I am an anti vaxxer (2 Viewers)

[Witz]

Many times. And I've made this case repeatedly, but we somehow keep coming back to this same place in multiple threads...

A. VAERS is an open reporting system, so it is capturing both true Covid vax injuries and others that are coincidental; and

B. VAERS is also little known to the broader community, so it's only capturing a subset of the actual adverse reactions - prior to Covid, it was estimated that only 1-13% of actual vax injuries were being reported.

Go ahead and discount the reported figures by some large degree to account for A. Let's say 50%. Let's say 75% to satisfy your doubts in extremis!... That still leaves 13k vax-induced deaths/perm disabilities that were reported and valid. But that *reported* word goes both ways, which so many of you here conveniently dismiss each time I bring up point B...

Namely, that we then must extrapolate whatever the valid amount is by the underreporting of events to the system. How to do that requires a firm % of reported/actual. Again, prior to Covid the estimates were between 1-13% of actual events were being reported to VAERS. I'll take out the extreme of 1%, and provide three possible alternatives for you to digest for extrapolation... 5% reported, 10% reported and 25% reported...

- 5% reported = 20x multiplication factor ... 13k x 20 = 260k dead or permanently disabled

- 10% reported = 10x factor ... 13k x 10 = 130k dead or permanently disabled

- 25% reported (double the high-end estimate) = 4x factor ... 13k x 4 = 52k dead or permanently disabled

The math goes both ways. Deal with it.

i appreciate the lengthy response. I just don’t agree with what you are trying to say because it just isn’t logical or feasible. The VAERS site in its current format and structure is meaningless. Plain and simple. You speak of facts and numbers yet ignore the details behind those facts and numbers. 

Looking at the very first VAERS report that indicates an individual died. Here is what is listed (VAERS ID 1901707) :

The patient passed away; This spontaneous case was reported by a consumer and describes the occurrence of DEATH (The patient passed away) in a 56-year-old patient of an unknown gender who received mRNA-1273 (Moderna COVID-19 Vaccine) for COVID-19 vaccination. No Medical History information was reported. On an unknown date, the patient received dose of mRNA-1273 (Moderna COVID-19 Vaccine) (unknown route) 1 dosage form. Death occurred on 01-Nov-2021 The patient died on 01-Nov-2021. The cause of death was not reported. It is unknown if an autopsy was performed. No concomitant medication reported. No Treatment Medication reported.

This is included in the count of over 15k deaths due to the vaccine. Besides not knowing when the individual received the vaccine we don’t even know how they died (and this is the very first report that comes up!). If an individual received the vaccine and dies at a later date it’s due to the vaccine? You know what every single one of those 15k have in common - they all drank water in the days leading up to their death but that doesn’t mean water caused their death just like if they got a vaccine it doesn’t mean it as well. 

In addition the reason folks are saying VAERS is meaningless (except for folks trying to cling to a narrative) is because it’s not validated or substantiated. You can write whatever you want. If you look at the ‘symptoms/ailments’ listed from folks who got the vaccine you see a wide variety of crazy things such as it gave folks lice, cured their alcoholism, etc. 

To be clear I’m not saying that no one has experienced significant effects from the vaccine (including death) - I’m just saying it is not anywhere close to the level you are attributing it to. 

 

[LawFitz]

You have continuously misused the VAERS data in the exact way that the organization providing the data warns against.   Every time someone points that out to you, you then mislead by claiming they are dismissing the VAERS data completely when they are in fact dismissing the way you are using the data. Then you fall back on some kind of 'compromise' numbers which is still a misuse of the data. 

You mislead by your post, then you mislead by misrepresenting the reaction to your post, then you mislead by using fabricated guesses about numbers that were never meant to be used that way.

I discounted the VAERS figures by 75% in my illustration to account for 'Correlation <> Causation.' That's clearly not good enough for you. What in your opinion is a fair number to discount them by?

 

[LawFitz]

The VAERS site in its current format and structure is meaningless. Plain and simple.

