soon after vaccination and would therefore be more strongly linked to vaccination would not be attributed to the vaccine, leading to underestimated adverse event rates.
Also, the recording of the adverse events is mostly reliant on unsolicited reporting by vaccine participants, especially for serious adverse events, according to Pfizer’s fact sheet for health providers. If the participant dies following the COVID-19 vaccine, the trial researchers may be unable to track this since they need reporting from the participants, according to Mr. Lataster.
COVID vaccination adverse event reports to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reports System show that more than 12 percent of deaths occurred on the day or the day after vaccination.
Furthermore, the placebo group was later given the COVID-19 vaccines, effectively “unblinding” them. This meant that researchers would be unable to compare the placebo and the vaccine group for potential long-term safety signals.
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2014
- Messages
- 8,979
- Reaction score
- 11,586
- Points
- 113
".....Millions of Lives Saved....."
Its like 2009/10 when Bomma was all about "jobs saved"!!!
like unicorns and the stains will win the SB and.......
Its like 2009/10 when Bomma was all about "jobs saved"!!!
like unicorns and the stains will win the SB and.......
- Joined
- Nov 4, 2014
- Messages
- 14,578
- Reaction score
- 16,937
- Points
- 113
Isn't that something. Just goes to show you when it comes down to it
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2014
- Messages
- 8,979
- Reaction score
- 11,586
- Points
- 113
- Joined
- Nov 4, 2014
- Messages
- 14,578
- Reaction score
- 16,937
- Points
- 113
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2014
- Messages
- 1,648
- Reaction score
- 2,585
- Points
- 113
I have.
Have you?
Or did you hear something once from Soledad O'Brian?
I'm sure you'll scoff at the source, and tell me how it's the love child of Tucker Carlson and Bill O'Reilly or something, but it's a pretty fair assessment on ALL things that COVID affected, not just death tolls......but those are cited and referenced, too.
Last edited:
Appendicitis as a possible safety signal for the COVID-19 vaccines - PubMed
This study reviewed cases of appendicitis following administration of COVID-19 vaccines reported to VigiBase, the WHO database of individual case safety reports (ICSRs). Three hundred fifty-eight cases were identified, and disproportionate reporting was noted, with 329 calculated expected cases...
pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
- Joined
- Sep 12, 2014
- Messages
- 14,361
- Reaction score
- 5,428
- Points
- 113
Flogstain, are you genuinely this dense? Yes, I know, you are. Nonetheless, let me retort.
The lockdown CAUSED gym closures and banned outdoor activities and led to weight gain, a bad thing. So no, Tim and the rest of us never should have been locked down and the lockdowns were a stupid idea, always, at all times.
Get it? Of course not. Have a 2nd grader explain it.
“itwas the lockdowns fault! Nobody is responsible for their own obesity!”Thats cute that you defend him, chubby chaser.
fatasssayswhut?
Thats cute that you defend him, chubby chaser.
stop marching dogs to early graves, Vick.
- Joined
- Sep 12, 2014
- Messages
- 14,361
- Reaction score
- 5,428
- Points
- 113
An 8.8% increase over expected cases. So instead of having a 1/1,000 chance, you have a 1/919 chance. Horrors!
Appendicitis as a possible safety signal for the COVID-19 vaccines - PubMed
This study reviewed cases of appendicitis following administration of COVID-19 vaccines reported to VigiBase, the WHO database of individual case safety reports (ICSRs). Three hundred fifty-eight cases were identified, and disproportionate reporting was noted, with 329 calculated expected cases...
you know, you lose on this no matter the increase. if it's even minimal at best. why? because you argue in other topics that even an extremely slight increase is more than enough.
so, yes, if you want to go that route, i was the 1 out of 919 that had appendicitis. how did the other 918 fare - did they have any other side effects?
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2014
- Messages
- 3,646
- Reaction score
- 6,827
- Points
- 113
I love how you post bullshit, you're proven wrong with facts, you then mock the facts as insignificant or marginal, and then you call someone a name. Rinse, repeat, that is floggy in a nutshell.
