Will you take an approved COVID-19 vaccine?

Quazzie

rusty cole wrote: »

If that's the case then the first timers will need another shot or so by summer before many of us have had a first run around.

You're confusing previously having COVID with receiving the vaccine.

Quazzie

I regurgitate the news wrote: »

For anyone that's interested here is a breakdown of the side effects and deaths related to the Pfizer vaccine between 9/12/20 and 31/01/21 in the UK..

The Source is below

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/960150/COVID-19_mRNA_Pfizer_BioNTech_vaccine_analysis_print.pdf

59614 disorders and 143 deaths

Less deaths with the AstraZeneca...Only 90 for the same period but not sure on the total number of the case study. Perhaps someone can advise

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/960151/COVID-19_AstraZeneca_Vaccine_Analysis_Print.pdf

Is there any evidence to link these directly or is it a case of old people who were going to die anyways, died after getting the vaccine. The vaccine doesn't make you immortal, it just means you are less likely to die from Covid

expectationlost

how many people will get covid while getting their vaccine? (while not from)

plodder

I regurgitate the news wrote: »

For anyone that's interested here is a breakdown of the side effects and deaths related to the Pfizer vaccine between 9/12/20 and 31/01/21 in the UK..

The Source is below

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/960150/COVID-19_mRNA_Pfizer_BioNTech_vaccine_analysis_print.pdf

59614 disorders and 143 deaths

Less deaths with the AstraZeneca...Only 90 for the same period but not sure on the total number of the case study. Perhaps someone can advise

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/960151/COVID-19_AstraZeneca_Vaccine_Analysis_Print.pdf

Those documents say nothing about "side effects". That would imply that the vaccines were responsible for the disorders and deaths.

Correction. They do list vaccine side-effects, but there are no related fatalaties.

I regurgitate the news

plodder wrote: »

Those documents say nothing about "side effects". That would imply that the vaccines were responsible for the disorders and deaths.

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/coronavirus-covid-19-vaccine-adverse-reactions

A weekly report covering adverse reactions to approved COVID-19 vaccines.....Not my words.....Quoting a UK government website

Quazzie wrote: »

Is there any evidence to link these directly or is it a case of old people who were going to die anyways, died after getting the vaccine. The vaccine doesn't make you immortal, it just means you are less likely to die from Covid

I'm just pointing out the results of the reports.....Like 5 people were blind after the Pfizer vaccine.....100% this could be pure coincidence....The deaths could all just be old people dying....Absolutely

robinph

I regurgitate the news wrote: »

For anyone that's interested here is a breakdown of the side effects and deaths related to the Pfizer vaccine between 9/12/20 and 31/01/21 in the UK..

The Source is below

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/960150/COVID-19_mRNA_Pfizer_BioNTech_vaccine_analysis_print.pdf

59614 disorders and 143 deaths

Less deaths with the AstraZeneca...Only 90 for the same period but not sure on the total number of the case study. Perhaps someone can advise

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/960151/COVID-19_AstraZeneca_Vaccine_Analysis_Print.pdf

the second most common cause of death in those stats being related to heart attacks or similar, a couple from sickness.

Far and away the most common cause of death given for those people though was recorded as ... wait for it... "death".

plodder

I regurgitate the news wrote: »

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/coronavirus-covid-19-vaccine-adverse-reactions

A weekly report covering adverse reactions to approved COVID-19 vaccines.....Not my words.....Quoting a UK government website



I'm just pointing out the results of the reports.....Like 5 people were blind after the Pfizer vaccine.....100% this could be pure coincidence....The deaths could all just be old people dying....Absolutely

Yes. The whole point of keeping statistics like this is to find out if there are previously unknown side-effects of the vaccines. They will be comparing them with previous sets of statistics to see if any of the numbers stand out as higher than would be expected.

I regurgitate the news

plodder wrote: »

Yes. The whole point of keeping statistics like this is to find out if there are previously unknown side-effects of the vaccines. They will be comparing them with previous sets of statistics to see if any of the numbers stand out as higher than would be expected.

Ah ok....Good to know....The Pfizer vaccine has more deaths associated with it but only 5 people left blind. The Astra Zeneca one has 8 people left blind but less deaths.