Not plain. Not simple. There is plenty of valid inference to gather and then explore to determine more accurate info. To say that the VAERS data is meaningless is convenient and misleading, and steers people away from asking more questions and demanding important answers pertaining to the raw figures that are emerging in that data set.

And yes it is a FACT that 52k cases of death/permanent disability have been reported to that site, whether you like it or not.

 

[Witz]

Not plain. Not simple. There is plenty of valid inference to gather and then explore to determine more accurate info. To say that the VAERS data is meaningless is convenient and misleading, and steers people away from asking more questions and demanding important answers pertaining to the raw figures that are emerging in that data set.

And yes it is a FACT that 52k cases of death/permanent disability have been reported to that site, whether you like it or not.

Unfortunately there is nothing more to say to you in that case as you cling to your narrative. Have fun storming the castle. 

 

[LawFitz]

Unfortunately there is nothing more to say to you in that case as you cling to your narrative. Have fun storming the castle. 

Same exact can be said for your narrative. Have fun hiding in the castle.

 

[jhib]

I discounted the VAERS figures by 75% in my illustration to account for 'Correlation <> Causation.' That's clearly not good enough for you. What in your opinion is a fair number to discount them by?

I reject the premise that you can account for correlation<>causation by simply guessing at a percentage, and I argue that it's completely inappropriate to analyze the raw data that way.

 

[LawFitz]

I reject the premise that you can account for correlation<>causation by simply guessing at a percentage, and I argue that it's completely inappropriate to analyze the raw data that way.

So how then should we account for this data? Vax Mob says dismiss it entirely. Your words above seem to lead to the same direction.

To avoid potential for #SeaLioning inference, I'll tell you now that I absolutely won't dismiss VAERS. I'll continue to assess and reference the data in a reasoned fashion. If you don't like it, feel free to place me on ignore, but whenever you or anyone attacks the database again is such a convenient and flippant manner, I will repost my A/B analysis again for everyone else to assess for themselves. Count on it.

 

[AAABatteries]

I know 1,000 deaths a day sounds bad, but in context it isnt the game changer some people think. Its 0.00029% of the U.S. population. 

Offset by 10,000 births a day.

The average age of a covid death is 78 years old. The average life expectancy in the US is 78 years old.

The U.S. and global populations have gone up since the pandemic started. 

We net gain a new person in the US every 44 seconds. 

This is an unbelievably horrible take, even for you.

 

[AAABatteries]

I care about the elderly of course. I think we should strive to live in a society that values everyone.

What concerns me is the effort to protect the elderly and compromised communities has come at a cost to the younger generation.

Education took a big hit. Societal aspects are still recovering from the pandemic. Suicide rates are up for young adults, as is domestic violence and substance abuse.

We just dont know the true cost of our actions yet. These stats were just keep things in context.

And yet you push vaccine hesitant stuff - horrible.

 

[tymarsas]

So how then should we account for this data? Vax Mob says dismiss it entirely. Your words above seem to lead to the same direction.

To avoid potential for #SeaLioning inference, I'll tell you now that I absolutely won't dismiss VAERS. I'll continue to assess and reference the data in a reasoned fashion. If you don't like it, feel free to place me on ignore, but whenever you or anyone attacks the database again is such a convenient and flippant manner, I will repost my A/B analysis again for everyone else to assess for themselves. Count on it.

My understanding is that the purpose of the VAERS database is to act as the canary in the coalmine. If the number of reports is out of line with other vaccine rollouts then the cases need to be investigated. There are probably a few reasons you are seeing a lot of reports. One is that this vaccine rollout has happened quickly. Since so many people have been vaccinated in a short period of time, then you are obviously going to get more reports. The second reason is the controversy that surrounds this vaccine. There are more people that are very aware of any negative effects and reporting them.

I'm not saying we should ignore the data or that it is useless. But without context or verifying the cases, then it is very misleading to use it as an argument.

 

[Max Power]

And yet you push vaccine hesitant stuff - horrible.

GTFO, I push recognizing natural immunity. I've never told people not to take the vaccine. They just aren't the miracle cure some people pretend they are.