Lunatic logic, I got the initial two shots, every booster available and never contracted Covid, therefore the vaccine works. Prove me wrong.
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2014
- Messages
- 18,564
- Reaction score
- 29,873
- Points
- 113
- Location
- The nearest Steelers bar.
Good point. Quite rural. More horses than people. Open area, plenty of deer in the yard. But to be fair, I did have to drive past 5 or 6 Dollar Generals on the way to Safeway.
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2014
- Messages
- 18,564
- Reaction score
- 29,873
- Points
- 113
- Location
- The nearest Steelers bar.
Thats cute that you defend him, chubby chaser.
What the ... ?? My God, Floggy, a bit of afternoon drinking? Ho-lee sheeit, once (if) you sober up, let me replay the discussion and show how stupid your comment is:
- You claim TSF got obese, severely fat, embarrassingly porky (a.k.a., "Floggy") during the pandemic and should have supported the lockdown. (TSF points out you're wrong, which would be your wrong, right? See what I did with "you're" and "your"??
) - I pointed out that the lockdowns closed gyms and outdoor activities and CAUSED weight gain to Americans - a proven fact.
- Therefore, of course we were certainly not in favor of lockdowns and began criticizing them vociferously by late spring/early summer of 2020.
You then somehow - remarkably, astonishingly - top your moronic spewing in your idiotic post with the dumbest comment you have made in almost a week (which says a LOT for you) by calling me a "chubby chaser." Ho-lee sheeit x 2, my wife is 5'8", 121 lbs. and my longtime girlfriend in college was 5'7", 118 lbs.
My God, Flogstain, I would tell you to take a walk but fear you would be dragging a dead dog on a leash for several miles if you did so.
- Joined
- Nov 4, 2014
- Messages
- 14,578
- Reaction score
- 16,937
- Points
- 113
Did they put bowls of pretzels and peanuts out? They'd make you thirsty for another round of beer and tune up your immune system at the same time.
But Dr. Flogstain be tell you if you have a Dorruh Generuh, ain't be no groceries in a hundo miles. You be live in a food desert.
FAX!!!
A truer self-reflection has NEVER been stated before.
Are you sure yer a damned lawyer??!!? Yer assuming Bluto could actually drag a dog for MILES???
- Joined
- Nov 4, 2014
- Messages
- 14,578
- Reaction score
- 16,937
- Points
- 113
That's something you can't unsee.Are you sure yer a damned lawyer??!!? Yer assuming Bluto could actually drag a dog for MILES???
I just saw an article that said 17% of high school students in America are obese. While I think that number maybe on the low side, for arguments sake let's say that holds true.
To counter this, 20 pages or so ago, I related what I saw in my high school year book, from 1969, a school in rural SW PA, about 25 miles east of Pittsburgh.
I pointed out that of my 275 fellow seniors, only 1 appeared obese, and 5 overweight. That works out to somewhere between 0.3% to 2% being overweight, depending on which metric you choose to use. I'll assume this would be an average snapshot of America from 55 years ago.
In conclusion, to say that in the majority of cases an individual is not responsible for being overweight is disingenuous at best, or just an outright lie.
To counter this, 20 pages or so ago, I related what I saw in my high school year book, from 1969, a school in rural SW PA, about 25 miles east of Pittsburgh.
I pointed out that of my 275 fellow seniors, only 1 appeared obese, and 5 overweight. That works out to somewhere between 0.3% to 2% being overweight, depending on which metric you choose to use. I'll assume this would be an average snapshot of America from 55 years ago.
In conclusion, to say that in the majority of cases an individual is not responsible for being overweight is disingenuous at best, or just an outright lie.
- Joined
- Sep 12, 2014
- Messages
- 14,361
- Reaction score
- 5,428
- Points
- 113
So, the JAMA study showing no increase was bullshit but Stupes post showing a 8.8% increase of a 1/1,000 event is fact? How so? Seems like it’s two study with the same conclusion. Before and after Covid vaccination, an appendicitis is rare.Similar threads