Probably go for the Astra Zeneca one

plodder

I regurgitate the news wrote: »

Ah ok....Good to know....The Pfizer vaccine has more deaths associated with it but only 5 people left blind. The Astra Zeneca one has 8 people left blind but less deaths.

Probably go for the Astra Zeneca one

But, that is just raw data. You can't draw any conclusions from it. For example, it hasn't been related back to the number of people that got each of the vaccines. A lot more older people have got the Pfizer vaccine at this point. It doesn't mean it's less safe or that the vaccines caused any of the conditions.

robinph

I regurgitate the news wrote: »

Ah ok....Good to know....The Pfizer vaccine has more deaths associated with it but only 5 people left blind. The Astra Zeneca one has 8 people left blind but less deaths.

Probably go for the Astra Zeneca one

That's not what those numbers show, in fact they don't really show anything at all on their own.

You need to compare the numbers to the general population, similar age groups, similar health conditions etc during the same time period to see if something stands out as being unusual.

I regurgitate the news

robinph wrote: »

That's not what those numbers show, in fact they don't really show anything at all on their own.

You need to compare the numbers to the general population, similar age groups, similar health conditions etc during the same time period to see if something stands out as being unusual.

Well, they show more a higher likelihood of blindness with Astra Zeneca if assuming deaths related to both are at the same likelihood.

Maybe taking this into consideration the Pfizer one would be a better choice

robinph

I regurgitate the news wrote: »

Well, they show more a higher likelihood of blindness with Astra Zeneca if assuming deaths related to both are at the same likelihood.

Maybe taking this into consideration the Pfizer one would be a better choice

Not unless you know what the incidence of people going blind is generally such as from old age related issues, cataracts or diabetes for example, and what the size of the population on the Pfizer list and the Astra Zenica list is.

I regurgitate the news

robinph wrote: »

Not unless you know what the incidence of people going blind is generally such as from old age related issues, cataracts or diabetes for example, and what the size of the population on the Pfizer list and the Astra Zenica list is.

Fair point. If the assumption is that the 13 people that went blind after the vaccines would have gone blind anyway then you are 100% correct

robinph

I regurgitate the news wrote: »

Fair point. If the assumption is that the 13 people that went blind after the vaccines would have gone blind anyway then you are 100% correct

Have a glance at pages 13 and 14 of this doc, sight loss is significant among older age groups, and older age groups are the majority of those who have been vaccinated:

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.rnib.org.uk/sites/default/files/Sight%2520loss%2520in%2520older%2520people%2520-%2520Guide%2520for%2520GPs.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwipwp7Iq-zuAhWCiFwKHRfwCesQFjALegQILxAB&usg=AOvVaw3mVY0g9fMaBg28PnNxCLZ_

astrofool

This data is being recorded to try and identify if there are any issues in the mass rollout that didn't occur during the mass trials.

They are not an indication that getting the vaccine caused anything, that is using the data for misleading purposes.

The comparison would be for a similar group 1 year prior, or a similar group who weren't vaccinated (unlikely as the rollout was to everyone) was there any difference between the groups, and the answer so far is that no there isn't, i.e. of a group of people of the same age without getting a vaccine, that some people went blind or died in a period of time.

Unfortunately, some people who are bad at reading data jump to conclusions.

This statement is just wrong, and very dangerous and misleading, and should be retracted:

I regurgitate the news wrote: »

Well, they show more a higher likelihood of blindness with Astra Zeneca if assuming deaths related to both are at the same likelihood.

Maybe taking this into consideration the Pfizer one would be a better choice

Doc07

I regurgitate the news wrote: »

Fair point. If the assumption is that the 13 people that went blind after the vaccines would have gone blind anyway then you are 100% correct

Correct that is the assumption and it’s based on looking at large Population stats of expected occurrence of common and some not so common events eg heart attacks, Bell’s palsy etc.

Since you were kind enough to link the UK report, I’ll go one further and paste the safety summary conclusion from the same report for your convenience. This was collated after more than 6 million Pfizer and 3 million AZ doses in UK.


‘Following very substantial exposure across the UK population, no other new safety concerns have been identified from reports received so far.

