exchemist
Veteran Member
Did you get long term fatigue after catching covid, then? How long for and has it gone away now?
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Most recent cases and deaths of Covid-19 are unvaccinated.
- Thread starter shunyadragon
- Start date
Shadow Wolf
Certified People sTabber
I had extremely terrible fatigue the first few weeks (sleeping over 12 hours a day and tired enough after a few hours to go back to bed, no energy for much of anything) and then the next few weeks was like a bad fibro flair up.
exchemist
Veteran Member
Hmm, not nice - and quite a common experience, apparently. Was this after vaccination or before? (I had a bit of that for a few weeks, mildly thank goodness, but that was probably because I got it before the vaccines were available.)
Ebionite
Well-Known Member
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
Okay, so what?
Wandering Monk
Well-Known Member
Have you ever looked at the disclaimer on the VAERS site? My god, I have been posting it for a couple of years now, but antivaxers are still stuck in the meme.
VAERS accepts reports of adverse events that occur following vaccination. Anyone, including Healthcare providers, vaccine manufacturers, and the public can submit reports to the system. While very important in monitoring vaccine safety, VAERS reports alone cannot be used to determine if a vaccine caused or contributed to an adverse event or illness. Vaccine providers are encouraged to report any clinically significant health problem following vaccination to VAERS even if they are not sure if the vaccine was the cause. In some situations, reporting to VAERS is required of healthcare providers and vaccine manufacturers.
VAERS reports may contain information that is incomplete, inaccurate, coincidental, or unverifiable. Reports to VAERS can also be biased. As a result, there are limitations on how the data can be used scientifically. Data from VAERS reports should always be interpreted with these limitations in mind.
Ebionite
Well-Known Member
So what? Kennedy wasn't using the VAERS data in isolation.
Wandering Monk
Well-Known Member
So, you concede that VAERS data is not a reliable source for vaccine safety. Thank you.
Now, what is your next objection to the vaccine?
Orbit
I'm a planet
I wonder why we see this regarding patterns in Covid deaths?
More specifically, the researchers say, their adjusted analysis found that "the excess death rate among Republican voters was 43% higher than the excess death rate among Democratic voters" after vaccine eligibility was opened.
Ebionite
Well-Known Member
Unreliable sources can still be used to build a "balance of probabilities" argument.
Wandering Monk
Well-Known Member
Why not use actual studies instead of unreliable inputs from VAERS?
Ebionite
Well-Known Member
I don't know what other studies Kennedy used.
Wandering Monk
Well-Known Member
Ebionite
Well-Known Member
That was a CDC study on VAERS reporting levels which found that adverse events were being under-reported by around a factor of 100.
It wasn't a study that was independent of the VAERS data, which is what I think you were looking for.
Wandering Monk
Well-Known Member
So unreliable, uncorroborated reports to VAERS of adverse events were being under-reported? So what? Why does under-reporting make adverse event reports more likely to be true?
And yes, I was looking for other independent studies that Vigilant Fox apparently didn't provide in the tweet.
Last edited:
Ebionite
Well-Known Member
It doesn't make the reports more likely to be true, but it dramatically increases the probability of harm.
It's not independent, but you could try the Pfizer document entitled 5.3.6 Cumulative Analysis of Post-Authorization Adverse Event Reports of PF-07302048 (BNT162B2) Received Through 28-Feb-2021
Over twelve hundred people died within three months of taking the injection (through the end of February 2021).
Pfizer Documents Confirm What We Already Knew: Covid Injections Are Dangerous
Pfizer documents show COVID vaccines were developed at an accelerated pace. Concerns to FDA about the poor management of the trials.
www.westonaprice.org
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
Okay. The vaccines were given to millions. What you need to do is to compare the death rate of a population of the same size before the pandemic. If twelve hundred people in a population of the same size and age distribution died within the same time period then you have a big nothing.It doesn't make the reports more likely to be true, but it dramatically increases the probability of harm.
It's not independent, but you could try the Pfizer document entitled 5.3.6 Cumulative Analysis of Post-Authorization Adverse Event Reports of PF-07302048 (BNT162B2) Received Through 28-Feb-2021
Over twelve hundred people died within three months of taking the injection (through the end of February 2021).
Pfizer Documents Confirm What We Already Knew: Covid Injections Are Dangerous
Pfizer documents show COVID vaccines were developed at an accelerated pace. Concerns to FDA about the poor management of the trials.
Unfettered
A striving disciple of Jesus Christ
For anyone interested, here is an excerpt and link to the study cited by Mr. Kennedy:
"Adverse events from drugs and vaccines are common, but underreported. Although 25% of
ambulatory patients experience an adverse drug event, less than 0.3% of all adverse drug events
and 1-13% of serious events are reported to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA).
Likewise, fewer than 1% of vaccine adverse events are reported. Low reporting rates preclude or
slow the identification of “problem” drugs and vaccines that endanger public health. New
surveillance methods for drug and vaccine adverse effects are needed. Barriers to reporting
include a lack of clinician awareness, uncertainty about when and what to report, as well as the
burdens of reporting: reporting is not part of clinicians’ usual workflow, takes time, and is
duplicative. Proactive, spontaneous, automated adverse event reporting imbedded within EHRs
and other information systems has the potential to speed the identification of problems with new
drugs and more careful quantification of the risks of older drugs.
Unfortunately, there was never an opportunity to perform system performance assessments
because the necessary CDC contacts were no longer available and the CDC consultants
responsible for receiving data were no longer responsive to our multiple requests to proceed with
testing and evaluation."
I always remember my statistics class where the teacher said, "You can make numbers say anything want it to say"
As I look at just this point, 99.75% were vaccinated. Just not as much as they wanted them vaccinated which means that most people hospitalized found that the vaccine wasn't very effective.
Then we find that the people who tested positive (like those hospitalized) were actually less in percentage that those who were hospitalized and, it would appear, they weren't placed into the hospital.
It also doesn't say how many of them actually contracted... was it just 10 out of 1,000? Apparently you can get "positive" with or without a vaccine.
So... looking at this group of statistics, it seems like it is better not to get vaccinated.
Mr. Kennedy is a conspiracy theory idiot and an unreliable source. His statements are distorted misinformation.