“Ethically Unjustifiable” – Scientists from Harvard & Johns Hopkins Found Covid-19 Vaccines 98 Times Worse Than the Virus

[WapPride]

Well you trust the medical professionals that authored the report referenced in this post then?

what post? the OP from GWP? no, because gateway pundit is not a credible source

 

[ctcseb]

Not trying to settle the vaccine debate thing, but here is what I am gathering from this.

The authors are creating a false equivalency based on hypotheticals and this is getting misinterpreted by the Growls of the world.

The abstract states that they are trying to assess how many people would need to be vaccinated to prevent a Covid related hospitalization. Because thousands of people would, they then project how many could have side effects. They think 18 to 98 may have “serious” side effects although there is no real indication of resulting handicap or long term impact (most healthy young people with the heart inflammation issue go back to normal within days), and that got transformed into the idiotic title of vaccine is 98 times worse that they gullible are eating up. A percentage of hospitalized patients died. Per the NiH, there is one known fatality worldwide out of all of the vaccinations related inflammation. So, if we play the stats games, a heart inflammation is thousands of times more desirable than an hospitalization. Regardless, unless we do a comparison on actual outcome, deaths with one option, deaths with the other, not sure how we can have a true equivalency between hospitalized people and people who had a temporary inflammation for a couple of days. So, if you can’t compare objectively, how can you say one is 98 times worse (which again, the range was 18 to 98 and unsurprisingly the high hypothetical range was selected for shock value…)

Again, not trying to pick sides here, I was against mandates, to me it’s a personal decision. But this paper is being used in misleading ways.

 

[CUTiger1977]

 

[TigerGrowls]

Not trying to settle the vaccine debate thing, but here is what I am gathering from this.

The authors are creating a false equivalency based on hypotheticals and this is getting misinterpreted by the Growls of the world.

The abstract states that they are trying to assess how many people would need to be vaccinated to prevent a Covid related hospitalization. Because thousands of people would, they then project how many could have side effects. They think 18 to 98 may have “serious” side effects although there is no real indication of resulting handicap or long term impact (most healthy young people with the heart inflammation issue go back to normal within days), and that got transformed into the idiotic title of vaccine is 98 times worse that they gullible are eating up. A percentage of hospitalized patients died. Per the NiH, there is one known fatality worldwide out of all of the vaccinations related inflammation. So, if we play the stats games, a heart inflammation is thousands of times more desirable than an hospitalization. Regardless, unless we do a comparison on actual outcome, deaths with one option, deaths with the other, not sure how we can have a true equivalency between hospitalized people and people who had a temporary inflammation for a couple of days. So, if you can’t compare objectively, how can you say one is 98 times worse (which again, the range was 18 to 98 and unsurprisingly the high hypothetical range was selected for shock value…)

Again, not trying to pick sides here, I was against mandates, to me it’s a personal decision. But this paper is being used in misleading ways.

Vaccine Narrative Collapses as Harvard Study Shows Jab More Dangerous than COVID

As boosters that have not been tested on humans are being rolled out across the country, a new study indicates that the jab is far more dangerous than COVID-19 itself. And the CDC has provided false information regarding their tracking of adverse events linked to the vaccines.

www.theflstandard.com

 

[TigerGrowls]

Europe: "The country with the lowest vaccination rate has the lowest excess mortality rate and the country with the highest vaccination rate has the highest excess mortality"... - Revolver News

What's to blame? Heat wave? Climate change? Eating meat? Taking cold showers? We can't wait to hear what excuse they will come up with next.

www.revolver.news

 

[TigerGrowls]

This is crazy too.

Guest Post: Biden Administration Orders 171 Million Bivalent Booster Doses After Successful Eight-Mouse Trial in Which All the Rodents Got Corona Anyway

Rav Arora on the astounding "vaccine zealotry" that has gripped American regulators

www.eugyppius.com

 

[ctcseb]

Vaccine Narrative Collapses as Harvard Study Shows Jab More Dangerous than COVID

As boosters that have not been tested on humans are being rolled out across the country, a new study indicates that the jab is far more dangerous than COVID-19 itself. And the CDC has provided false information regarding their tracking of adverse events linked to the vaccines.

www.theflstandard.com

Asking honestly, what part of the article invalidates what I said? They are repeating the talking points from the Epoch article verbatim, including the “98 times worse” part that I explained was misleading.

I’ll put the false equivalency formula in mathematical terms.

hospitalization cases * mortality rate < heart inflammation cases * mortality rate + minor side effects cases * mortality rate

They are saying that the stuff on the right is much “worse” than the stuff on the left. Let’s plug the stats.

1 * 0.17 (17% per studies) < 98 * 0.00001% (extremely low mortality from inflammation) + 3,000 * 0% (no deaths from feeling queasy)

0.17 < 0.00098

Obviously this is wrong. And that’s the point I am making and I don’t see where the article invalidates that. How is a low chance of someone dying 98 times worse than essentially zero chance of someone dying?

Would you mind pointing me to the part of the article that shows my point is invalid? Genuinely asking.