 The increases in number of ADR reports reflects the increase in vaccine deployment as new vaccination centres have opened across the UK.
 The number and nature of suspected adverse reactions reported so far are not unusual in comparison to other types of routinely used vaccines.
 The overall safety experience with both vaccines is so far as expected from the clinical trials
 Based on current experience, the expected benefits of both COVID-19 vaccines in preventing COVID-19 and its serious complications far outweigh any known side effects
 As with all vaccines and medicines, the safety of COVID-19 vaccines is being continuously monitored’

I regurgitate the news

astrofool wrote: »

This data is being recorded to try and identify if there are any issues in the mass rollout that didn't occur during the mass trials.

They are not an indication that getting the vaccine caused anything, that is using the data for misleading purposes.

The comparison would be for a similar group 1 year prior, or a similar group who weren't vaccinated (unlikely as the rollout was to everyone) was there any difference between the groups, and the answer so far is that no there isn't, i.e. of a group of people of the same age without getting a vaccine, that some people went blind or died in a period of time.

Unfortunately, some people who are bad at reading data jump to conclusions.

This statement is just wrong, and very dangerous and misleading, and should be retracted:

For 90 deaths after the Astra Zeneca there were 8 people left blind.....for 143 deaths after the Pfizer there were only 5 people left blind.

Germany is not giving the Astra Zeneca jab to over 65s. Is this also dangerous?

Here is a document from the FDA ( Food & Drug Administration) Working list of possible adverse event outcomes...page 16

Guillain-Barre syndrome
Acute disseminated encephalomyelitis
Transverse myelitis
Encephalitis
Myelitis
Encephalomyelitis
Meningoencephalitis
Meningitis
Encephalopathy
Convulsions
Seizures
Stroke
Narcolepsy
Cataplexy
Anaphylaxis
Acute myocardial infarction (heart attack)
Myocarditis
Pericarditis
Autoimmune disease
Death
Pregnancy, Birth outcomes
Other acute demyelinating diseases
Non anaphylactic allergy reactions
Thromocytopenia
Disseminated intravascular coagulation
Venous thromboembolism
Arthritis
Arthralgia
Joint pain
Kawasaki disease
Multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children
Vaccine enhanced disease


https://www.fda.gov/media/143557/download

Do you want to censor government department reports?

Some people might not be privy to these reports so I don't see how this is dangerous

hmmm

I regurgitate the news wrote: »

For 90 deaths after the Astra Zeneca there were 8 people left blind.....for 143 deaths after the Pfizer there were only 5 people left blind.

They were not "left blind".

When you monitor millions of very elderly and frail people there are going to be deaths and a number of other events just by the nature of this group. You might as well blame the jelly and ice-cream they got at dinner.

The purpose of this tracking is to see if the vaccine is at fault, or was it purely natural.

I regurgitate the news

hmmm wrote: »

They were not "left blind".

When you monitor millions of very elderly and frail people there are going to be deaths and a number of other events just by the nature of this group. You might as well blame the jelly and ice-cream they got at dinner.

The purpose of this tracking is to see if the vaccine is at fault, or was it purely natural.

After the respective vaccines they were blind according to the reports. It does not say whether this was related to the vaccine or not.

4 billion has been paid out in US dollars (by the US government not the manufacturers) to people and families who suffered vaccine injury or deaths.

Wouldn't it be better to say there is a risk in getting vaccinated as well as a risk in not getting vaccinated and that it is up to everyone to choose what it best for themselves based on their own circumstances?

robinph

I regurgitate the news wrote: »

Some people might not be privy to these reports so I don't see how this is dangerous

Because you are just listing a bunch of random conditions with scary names, zero context about what they are, how they might be bad, how likely they are to happen to someone during the normal course of their day and the only possible result from posting that information is that you scare people off from taking the vaccines....

...and scaring people from taking vaccines is dangerous to the population as a whole.



Be careful with the jelly and ice cream.

I regurgitate the news

robinph wrote: »

Because you are just listing a bunch of random conditions with scary names, zero context about what they are, how they might be bad, how likely they are to happen to someone during the normal course of their day and the only possible result from posting that information is that you scare people off from taking the vaccines....