 

[LawFitz]

My understanding is that the purpose of the VAERS database is to act as the canary in the coalmine. If the number of reports is out of line with other vaccine rollouts then the cases need to be investigated. There are probably a few reasons you are seeing a lot of reports. One is that this vaccine rollout has happened quickly. Since so many people have been vaccinated in a short period of time, then you are obviously going to get more reports. The second reason is the controversy that surrounds this vaccine. There are more people that are very aware of any negative effects and reporting them.

I'm not saying we should ignore the data or that it is useless. But without context or verifying the cases, then it is very misleading to use it as an argument.

The canaries are chirping. Sadly however, the Vax Mob is claiming they are fake canaries and their chirps don't count.

 

[Dickies]

GTFO, I push recognizing natural immunity. I've never told people not to take the vaccine. They just aren't the miracle cure some people pretend they are.

Nobody in here is claiming it's a miracle cure, but it's the best protection we've got.

 

[AAABatteries]

GTFO, I push recognizing natural immunity. I've never told people not to take the vaccine. They just aren't the miracle cure some people pretend they are.

No, you GTFO - you consistently post #### to downplay the vaccine results and efficacy and then say “wait, I never said don’t take it”.  Mostly in the name of bashing Fauci and Biden.  Your posts are naive at best and disingenuous are worst.

 

[tymarsas]

The canaries are chirping. Sadly however, the Vax Mob is claiming they are fake canaries and their chirps don't count.

I think it is highly political on both sides. For instance, you seem to be highly invested in making the vaccines seem dangerous. I do agree that we shouldn't dismiss this data so easily. This vaccine is probably the most highly researched one ever, I would guess someone is looking into this data.

 

[Max Power]

No, you GTFO - you consistently post #### to downplay the vaccine results and efficacy and then say “wait, I never said don’t take it”.  Mostly in the name of bashing Fauci and Biden.  Your posts are naive at best and disingenuous are worst.

I post the news stories. Sorry they dont live up to up to the hype. Dont be so angry about it. Fauci and Biden are both doing a horrible job. 

 

[LawFitz]

I think it is highly political on both sides. For instance, you seem to be highly invested in making the vaccines seem dangerous. I do agree that we shouldn't dismiss this data so easily. This vaccine is probably the most highly researched one ever, I would guess someone is looking into this data.

I am highly invested in exploring all sides of these vaxxes. The pro-side has been very clearly defined. The counter-arguments, OTOH, are only spoken by few - and I happen to be the one to raise those concerns the most around here. I am still not making any conclusions about the vaxxes, but I am going to sound alarms when I hear/see them b/c so far at least, the vaxxes are painting far from the rosy picture the Vax Mob likes to portray them with.

Given proper time and space to better assess their long-run impact, I have stated before, and will say it again now, that I am open to changing my hesitancy towards them. But the trend in emergent data hasn't given me any new confidence over the last few months. Unfortunately, it's been the contrary - for now...

Now Covid vax mandates, OTOH, I am 1000% against. #### Covid vax mandates of any kind!!

 

[AAABatteries]

I post the news stories. Sorry they dont live up to up to the hype. Dont be so angry about it. Fauci and Biden are both doing a horrible job. 

Not angry - I think you selectively posts things and look at COVID through a political angle.  I think Fauci and Biden have made mistakes with COVID (maybe lots) and should be doing better.  But Covid shouldn’t be political.

 

[Witz]

The canaries are chirping. Sadly however, the Vax Mob is claiming they are fake canaries and their chirps don't count.

Take the vaccine at your own risk lest you contract bed lice!! Chirp chirp!

 

[Navin Johnson]

Congrats? 

 

[LawFitz]

Take the vaccine at your own risk lest you contract bed lice!! Chirp chirp!

Good one.

Yes, all 52,000 reports of death/disability are bunk! Carry on, Witz, you're on a roll!!

 

[Max Power]

Not angry - I think you selectively posts things and look at COVID through a political angle.  I think Fauci and Biden have made mistakes with COVID (maybe lots) and should be doing better.  But Covid shouldn’t be political.

When the president tries to ram mandates down the working class with no regards to the nuance of the situation, it is political. 

Big Pharma out here telling everyone how many shots they need (7 btw) and our politicans are jumping to foot the bill. I dont like it. 

I think the censorship of alternate views on covid are dangerous and the media is along for the ride at this point.

 

[Witz]

Good one.

Yes, all 52,000 reports of death/disability are bunk! Carry on, Witz, you're on a roll!!

You keep shouting that number as if it’s real. Pro tip - it’s not.

 

[LawFitz]

You keep shouting that number as if it’s real. Pro tip - it’s not.

Actually you are correct. The number is 51,000.

FACT: 51,000 reported deaths/permanent disabilities on VAERS from Covid vaccinations a/o Nov, 26, 2021.

https://openvaers.com/covid-data

Pro tip - facts are facts, whether Wintz likes them or not.

 

[Dickies]

Actually you are correct. The number is 51,000.

FACT: 51,000 reported deaths/permanent disabilities on VAERS from Covid vaccinations a/o Nov, 26, 2021.

https://openvaers.com/covid-data

Pro tip - facts are facts, whether Wintz likes them or not.

Now do Covid.

 

[LawFitz]

Now do Covid.

How about YOU do Covid Injuries vs. Vax Injuries in the young and healthy.

One good gotcha deserves another, amirite.

 

[opensourcebeer]

I think the censorship of alternate views on covid are dangerous and the media is along for the ride at this point.

Can you elaborate on this a bit?  Do you mean stuff like social media bans and vaccine fact checking or something else?  If that's a valid example, I'm genuinely curious to why you think they did that.

 

[ignatiusjreilly]

Wait... saying you can still die of covid if vaccinated is an anti-vax statement?

Too much...

You're right. Perhaps I should give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you just don't understand the concept of probabilities. Please accept my apology.

 

[opensourcebeer]

Actually you are correct. The number is 51,000.

FACT: 51,000 reported deaths/permanent disabilities on VAERS from Covid vaccinations a/o Nov, 26, 2021.

https://openvaers.com/covid-data

Pro tip - facts are facts, whether Wintz likes them or not.

"The number of reports alone cannot be interpreted or used to reach conclusions about the existence, severity, frequency, or rates of problems associated with vaccines".

- VARS CDC Disclaimer on the OpenVARS website.

 

[LawFitz]

"The number of reports alone cannot be interpreted or used to reach conclusions about the existence, severity, frequency, or rates of problems associated with vaccines".

- VARS CDC Disclaimer on the OpenVARS website.

Agreed. So let's adjust the data, shall we...

I've made this case repeatedly, but we somehow keep coming back to this same place in multiple threads...

A. VAERS is an open reporting system, so it is capturing both true Covid vax injuries and others that are coincidental; and

B. VAERS is also little known to the broader community, so it's only capturing a subset of the actual adverse reactions - prior to Covid, it was estimated that only 1-13% of actual vax injuries were being reported.

Go ahead and discount the reported figures by some large degree to account for A. Let's say 50%. Let's say 75% to satisfy your doubts in extremis!... That still leaves 13k vax-induced deaths/perm disabilities that were reported and valid. But that *reported* word goes both ways, which so many of you here conveniently dismiss each time I bring up point B...

Namely, that we then must extrapolate whatever the valid amount is by the underreporting of events to the system. How to do that requires a firm % of reported/actual. Again, prior to Covid the estimates were between 1-13% of actual events were being reported to VAERS. I'll take out the extreme of 1%, and provide three possible alternatives for you to digest for extrapolation... 5% reported, 10% reported and 25% reported...

- 5% reported = 20x multiplication factor ... 13k x 20 = 260k dead or permanently disabled

- 10% reported = 10x factor ... 13k x 10 = 130k dead or permanently disabled

- 25% reported (double the high-end estimate) = 4x factor ... 13k x 4 = 52k dead or permanently disabled

The math goes both ways. Deal with it.