...and scaring people from taking vaccines is dangerous to the population as a whole.



Be careful with the jelly and ice cream.

That is not my list.....That is from the FDA, page 16 on the report you didn't read

robinph

I regurgitate the news wrote: »

After the respective vaccines they were blind according to the reports. It does not say whether this was related to the vaccine or not.

4 billion has been paid out in US dollars (by the US government not the manufacturers) to people and families who suffered vaccine injury or deaths.

Wouldn't it be better to say there is a risk in getting vaccinated as well as a risk in not getting vaccinated and that it is up to everyone to choose what it best for themselves based on their own circumstances?

4 billion for what and when? You've just thrown up a random number which means nothing on its own.

That's not payouts in relation to covid vacancies anyway, so I suspect it's just over the last 50 years or something, so an utterly meaningless number.

hmmm

I regurgitate the news wrote: »

That is not my list.....That is from the FDA, page 16 on the report you didn't read

It's a list of things they are monitoring for which might indicate a problem with the vaccine, the same as they'd monitor any new medication. They're not saying the vaccine causes all these issues.

If they suddenly got a rush of people with one of these conditions shortly after receiving the vaccine, they'd investigate.

robinph

I regurgitate the news wrote: »

That is not my list.....That is from the FDA, page 16 on the report you didn't read

Did you look at the list of causes of death posted earlier for people who had had the Pfizer vaccination? It included 66 people whose cause of death was stated as "death".

You have no understanding of what it is that you are linking to or what those numbers are to be used for.

I regurgitate the news

robinph wrote: »

4 billion for what and when? You've just thrown up a random number which means nothing on its own.

Over 4.5 Billion US Dollars has been paid out by the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program. A breakdown in the below link from Health Resources & Service Administration in the US

https://www.hrsa.gov/sites/default/files/hrsa/vaccine-compensation/data/data-statistics-report.pdf

robinph wrote: »

That's not payouts in relation to covid vacancies anyway, so I suspect it's just over the last 50 years or something, so an utterly meaningless number.

Of course not. It is unlikely people have started claiming against a vaccine only administered a few weeks.

The payouts started taking place after the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act was signed in 1986. Before then vaccine manufacturers could be sued.

Payments started in 1989

robinph

I regurgitate the news wrote: »

Over 4.5 Billion US Dollars has been paid out by the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program. A breakdown in the below link from Health Resources & Service Administration in the US

https://www.hrsa.gov/sites/default/files/hrsa/vaccine-compensation/data/data-statistics-report.pdf




Of course not. It is unlikely people have started claiming against a vaccine only administered a few weeks.

The payouts started taking place after the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act was signed in 1986. Before then vaccine manufacturers could be sued.

Payments started in 1989

So an utterly pointless number which has been paid out over 30+ years then. What is your reason for wanting us to know that number?

I regurgitate the news

robinph wrote: »

So an utterly pointless number which has been paid out over 30+ years then. What is your reason for wanting us to know that number?

Pretty callous.

If it is such an insignificant figure surely the manufacturers should pay it?

The point I am making which seems to be going over your head is that there is a small risk in getting vaccinated as well as a risk in not getting vaccinated ( as I have said already)

robinph

I regurgitate the news wrote: »

Pretty callous.

If it is such an insignificant figure surely the manufacturers should pay it?

The point I am making which seems to be going over your head is that there is a small risk in getting vaccinated as well as a risk in not getting vaccinated ( as I have said already)

About the same as the small risk in getting out of bed in the morning.

hmmm

I regurgitate the news wrote: »

The point I am making which seems to be going over your head is that there is a small risk in getting vaccinated as well as a risk in not getting vaccinated ( as I have said already)

You're not making a point, you know full well you are spreading misinformation by deliberately choosing to misrepresent data "The Astra Zeneca one has 8 people left blind but less deaths.".

astrofool

I regurgitate the news wrote: »

Gibberish

What you are posting is untrue, and dangerous.

Will you take a COVID-19 vaccine?

What is driving that decision? What evidence?

If you choose not to take it, are you OK with being excluded from international travel for the foreseeable future?