 

[opensourcebeer]

Agreed. So let's adjust the data, shall we...

I'm pretty doubtful of your qualifications to "adjust the data" in a scientific and statistically valid manner.

 

[LawFitz]

Even if we were to concede 9 out of 10 reports to be bunk (which I think is far too severe of a discount), that still leaves 5k valid deaths/permanent disabilities. But we'd then still need to extrapolate for lack of awareness/reporting to VAERS, broadly. Again using the extrapolating factors above...

- 5% reported = 20x multiplication factor ... 5k x 20 = 100k dead or permanently disabled

- 10% reported = 10x factor ... 5k x 10 = 50k dead or permanently disabled

- 25% reported (double the high-end estimate) = 4x factor ... 5k x 4 = 20k dead or permanently disabled

 

[LawFitz]

I'm pretty doubtful of your qualifications to "adjust the data" in a scientific and statistical valid manner.

I'm pretty doubtful of your qualifications to be doubtful of anything.

 

[opensourcebeer]

I'm pretty doubtful of your qualifications to be doubtful of anything.

I didn't want to invoke your dreaded Sealioning response so I didn't ask in a form of a question.  My apologies on the phrasing of my previous comment if it came off as an ad hominem.

Would you be willing to provide your qualifications to make the scientific and statistical analysis you've stated on the OpenVARS data?

 

[Max Power]

Can you elaborate on this a bit?  Do you mean stuff like social media bans and vaccine fact checking or something else?  If that's a valid example, I'm genuinely curious to why you think they did that.

There have been several media bans on Twitter and videos removed on youtube.

Dr. Peter Doshi who is a senior editor of the British Medical Journal (BMJ) had videos and thoughts censored for misinformation by YouTube. His articles and posts were respectful and well researched and in a world that benefits from scientific discourse, a private company takes it on themselves to choose what is and isn't allowed to be discussed.  Nobody should be ok with this.

There are several YouTube personalities who have been given misinformation warnings for simply talking through an evolving situation.

Heck Steven Crowder (hate him if you will) had his channel suspended for quoting CDC data about the statistical risk children face with covid. 

I don't like any of this. 

 

[Max Power]

You're right. Perhaps I should give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you just don't understand the concept of probabilities. Please accept my apology.

No, I understand them. What I don't understand is why it upsets you that I said a vaccinated person can still die of covid. 

 

[ignatiusjreilly]

No, I understand them. What I don't understand is why it upsets you that I said a vaccinated person can still die of covid. 

No, you said getting more people vaccinated doesn't save lives because vaccinated people can still die. That's a non-sequitur. If I said that drunk driving laws save lives and you responded that they don't because sober people can still get in car crashes, it would be reasonable to assume you were objectively pro-drunk driving, because why else would you make such a ridiculous point?

 

[RCon]

No, you GTFO - you consistently post #### to downplay the vaccine results and efficacy and then say “wait, I never said don’t take it”.  Mostly in the name of bashing Fauci and Biden.  Your posts are naive at best and disingenuous are worst.

I think the part that bothers me the most is when Max's almost giddy reaction to reports of the Omicron variant being more vaccine evasive.  It's like he wants the vaccine to perform poorly.

 

[opensourcebeer]

There have been several media bans on Twitter and videos removed on youtube.

Dr. Peter Doshi who is a senior editor of the British Medical Journal (BMJ) had videos and thoughts censored for misinformation by YouTube. His articles and posts were respectful and well researched and in a world that benefits from scientific discourse, a private company takes it on themselves to choose what is and isn't allowed to be discussed.  Nobody should be ok with this.

There are several YouTube personalities who have been given misinformation warnings for simply talking through an evolving situation.

Heck Steven Crowder (hate him if you will) had his channel suspended for quoting CDC data about the statistical risk children face with covid. 

I don't like any of this. 

Thanks for the additional information.

What's your opinion on why Twitter and YouTube banned individuals and/or removed content? 

 

[LawFitz]

I didn't want to invoke your dreaded Sealioning response so I didn't ask in a form of a question.  My apologies on the phrasing of my previous comment if it came off as an ad hominem.

Would you be willing to provide your qualifications to make the scientific and statistical analysis you've stated on the OpenVARS data?

My methodology for adjustment is simple, elegant, reasoned, fully transparent and put out here for all to see and debate its merits.

My personal qualifications are otherwise irrelevant. Please stop fishing for ways to attack the messenger when you get stuck in mud attacking the message.

 

[tymarsas]

My methodology for adjustment is simple, elegant, reasoned, fully transparent and put out here for all to see and debate its merits.

My personal qualifications are otherwise irrelevant. Please stop fishing for ways to attack the messenger when you get stuck in mud attacking the message.

Your methodology amounts to just taking a bunch of random guesses. While the VAERS data shouldn't be completely ignored, your guess should definitely be completely ignored.

 

[Max Power]

No, you said getting more people vaccinated doesn't save lives because vaccinated people can still die. That's a non-sequitur. If I said that drunk driving laws save lives and you responded that they don't because sober people can still get in car crashes, it would be reasonable to assume you were objectively pro-drunk driving, because why else would you make such a ridiculous point?

I said the mandate wont prevent deaths

 

[Dickies]

How about YOU do Covid Injuries vs. Vax Injuries in the young and healthy.

One good gotcha deserves another, amirite.

We're up to 792,000 Covid deaths and from what I can tell around 2.5M hospitalizations.

 

[Max Power]

I think the part that bothers me the most is when Max's almost giddy reaction to reports of the Omicron variant being more vaccine evasive.  It's like he wants the vaccine to perform poorly.

How does reporting the cases come off as giddy? That isnt my intention, so I dont like hearing it's coming off that way.

 

[LawFitz]

Your methodology amounts to just taking a bunch of random guesses. While the VAERS data shouldn't be completely ignored, your guess should definitely be completely ignored.

Thankfully, it's not your call. We'll just have to let the people decide who should and shouldn't be ignored. You know, like in a free and open society where discourse and debate happens in order to find greater truths.

 

[Max Power]

Thanks for the additional information.

What's your opinion on why Twitter and YouTube banned individuals and/or removed content? 

No idea, but when respected doctors are questioning the censorship, it's not a good thing.  There seems to be a desire to control covid thinking. 

 

[Dickies]

Mother of 7 has passed away after almost 2 months of needless and intense suffering documented on her GoFundMe.

So incredibly sad.  These kids will grow up without a mother because grifters on social media filled her head with propaganda.  

 

[opensourcebeer]

My methodology for adjustment is simple, elegant, reasoned, fully transparent and put out here for all to see and debate its merits.

My personal qualifications are otherwise irrelevant. Please stop fishing for ways to attack the messenger when you get stuck in mud attacking the message.

To fullfil your request to debate it's merits, my criticism of your method is it doesn't seem based on statistics and science.

 

[tymarsas]

Thankfully, it's not your call. We'll just have to let the people decide who should and shouldn't be ignored. You know, like in a free and open society where discourse and debate happens in order to find greater truths.

Absolutely. I'm only stating my opinion. I'll let everyone else reading this thread make up their own mind about your guesses.

Making up random numbers then posting them as facts is not making me think that you are "just trying to look at all sides".

 

[LawFitz]

To fullfil your request to debate it's merits, my criticism of your method is it doesn't seem based on statistics and science.

So, please, by all means, let's see your methodology for adjusting the VAERS data into something usable. Problem is none of you even want to try. All you want to do is dismiss the data summarily as unusable. It's plenty usable if you apply varying ranges to the two major factors at question, namely,

A. What % of the 51,000 reported deaths/permanent disabilities were actually caused by the vaxxes?

B. What % of total actual vax injuries were reported to VAERS?

There is no way to perfectly calibrate these figures, but we can use reason and logic to come to some decently reliable estimates - which I did - as basis for further investigation should those numbers warrant. They do. Even when I exclude 9 out of 10 reports as invalid and not resultant from vax, the numbers still do.